40k 7th Edition release 24th may - All info in 1st post, psychic power cards added (5/21)

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.

**ClockworkZion**

Idolator wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:

No, we all lose because this idea was brought up. There are 32 Million Shares of GW stock "issued" right now. To have enough control over the company to boot Kirby you'd need in excess of half of it (so 16,320,000 to have 51% control of the company) which would cost at least 9,343,200,000 GBP.

And while you're trying to get all that together they could just split the stocks requiring you to need even more shares to gain control of the company.

In short: buying enough shares to control a company is something only people like Bill Gates can pull off in a single day.

You don't truly need to hold that much stock to effect change. You only need enough to have a member on the board of directors. A 11% ownership of stock is currently the largest investor. You only need to shift enough votes to remove him from the position. If another investor were to control 10% of the stock (but about only half of that would be required) they would be able to exert a large amount of influence, especially if it was known that said investor would dump his stock if changes weren't made. None of the other investors would want to see 1/10 of of a companies stock flood the market and cause a huge drop in value. It could spark a massive sell off because those that aren't on the board wouldn't know what was happening, just that someone "in the know" was bailing out of the company at an accelerated rate. Leading to the larger investors losing a substantial amount.

It's complicated.

11% = 3,520,000 Shares or ~20,134,400GBP.

Basically you might want to start playing the Powerball to have enough money to try and get that much control.

**Uriels_Flame**

Nev'a! As long as GW keeps ramming it's collective head against the wall, we will always be here to revive the "if i ran things" thread!

**ClockworkZion**

Back on topic: Anyone else want to speculate if we're getting a new cover for the updated rulebook?

**Idolator**

ClockworkZion wrote:
Idolator wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:

No, we all lose because this idea was brought up. There are 32 Million Shares of GW stock "issued" right now. To have enough control over the company to boot Kirby you'd need in excess of half of it (so 16,320,000 to have 51% control of the company) which would cost at least 9,343,200,000 GBP.

And while you're trying to get all that together they could just split the stocks requiring you to need even more shares to gain control of the company.

In short: buying enough shares to control a company is something only people like Bill Gates can pull off in a single day.

You don't truly need to hold that much stock to effect change. You only need enough to have a member on the board of directors. A 11% ownership of stock is currently the largest investor. You only need to shift enough votes to remove him from the position. If another investor were to control 10% of the stock (but about only half of that would be required) they would be able to exert a large amount of influence, especially if it was known that said investor would dump his stock if changes weren't made. None of the other investors would want to see 1/10 of of a companies stock flood the market and cause a huge drop in value. It could spark a massive sell off because those that aren't on the board wouldn't know what was happening, just that someone "in the know" was bailing out of the company at an accelerated rate. Leading to the larger investors losing a substantial amount.

It's complicated.

11% = 3,520,000 Shares or ~20,134,400GBP.

Basically you might want to start playing the Powerball to have enough money to try and get that much control.

How is 20 eleven percent of 90?

**ClockworkZion**

Idolator wrote:
How is 20 eleven percent of 90?

32,000,000 Shares in the company x 11% = 3,520,000 Shares to have 11% of the company. 3,520,000 x 5.72GBP (current share price) = 20,134,400 GBP to buy that many shares assuming no change in stock prices while you do it.

**Azreal13**

ClockworkZion wrote:
Uriels_Flame wrote:
azreal13 wrote:
Might want to check your figures there, UK share prices are in pennies, not GBP.

Yes, not quite the 9B you're thinking there.

See, that's just asinine as there is no "P" listed anywhere saying it's in cents and not pounds. Friggin Brits.

So more like 92,289,600 GBP. Still too much for your average consumer.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

pretre wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
azreal13 wrote:
Might want to check your figures there, UK share prices are in pennies, not GBP.

I don't see anything that indicates that on a number of sites that list the price.

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/g/gbp.asp

"The British pound sterling is symbolized by the pound sign (£) and is nicknamed "quid." Because stocks are traded in pence (the British term for pennies), investors may see stock prices listed as pence sterling - GBX, or GBp. "

Right, but that's not listed on the actual stock exchange sites that actually LIST the prices, but on basically an investment reference site. I'm not accepting responsibility on this one.

