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.

 Shandara wrote:
Noone wins or loses! Great news, Jervis.

Participation trophies for everyone!

Also, everyone wins when they buy Games™ Workshop ™ Products™!

 Kosake wrote:

But yeah, 6th edition being the Vista to the upcoming 7th edition Win7 sounds promising.

Of course it sounds promising, what kind of lunatic would take offence to being forced to pay the highest cost in the miniature wargaming market for a set of "trial" rules, only to have the privilege of paying the exact same amount or even more for the "finished" product after two years! Anyone that objects to that is clearly unreasonable and I would never wan't to forge a narrative with such a person anyway!

rexscarlet wrote:
Boycott needs to be NOW! (or this will continue to happen)
.
$75 Main/Big Rule Book obsolete in less than two years (6e 23rd of June, 2012)
Wow, just wow.
.
No "new" FaQs for months, no older FaQs on the "new" website. Now the excuse will be that GW was gearing up for the change.
No rules Support, ever.
Massive flooding of multiple Rule Books with huge issues attached to each.
Constantly making "current" purchased publications obsolete with a release of another purchased publication.
No Battle Bunkers, No tables in GW stores.(where we used to go to see what "fair" House Rules were being used by a large majority, rather than relying on non GW Tournaments).
GW Stock in the toilet.
.
All of which We will have to Pay For.
.
Boycott Now

Still getting it to review it. Go journalism?

YakManDoo wrote:I would direct folks to the Jervis Johnson article in the latest WD to see a possible trajectory for 7th edition. He writes about a design change set wherein armies compete for specific objectives as opposed to single objectives both armies fight over.

That's a big knock back to 2nd edition mission cards. As are the rumors for a psychic phase. I wonder if we'll see the reintroduction of strategy cards as well; I hope not. Strategy cards were fun, but awful for fair / balanced game play. They could swing the game from a loss to a win, make the game horribly one sided or devastate your army before game turn one even began.

I'm quite angry that GW would release a new edition so soon. 6th edition hasn't even been around for a full 2 years. I sincerely hope that 7th edition is so incredible and solid that it sticks around for 6+ years to make up for the short life span of 6th.

The rapid release schedule has put me off quite a bit, it's too much, too quickly. If GW can't get their gak together and this becomes a regular thing; rapid releases combined with a new edition every two years... I fear my days in this hobby are numbered.

 kronk wrote:

rexscarlet wrote:
Boycott needs to be NOW! (or this will continue to happen)
.

I was wondering when the voice of reason would show up!

Thank you, sir! No more waiting!

.
Yeah, RIGHT?

That the FLGS stand for it is what really amazes me...

It would be great if people just stopped forcing themselves into following any new crap Games Workshop releases, and instead just played the editions and codeci (or even alternative systems) they liked the best.

Anyways, I'm looking forward to the new Starter set (though I'm afraid the price will be same even with same amount of models). New rules, not so much! GW is really jumping the shark with their relese schedules.

rexscarlet wrote:

 kronk wrote:

rexscarlet wrote:
Boycott needs to be NOW! (or this will continue to happen)
.

I was wondering when the voice of reason would show up!

Thank you, sir! No more waiting!

.
Yeah, RIGHT?

That the FLGS stand for it is what really amazes me...

Why wouldn't they? Selling the rulebook is going to make them money too. The only real potential problem for them is if GW doesn't buy back the old rulebook.

rexscarlet wrote:
There are plenty of places to get "it" besides GW.

None of the "free" versions are exactly legal or are supported by the forums due to them being related to an act often associated with the Jolly Roger.

rexscarlet wrote:
There is no rule against cutting off the back binding, copying for personal use, spiral binding the original, and selling spiral bound original.

Sounds like a legal gray area honestly and still requires the initial investment in the rulebook (which will likely be hardcover meaning you'll probably spend more than you'll make doing this).

rexscarlet wrote:
Not to mention all the Beardy ways...

Said ways which won't be available for day 1 review. Sorry, but I'm going to need the actual book in my hands no later than the 31st if I'm going to review it (since GW doesn't do review copies) and I'll likely not finish writing the review until the next day just because of the length and potential scope of changes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rexscarlet wrote:
There is no buyback program for FLGS, maybe for the distributor, you would have to ask one?

Do you have evidence of this or is this an assumption?

rexscarlet wrote:
so solid business practice in your opinion?

Only potential issue I see is a lack of a buy-back program. Otherwise FLGS are going to making money off this too and (from a business standpoint, not a player one) won't have a reasons to complain (outside of the potential lack of a buy-back or the new books being given at a discount or some kind of compensation).

