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.

The hostages are just one point why the Ukrainian war is top topic in German news and why people here will be easily offended by the poster.

I didn't see anything in the first post. What's all this about a poster?

 Kroothawk wrote:
The hostages are just one point why the Ukrainian war is top topic in German news and why people here will be easily offended by the poster.

What's unbelievable to me is that, rather than hold your hands up and admit it was maybe in poor taste, or even just not respond, you're actually trying to justify yourself?

Enough now, this might be the top news story in Germany (it's up there here in the UK too, unsurprisingly) but trying to pervert the possible implications of a poster for a game into some sort of political BS so your posts aren't both in bad taste AND off topic won't get any more item from me, let the Mods sort it out.

 Lansirill wrote:
I didn't see anything in the first post. What's all this about a poster?

Poster in this post:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/1110/592379.page#6790380

A Comissar ... is our only hint.

I must say I am amazed at how much flak kroothawk is getting from a, somewhat dark, joke, there is a difference between a joke and being serious.

 Jaceevoke wrote:
I must say I am amazed at how much flak kroothawk is getting from a, somewhat dark, joke, there is a difference between a joke and being serious.

The flak seems to be less about the joke and more about his attempts at justifying his joke.

Anyone still excited about the new rulebook coming up?

 Purifyingflame_7 wrote:
Wow, that went from hilarious Tinfoil-Hat-Party, to political bs with just a single post. Can't we all just unite in a shared hatred of GW? My Nids are doing fantastic as of 6th, so I'd be more keen to see a great trademark caper run-around instead of them adding, subtracting, or dicking the rules as they are now.

It's a little tragic that the idea of each new edition of 40K having "winners" and "losers" is so ingrained by now. But it's the consequence of retrofitting existing army lists to an edition they weren't designed for--which also prevents the rules getting the clean sweep they really need.

OK.

On topic, please.

Warnings and suspensions from this point forward.

 Elemental wrote:

 Purifyingflame_7 wrote:
Wow, that went from hilarious Tinfoil-Hat-Party, to political bs with just a single post. Can't we all just unite in a shared hatred of GW? My Nids are doing fantastic as of 6th, so I'd be more keen to see a great trademark caper run-around instead of them adding, subtracting, or dicking the rules as they are now.

It's a little tragic that the idea of each new edition of 40K having "winners" and "losers" is so ingrained by now. But it's the consequence of retrofitting existing army lists to an edition they weren't designed for--which also prevents the rules getting the clean sweep they really need.

Apparently that very nearly happened for 4th edition. Andy Chambers had written the rules - the decision was made however to keep the same rule structure/mechanics. Andy then went on to use the rules for the now sadly defunct Starship Troopers.

It was a pretty good ruleset, certainly quite fast and I think more suited to the scale of game that 40k became after 2nd edition.

Was Pancake Edition's (mmmm..pancakes) provenance ever determined/proven?

I do wonder, if one was to credit GW with competence just for a second, that if there was a long term plan, that 6th was a stop gap, and Pancake was always meant as 7th, or was pushed to 7th and 6th knocked up in short order (which would explain a lot.)

It would be one way we might see Pancake, or son of Pancake, in the wild.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Anyone still excited about the new rulebook coming up?

I'm excited to see what it does, but I'm always excited to see what is in a release.

*edit*

So if it is a release on the 24th of May, would we get a "teaser" soon?

Do you think it will be a 2 week pre-order or a one week pre-order? If I remember 6th edition was a 2 week pre-order correct? So maybe something this week, for a teaser?

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Anyone still excited about the new rulebook coming up?

I'm excited to see what it does, but I'm always excited to see what is in a release.

Me too, this is the one time my cynicism for cash grabs and customer exploitation is outweighed by my excitement for new challenges and changes.

Assuming there are any and it isn't just 6th in a new dress.

 fishy bob wrote:

 Perfect Organism wrote:
If they manage to change 'space wolves' into something even slightly dignified, I'll be overjoyed.

Like Spaca Wolfum?

No more like Flea Bags!!! Says the Blood Angels sitting at the bar looking for trouble.

I already posted the teaser, you guise

 dantay_xv wrote:
Astral Waelwulfas: Waelwulas is an old saxon term used for viking, commonly translated as Slaughter wolves

Imperial Amat or Amat Imperium for Imperial Fists,
Tractus Lupos for Space Wolves
Tenebrarum Angeli for Dark Angels
Sanguinem Angeli for Blood Angels
Salamandra for salamanders
Album Cicatrices for White Scars
Ultramarines for Ultramarines
Manibus Ferreis for Iron Hands
Custodi Corvus for Raven Guard,
Courtesy of google translator english to latin

We are going off-topic.

Any more word on what we may expect on or around the 24th May?

I love the come back!!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Only twenty one more days... only twenty one more days...

 azreal13 wrote:
Was Pancake Edition's (mmmm..pancakes) provenance ever determined/proven?

I do wonder, if one was to credit GW with competence just for a second, that if there was a long term plan, that 6th was a stop gap, and Pancake was always meant as 7th, or was pushed to 7th and 6th knocked up in short order (which would explain a lot.)

It would be one way we might see Pancake, or son of Pancake, in the wild.

It was completely a fan-made ruleset.

 azreal13 wrote:
I'm sorry, but I'm finding joking about a situation where people are actually dying, when we have a Ukranian community here on Dakka, in relation to the release of a game to be in pretty bad taste.
Perhaps its a German thing....

I disagree. I was born in Odessa and I find Kroots joke pretty hillarious a suggestion. And then people say germans have no sense of humour.

Anyways, I think there is one thing we can agree on: Given the current state of mass superheavies, flyers, vastly imballanced unit types (walkers vs MC) and USR bloat, battle brothers and death-star shenanigans, GW would be hard-pressed to make it any worse.