Heaven forfend that people who look at these things know a bit about what they're looking at!

Frankly, that your figures calculating GW's worth was in the billions on a company who's turnover barely exceeds£ 100m didn't tip you off suggests you're crunching numbers without really considering the results.

But, meh, it's all been done to death before anyway, back to topic...

**ClockworkZion**

azreal13 wrote:

Heaven forfend that people who look at these things know a bit about what they're looking at!

I apologize for not knowing that a different country's stock market used cents instead of pounds (the US uses dollars not cents, hence the confusion, I don't own stock in the UK).

**Steve steveson**

From Nafka/faeit 212

http://natfka.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/7th-edition-information-there-is-no.html?m=1

Above is the poster that is coming in the next White Dwarf and that are already being shown at GW store locations. The picture above was revealed on facebook for the Liverpool GW Store. Not only that but we are now getting some reports on the contents of the book from more than one person.

Here is a link to the facebook page for Liverpool where the image was revealed.
https://www.facebook.com/GWLiverpool

The information below must be taken as rumor, since we just cannot verify that these are from official sources. It looks very much like we will be calling this 6.5. Just to understand where these are coming from, GW managers have been in meetings in the UK, and this is where I am assuming that the information is being spread from. Hard to tell at this moment though, and the next few weeks will show us more of what is coming.

via an source over on Talkwargaming- Thanks for the heads up Zion
The new rulebook is not a 7th edition of the game, but a re-issue of 6th edition which has the FAQs incorporated in it, and some minor tweaks across the board. Some of you may remember when they did something similar during 3rd edition, where they totally overhauled the assault phase, but the edition itself was left alone from that point. Same idea here-- they're folding in the changes in Stronghold Assault into the main rulebook, and quantifying superheavy units and D weapons in the main rules. But that's about it.

via an anonymous source here at Faeit 212
My brother just got in from GW and the manager said the rulebooks were just getting errata tweaks put in them and would be re-released alongside something else. So just a 6.5 rather than a 7th edition

Could the "something else" from the second source be the black box Eldar and IG that we have been talking about?

More info saying it is just bringing everything together, so as long as you have your current rules and the FAQs your good to go. No need for a new book.

**Alpharius**

On topic:

ClockworkZion wrote:Back on topic: Anyone else want to speculate if we're getting a new cover for the updated rulebook?

Not on topic:

ClockworkZion wrote:
Idolator wrote:
How is 20 eleven percent of 90?

32,000,000 Shares in the company x 11% = 3,520,000 Shares to have 11% of the company. 3,520,000 x 5.72GBP (current share price) = 20,134,400 GBP to buy that many shares assuming no change in stock prices while you do it.

Please stay on topic!

**Uriels_Flame**

30% of the time, we are on topic 100% of the time!

I would be more interested to see how they are going to rectify this with those who have purchased the rulebook online.

Sounds like they could do the update and send it out as such, but I seriously doubt this occurs.

**Azreal13**

Steve steveson wrote:
From Nafka/faeit 212

http://natfka.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/7th-edition-information-there-is-no.html?m=1

Above is the poster that is coming in the next White Dwarf and that are already being shown at GW store locations. The picture above was revealed on facebook for the Liverpool GW Store. Not only that but we are now getting some reports on the contents of the book from more than one person.

Here is a link to the facebook page for Liverpool where the image was revealed.
https://www.facebook.com/GWLiverpool

The information below must be taken as rumor, since we just cannot verify that these are from official sources. It looks very much like we will be calling this 6.5. Just to understand where these are coming from, GW managers have been in meetings in the UK, and this is where I am assuming that the information is being spread from. Hard to tell at this moment though, and the next few weeks will show us more of what is coming.

via an source over on Talkwargaming- Thanks for the heads up Zion
The new rulebook is not a 7th edition of the game, but a re-issue of 6th edition which has the FAQs incorporated in it, and some minor tweaks across the board. Some of you may remember when they did something similar during 3rd edition, where they totally overhauled the assault phase, but the edition itself was left alone from that point. Same idea here-- they're folding in the changes in Stronghold Assault into the main rulebook, and quantifying superheavy units and D weapons in the main rules. But that's about it.

via an anonymous source here at Faeit 212
My brother just got in from GW and the manager said the rulebooks were just getting errata tweaks put in them and would be re-released alongside something else. So just a 6.5 rather than a 7th edition

Could the "something else" from the second source be the black box Eldar and IG that we have been talking about?

