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.

 Zweischneid wrote:
Either way. The current rumour accuracy tracking is great, and I would not recommend to change a thing.

Still, you shouldn't let the methodology of the thing blind yourself to the purpose this tool was developed for.

At the end of the day, a "true" or "false" on an army book a month this way or that way (though it should be recorded meticulously) doesn't have nearly as much weight as a "true" or "false" on predicting a 7th Edition of 40K 2 years early, when nobody else did, and long before anything went to printers (i.e. the ~1-2 month window most rumours start to flow), or, similarly, predicting a "40K skirmish game" that went nowhere.

The Rumour Accuracy Tracking is a tool. A very good tool, but still only a tool. Don't let it blind you to the real thing

I would love to be able to 'weight' rumors as to when they were said but haven't figured out a good method. As it is though, timing of the rumor doesn't seem to affect overall accuracy. Harry and Hastings usually predict way out and have great ratings. Natfka is all over the place for timing and is all over the place for rating.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
No! no! You're missing the trend line!

2008 - 5th edition
2012 - 6th edition
2014 - 7th edition
2015 - 8th edition
2016 (January) - 9th edition
2016 (April) - 10th edition
2016 (Mid-June) - 11th edition

That's what happened to Firefox !

 pretre wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:
You seem very eager to bring 40K Radio down

Either way. The current rumour accuracy tracking is great, and I would not recommend to change a thing.

Still, you shouldn't let the methodology of the thing blind yourself to the purpose this tool was developed for.

At the end of the day, a "true" or "false" on an army book a month this way or that way (though it should be recorded meticulously) doesn't have nearly as much weight as a "true" or "false" on predicting a 7th Edition of 40K 2 years early, when nobody else did, and long before anything went to printers (i.e. the ~1-2 month window most rumours start to flow), or, similarly, predicting a "40K skirmish game" that went nowhere.

The Rumour Accuracy Tracking is a tool. A very good tool, but still only a tool. Don't let it blind you to the real thing

Kroot is equal opportunity on bringing people down.

On your point, however, I would love to be able to 'weight' rumors as to when they were said but haven't figured out a good method. As it is though, timing of the rumor doesn't seem to affect overall accuracy. Harry and Hastings usually predict way out and have great ratings. Natfka is all over the place for timing and is all over the place for rating.

Well, I wouldn't start weighting rumours. Trying to develop a fair method would probably be near impossible.

There is, however, a certain "pile-in" effect with lots of rumours. One person breaks the "news" (7th Edition from 40K Radio recently, Inquisitor Skirmish from BoK, etc..), and suddenly everyone has something to say about it. Could be sources feeling more "secure" to come out with info after the "big break" is done. Could just be people "wish-listing" along.

And I don't think there is the kind of "gotcha" effect for giving anyone a "false" for being off by a month, like there would be for .. say ... 40K Radio if 7th Edition or Knight Titans never appear, or for BoLS, if the Blood Angels vs. Orks box never appears.

Just the way it is. Stickmonkey clearly (deservedly?) suffered a lot more for the "Summer of Flyers" than anyone ever did for "ups, missed the Codex by a month":

 Zweischneid wrote:
Well, I wouldn't start weighting rumours. Trying to develop a fair method would probably be near impossible.

There is, however, a certain "pile-in" effect with lots of rumours. One person breaks the "news" (7th Edition from 40K Radio recently, Inquisitor Skirmish from BoK, etc..), and suddenly everyone has something to say about it. Could be sources feeling more "secure" to come out with info after the "big break" is done. Could just be people "wish-listing" along.

And I don't think there is the kind of "gotcha" effect for giving anyone a "false" for being off by a month, like there would be for .. say ... 40K Radio if 7th Edition or Knight Titans never appear, or for BoLS, if the Blood Angels vs. Orks box never appears.

Yeah, piling on is pretty hilarious and generally hurts the person who piles on. The inquisitor rumor from BOK was a great example, as were the silly Nid rumors with the Dominar or whatever from BOLS. We'll see on this 7th edition thing if it is similar.

The saddest thing about this thread is the casual acceptance by the userbase of GWS reaching the nadir of rules-writing: specifically that Games Workshop now realizes it's more profitable for them to write lousy rules because they can then sell a x.5 version to patch it with the FAQ's they released for free.

I guess now we know what step 3 is.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
. So why, with their next starter set, would they pack it full of stuff that will directly compete with the still-fairly-new Blood Angels plastics? Why would they provide people with a way to acquire huge mobs of cheap Orks with a new codex release on the horizon?

One simple reason: because it's potentially more money in GW's pocket. Were it not for the masses of Orks to be had from AoBR, I would never have started an Ork army, thus depriving GW of the money I spent. Were it not for the masses of Dark Angels from DV, I would never have built a Ravenwing and Deathwing armies, so that's more money GW got from me. Were it not for all of my leftover Space Marines from AoBR and the Chaos from DV, I would never have built my Chaos army. Again, more money GW got from me because of the starter sets providing lots of cheap models to form the core of an army. I still had to buy the Codexes and other models to fill out these armies, which I never would have bought otherwise.