 Pacific wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Was Pancake Edition's (mmmm..pancakes) provenance ever determined/proven?

I do wonder, if one was to credit GW with competence just for a second, that if there was a long term plan, that 6th was a stop gap, and Pancake was always meant as 7th, or was pushed to 7th and 6th knocked up in short order (which would explain a lot.)

It would be one way we might see Pancake, or son of Pancake, in the wild.

It was completely a fan-made ruleset.

But we have who's word for that?

Did the originator actually come of and say so, or has it been assumed because 6th didn't resemble it in he slightest?

 azreal13 wrote:

 Pacific wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Was Pancake Edition's (mmmm..pancakes) provenance ever determined/proven?

I do wonder, if one was to credit GW with competence just for a second, that if there was a long term plan, that 6th was a stop gap, and Pancake was always meant as 7th, or was pushed to 7th and 6th knocked up in short order (which would explain a lot.)

It would be one way we might see Pancake, or son of Pancake, in the wild.

It was completely a fan-made ruleset.

But we have who's word for that?

Did the originator actually come of and say so, or has it been assumed because 6th didn't resemble it in he slightest?

http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?346380-Review-6th-Edition

Don't know if its legit or not though. . .

3.) New starter will be BA vs. Orks.

God I hope this one is true, the Orks need some more models these days, and the Blood Angels could be pretty cool

Interesting reading..

He kind of discredits himself by citing 6th as a better system than Pancake, but certainly writes as if he knew his subject!

He also implies that it wasn't an amateur project, and denies it was written by 'an (ex) GW employee.' Which of course means it could have been written by someone who still worked for them.

There's also an implication that pancake was written for something, or would be available for sale to then be attached to a system.

I'm not even sure where I'm going with this, but I guess I'm finding the idea of chewing over if Pancake was, or could be, 7th rather than 6th interesting.

 Lloyld wrote:
3.) New starter will be BA vs. Orks.

God I hope this one is true, the Orks need some more models these days, and the Blood Angels could be pretty cool

I'd be surprised considering this would be a repeat of 5th edition which was releasing boxes only about 2 years ago.

 azreal13 wrote:
Interesting reading..

He kind of discredits himself by citing 6th as a better system than Pancake, but certainly writes as if he knew his subject!

He also implies that it wasn't an amateur project, and denies it was written by 'an (ex) GW employee.' Which of course means it could have been written by someone who still worked for them.

There's also an implication that pancake was written for something, or would be available for sale to then be attached to a system.

I'm not even sure where I'm going with this, but I guess I'm finding the idea of chewing over if Pancake was, or could be, 7th rather than 6th interesting.

I don't know if you noticed but the account only has 14 posts in total 11 of which are in those threads, which makes it seem like it was an account that was created for the sole purpose of starting those threads and getting feedback. The other three post made by slayer of lies was one saying he was a long time lurker of warseer, the other two were in a thread regarding the then new flyer spam armies and what to call them. But has not posted anything since his last post in his "Review Sixth Edition", not sure if that makes seem more or less reliable.

I personally hope that an revised version of the pancake edition is 7th edition, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was going to be the rule system for a competitor of 40k. That they released claiming it as the supposed 6th edition to get feedback from their target audience.

 azreal13 wrote:

I do wonder, if one was to credit GW with competence just for a second, that if there was a long term plan, that 6th was a stop gap, and Pancake was always meant as 7th, or was pushed to 7th and 6th knocked up in short order (which would explain a lot.)

I hoped this was the plan when 6th was released and looked nothing like Pancake, but alas, the quality (or lack thereof) of the codexes and supplements released since then suggest that level of forethought is beyond that which the studio is operating.

 Lloyld wrote:
3.) New starter will be BA vs. Orks.

God I hope this one is true, the Orks need some more models these days, and the Blood Angels could be pretty cool

New starter set or not, the new Ork models are going to be awesome. Flashgitz ftw.

I thought Pancake was an early playtest version of 6th with a wishlist of rules?

Maybe it was just more disinformation.

 Kosake wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
I'm sorry, but I'm finding joking about a situation where people are actually dying, when we have a Ukranian community here on Dakka, in relation to the release of a game to be in pretty bad taste.
Perhaps its a German thing....

I disagree. I was born in Odessa and I find Kroots joke pretty hillarious a suggestion. And then people say germans have no sense of humour.

Anyways, I think there is one thing we can agree on: Given the current state of mass superheavies, flyers, vastly imballanced unit types (walkers vs MC) and USR bloat, battle brothers and death-star shenanigans, GW would be hard-pressed to make it any worse.

One of GW's problems is they cannot change one thing at a time. Partly because you can't justify a new £45 rulebook by say only a revised Allies chart, but also because they can't seem to let well alone where things are working fairly well. For example, with 6th edition/Tau codex, they changed Rapid Fire, opportunity fire, cover, Markerlights, and several other things that all affected shooting, and the effect of these changes together with some changes that affected assault, suddenly had a major effect on game balance.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
One of GW's problems is they cannot change one thing at a time. Partly because you can't justify a new £45 rulebook by say only a revised Allies chart, but also because they can't seem to let well alone where things are working fairly well. For example, with 6th edition/Tau codex, they changed Rapid Fire, opportunity fire, cover, Markerlights, and several other things that all affected shooting, and the effect of these changes together with some changes that affected assault, suddenly had a major effect on game balance.

I think that's a symptom of non-digital games in general: updates have to be big to get people to buy into them, they swing things massively and because of it they can really shift/overturn metas.

A counter-measure to the pendelum going to far in any direction of course would be regular FAQs that actually change things, but GW has never been good about that on any level.