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.

rigeld2 wrote:
It's near impossible for me ( as a player) to remember which book has the newest rules for a given FW model.
The fact that FW does nothing to help that is extremely annoying.

And its near impossible for me (as a player) to remember what all the new rules are for all the codexes that keep coming out. GW's pricing and release schedule aren't helping me out on that at all either.

Heck, it'd be cheaper and easier for me to buy IA1v2 from forgeworld rather than the last three or four codexes.

hands_miranda wrote:

Uh.. the difference is that the 3rd and 4th edition version of the Tau Codex aren't currently available from GW. The old version of the Remora is still available from Forgeworld via IA Aeronautica. You can say this isn't confusing, but having mutliple different currently sold books with different statlines for the same unit is confusing, especially since Forgeworld doesn't think to list which book is required on the unit's ordering page. Again, it's easy if you know what you're doing and have all the books, but otherwise it's a bit opaque.

hands_miranda, just wanted to post and say you are definitely not alone - trying to guess what book has what units in it and what counts as "current" is definitely a lesson in frustration. Sabre Weapons platform - I have seen mention of those and I went to see which book they were in. Seems like they could be Imperial Armour Aeronautica (they are anti-air and this book apparently covers all things anti-aircraft) or Imperial Armour Volume One - Second Edition: Imperial Guard (this is the IG book, right?)

If I get tabled by Imperial Guard I know exactly where to look: Codex: Imperial Guard. If I get tabled by a bunch of random IG FW stuff I have at least two places I need to look to see what hit me... hell, maybe more, and the fact that I cannot even provide a definitive there is one of the major problems.

quiestdeus wrote:
If I get tabled by Imperial Guard I know exactly where to look: Codex: Imperial Guard. If I get tabled by a bunch of random IG FW stuff I have at least two places I need to look to see what hit me... hell, maybe more, and the fact that I cannot even provide a definitive there is one of the major problems.

No, you have one place to look because the FW website has the table of contents for each book and you know that IA1 is the more recent book so it has the current rules.

 Peregrine wrote:

quiestdeus wrote:
If I get tabled by Imperial Guard I know exactly where to look: Codex: Imperial Guard. If I get tabled by a bunch of random IG FW stuff I have at least two places I need to look to see what hit me... hell, maybe more, and the fact that I cannot even provide a definitive there is one of the major problems.

No, you have one place to look because the FW website has the table of contents for each book and you know that IA1 is the more recent book so it has the current rules.

Interesting - where is the ToC? and how do I know IA1 is more recent?

Definitely not saying the information is not there, but all I see is :

Imperial Armour Volume One - Second Edition: Imperial Guard is a book dedicated to the fighting vehicles of the Imperial Guard; the steel-clad behemoths that rumble and clank their way across the battlefields of the far future, unleashing fire and shell at the enemies of Mankind. Inside this 294-page book, the full panoply of Imperial Guard armoured vehicles are displayed in exhaustive detail, including profiles and rules for over fifty tanks, support vehicles, artillery pieces and super-heavy vehicles, alongside extensive background material on these war machines, their munitions and manufacture.

In addition to the wealth of information, colour profiles and photographs, the book also includes a full army list that allows you to field the sledgehammer of Imperial military power: the Imperial Guard Armoured Battlegroup. Also included are rules for some of the most famous Tank Aces of the Imperium including General Grizmund of the 1st Narmenian Armoured Regiment

and either way, the fact that we are even having this discussion means it is more complicated than the traditional Codex system.

But I am legitimately curious where to get the ToCs for each book.

quiestdeus wrote:
Interesting - where is the ToC? and how do I know IA1 is more recent?

The table of contents is in the picture gallery, second from the left in the top row. And the publication date doesn't seem to be available directly from FW, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_%28Warhammer_40,000%29 (found with just a few seconds of searching) shows the correct publication order for every 40k rulebook.

and either way, the fact that we are even having this discussion means it is more complicated than the traditional Codex system.

Sure, it's a stupid way of doing things and they really need to keep an updated list of where each unit's rules are. But that's an ease of use issue, not any real ambiguity about what the answer is.

ToCs in the pictures is a surprisingly good idea on their part.

But as I look through them... they vary in clarity. What are the units in the Elysian drop troop army list? It just says "heavy support" in Imperial Armour Volume Three – Second Edition's ToC - what counts as heavy support?

