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.
Wow. So. Something will happen on 24 May. Something... red, white, diagonal, and connected with Imperial Guard? I wish they'd at least tell us if this was a book, film, or play. :( Worst game of charades ever.
Gorlack wrote: Hm... So, video "teaser" already. Could indicate that they would open the pre releases on the 10th with a 14 day window like last time?
That is what my guess is.
Now since I have CRS, I don't recall, if the pre-orders were the date of the teaser trailer date or if that was the actual release date.
Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.
Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?
Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".
Nah, they want you to log on May 24th to make your pre-order. If they opened it on the 10th you'd have two weeks to get cold feet and cancel. *edit* Then again, with the 24th being a saturday... hmm.
That teaser is probably the least effort of them all so far. Still, I'm not sure what of that could make you "even less" interested - it really is just the poster again. "I didn't mind this when it was a still image, but in motion it's a massive turnoff. I'm out"
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/05/05 14:01:23
May 24th is also the day of the UEFA champions league final between Athletico Madrid and Real Madrid. Athletico play in red and white. Maybe GW are getting in football mood
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
I'm definitely starting to think its Guard in the starter set.
Mr Mystery wrote:Suffice to say, if any of this is actually true, then clearly Elvis is hiding behind my left testicle, and Lord Lucan behind the right.
I thought there wasn't supposed to be a new starter?
If I were to bet on it I'd just say they were re-using the Astra Militarum cover art for the new rulebook...assuming it's even for a new rulebook since I don't know what the hell's going on anymore.
Desubot wrote: Why isnt Slut Wars: The Sexpocalypse a real game dammit.
"It's easier to change the rules than to get good at the game."
Spurious analogy. Your salad does not have its own opinion about what should be included in it, you are the only one making a decision in scenario two, so you can present it as being a neutral option when it evidently is not in the context of 40K.
So.. your 40k books are sentient and have an opinion on how you should play them? Your understanding of his example is flawed. I assume you mean instead to compare the restaurant with GW instead (which is an apt comparison) but somewhat pointless as he is trying to make the point that the restaurant is letting him choose what he wants instead of forcing the allies/olives into his game/salad and then telling him to take them out.
Spurious analogy. Your salad does not have its own opinion about what should be included in it, you are the only one making a decision in scenario two, so you can present it as being a neutral option when it evidently is not in the context of 40K.
So.. your 40k books are sentient and have an opinion on how you should play them? Your understanding of his example is flawed. I assume you mean instead to compare the restaurant with GW instead (which is an apt comparison) but somewhat pointless as he is trying to make the point that the restaurant is letting him choose what he wants instead of forcing the allies/olives into his game/salad and then telling him to take them out.
What the feth are we talking about? Sentient salad?
Back on topic, ish, thanks to the modern digital technology there is no reason not to publish everything in chunks and let people buy, compile and download the modules they want.
For example, I would like the core rules including vehicles, but not the flyers, D weapons and other Escalation stuff, and no fluff or modelling stuff.
Then the Tau codex, the Tyranid codex, with no fluff or modelling. In the longer term I might like some of the dataslates, an updated Cities of Death, and a Killteam module.
This of course would require GW to organise the rules to be published in this manner, and everyone to accept that everyone does not want to buy and play with everything in the entire rule system.
Precisely. I would pay for a rulebook that came at a reasonable price if it did not have any fluff or modeling stuff. I don't give a single poopoo about anything bar Necrons and all fluff I actually care for came with the 3rd codex anyway. That's why the minibook is awesome - no unnecessary filler stuff.
Kilkrazy wrote: Back on topic, ish, thanks to the modern digital technology there is no reason not to publish everything in chunks and let people buy, compile and download the modules they want.
For example, I would like the core rules including vehicles, but not the flyers, D weapons and other Escalation stuff, and no fluff or modelling stuff.
Then the Tau codex, the Tyranid codex, with no fluff or modelling. In the longer term I might like some of the dataslates, an updated Cities of Death, and a Killteam module.
