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.

 Peregrine wrote:
Don't be surprised if the concept of troops being the only scoring units goes away. After all, we can't have unbound armies getting crushed because the "awesome" all-LRBT army the WD author is going to to buy can't claim objectives..

Yeah, it wouldn't be too surprising if all units in Unbound armies count as scoring, ala Knights.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:
2 years really isn't that short of a time frame, it just feels short because we're used to it being longer.

Yes it is. Look at the other games listed. 2 years is nothing. And it means one of two things:

1. GW know 6th is a mess, so have 7th to fix it (but this would imply that they acknowledge the game is problems).
2. They just want to boost the figures for that quarter, and edition releases always boost sales.

Given that we have no indication that the people writing the game understand the game they're writing (Ref. everything they've done for the past year, their obsession with 'Forging a Narrative'), my money's on the former: A cynical cash-grap to tick a box in a quarterly report.

In all the ways 40k can't be compared to the other games due to poor quality of rules, scale of the game and scope of the setting and now we want to compare how long the edition lasted?

Like I said, if 2 years becomes the new norm but they're actively correcting things with each new ruleset, I'm okay with that. If this ruleset, or any other one after this doesn't and actually makes the game a broken mess, then I'll be moving away from 40k and looking at Fantasy, or another system entirely until things change. I like 40k, but I can't ethically support a system that's being turned into a quick cash in and if the rules turn out to be that then I'll be on hiatus from it fro a while.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Honestly, I do believe that wagamers are worse than football (soccer) fans when it comes to overreacting to little or no information and a whole load of supposition.

The WD scan states verbatim that you can literally take an army of riptides. If you feel that throwing in the towel is an "overreaction" to that, then I envy you for your Zen mastery.

Actually, "verbatim", it says 4 Riptides and a bunch of Broadsides.

read it again, the article refers to "Glenn" having 4 riptides (now).....and using his 4....and lots of broadsides.....

 azreal13 wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Honestly, I do believe that wagamers are worse than football (soccer) fans when it comes to overreacting to little or no information and a whole load of supposition.

The WD scan states verbatim that you can literally take an army of riptides. If you feel that throwing in the towel is an "overreaction" to that, then I envy you for your Zen mastery.

I just don't intend to regularly play Unbound games, and sure as hell won't be playing ANY as pick up games. You can too!

Honestly, I have reservations, I really do, but I'm just not willing to throw myself out of the window yet.

Others are, inexplicably, reminding me of these guys..

Meh it's just, I've been frustrated for so long and this is just touching on the last straw.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 mitch_rifle wrote:
Could be a good thing to happen maybe it will seperate the game for those who want to play WAAC with ridiculous combos and those who want to play normally

Until you have the guy wanting to play his battlesuit/riptide spam army because he just likes them.

 Eldarain wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Honestly, I do believe that wagamers are worse than football (soccer) fans when it comes to overreacting to little or no information and a whole load of supposition.

The WD scan states verbatim that you can literally take an army of riptides. If you feel that throwing in the towel is an "overreaction" to that, then I envy you for your Zen mastery.

Actually, "verbatim", it says 4 Riptides and a bunch of Broadsides.

"Verbatim" it says all his Riptides (last count 4)

And that's not an army made completely of Riptides, it's 4 Riptides AND Broadsides. Words mean things and if we're going to use them we should do so correctly. We already ruined "literally" lets not ruin "verbatim" while we're at it.

 StarTrotter wrote:

 mitch_rifle wrote:
Could be a good thing to happen maybe it will seperate the game for those who want to play WAAC with ridiculous combos and those who want to play normally

Until you have the guy wanting to play his battlesuit/riptide spam army because he just likes them.

Which if we had better rules, there wouldn't be this problem, sadly. I, too, would love a Quint-tide army because Giant Robots are awesome. Who doesn't?

 krazynadechukr wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 ZultanQ wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Honestly, I do believe that wagamers are worse than football (soccer) fans when it comes to overreacting to little or no information and a whole load of supposition.