More info saying it is just bringing everything together, so as long as you have your current rules and the FAQs your good to go. No need for a new book.

Lol, you realise you're quoting a rumour from a guy who has already posted the rumour himself int his thread?

Automatically Appended Next Post:
For the record, I've had a GW 'source' tell me that it was definitely a bona fide 7th.

I am ambivalent on the quality of this info, but just to balance out those claiming the opposite.

**Idolator**

ClockworkZion wrote:
Idolator wrote:
How is 20 eleven percent of 90?

32,000,000 Shares in the company x 11% = 3,520,000 Shares to have 11% of the company. 3,520,000 x 5.72GBP (current share price) = 20,134,400 GBP to buy that many shares assuming no change in stock prices while you do it.

Then your original numbers were WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYY off. The companies value isn't 9 billiion, nor is it 90 million (which is what your calculated number would have been had you had the decimal point in the right place) It's roughly 183 million.

Eleven percent of 183 is around 20.

Edit: I know not on topic. I was writing and looking it up before the MOD posted.

**Steve steveson**

No... Sorry. I did look back and didn't see it. *facepalm*

Actually, no, I was using it as a chance to bring the thread back on topic... *whistles and sidles away quietly*

**ClockworkZion**

azreal13 wrote:
Steve steveson wrote:
From Nafka/faeit 212

http://natfka.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/7th-edition-information-there-is-no.html?m=1

Above is the poster that is coming in the next White Dwarf and that are already being shown at GW store locations. The picture above was revealed on facebook for the Liverpool GW Store. Not only that but we are now getting some reports on the contents of the book from more than one person.

Here is a link to the facebook page for Liverpool where the image was revealed.
https://www.facebook.com/GWLiverpool

The information below must be taken as rumor, since we just cannot verify that these are from official sources. It looks very much like we will be calling this 6.5. Just to understand where these are coming from, GW managers have been in meetings in the UK, and this is where I am assuming that the information is being spread from. Hard to tell at this moment though, and the next few weeks will show us more of what is coming.

via an source over on Talkwargaming- Thanks for the heads up Zion
The new rulebook is not a 7th edition of the game, but a re-issue of 6th edition which has the FAQs incorporated in it, and some minor tweaks across the board. Some of you may remember when they did something similar during 3rd edition, where they totally overhauled the assault phase, but the edition itself was left alone from that point. Same idea here-- they're folding in the changes in Stronghold Assault into the main rulebook, and quantifying superheavy units and D weapons in the main rules. But that's about it.

via an anonymous source here at Faeit 212
My brother just got in from GW and the manager said the rulebooks were just getting errata tweaks put in them and would be re-released alongside something else. So just a 6.5 rather than a 7th edition

Could the "something else" from the second source be the black box Eldar and IG that we have been talking about?

More info saying it is just bringing everything together, so as long as you have your current rules and the FAQs your good to go. No need for a new book.

Lol, you realise you're quoting a rumour from a guy who has already posted the rumour himself int his thread?

Automatically Appended Next Post:
For the record, I've had a GW 'source' tell me that it was definitely a bona fide 7th.

I am ambivalent on the quality of this info, but just to balance out those claiming the opposite.

The rumor from Natfka contains a second source saying the same as I did though so it's not completely wasted.

And my info comes from a GW distributor (through a third party I know well) talking about the "new" product. Soooo we have GW vs GW then. Let's have them fight it out in the Thunderdome!

**warboss**

ClockworkZion wrote:
Soooo we have GW vs GW then. Let's have them fight it out in the Thunderdome!