This of course would require GW to organise the rules to be published in this manner, and everyone to accept that everyone does not want to buy and play with everything in the entire rule system.
That's so meta!
I am hoping that Escalation doesn't make it's way into the new rule book, but will accept it IF they get rid of battle brother's allies.
Bull0 wrote: I don't think there's much worth in speculating about the idea of dropping individual codexes in favour of a BRB with all the core army lists in, given that:
1) that'd be a huge drop in revenue, at least in the short term
2) GW are doing the opposite at the moment with multiple books per core army rerelease
I contest your first point, sir.
Codex Tyranids- 49.50 USD
vs
How to paint Tyranids 15.99
Leviathan Rising Dataslate 1699
Tyranid Onslaught 16.99
Tyranid Vanguard Dataslate 16.99
Digital Downloads total- 65.99 or so. Physical rules, 49.50. The DLC has eclipsed the physical product as a revenue stream- at that point, making the conversion to a FTP model is worthwhile. Now, with the addition of GW's no models without rules policy, imagine a dataslate corresponding to a new and unseen model or two- a release may be a 15 or 16 dollar slate and a dual purpose box. Suddenly, a new release is truly a supplement which will soak $50 from existing players, and not a hail mary to catch anyone who can drop 500-1000 bucks on a brand spankin' new army. The allies structure makes this sort of release approach maintain an even broader appeal. GW has been testing the waters with the Knight codex, and I would imagine their marketing monkeys have informed them that it is successful and will work. Now, I don't know when GW will see the reason in this approach, but I would bet that dataslates have a much higher profit margin than Codices.
Klawz-Ramming is a subset of citrus fruit?
Gwar- "And everyone wants a bigger Spleen!"
Mercurial wrote:
I admire your aplomb and instate you as Baron of the Seas and Lord Marshall of Privateers.
Orkeosaurus wrote:Star Trek also said we'd have X-Wings by now. We all see how that prediction turned out.
Orkeosaurus, on homophobia, the nature of homosexuality, and the greatness of George Takei.
English doesn't borrow from other languages. It follows them down dark alleyways and mugs them for loose grammar.
Kilkrazy wrote: Back on topic, ish, thanks to the modern digital technology there is no reason not to publish everything in chunks and let people buy, compile and download the modules they want.
For example, I would like the core rules including vehicles, but not the flyers, D weapons and other Escalation stuff, and no fluff or modelling stuff.
Then the Tau codex, the Tyranid codex, with no fluff or modelling. In the longer term I might like some of the dataslates, an updated Cities of Death, and a Killteam module.
This of course would require GW to organise the rules to be published in this manner, and everyone to accept that everyone does not want to buy and play with everything in the entire rule system.
And that everything that they've bought would now be relatively useless similar to what happened back in 3rd edition. If GW had NOT been doing rapid fire $50 releases for the past two years, I'd support the decision as long as those chunks were priced a bit more sensibly unlike the current DLC offerings. I am a bit biased because I play DA, Tau, IG, and Eldar and they've all been updated since 6e and my only remaining force (BA) is rumored to be down the line as well for this year. That said.. I don't expect it to happen. What I see as more likely is that GW will try to have their cake and eat it too and sell mighty morphing digital chunks AND paper copies that are traditionally expected to "last" 5 years before turnover.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/05/05 15:12:29
Spurious analogy. Your salad does not have its own opinion about what should be included in it, you are the only one making a decision in scenario two, so you can present it as being a neutral option when it evidently is not in the context of 40K.
So.. your 40k books are sentient and have an opinion on how you should play them? Your understanding of his example is flawed. I assume you mean instead to compare the restaurant with GW instead (which is an apt comparison) but somewhat pointless as he is trying to make the point that the restaurant is letting him choose what he wants instead of forcing the allies/olives into his game/salad and then telling him to take them out.