The WD scan states verbatim that you can literally take an army of riptides. If you feel that throwing in the towel is an "overreaction" to that, then I envy you for your Zen mastery.

Actually, "verbatim", it says 4 Riptides and a bunch of Broadsides.

read it again, the article refers to "Glenn" having 4 riptides (now).....and using his 4....and lots of broadsides.....

I don't need to read it again because apparently I'm the only one paying attention to what it actually says. 4 Riptides + a bunch of Broadsides is not the magazine saying "verbatim" that he's taking an Army of Riptides, that's implied, not explicitly stated.

And with how often WD gets rules wrong I'm not even counting on that idea being correct.

This might help balance an Unbound list vs. a battle-forged list.

Battle-forged - you obey all FOC rules and stick to one Codex.

If you bring a battle-forged list and play against an unbound list you immediately receive the following VP bonuses.

You receive Victory Points determined by what your OPPONENT brings.

For every Codex/Dataslate/Formation after the first one that your opponent brings, you receive two VPs.

For every duplicate of a unit your opponent brings (other than troops and their transports) you receive one VP.

For every superheavy your opponent brings you receive five VPs.

For every flyer (including FMC) after the first one your opponent brings, you receive two VPs.

For every MC your opponent brings after the first one, you receive two VPs.

For every D strength weapon your opponent brings, you receive three VPs.

For every 2++ rerollable your opponent rolls during the game you immediately receive seven VPs.

Victory Point conditions stack and are cumulative. Ergo, the second FMC in your opponent's list will yield you five VPs (+2 flyer, +2 MC, +1 duplicate unit).

In all instances in which a dispute arises the maximum number of VPs must be conveyed to the battle-forged list player.

jamesk1973 wrote:
stuff

And it's come full circle, guys. Mission complete.

This is fake, by the way.

*sigh*

James, you should have figured out by now that you shouldn't be posting that in this thread as if it's worth gak. We don't need more people mistaking it for actual rumours.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Leth wrote:
So if your army of riptides loses because I got one victory point on turn two and you have no scoring units. Is your army of riptides still good?

Don't be surprised if the concept of troops being the only scoring units goes away. After all, we can't have unbound armies getting crushed because the "awesome" all-LRBT army the WD author is going to to buy can't claim objectives.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Commander_Farsight wrote:
What do you guys make of the Psychic Phase and the open FOC now form the leaked White Dwarf issue?

Stupid as hell. But that's what we should expect from GW, stupid changes for the sake of having changes.

Wow cool wow all tank regiment! It's not like FW already maeks that and we are slightly stepping on their toes or anything

 AlexHolker wrote:
*sigh*

James, you should have figured out by now that you shouldn't be posting that in this thread as if it's worth gak. We don't need more people mistaking it for actual rumours.

....Again.

Seriously take it to Proposed Rules if you're going to post it.

 AlexHolker wrote:

 azreal13 wrote:
Honestly, I do believe that wagamers are worse than football (soccer) fans when it comes to overreacting to little or no information and a whole load of supposition.

People are reacting to Games Workshop's own attempt to present 7th edition in the best possible light. They put their best foot forward, and it has gangrene on it.

Make no assumptions on that, look at some of the shoddy paint jobs on some recent releases, GW have repeatedly failed to present their products in the best light, even when the product has actually been decent.

This thread is not for sanity. It is to feed the gnawing need to vent our frustrations because the company we pander will not listen.

Alright I was trying to be respectful but it seems that you are not capable of giving the same courtesy in response so lets go through your points one by one.

"So you don't like any other game (odd), great."

I didnt say I didnt like other games, I said I did not enjoy them enough to invest instead of getting more 40k

"I have traveled across the USA over 4 years and have found 40k commuinities and communities for every other game routinely mentioned on Dakka. I know of just as many Malifaux, Infinity, and Warmachine events as I do 40k."

and I have been playing for 15 years and I have huge communities come and go. ALWAYS they are going to be the one that topples GW, and yet many of them are gone and GW is still here.

