Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I just had some delicious ice cream.

Harriticus wrote:I remember when we thought the WD spines meant a Dark Angels codex.

Because, you know, surely a Space Marine wouldn't mean a new rulebook. There's more to 40k then space marines....

Here's to removing all xenos and making IG/SoB retinue choices for 7th! In Marinehammer 40,000, there is only the pwning of Chaos Space Marines, because at least they used to be Space Marines.

This crap is really getting tiresome.

People who have no earthly clue what the hell they are talking about, who act like there is some sudden shift in the way GW is marketing their game.

1st, 2nd, 3rd all had Space Marines on the cover. The chapter changed, but it was always Space Marines.

It is nothing new. It is nothing unusual. So if you want to bitch and moan about some 'new development' then please be sure to pick some 'new development' that has not been around since the very first rulebook was published 25 years ago.

[/rant]

lol you mad

erikwfg wrote:lol you mad

Please use proper spelling, grammar, and punctuation in accordance with the rules of DakkaDakka.

Thank you kindly,

d-usa

[/rant2]

I was actually going to agree somewhat with the post you quoted, but you scared me away (but I ran away laughing).

erikwfg wrote:I was actually going to agree somewhat with the post you quoted, but you scared me away (but I ran away laughing).

I was messing around in the spirit of ranting, hence the smiley at the end.

d-usa wrote:

Harriticus wrote:I remember when we thought the WD spines meant a Dark Angels codex.

Because, you know, surely a Space Marine wouldn't mean a new rulebook. There's more to 40k then space marines....

Here's to removing all xenos and making IG/SoB retinue choices for 7th! In Marinehammer 40,000, there is only the pwning of Chaos Space Marines, because at least they used to be Space Marines.

This crap is really getting tiresome.

People who have no earthly clue what the hell they are talking about, who act like there is some sudden shift in the way GW is marketing their game.

1st, 2nd, 3rd all had Space Marines on the cover. The chapter changed, but it was always Space Marines.

It is nothing new. It is nothing unusual. So if you want to bitch and moan about some 'new development' then please be sure to pick some 'new development' that has not been around since the very first rulebook was published 25 years ago.

[/rant]

The world is full of people who have no clue what they are talking about, but will talk as if they are the world's foremost expert on the subject. This forum just seems to have a much higher percentage, especially in regards to anything GW related. No point getting worked up over it.

Could I at least beat everybody that complains about GW starting to put Space Marines on the cover with all previous editions of the rulebook featuring Space Marines on the cover?

You beat them in a sense, but then you will inevitably get dragged down by "u mad?" comments in a wave of unending wave of pure, unbridled idiocy.

Then you rise from the ashes, and from all across the vastness of the internet they will gather to proclaim you "White Knight" and all knowledge you possess will mean nothing in the face of entitled nerds who believe this game was made specifically for them. Which it obviously was, and GW is changing it now because they hate us.

For the record:

1st Ed: Crimson Fists
2nd Ed Crimson Fists (BA on wargear and Codex imperialis)
3rd Ed Black Templars
4th Ed no marines
5th Ed no marines

So marines on the cover would actually be a return to the norm for GW.

For what its worth i dont hate the new cover, i think its ok. I think it will look a little odd on the shelf however. Anyway i dont really care, its the stuff inside i want to see...

I don't play DA, but I like this if legit. Not sure why there's drama over it.

Let's roll!

Someone take a photo of the inside of the book!

DiabolicAl wrote:For the record:

1st Ed: Crimson Fists
2nd Ed Crimson Fists (BA on wargear and Codex imperialis)
3rd Ed Black Templars
4th Ed no marines
5th Ed no marines

So marines on the cover would actually be a return to the norm for GW.

For what its worth i dont hate the new cover, i think its ok. I think it will look a little odd on the shelf however. Anyway i dont really care, its the stuff inside i want to see...

Yes, 5th ed did too have marines on the cover. In the background there is a monochrome woodcut with marines on the left and Orks on the right. WAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!

NoBaconz4You wrote:I find it very hard to believe considering there's no sign of a 'war hammer', something that has appeared in some form or another on the front of almost every recent rulebook.

1
2
3
4
5

I could be wrong though.

Although there are DA on the front cover. I did think BT at first but the red arrow on the closest marine's shoulder pad made me think otherwise.

3rd edition rulebook

Cadaver wrote:You beat them in a sense, but then you will inevitably get dragged down by "u mad?" comments in a wave of unending wave of pure, unbridled idiocy.

Then you rise from the ashes, and from all across the vastness of the internet they will gather to proclaim you "White Knight" and all knowledge you possess will mean nothing in the face of entitled nerds who believe this game was made specifically for them. Which it obviously was, and GW is changing it now because they hate us.

Ahhh! Can you grind that axe somewhere else. The noise is deafening.

warpcrafter wrote:

DiabolicAl wrote:For the record:

1st Ed: Crimson Fists
2nd Ed Crimson Fists (BA on wargear and Codex imperialis)
3rd Ed Black Templars
4th Ed no marines
5th Ed no marines

So marines on the cover would actually be a return to the norm for GW.

For what its worth i dont hate the new cover, i think its ok. I think it will look a little odd on the shelf however. Anyway i dont really care, its the stuff inside i want to see...

Yes, 5th ed did too have marines on the cover. In the background there is a monochrome woodcut with marines on the left and Orks on the right. WAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!

So it does, i never noticed that before. But then i also only just noticed that the background of 4th ed is that old John Blanche picture..

Realy I almost want to see the back cover of the book more. I want to see if their is any pitchers that will hint at what is in the next starter box/confirm DA vs. Chaos.