Are the hellhound rules up-to-date in the Imperial Armour Volume Twelve: The Fall of Orpheus or in the Imperial Armour Volume One - Second Edition: Imperial Guard?

I can go to a third page to see which is more recent... but needing to go to a third page does not make the information on forgeworld's site ambiguous? Interesting.

I'm sure you know I am just asking rhetoricals now, as while the ability to peruse the tables of contents is helpful, its implementation (and inconsistency in detail across the books) does not seem able to answer everything.

I do appreciate the effort though.

quiestdeus wrote:
What are the units in the Elysian drop troop army list? It just says "heavy support" in Imperial Armour Volume Three – Second Edition's ToC - what counts as heavy support?

Doesn't matter. You have to use the whole Elysian army list at once, you can't pick and choose, say, the heavy support from IA3(2nd) and the fast attack from IA8. All you need to know is that the current version of the Elysian army list is in IA3(2nd).

Are the hellhound rules up-to-date in the Imperial Armour Volume Twelve: The Fall of Orpheus or in the Imperial Armour Volume One - Second Edition: Imperial Guard?

In this case it doesn't matter because the Hellhound page in IA1(2nd) is just fluff and a reprint of the codex rules.

But note that the IA12 entry for the Hellhound is only as part of the DKoK army list and can not be used separately. And if you're using the DKoK army list there's only one place you can look for your rules.

I can go to a third page to see which is more recent... but needing to go to a third page does not make the information on forgeworld's site ambiguous? Interesting.

It's not ambiguous because you know the answer without any possible uncertainty. Yes, it sucks from an ease of use perspective, but if you're trying to figure out where the current rules for something are all you have to do is spend the effort. You're never going to be left with ambiguity about which source is the right one.

 Cruentus wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
It's near impossible for me ( as a player) to remember which book has the newest rules for a given FW model.
The fact that FW does nothing to help that is extremely annoying.

And its near impossible for me (as a player) to remember what all the new rules are for all the codexes that keep coming out. GW's pricing and release schedule aren't helping me out on that at all either.

You do understand the difference between knowing the rules and knowing which rules are valid right?
I'm addressing the latter, you seem to have addressed the former...
If I want to know where to look for the mode current codex IG lists, it's trivial. If I want to know where to look for the most recent ABG lists it takes detective work. That's absolutely stupid.

Heck, it'd be cheaper and easier for me to buy IA1v2 from forgeworld rather than the last three or four codexes.

Okay? Sure. And?

rigeld2 wrote:

 Cruentus wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
It's near impossible for me ( as a player) to remember which book has the newest rules for a given FW model.
The fact that FW does nothing to help that is extremely annoying.

And its near impossible for me (as a player) to remember what all the new rules are for all the codexes that keep coming out. GW's pricing and release schedule aren't helping me out on that at all either.

You do understand the difference between knowing the rules and knowing which rules are valid right?
I'm addressing the latter, you seem to have addressed the former...
If I want to know where to look for the mode current codex IG lists, it's trivial. If I want to know where to look for the most recent ABG lists it takes detective work. That's absolutely stupid.

There's nothing in Codex: Black Templars or the FAQ telling me that I'm allowed to take a Storm Talon or a Storm Raven. How do I know where to find the rules, and why is one supplement not referenced in any way in the Codex or FAQ OK but another not?

Any ETA on templars/SoB

 ThouShallNotHeal wrote:
Any ETA on templars/SoB

"When they're ready"...

When is GW ever truly ready

SoB are due for a VERY, VERY long time as GW recently told people they can't use the old sculpts for plastic models. They would therefore have to produce entirely new sculpts for the army...and seriously, that's a lot of effort (and money!) you'd spend to satisfy a small niche audience.

Nah, Just market them as allies of ultramarines and they're golden.

Ok So the Pro-FW people are missing the point entirely on the confusion about know which rules are current. It is not that I as a player cannot do internet research to find this out. It is about if I am at a table and a guy shows up with a FW unit and a book with the rules for that unit in it, how do I know they are the current rules?

Do I assume he put in his due diligence to bring the most current rules? Do I whip out my smart phone, or find someone with one and start googling stuff to find out if he is using the right book?

OR should I have memorized every FW unit and what book contains its newest iteration?

This is a problem even if a TO provides a list of legal units and the books they come in. As a player unless the TO is individually checking how do I know a player is not cheating me, or making a mistake?