Err, no. In scenario one, he is given a "set" salad, and then is forced to pick out the bits he dislikes, this is meant to equate with a version of 40K in which everything is allowed by default, and then he has to persuade opponents before each game to exclude this or that part that he doesn't like - Escalation, Allies, etc etc. Scenario two is supposed to describe an exclusive version of 40K, in which only the core rules are permitted by default, as a neutral "pick and choose what I like" situation, but it fails to acknowledge that what he likes may not be what his opponent likes.
Lets dispense with the salad, as I say it's flawed.
Scenario one, inclusive rules. MGS and I arrive for a game, I have a Knight, Allies, and an Inquisitorial Detachment. MGS doesn't want to play with Knights and Allies, but because the "default" position of the rules is that these things are allowed, the burden is on him to convince me to change my list. MGS is disadvantaged.
Scenario two, exclusive rules. MGS and I arrive for a game, I have a Knight, Allies, and an Inquisitorial Detachment. MGS doesn't want to play with Knights and Allies, and because the "default" position of the rules is that these things are not allowed, the burden is on me to convince him to allow me to use my army. I am disadvantaged.
MGS is seeking to present scenario two as being objectively better than scenario one, but it is not, merely better for him and those who agree with him. In both cases, the players disagree and must negotiate, all that changes is who starts out at an advantage because the "official" way of doing things agrees with their preference.
"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal
And yet most other codexes were updated twice while DE were waiting for their update...
Than you should be among the people rejoicing at how GW changed their release schedule these days, abandoning the lazy and incoherent ways of the Rick Priestley & Alessio Cavatore times, no?
I would say a good chunk of the ire for GKs and Necrons was due to the sweeping changes in background to them, rather than gameplay (certainly in the case of Necrons).
See, this really irritates me. Necron fluff did not change, it was expanded.
In the previous Necron book, it was written from the point of view of the imperium. The current book is written as by a narrator, so we see what is actually going on, not just what mankind assumes based on their limited observations.
Now with grey knights, I can understand the issues.
rigeld2 wrote: Now go ahead and take that out of context to make me look like a fool.
I'm pretty sure the Necron Pariah's would like a word about "expansion" (along with Squats) ....
And I'm sure the sisters didn't like being used to grease the psychic trail for the GK's.
Stupid is as Stupid does, and those "expansions" were dumb and added nothing to the fluff.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/05/05 15:29:45
No madam, 40,000 is the year that this game is set in. Not how much it costs. Though you may have a point. - GW Fulchester The Gatling Guns have flamethrowers on them because this is 40k - DOW III
So I guess Friday at 6pm EST on May 9th (or is it 7pm? EST?) will be the pre-orders of something then.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/05/05 15:46:24
Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.
Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?
Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".
Uriels_Flame wrote: I'm pretty sure the Necron Pariah's would like a word about "expansion" (along with Squats) ....
Pariahs were removed, that's the only real retcon. Removing one bad unit from a codex is not the same thing as removing an entire army because they were too silly for the new direction 40k was going. I do wish squats would come back, it would be sweet to have space dwarves again.
Uriels_Flame wrote: And I'm sure the sisters didn't like being used to grease the psychic trail for the GK's.
I am glad we agree on the SoB blood sacrifice being ridiculous.
Uriels_Flame wrote: Stupid is as Stupid does, and those "expansions" were dumb and added nothing to the fluff.
So, actually telling the story of the necrons, rather than imperial conjecture, was "dumb" and added nothing to the fluff? Have you even read either of the Necron books?
rigeld2 wrote: Now go ahead and take that out of context to make me look like a fool.
Its hard to be awesome, when your playing with little plastic men. Welcome to Fantasy 40k
If you think your important, in the great scheme of things. Do the water test.
Put your hands in a bucket of warm water,
then pull them out fast. The size of the hole shows how important you are.
I think we should roll some dice, to see if we should roll some dice, To decide if all this dice rolling is good for the game.
Waaagh an' a 'alf
1500 Pts WIP 
No madam, 40,000 is the year that this game is set in. Not how much it costs. Though you may have a point. - GW Fulchester 
The Gatling Guns have flamethrowers on them because this is 40k 