We're talking about a company which stopped supporting and eventually scrapped several popular games which had valuable customer recruitment and retention effects, at least in part, because they believed they were "competing" with the core games and that every gang or warband a customer bought meant one less squad or regiment would be sold. I'm not even remotely convinced that GW's current corporate culture is capable of recognising concepts like loss-leaders, or luring people into starting new forces by making it easy for them. The starter sets exist to give staff an easy sell to Wee Timmy's parents when they wander in believing they've found a videogame store to dump the kid in while they go for a coffee, the last thing GW want is whatever base of repeat customers they have left building cheap armies out of their contents.

 Yodhrin wrote:
[...at least in part, because they believed they were "competing" with the core games and that every gang or warband a customer bought meant one less squad or regiment would be sold..

That's not actually quite right.

It's not a one-for-one deal. A customer who buys Necromunda is never going to need to buy as many models as the customer who gets into 40K, simply because you don't need as many models for the game. So if GW are going to spend time encouraging you to start one of their games, it's in their better interests to encourage you towards 40K instead of Necromunda... that way they can selll you an army instead of 10 guys.


That's only ever been fan supposition though. I don't think GW have ever publicly given an actual reason for Specialist Games being scrapped.

Being snarky probably because Kirby lost the Bloodbowl in-house campaign too many times. It doesn't make any sense but at this stage of the game what GW policy does?

M.

I got told it was lack of sales and that if I wanted them to stay around I should have bought more.

 jonolikespie wrote:
I got told it was lack of sales and that if I wanted them to stay around I should have bought more.

Wow what a company. We should all learn from these masters of consumerism.

What is sad though, is that this 7th edition would mean that Orkz would not have, and had, an edition for 3 editions or so. This is rather quite saddening to my Green Eyes and Ears...

(Forgive me if someone already "whined" about this matter, I have a hard time reading 20 pages of information to see if one sentence was uttered out of... lotz.)

Specialy since its been repeated multiple times that THIS WILL NOT BE A 7TH EDITION.

Only an updated 6th Ed rulebook, with some tweaks and addition of Stronghold assault.

Well, regardless. My mentioning of "would be" is pretty flexible anyhow. Sorry for missing the repeated sentences, but I will just pretend that "7th edition" will be some hip cool slang for "Update to 6th edition" that I invented.

 Da Kommizzar wrote:
What is sad though, is that this 7th edition would mean that Orkz would not have, and had, an edition for 3 editions or so. This is rather quite saddening to my Green Eyes and Ears...

But not really anything new. If Orks have to wait until 7th edition proper (2016) for a new Codex, they'll still beat the time it took them to be updated last time (9 years!)

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 Shandara wrote:
Maybe something like:
2012 - 6th release
2014 - halfway update/re-release
2016 - 7th release

No! no! You're missing the trend line!

2008 - 5th edition
2012 - 6th edition
2014 - 7th edition
2015 - 8th edition
2016 (January) - 9th edition
2016 (April) - 10th edition
2016 (Mid-June) - 11th edition

By the end of 2016 the edition you're playing will be obsolite before the end of the game!
We'll be mourning the goold old days of 108th edition as we try to play out turns 3 and 4 using 109th!
Then turn 5 using 110th!

And soon we'll be seeing a double event!

 insaniak wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
[...at least in part, because they believed they were "competing" with the core games and that every gang or warband a customer bought meant one less squad or regiment would be sold..

That's not actually quite right.

It's not a one-for-one deal. A customer who buys Necromunda is never going to need to buy as many models as the customer who gets into 40K, simply because you don't need as many models for the game. So if GW are going to spend time encouraging you to start one of their games, it's in their better interests to encourage you towards 40K instead of Necromunda... that way they can selll you an army instead of 10 guys.

Well, if the player decides that Warhammer 40K isn't what he's interested in and instead starts up Infinity or Deadzone or Warmachine or whatever, then there's not much profit in it for GW, is there?

It just makes me mad that i have to get another brb to be able to play because the rules i got will be outdate. y don't they just faqthe rule book instead of charging me another 80. I feel sorry for any one get in to this game as they are get ripped off

Well, we don't know yet, if there will be heavy changes in this BRB. Supposedly, current FAQ would be included, and a little tweaks here and there.
If true, that means we could handle the shift using the old rulebook and a small printed listing of changes, be it GW official, or a fan-made recollection. No big deal in that case.

If it is an update, all digital BRB would have the updates included automatically so those players it wouldn't affect at all

Or they could just call it a second printing. Wizards did this with Star Wars Saga Basic book. The second printing incorporated errata to the first printing and everyone was happy.

 Slayer le boucher wrote:
Specialy since its been repeated multiple times that THIS WILL NOT BE A 7TH EDITION.

Only an updated 6th Ed rulebook, with some tweaks and addition of Stronghold assault.

As far as I know, 40K Radio - who broke the original rumour - are sticking with 7th.

So presumably (afaik) it's a new edition as much as 4th, 5th or 6th was a "new" edition (though not a genuine reboot in the sense of 2nd to 3rd).

Of course, if you wanna see it as an "update", just as 6th was just 5th Edition with some tweaks and the addition of Death from the Skies, it'd be hard to argue against that, technically.