Boooring. They'll just end up d6'ing it because they can't agree on something and then forging a lame narrative about it.

**pretre**

ClockworkZion wrote:
Soooo we have GW vs GW then.

Not really. We have internet guy vs internet guy. Their sources are really irrelevant.

**ClockworkZion**

warboss wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
Soooo we have GW vs GW then. Let's have them fight it out in the Thunderdome!

Boooring. They'll just end up d6'ing it because they can't agree on something and then forging a lame narrative about it.

Then take away their dice and make them fight with the hobby tools.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

pretre wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
Soooo we have GW vs GW then.

Not really. We have internet guy vs internet guy. Their sources are really irrelevant.

True, I just meant both of us are hearing stuff coming from GW folks.

**Talizvar**

Place your bets on them making "one" change "most" of us like.

We can hold a poll of the change most like and the one most reviled.

So from the look of new picture rumors we are seeing something on May 24th??

**ClockworkZion**

Talizvar wrote:
So from the look of new picture rumors we are seeing something on May 24th??

Pre-orders and release announcement.

**tomjoad**

So, I haven't read the whole thread, so apologies if this has already been discussed, but...

Might this 6.5 release be why we stopped seeing FAQs? If the team who SHOULD have been doing FAQs have been writing this, we might see more than just the already-released FAQs rolled into the new book, but the answers to questions that we've been begging them for over the past year as well. I don't mean to give too much credit to GWs design team, but I am starting to feel optimistic about this new rule book and I'm ready to believe that it'll be the tightest rule set that 40k has ever had.

**Azreal13**

pretre wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
Soooo we have GW vs GW then.

Not really. We have internet guy vs internet guy. Their sources are really irrelevant.

My chap was recently ex-GW when he told me, which has me 50/50 on whether it was feth them, I don't care anymore, or just devilment on his part and he really knew nothing.

Equally, I have no cause to doubt his honesty, but I'm not sure he was in a position to really know much in the first place. But I believe he knew guys who were.

Hence my ambivalence!

**ClockworkZion**

azreal13 wrote:
pretre wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
Soooo we have GW vs GW then.

Not really. We have internet guy vs internet guy. Their sources are really irrelevant.

My chap was recently ex-GW when he told me, which has me 50/50 on whether it was feth them, I don't care anymore, or just devilment on his part and he really knew nothing.

Equally, I have no cause to doubt his honesty, but I'm not sure he was in a position to really know much in the first place. But I believe he knew guys who were.

Hence my ambivalence!

Fair enough. I'm always willing to be wrong so I have no skin in this game either.

**pretre**

azreal13 wrote:
pretre wrote:
ClockworkZion wrote:
Soooo we have GW vs GW then.

Not really. We have internet guy vs internet guy. Their sources are really irrelevant.

My chap was recently ex-GW when he told me, which has me 50/50 on whether it was feth them, I don't care anymore, or just devilment on his part and he really knew nothing.

Equally, I have no cause to doubt his honesty, but I'm not sure he was in a position to really know much in the first place. But I believe he knew guys who were.

Hence my ambivalence!

The point is that I could say that Tom Kirby told me that it is actually a combined Fantasy/40k ruleset called 'There is Only War' and is no edition number. It doesn't make my statement any more or less reliable. It is still just a statement from an Internet Guy (one with a horrible rumor tracker record too).

**Azreal13**

Fair point, but with 3 years and thousands of posts under my belt, I think I probably rate slightly above "Internet guy" in terms of my honesty?

I'll concede, this might have been the most elaborate troll ever, but I'm not exactly the "signed up yesterday, only made one post" type am I?

**Accolade**

tomjoad wrote:
So, I haven't read the whole thread, so apologies if this has already been discussed, but...

Might this 6.5 release be why we stopped seeing FAQs? If the team who SHOULD have been doing FAQs have been writing this, we might see more than just the already-released FAQs rolled into the new book, but the answers to questions that we've been begging them for over the past year as well. I don't mean to give too much credit to GWs design team, but I am starting to feel optimistic about this new rule book and I'm ready to believe that it'll be the tightest rule set that 40k has ever had.