I like how Dark Angles are the worst kept secret that they will be in the new starter box, But their hasn't been nearly as much confirmation in regards to Chaos being in the box. Even at this point.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Cadaver wrote:You beat them in a sense, but then you will inevitably get dragged down by "u mad?" comments in a wave of unending wave of pure, unbridled idiocy.

Then you rise from the ashes, and from all across the vastness of the internet they will gather to proclaim you "White Knight" and all knowledge you possess will mean nothing in the face of entitled nerds who believe this game was made specifically for them. Which it obviously was, and GW is changing it now because they hate us.

Ahhh! Can you grind that axe somewhere else. The noise is deafening.

Touch a nerve?

If you couldn't tell I was be facetious. I'm not going to waste my time taking this stuff seriously because it's pretty obvious what the level of debate there is to be had here. Between every 3rd comment repeatedly proving people won't let their lack of knowledge about something as basic as what has been on the cover of previously rulebooks get in the way of some GW bashing.

I like this "cover"

If it is the legit 6th Ill be happy.

I just realized reading threw this and other threads their are some people who are already judging 6th ed based on this cover. LITTERLY judging a book by it's cover. This makes me lawl.

Lockark wrote:I just realized reading threw this and other threads their are some people who are already judging 6th ed based on this cover. LITTERLY judging a book by it's cover. This makes me lawl.

Well if those inconsiderate good-fer-nuthin’ rumour-mongers (that are ruining the HHHobby) hadn’t spoiled the whole book (and the 6th Ed release) by taking a blurry photo of the front cover, we wouldn’t have this problem, would we?

Lockark wrote:I just realized reading threw this and other threads their are some people who are already judging 6th ed based on this cover. LITTERLY judging a book by it's cover. This makes me lawl.

The reason is is that GW gives us very little to actually criticize beforehand. We have nothing concrete to actually critique at this point since all we've seen released is a non-information teaser trailer on youtube and a slightly fuzzy cover shot to what could be the 6th edition rulebook.

So yeah, if there was any judgement for anything, we have exactly two pieces of information to judge 6th edition with...AND we're less than two weeks away from launch.

DiabolicAl wrote:

warpcrafter wrote:

DiabolicAl wrote:For the record:

1st Ed: Crimson Fists
2nd Ed Crimson Fists (BA on wargear and Codex imperialis)
3rd Ed Black Templars
4th Ed no marines
5th Ed no marines

So marines on the cover would actually be a return to the norm for GW.

For what its worth i dont hate the new cover, i think its ok. I think it will look a little odd on the shelf however. Anyway i dont really care, its the stuff inside i want to see...

Yes, 5th ed did too have marines on the cover. In the background there is a monochrome woodcut with marines on the left and Orks on the right. WAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!

So it does, i never noticed that before. But then i also only just noticed that the background of 4th ed is that old John Blanche picture..

Okay I normally am not like this but the picture on the 4th edition book is by a dude named Wil Rees haha
It's all good though, they both did weird stuff so it's easy to get them confused

For those wondering what I'm talking about, look at this picture and then at your 4th edition 40k rulebook if you still have it

Harriticus wrote:I remember when we thought the WD spines meant a Dark Angels codex.

Because, you know, surely a Space Marine wouldn't mean a new rulebook. There's more to 40k then space marines....

Here's to removing all xenos and making IG/SoB retinue choices for 7th! In Marinehammer 40,000, there is only the pwning of Chaos Space Marines, because at least they used to be Space Marines.

wth. Last time I check, Necrons had a nice makeover in the past 6 months and are insanely good now. Dark Eldar are amazing in-game and Ork's continue to get tons of love, the Bommers are incredible and orks can be pretty awesome in the right hands.

That being said, dude...the main characters in the 40K universe are Space Marines....they are us to a degree, the entire universe is told through their eyes. From the black library, through to the codices. Do you really think that the Tau called one of their vehicles a "Hammerhead"? no..that's an earth term relating to an earth Shark...the entire universe is seen through the imperiums eyes, hence...Space Marines are the main players and always will be.

That being said, first look at the cover...looks kinda blah...but the more I look at it, the more I like it....I'm excited...

Meh, was hardly into 40k over the 2nd/3rd/4th periods but I became attracted to the game through the lore, and looking at the way lore evolved through the editions I always felt beyond 3rd edition (which saw more non-Imperial factions) it was proper to represent the rulebook with the warhammer seen on 4th and 5th.

Plus I don't see why because past editions had Marines on them, that makes it okay. If I wasn't a little annoying kid but rather my present little annoying adult state back when 3rd and 2nd eds were out I'd have complained about Marines there too. GW has been stupid with the fantastic universe they've created for quite some time, though it was at its best at 3rd Edition before a decline again.

H.B.M.C. wrote:...the HHHobby...

Man, you are trying really hard to make this stick.

Is there even a punchline behind it, or is it a more-or-less arbitrary neologism? I love it when people take GW to task, but it's always better when there's some wit underpinning the gibes.

Harriticus wrote:Plus I don't see why because past editions had Marines on them, that makes it okay.

Make it ok?

It doesn't make it 'ok' or 'not ok' because it doesn't matter. It's a cover FFS!

Altruizine wrote:Man, you are trying really hard to make this stick.

I don't need 'make' anything 'stick'. It's already stuck. I didn't invent it (I believe that honour goes to Kill Krazy) and I'm not the only one saying it.

Is it only a cover? Yes.

But in a thread about a cover, the cover is the main discussion.

Lockark wrote:LITTERLY judging a book by it's cover. This makes me lawl.

LITTERLY

Speaking of "lawl"...

Makes me lawl. Literally.