"Almost every major GT this year features these events and they are usually sponsored or supported by the company that makes said product. And volunteers identified by the companies are running slow grow events, leagues, tournaments, etc. all supported by the companies, too. They feature fully supported social media functions, open play tested rules, up-to-date FAQs, and tournament season rules."

and none of these games offer the same versatility in armies, models, and rules interactions. They are small, they started in recent years, they are dealing with a different structure. They are also much smaller so it will be interesting to see how they continue going forward, if they maintain the functions the same way. It is too new to tell and make any conjectures.

"And you never see discounts on Infinity, Warmachine, etc? You're just being plain dumb now:

http://www.miniaturemarket.com/table-top-miniatures/warmachine-hordes.html
http://www.thewarstore.com/InfinityAriadna.html"

and I was talking about my local game store that I try to support so once again your arguement is not valid. I used to get 20-25% in store for GW and they didnt discount warmachine. That is the experience I was talking about.

"And those games are cheaper to play. Stop talking out your bum. "

I said value not price, so pull the cotton out of your ears. Yes you can play those games for cheaper but it doesnt mean that I am getting the same VALUE for my investment. Or is that a concept that is too difficult for you?

"I said objective. Here are objective facts. GW's community support is non-existent, their rules are overpriced and slipshod, their model quality is not "the best in the industry" or shall we discuss Finecast? Yes, they have the same customer service record as all the other companies: when you have a dud model, you get a free replacement in the mail 99 out of 100 times if you're not taking advantage of the company. They have checked one box. Great. "

Community support is based on what you want from them. I would like them to do more so I will agree on that front. Once again overpriced is subjective so you cant say it is or isnt, the level of slipshod is also subjective. Are the rules as tight as others? Nope but that is not a big deal in my decision making so I dont value it highly. For the most part I enjoy playing and there are not problems with the rules that are not easily resolved. Best in the industry is also subjective combined with price, are they the best on all models? Nope but across everything? I have never had a problem with finecast, in fact it has been better for me than metals. Didnt get any bubbles and it was easier to convert and work with so once again SUBJECTIVE OPINION. How many companies do you know that will send you a new plastic kit when you open a 15 year old box and it is missing a piece? Go on? I called about my old screamer killer carnifex missing a claw and they sent me a new plastic one. Go on, how many companies would do that?

So you are countering my subjective view with your own subjective view then calling me an idiot because I call your subjective view a subjective view. I didnt say that the other games were bad, I said I did not enjoy them to the same extent. Price =/ Value, or is that something that doesnt register to you? I could play warmachine for less than 40k that is true, but it doesn't mean that per dollar I am getting the same subjective value.

 AlexHolker wrote:
*sigh*

James, you should have figured out by now that you shouldn't be posting that in this thread as if it's worth gak. We don't need more people mistaking it for actual rumours.

Well, we are in a rumours section...

You have to admit it makes taking spam/deathstars a little less enticing.

There is still too many unknowns about 7th edition and the 'unbound' army rules to make any kind of real judgements. Often things that sound absurd turn out to be relatively fine once you see the whole puzzle put together.

However, part of keeping that positive outlook is trust in the company producing the rules/game that they have a firm understanding of how their rules changes affect different gaming circles. Unfortunately, GW has shown in the past couple years an increasing detachment from either knowing what their rules changes are doing to certain segments of their player base, or else not caring what their rules changes are doing…and either answer is pretty much equally troubling.

Without seeing the entirety of the 7th edition rules, it seems like the concept of the 'unbound' (no FOC) army being able to be relatively balanced against a 'battle-forged' (FOC army) rests almost solely upon whatever those 'in-game bonuses' a player using a battle-forged army gains. However, 40K is such a massive unbalanced game that it seems almost impossible to come up with any sort of single 'in-game bonus' that could make up for the other player getting to completely ignore the FOC.