Avian wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:
[...at least in part, because they believed they were "competing" with the core games and that every gang or warband a customer bought meant one less squad or regiment would be sold..

That's not actually quite right.

It's not a one-for-one deal. A customer who buys Necromunda is never going to need to buy as many models as the customer who gets into 40K, simply because you don't need as many models for the game. So if GW are going to spend time encouraging you to start one of their games, it's in their better interests to encourage you towards 40K instead of Necromunda... that way they can selll you an army instead of 10 guys.

Well, if the player decides that Warhammer 40K isn't what he's interested in and instead starts up Infinity or Deadzone or Warmachine or whatever, then there's not much profit in it for GW, is there?

Most people don't know those games exist, especially if they're new to the hobby and walking into a GW store.

I like 6th edition. A lot. I don't like the supplements Stronghold Assault and Escalation, but those could be ignored.

Rolling them into the 6th edition rulebook makes me a sad panda.

 kronk wrote:
I like 6th edition. A lot. I don't like the supplements Stronghold Assault and Escalation, but those could be ignored.

Rolling them into the 6th edition rulebook makes me a sad panda.

I do recall a rumor stating that their goal was to allow more of "fielding miniatures you've bought in games of 40k" so that doesn't bode well for limiting the nonsense from things like Escalation.

Avian wrote:

Well, if the player decides that Warhammer 40K isn't what he's interested in and instead starts up Infinity or Deadzone or Warmachine or whatever, then there's not much profit in it for GW, is there?

Right.

I think it's funny that GW stopped supporting specialists games and then these new companies start up based around smaller skirmish games.

GW probably didn't realize how much those specialist games mattered. A lot of people would kitbash to get their mordheim gang/ bb team, or they would buy multiple teams/warbands since they were so much cheaper.

 pretre wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:
You seem very eager to bring 40K Radio down

Kroot is equal opportunity on bringing people down.

Well, I don't want to bring any rumour monger down. But concerning the release schedule, 40k Radio is just repeating Hastings' prediction from more than a year ago, trying to guess the correct month, giving several options. That's why this list is basically in the Dakka rumour roundup since before 40k radio made their guesses.

They had a good SM Codex leak early, that's what gave them their reputation. This leak should be closed by now. So don't expect wonders from them in the future.

 Kroothawk wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:
You seem very eager to bring 40K Radio down

Kroot is equal opportunity on bringing people down.

Well, I don't want to bring any rumour monger down. But concerning the release schedule, 40k Radio is just repeating Hastings' prediction from more than a year ago, trying to guess the correct month, giving several options. That's why this list is basically in the Dakka rumour roundup since before 40k radio made their guesses.

They had a good SM Codex leak early, that's what gave them their reputation. This leak should be closed by now. So don't expect wonders from them in the future.

Do you really think they "repeat" Hastings? They might simply have a similar schedule. If it is (more or less) correct, it's not surprising that there are similarities.

Either way, 40K Radio has at least 3 very specific, very unique rumours out atm

- Imperial Knights in March
- Imperial Guard renamed into "Astra Militarum"
- 40K 7th Edition

All allegedly in the first half of this year.

By July this year, they'll be the gods of 40K rumours or the laughingstock of the internet.

 scarletsquig wrote:

Avian wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

It's not a one-for-one deal. A customer who buys Necromunda is never going to need to buy as many models as the customer who gets into 40K, simply because you don't need as many models for the game. So if GW are going to spend time encouraging you to start one of their games, it's in their better interests to encourage you towards 40K instead of Necromunda... that way they can selll you an army instead of 10 guys.

Well, if the player decides that Warhammer 40K isn't what he's interested in and instead starts up Infinity or Deadzone or Warmachine or whatever, then there's not much profit in it for GW, is there?

Most people don't know those games exist, especially if they're new to the hobby and walking into a GW store.

That isn't the way most people get introduced to miniature wargaming, since most people live places where there isn't a GW store anywhere near them. My country, for example, has ONE. People getting into the hobby by walking into a GW store is something that almost exclusively happens in the UK, and with reduced opening hours for the shops there, I expect it's happening less there as well. A business plan based on nabbing wannabe skirmish gamers that randomly walk into your store and convincing them to play 40K instead simply cannot work in the vast majority of places.

 Zweischneid wrote:


Either way, 40K Radio has at least 3 very specific, very unique rumours out atm

....

- Imperial Guard renamed into "Astra Militarum"...

Oh come on, what the feth? That's got to be bs? Are they saying Imperial Guard isn't copyrightable so let's give them the
language ! name we can think of instead?

 Bull0 wrote:

 Zweischneid wrote:


Either way, 40K Radio has at least 3 very specific, very unique rumours out atm

....

- Imperial Guard renamed into "Astra Militarum"...

Oh come on, what the feth? That's got to be bs? Are they saying Imperial Guard isn't copyrightable so let's give them the worst name we can think of instead?

Presumably, yeah. SoB > Adepta Sororitas style

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?388438-40K-Radio-Imperial-Knights-in-March&p=7047062&viewfull=1#post7047062

It's the only reason that makes "sense".