SO it is not a matter of can I find out. Sure I can with enough research. IT is a matter of how do I know.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Cruentus wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
It's near impossible for me ( as a player) to remember which book has the newest rules for a given FW model.
The fact that FW does nothing to help that is extremely annoying.

And its near impossible for me (as a player) to remember what all the new rules are for all the codexes that keep coming out. GW's pricing and release schedule aren't helping me out on that at all either.

You do understand the difference between knowing the rules and knowing which rules are valid right?
I'm addressing the latter, you seem to have addressed the former...
If I want to know where to look for the mode current codex IG lists, it's trivial. If I want to know where to look for the most recent ABG lists it takes detective work. That's absolutely stupid.

There's nothing in Codex: Black Templars or the FAQ telling me that I'm allowed to take a Storm Talon or a Storm Raven. How do I know where to find the rules, and why is one supplement not referenced in any way in the Codex or FAQ OK but another not?

Why are you assuming Death from the Skies is "okay"?
Am I arguing against Forgeworld? If I am, please quote where I've said that.
I've said it's stupid that I have to do detective work to figure out where FW rules are.
That doesn't mean I'm okay with how DftS has been handled.

rigeld2 wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Cruentus wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
It's near impossible for me ( as a player) to remember which book has the newest rules for a given FW model.
The fact that FW does nothing to help that is extremely annoying.

And its near impossible for me (as a player) to remember what all the new rules are for all the codexes that keep coming out. GW's pricing and release schedule aren't helping me out on that at all either.

You do understand the difference between knowing the rules and knowing which rules are valid right?
I'm addressing the latter, you seem to have addressed the former...
If I want to know where to look for the mode current codex IG lists, it's trivial. If I want to know where to look for the most recent ABG lists it takes detective work. That's absolutely stupid.

There's nothing in Codex: Black Templars or the FAQ telling me that I'm allowed to take a Storm Talon or a Storm Raven. How do I know where to find the rules, and why is one supplement not referenced in any way in the Codex or FAQ OK but another not?

Why are you assuming Death from the Skies is "okay"?
Am I arguing against Forgeworld? If I am, please quote where I've said that.
I've said it's stupid that I have to do detective work to figure out where FW rules are.
That doesn't mean I'm okay with how DftS has been handled.

Sorry, must've jumped to conclusions. I guess I read into stuff that wasn't there in your comments. I can only agree with you that it's been handled badly, my point (which was, seemingly, mis-aimed) was that it's not unique to ForgeWorld publications. Sorry about my fail.

EDIT: Anyhow, the reason I'm assuming that DFtS is OK is because no one ever complains about it being official yet badly handled, while the fact that we're now on page 43 of this debate seems to imply that ForgeWorld is not, despite both having similar issues (and don't get me started on the Sisters of Battle WDs...).

quiestdeus wrote:

hands_miranda wrote:

Uh.. the difference is that the 3rd and 4th edition version of the Tau Codex aren't currently available from GW. The old version of the Remora is still available from Forgeworld via IA Aeronautica. You can say this isn't confusing, but having mutliple different currently sold books with different statlines for the same unit is confusing, especially since Forgeworld doesn't think to list which book is required on the unit's ordering page. Again, it's easy if you know what you're doing and have all the books, but otherwise it's a bit opaque.

hands_miranda, just wanted to post and say you are definitely not alone - trying to guess what book has what units in it and what counts as "current" is definitely a lesson in frustration. Sabre Weapons platform - I have seen mention of those and I went to see which book they were in. Seems like they could be Imperial Armour Aeronautica (they are anti-air and this book apparently covers all things anti-aircraft) or Imperial Armour Volume One - Second Edition: Imperial Guard (this is the IG book, right?)

If I get tabled by Imperial Guard I know exactly where to look: Codex: Imperial Guard. If I get tabled by a bunch of random IG FW stuff I have at least two places I need to look to see what hit me... hell, maybe more, and the fact that I cannot even provide a definitive there is one of the major problems.

You guys are not alone, I'm right there with you.

This is why, the only tournaments who can responsibly run FW right now are ones that are doing it to the level of AdeptiCon- making a list like this before each iteration of their event, and making sure it is current:
http://www.adepticon.org/13rules/201340KIAApoc.pdf

To the average player, it is not obvious which FW book is most current. Particularly, if you're matched up against a new army for Round 3 of an event, and they hand you their book with the rules of their unit. Are you going to whip out your iPad and check each book's entry on the FW site, one at a time, to see if a more recent book has the same unit listed? I think not!