The reason for this is because frankly there are units that are way too good for their points cost compared to other units and their relative points cost. Throughout the history of 40k, those players who like to win their games, naturally looked at which units were undercoated for their value, and stuffed as many of those units into their army as they could. Then when 6th edition was released and allies came into play, players now had more opportunity than ever to circumvent the FOC (through the ally rules) to include even more of these undercosted units into their armies. This created a much greater imbalance than ever before between the 'hardcore' army list and the casual 'theme' army list…the latter would be completely obliterated by the former, where in previous editions of the game, it wasn't quite so big a disparity, because armies were still limited by a single FOC and a single codex (not including the first two editions of the game, which also had rules for allies).

The concept of an 'unbound' army takes this absurdity to almost its absolute peak. Now a player's army can be comprised of only the most points efficient units in the game, with the *only* restriction seeming to be the new ally matrix (and we still do not know how this is organized).

However, if you're giving a battle-forged force bonuses to combat those gained by a player taking an unbound army, how can this be done? How can you create bonuses that are fair if the opponent is taking a completely 'fluffy' unbound army filled with overcosted (comparatively weak) units vs. if the opponent is taking an army filed with only the most undercosted (comparatively powerful) units in the game? It just doesn't seem possible. Either these bonuses are so amazing that a battle-forged army will walk all over a weak unbound army all day long or the bonuses are so pathetic that they won't come even close to making up for an army across the table that is going to completely destroy your battle-forged force in a few turns.

If you look how GW handled Escalation's 'in-game bonuses' when playing against a Lord of War, I think you get a big clue to how terrible this is likely going to be. In Escalation, if one side has a Lord of War and the other player doesn't, the side without the Lord of War gets a special Warlord table (which is mediocre at best) and damaging Lords of War gives out additional VPs to the opponent. If a player is taking a fairly benign Lord of War, like a Baneblade, then these compensation bonuses are pretty fair…but as soon as a Lord of War enters the game with a ranged D-weapon, those compensation bonuses are completely pathetic because of how ridiculously undercosted ranged D-weapons are.

And that is the biggest clue to me that GW just doesn't give a crap anymore. Any person or company that could put out a set of rules where ranged D-weapons cost the same amount of points as ANY other type of weapon either has no idea about how their rules function, or they don't care.

And I just don't see any evidence that they've learned anything since then, so frankly I'm expecting more of the same from these new rules, which is really, really bad news IMHO.

Well I've got my expectations sufficiently lowered enough I think. I'm fully mentally prepared to move onto something else if this update doesn't actually improve things. Which sucks as a choice but I WANT 40k to get better not worse.

I don't even know what to expect at this point, guess I should go with the old standby of "it'll be on fire and thrown at my head when I buy it via a trebuchet" just so things look better by comparison and I don't get my hopes too far up.

Yeah, the signs don't look good... but at least you may be able to more easily deny buffs to enemy units now. Hopefully it is not too much like the fantasy magic phase, as that has been very unpopular!

Objective cards sound interesting, though... I'm open to the idea, at least.

So... All through 6th I kept an eye on my local meta hoping things might improve and I could return to the game.
I think I'm now at the point where I can simply stop watching this thread, stop watching the meta and just enjoy the other games on the market now. I suppose I have just lost the last bit of interest I had.

There is a LOT of off-topic discussion going on this thread.

PLEASE STOP. This topic is of great interest to lots of people, so every off-topic post just adds needless bloat to the thread.

I will be going through and deleting OT posts for the last few pages, so PLEASE STOP discussing TV shows, other game company's business practices, etc, etc, etc.

You have been warned!

 Leth wrote:
Alright I was trying to be respectful but it seems that you are not capable of giving the same courtesy in response so lets go through your points one by one.

"So you don't like any other game (odd), great."

I didnt say I didnt like other games, I said I did not enjoy them enough to invest instead of getting more 40k

"I have traveled across the USA over 4 years and have found 40k commuinities and communities for every other game routinely mentioned on Dakka. I know of just as many Malifaux, Infinity, and Warmachine events as I do 40k."

and I have been playing for 15 years and I have huge communities come and go. ALWAYS they are going to be the one that topples GW, and yet many of them are gone and GW is still here.