I told my kids that 7th is likely coming out in a month. There response "I'm still trying to get the rules straight and they are changing them again? grr..."

lol.

 oni wrote:

That's a big knock back to 2nd edition mission cards. As are the rumors for a psychic phase. I wonder if we'll see the reintroduction of strategy cards as well; I hope not. Strategy cards were fun, but awful for fair / balanced game play. They could swing the game from a loss to a win, make the game horribly one sided or devastate your army before game turn one even began.

I still have the White Dwarf where Andy Chambers basically states "What was I thinking?" and advises ripping up Virus Outbreak.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Still getting it to review it. Go journalism?

I am going to read your review to learn if I want to get the new rules. One way or another. Likely another.

rexscarlet wrote:

.
drops mike...

So hard core and edgy! It's mic, not mike. Mike is a person. Unless you have superhuman strength or enjoy piggy back rides...

Anyway, I went to a sci-fi convention in Houston, and during the costume contest, 3 people dropped the mic. The 3rd one broke it and no one else got to use the mic after that. Don't be selfish. Don't drop the mic!

 ausYenLoWang wrote:
the game needs LESS of things like that.

it really flat out defeats the purpose, and is unnecessary, because you can house rule anything you want out. so just leave everything legal. less dramas, more options,

things like allies, BB needs toning down.
SHV, needs StrD weapons sorted out.
why just flat out remove them and not just fix the problems.?

Hopefully they fix them rather than just dump things, though lets be honest, they wont be, after already adding escalation to the game a couple of months back its here to stay, same as allies, just be hoping they fix them to be a bit more sensible

You don't seem to understand that it's easier to loosen restrictions than to add them in. If things like allies are optional, it's easier for the casual/narrative people to add them to games than it is for the competitive players to get rid of them if they are "core". That's why there needs to be solid core rules and everything else (flyers, escalation, allies, strongholds, etc.) as OPTIONAL extras; little or no hassle to add them in for friendly narrative games, but tournaments and competitive gamers can safely ignore them instead of having to house-rule them away.

Also, natfka is now reporting a new starter set containing Astra Militarum vs. Eldar. I guess he can't make up his mind. So it's either Orks vs. BA for 40k, Orks vs. BA for a revised Epic (yeah, right) or now AM vs. Eldar (which I call BS on, there's never been a starter set that didn't have Space Marines)

 Kosake wrote:
So, we have 10 pages of doomsaying, speculation, premature ragequits and panic based on the fact that the core book is currently unavailable..? Good thing thing that 40k radio actually said that a new edition will be coming shortly, otherwise this would seem a bit silly.

It's a news and rumor thread in a news and rumor forum discussing some news and rumors. Yet, you show up to throw derision. That seems a pointless exercise.

I love to give GW my money for their great models. I love their IP. However, I do not understand why they continue to commit design suicide. If this Jervis article is indeed the trajectory of 7th, which I definitely assume that it is, then they are effectively killing the way I have to play the game. I play pick up games at the store with people I know casually. I don't have a community of friends who play this game. I have a group of acquaintances that shifts from week to week. I need a reliable ruleset that arbitrates the relationship peacefully as I do not have enough of a relationship to arbitrate the ruleset peacefully. Jervis, stop living in the late 70s. Just stop. You are killing your company by assuming the world games like you do. (I do recognize the inherent irony of my post doing exactly what I accuse Jervis of doing.)

The current state of the rules for 40k is abysmal.

I sorted out all my files for 40k, and what a chore it was with the rules spread between codices, imperial armour, data slates , supplements and expansions.

This is over 50 books. Even if we take a very conservative average of £20 per book (considering the high prices of rulebooks and codices, alongside the cheaper data slates) all of the rules will cost you in the region of £1000.

£1000 for the rules to a game. Let that sink in. (alongside the threat of deforestation).
Couple this with poor writing and day 1 FAQs and you have an overpriced product with questionable quality. Also attempting to find and obtain all the most up to date rules is often a game in itself.
I find it disgraceful that this has become the state of the GW-Consumer relationship.

I hope 7th edition will change this, and bring more unified and complete rules, covered by a proofreader of decent quality, without the desire to blatantly milk the fanbase of their cash. But I'm not holding my breath.

I won't be getting the new rulebook for these reasons. But I'll get the rules nontheless.

gungo wrote:

Stormbreed wrote:
Consolidate into another combat and fix battle brothers.

I wonder what they felt was wrong in 6th edition for such a quick edition change.

A huge loss in customer purchases.

 Idolator wrote:

gungo wrote:

Stormbreed wrote:
Consolidate into another combat and fix battle brothers.

I wonder what they felt was wrong in 6th edition for such a quick edition change.

A huge loss in customer purchases.

QFT...cannot wait to see the end of the fiscal sales numbers.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Still getting it to review it. Go journalism?

I am going to read your review to learn if I want to get the new rules. One way or another. Likely another.

Which was the reason I started writing them: because I kept seeing people complain they were tired of buying stuff blind.