You can say the TO is responsible for the player having the current rules, but ah, there's the rub!
The amount of extra work this could add to a TO, once it became less a novelty that a few players at an event are taking, and instead included in most armies at an event, is insane! As is the amount of extra knowledge required in sheer number of units for them to be familiar with, and ready to make rules dispute calls on in the midst of a timed event. People advocating for more FW need to lobby GW and FW, not the TOs, to make it's inclusion easier!

Things like an index (which AdeptiCon does for their own events) would make it massively easier for a TO to check that players are using the current rules. Of course, consolidating rules into less books or marking the old ones as out of date would do that, too... but that doesn't seem to be happening. Instead, there are still some units in the old books that don't have replacements, afaik, and so those books remain in use... but only for a small selection of their contents.

Obviously, this is confusing and comparing it to a new edition of a codex, or a flyers supplement, is like comparing a huge warehouse to a small shack, imo. They're in the same category, but completely different levels of the same thing. And it'd be an easy thing to fix, to boot... but that's up to GW and FW to do, not TOs trying to run a smooth and fun event.

(Unless they're willing to put in the work to make it smooth and fun- a la AdeptiCon, and I believe the Nova Open soon as well, if not already)

 Peregrine wrote:

quiestdeus wrote:
Interesting - where is the ToC? and how do I know IA1 is more recent?

The table of contents is in the picture gallery, second from the left in the top row. And the publication date doesn't seem to be available directly from FW, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_%28Warhammer_40,000%29 (found with just a few seconds of searching) shows the correct publication order for every 40k rulebook.

and either way, the fact that we are even having this discussion means it is more complicated than the traditional Codex system.

Sure, it's a stupid way of doing things and they really need to keep an updated list of where each unit's rules are. But that's an ease of use issue, not any real ambiguity about what the answer is.

Searching a bunch around the internet (including wiki, which is non-vetted and in some cases an absolute joke) is not what I would call a normal method to determine this stuff. Nothing on FW's site tells you publication order, and wiki is only as good as the last basement-dweller to edit it. What A-Con does is really the gold standard for this kind of thing, but really the same kind of thing should be done by FW itself, since A-Con only does a chart for its own events.

Note this is not coming from a pro and anti FW position. We're trying stuff out for our club as a way to add more variety into games, not out of some balance need-- the game is bad without it so it's not going to get any more broken including it. FW has just made it very hard to ensure you're using the correct version of the unit (in reality we're just going to use the IA Aero version because it's what we have and if anything worse than the IA3 version)

Oh, wow, I didn't even realize that. So there's no way to tell on FW site which book is the most recent... as far as I can see?

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/Warhammer-40000/Imperial_Armour_Books

The blurbs for each are also really brief. Nothing like AdeptiCon's list of exactly which unit is in which book:
http://www.adepticon.org/13rules/201340KIAApoc.pdf

Also, as someone unfamiliar with these things, on the top of the page I see Imperial Armor Volume 3, Second Edition. Imperial Armor Volume 12, and Imperial Armor Volume 1, Second Edition.

Is there no Volume 2, Second Edition?

From the Imperial Armor Volume 12 blurb:

Imperial Armour Volume Twelve: The Fall of Orpheus, written by Alan Bligh, is a mighty 232-page, full colour tome, packed with lavish maps, colour profiles and photographs. The horrors of the Orphean War are recounted in detail, alongside a new variant Necron army list – the Dark Harvest – which represents the tainted Maynarkh Dynasty, and full rules for new Necron units such as the Night Shroud Bomber, the Canoptek Acanthrites and the mighty Tomb Citadel.

The book also contains a new Death Korps of Krieg army list – the Assault Brigade – updated background, units and characters for the Minotaurs Space Marine Chapter, as well as rules for numerous Warhammer 40,000 Space Marine units.

"Rules for numerous Warhammer 40,000 Space Marine units." What does that even mean? Are these the most current rules for all Space Marine units? How do I know which units this book covers, if an opponent hands me an older book with a Space Marine unit in it?

Not trying to be an ass here, but seriously, people who love FW can be very intimidating to average players (like myself!) with the "Well, it was in Imperial Armor Volume 7, you should have known that!" attitude that comes across (to me). How the can I know where the rules are for units if FW doesn't list them, and is as vague as the above?