So what, we pointed out a number of contradictions in the rules, needed clarifications, or other imbalances and GW says:

Hey, thanks guys! We dealt with your concerns and "errors" you found, and everything is nice and neat!

It'll just be $100 to get those clarifications. I mean, it's not like this stuff was wrong in the first place!

Sorry, not trying to be snotty but I just don't see a lot of good in GW taking all the FAQs and effectively charging us for their mistakes

**tomjoad**

Accolade wrote:
tomjoad wrote:
So, I haven't read the whole thread, so apologies if this has already been discussed, but...

Might this 6.5 release be why we stopped seeing FAQs? If the team who SHOULD have been doing FAQs have been writing this, we might see more than just the already-released FAQs rolled into the new book, but the answers to questions that we've been begging them for over the past year as well. I don't mean to give too much credit to GWs design team, but I am starting to feel optimistic about this new rule book and I'm ready to believe that it'll be the tightest rule set that 40k has ever had.

So what, we pointed out a number of contradictions in the rules, needed clarifications, or other imbalances and GW says:

Hey, thanks guys! We dealt with your concerns and "errors" you found, and everything is nice and neat!

It'll just be $100 to get those clarifications. I mean, it's not like this stuff was wrong in the first place!

Sorry, not trying to be snotty but I just don't see a lot of good in GW taking all the FAQs and effectively charging us for their mistakes

And you're going to buy it. So am I. So what?

**pretre**

azreal13 wrote:
Fair point, but with 3 years and thousands of posts under my belt, I think I probably rate slightly above "Internet guy" in terms of my honesty?

Counterpoint: Larry Vela's been around for years and has thousands of posts under his belt.

**ClockworkZion**

azreal13 wrote:
Fair point, but with 3 years and thousands of posts under my belt, I think I probably rate slightly above "Internet guy" in terms of my honesty?

I'll concede, this might have been the most elaborate troll ever, but I'm not exactly the "signed up yesterday, only made one post" type am I?

You at least rate "totally bodacious internet dude".

**Accolade**

tomjoad wrote:
Accolade wrote:
tomjoad wrote:
So, I haven't read the whole thread, so apologies if this has already been discussed, but...

Might this 6.5 release be why we stopped seeing FAQs? If the team who SHOULD have been doing FAQs have been writing this, we might see more than just the already-released FAQs rolled into the new book, but the answers to questions that we've been begging them for over the past year as well. I don't mean to give too much credit to GWs design team, but I am starting to feel optimistic about this new rule book and I'm ready to believe that it'll be the tightest rule set that 40k has ever had.

So what, we pointed out a number of contradictions in the rules, needed clarifications, or other imbalances and GW says:

Hey, thanks guys! We dealt with your concerns and "errors" you found, and everything is nice and neat!

It'll just be $100 to get those clarifications. I mean, it's not like this stuff was wrong in the first place!

Sorry, not trying to be snotty but I just don't see a lot of good in GW taking all the FAQs and effectively charging us for their mistakes

And you're going to buy it. So am I. So what?

I am seriously considering not buying this release. That is really surprising to me, I bought the 6th LE and everything, I've been a big fan of 40k since 3rd edition.

But this (possible) release...I just don't know if I can support this direction 40k is going in. Maybe I will really have to play with just my 6th copy, or maybe I'll have to quit.

It's not a sob story, I just honestly don't see myself picking this book up, especially if it will only last 2 years like the last.

**loki old fart**

tomjoad wrote:
So, I haven't read the whole thread, so apologies if this has already been discussed, but...

Might this 6.5 release be why we stopped seeing FAQs? If the team who SHOULD have been doing FAQs have been writing this, we might see more than just the already-released FAQs rolled into the new book, but the answers to questions that we've been begging them for over the past year as well. I don't mean to give too much credit to GWs design team, but I am starting to feel optimistic about this new rule book and I'm ready to believe that it'll be the tightest rule set that 40k has ever had.

And within a month there's a FAQ/errata post