YakManDoo wrote:
I love to give GW my money for their great models. I love their IP. However, I do not understand why they continue to commit design suicide. If this Jervis article is indeed the trajectory of 7th, which I definitely assume that it is, then they are effectively killing the way I have to play the game. I play pick up games at the store with people I know casually. I don't have a community of friends who play this game. I have a group of acquaintances that shifts from week to week. I need a reliable ruleset that arbitrates the relationship peacefully as I do not have enough of a relationship to arbitrate the ruleset peacefully. Jervis, stop living in the late 70s. Just stop. You are killing your company by assuming the world games like you do. (I do recognize the inherent irony of my post doing exactly what I accuse Jervis of doing.)

The difference being that it's easier for clubs to discuss things than it is for pickup games and/or tournaments, but GW doesn't seem to care about that and instead pushes the "one true way" when they should focus on making a game that's balanced and concise enough for pickup games and tournaments BUT allow for options to help clubs and narrative/casual gamers. So this "talk with your opponent about the mission" thing works well as an optional extra if you choose to use it, not as a "default" rule that affects everyone. The intelligent thing to do in that case would be to have an extra section of optional rules for "enhancing the narrative" that competitive/tournament/pickup game players can ignore rather than just try to force everyone to play the way GW does.

A smart game designer would first write rules that are intended to be played in a tournament (i.e. balanced and concise) and then add in options for campaign/narrative/cinematic/non-tournament play that loosen up the normally-restrictive rules. GW, however, does the opposite - they write loose rules with the unstated assumption that everyone only plays campaign/narrative/cinematic/non-competitive games, so rules are written either only for that style of play or require discussion beforehand, and feth anyone else. They're operating, like most everything else they do, at a complete 180 to how they should be doing things.

6th ed came out so fairly recently, and now a 7th edition? they really should just keep to fleshing things out before tossing a new edition out.

rexscarlet wrote:
Got it, I see you have a website, so no worries, controversy gets clicks, solutions do not, so you will continue to support a company that gets you clicks.

Actually, I'm supporting a company who makes the game I enjoy playing and am using that support to try and make use of the fact I'm going to buy the books anyways to try and make things less of a blind purchase for others. Codex prices being what they are I would have probably stopped buying all of them a year ago but since I started covering them I kind of needed to keep buying them.

Most I get from my FLGS though so really I'm supporting my local hobby store more than GW (since the FLGS is going to order the codexes anyways).

Also, I'm just one of many people who write for that blog, but since I am one of the people there a bit more into 40k I took up doing the reviews for them because I saw a niche that wasn't being filled. I pay for the books out of pocket and am not paid for my work. We're just not "big" enough for me to feel I warrant pay for my articles. So basically the clicks don't matter to me.

loki old fart wrote:Do GW still have the quality of staff to turn this around??

No, but the staff certainly has the right attitude now

H.B.M.C. wrote:Yeah. That sounds like a completely practical thing to do for a pickup game against someone you don't know.

Well, Jervis is realistic enough to assume, that with 7th edition, you will know every remaining player within 100 miles for years

Also:

anonymous source on faeit212, translated wrote:New item has come up in inventory, in a black box: imperial guard vs eldar. Not all stores got it, but it is there. Systems were updated last year on inventory, so this is new. I would say no to blood angels and orks with this later in the year.

If that IG vs Eldar thing is true then that's just what the game needed.

More Eldar Serpentspam. Yay.

 Kroothawk wrote:

loki old fart wrote:Do GW still have the quality of staff to turn this around??

No, but the staff certainly has the right attitude now

H.B.M.C. wrote:Yeah. That sounds like a completely practical thing to do for a pickup game against someone you don't know.

Well, Jervis is realistic enough to assume, that with 7th edition, you will know every remaining player within 100 miles for years

If by "years" you mean "until the end of 2015", since that is the planed release date for 8th edition.

There is nothing bad about copying a successful strategy, especially if it is well liked by the customers.

GW is desperate. They're copying Privateer press's advancing story line as books are released.

carmachu wrote:

There is nothing bad about copying a successful strategy, especially if it is well liked by the customers.

GW is desperate. They're copying Privateer press's advancing story line as books are released.

GW might be desperate but they aren't willing to acknowledge the major issues (i.e. lack of rules balance, pushing some factions to the exclusivity of others, constantly-increasing prices for a constantly-expanding size game).

carmachu wrote:

There is nothing bad about copying a successful strategy, especially if it is well liked by the customers.

GW is desperate. They're copying Privateer press's advancing story line as books are released.

?? Granted I don't buy any digital releases or not-optional cuz we want to sell MOAR supplements like escalation but at least in the codex books I buy the story line since 3rd edition has advanced less in years than I have while playing it. Did I miss some major development? Or is my sarcasm detector set too low?