They need to make and upkeep a document or index like AdeptiCon does, to really be seriously considered for widespread tourney use at small events where TOs can't put in that kind of time and research for monthly events and the like, as opposed to a once-a-year GT.

Breng77 wrote:
Ok So the Pro-FW people are missing the point entirely on the confusion about know which rules are current. It is not that I as a player cannot do internet research to find this out. It is about if I am at a table and a guy shows up with a FW unit and a book with the rules for that unit in it, how do I know they are the current rules?

If a person shows up with a codex you aren't familiar with how can you know it is current? Or how do you that they haven't just edited the rules and made their own (ipad) codex?

OR should I have memorized every FW unit and what book contains its newest iteration?

I don't know about every unit, but doing the research on units you expect to face is just part of being prepared for a tournament. We wouldn't feel much sympathy for someone who lost to Tau because they didn't know about JSJ, so why should we feel sympathy for someone who was cheated because they didn't do even a minimal amount of research on what units are out there?

This is a problem even if a TO provides a list of legal units and the books they come in. As a player unless the TO is individually checking how do I know a player is not cheating me, or making a mistake?

I don't see how this is a problem. If the TO provides a list of units and which books they're in how can you possibly be cheated? Your opponent shows you their list, you ask to see their books. If they match the ones on the TO's list it's legitimate, if they don't you have a problem.

 Peregrine wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
Ok So the Pro-FW people are missing the point entirely on the confusion about know which rules are current. It is not that I as a player cannot do internet research to find this out. It is about if I am at a table and a guy shows up with a FW unit and a book with the rules for that unit in it, how do I know they are the current rules?

If a person shows up with a codex you aren't familiar with how can you know it is current? Or how do you that they haven't just edited the rules and made their own (ipad) codex?

To further on this point, if this is at a Tournament were said player turns up wit his FW unit and book, surely this would have been approved with is submitted army list to the TO? So why would you need to worry about it being an unapproved model?

It's not about an unapproved model- it's that there isn't a list of which is the most current ruleset for said model.

It's absurdly easy to check if it's the most recent version of a codex. Right now, with no index provided by FW, it is not nearly so easy to see if you have the most recent version of rules for a given unit.

Some may be easier than others (does the new Imperial Armor, Volume 3, Second Edition have all Tau units?) but just look at AdeptiCon's list and you'll see how scattered the rules are:

http://www.adepticon.org/13rules/201340KIAApoc.pdf

I'm linking to this again because the confusion should be very obvious, I don't know why you guys are not seeing that... there are multiple books being sold by FW, with mutiple entries for the same units, yet no list saying which book has the most current rules for any particular unit or even which book is more current in general.

 RiTides wrote:
It's absurdly easy to check if it's the most recent version of a codex.

Really? How do you check the most recent version of a codex, assuming you have no internet access (since if you did you could check the FW books)? And how do you check that your opponent hasn't edited their codex?

Right now, with no index provided by FW, it is not nearly so easy to see if you have the most recent version of rules for a given unit.

It isn't as convenient, but it's possible. I won't disagree that FW should keep a single list of what rules are where, but this is hardly a fatal problem for allowing FW in tournaments.

 Peregrine wrote:
I won't disagree that FW should keep a single list of what rules are where, but this is hardly a fatal problem for allowing FW in tournaments.

More like death by a thousand cuts

It is a pretty big deal, though, and is a large part of the reason why the way AdeptiCon deals with FW is great... but very different than a blanket "Have at it, guys!" And also why I think we have to at least acknowledge what needs to be done to make FW easier to implement in a tournament setting.

The big difference that is not being noted here is not about telling the most recent version of any one book (that is as easy for FW as it is for Codices.) The problem is that FW prints rules for the same unit/army in multiple books.

It is quite different as your opponent if you bring codex Eldar with you and show me the rules for Warp Spiders, as I just need to be able to recognize that it is the newest version of codex eldar (which if we are playing at a store is likely for sale on the wall.)

Than an opponent bringing Imperial armor: Apocalypse 2nd ed, with the rules for Sabers (could be wrong I don't know what books they are in.), when those rules have been updated in say Imperial Armor: Aeronautica. This requires me to know which units are in which books, as well as which books are more recent. I need to know that the rules have been re-printed in a differently named book (and as shown above I'm not sure which books contain which units to begin with). This is a pretty big failing of Forgeworld. If say sabers were only ever in IA: Apocalypse, then all I would need know is what the newest edition of the book is (2nd ed, or 3rd if they reprint it again.)

Currently I need to know that x unit is in books y and Z and I need to know which of books y and z is more current.

Even with Adepticons list of units it requires one of two things...

1.) The tournament judges/organizers to vet that the rules being used by each player are correct (very labor intensive).
2.) Opponents of those players to be inimately familar with the list of units and which books they fall into, so that if their opponent is using the wrong rules they can be called on it.

Breng77 wrote:
The big difference that is not being noted here is not about telling the most recent version of any one book (that is as easy for FW as it is for Codices.) The problem is that FW prints rules for the same unit/army in multiple books.

While true, and is an issue, I will point out that basically the last year and a half is the first time we haven't had the same situation with core GW products. We had multiple different rules and points costs for supposedly identical items across very similar armies, things like PotMS, Stormshields, Assault Cannons, Rhinos, etc for years and years and multiple editions. Hell, Inquisitor Karamazov existed in two different armies with two different sets of rules for half a year after the GK book came out

So yes, while it's an understandable issue, it's something that GW as a whole is only recently moving away from, and not by any means a FW-specific malady.

 Peregrine wrote:

 RiTides wrote:
It's absurdly easy to check if it's the most recent version of a codex.

Really? How do you check the most recent version of a codex, assuming you have no internet access (since if you did you could check the FW books)? And how do you check that your opponent hasn't edited their codex?.

Well, if you are playing at a store you can walk 10' and look to see if the covers match. That is something that you can't do with forge world.

If you are at a tournament everyone knows what the current codexes are. If you are at a level to find a tournament, you are at a level to know what the current codexes are.

 Peregrine wrote:

 RiTides wrote:
It's absurdly easy to check if it's the most recent version of a codex.

Really? How do you check the most recent version of a codex, assuming you have no internet access (since if you did you could check the FW books)?

You're being disingenuous about the level of effort to check validity. Less than 10 seconds (pending page loads) to check the current version of any GW codex. For FW we have to a) ascertain which books the unit is in (and the only way to do that afaik is to check each book) b) ascertain which one was the latest (which there's no FW source for)

And how do you check that your opponent hasn't edited their codex?

Please tell me how to edit an iBook. I'd love it. I'd send you money for that information.
Or are you spouting fud?

Right now, with no index provided by FW, it is not nearly so easy to see if you have the most recent version of rules for a given unit.

It isn't as convenient, but it's possible. I won't disagree that FW should keep a single list of what rules are where, but this is hardly a fatal problem for allowing FW in tournaments.

Except it is. Every TO should vet a list of units->books prior to an event which adds a significant amount of work. No vetting required for GW codexes.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Breng77 wrote:
The big difference that is not being noted here is not about telling the most recent version of any one book (that is as easy for FW as it is for Codices.) The problem is that FW prints rules for the same unit/army in multiple books.

While true, and is an issue, I will point out that basically the last year and a half is the first time we haven't had the same situation with core GW products. We had multiple different rules and points costs for supposedly identical items across very similar armies, things like PotMS, Stormshields, Assault Cannons, Rhinos, etc for years and years and multiple editions. Hell, Inquisitor Karamazov existed in two different armies with two different sets of rules for half a year after the GK book came out

So yes, while it's an understandable issue, it's something that GW as a whole is only recently moving away from, and not by any means a FW-specific malady.

Except that in all those cases unless FAQ'd by GW we were expected to play the appropriate rules from our codex. IN otherwords the Rhino Point costs for Vanilla Marines did not replace those for say Templars. That is not the case for Forgeworld, Saber in One book replaces the rules for the saber in an entirely different book, both for use by IG. So your argument here holds no water. It is not the having multiple sets of rules, it is the having multiple sets of rules that all apply to the same army. For example if FW puts out a Space Wolf Contemptor (which they do) its rules do not supercede the rules for a Blood Angel Contemptor. Much the same way a Space Wolf Rhino does not supercede the rules for A Blood Angels rhino. They are different units in different books, despite the same name. Now occasionally GW erratas these changes, but then they are changing the book in question.

Now you can make that argument about say the Daemon WD rules or Death from the Skies, that we had/have 2 sets of rules for units at the same time, in two different sources. I agree that could be confusing, but it was for one book/one supplement, GW included many of these changes in their FAQs, so if you read the FAQ you knew of the difference.