"Almost every major GT this year features these events and they are usually sponsored or supported by the company that makes said product. And volunteers identified by the companies are running slow grow events, leagues, tournaments, etc. all supported by the companies, too. They feature fully supported social media functions, open play tested rules, up-to-date FAQs, and tournament season rules."

and none of these games offer the same versatility in armies, models, and rules interactions. They are small, they started in recent years, they are dealing with a different structure. They are also much smaller so it will be interesting to see how they continue going forward, if they maintain the functions the same way. It is too new to tell and make any conjectures.

"And you never see discounts on Infinity, Warmachine, etc? You're just being plain dumb now:

http://www.miniaturemarket.com/table-top-miniatures/warmachine-hordes.html
http://www.thewarstore.com/InfinityAriadna.html"

and I was talking about my local game store that I try to support so once again your arguement is not valid. I used to get 20-25% in store for GW and they didnt discount warmachine. That is the experience I was talking about.

"And those games are cheaper to play. Stop talking out your bum. "

I said value not price, so pull the cotton out of your ears. Yes you can play those games for cheaper but it doesnt mean that I am getting the same VALUE for my investment. Or is that a concept that is too difficult for you?

"I said objective. Here are objective facts. GW's community support is non-existent, their rules are overpriced and slipshod, their model quality is not "the best in the industry" or shall we discuss Finecast? Yes, they have the same customer service record as all the other companies: when you have a dud model, you get a free replacement in the mail 99 out of 100 times if you're not taking advantage of the company. They have checked one box. Great. "

Community support is based on what you want from them. I would like them to do more so I will agree on that front. Once again overpriced is subjective so you cant say it is or isnt, the level of slipshod is also subjective. Are the rules as tight as others? Nope but that is not a big deal in my decision making so I dont value it highly. For the most part I enjoy playing and there are not problems with the rules that are not easily resolved. Best in the industry is also subjective combined with price, are they the best on all models? Nope but across everything? I have never had a problem with finecast, in fact it has been better for me than metals. Didnt get any bubbles and it was easier to convert and work with so once again SUBJECTIVE OPINION. How many companies do you know that will send you a new plastic kit when you open a 15 year old box and it is missing a piece? Go on? I called about my old screamer killer carnifex missing a claw and they sent me a new plastic one. Go on, how many companies would do that?

So you are countering my subjective view with your own subjective view then calling me an idiot because I call your subjective view a subjective view. I didnt say that the other games were bad, I said I did not enjoy them to the same extent. Price =/ Value, or is that something that doesnt register to you? I could play warmachine for less than 40k that is true, but it doesn't mean that per dollar I am getting the same subjective value.

Ok. Not liking other games as much is fine, but is subjective.

Being in the game for 15 years isn't that long. I've been in it for 25, and have seen more companies come and go. Others have been in longer. It's not a pissing contest. Frankly I haven't heard of other games "toppling GW" before, but now that other games have ten plus years in the industry GW is quickly loosing its "big dog" status,

I do find it interesting that you used to get 25% discounts on GW, but no longer. Really a discount has nothing to do with the manufacturer in thus industry. When you get a discount your retailer is giving you a deal. Online retailers giving 20% off are making it up in volume. GW still gets their full cut. Don't give them any credit for your LGS's discounts.

Personally I do not find as much "value" with GW as you describe it. I find too large of the player base in my age range to be Waac, and other less nice words. I'd rather play a more fun game, with better rules (yes it's subjective) than give that soulless corporation anymore of my money.

The community is better, the company player support is better, the rules are better and the tourney scene (if you're into that) is better with other games at this point. Those other games have also proven that they're here to stay, and more vets are bailing out for them everyday.

You could already take 6 Riptides/Heldrakes in a double force organization game. That is the way GW wanted you to play the game in 6th plus escalation and all the other things. Unbounded just allows you to take infinite Riptides. This is a logical escalation of the direction GW was going.

Remember that space marine chapter that was $11,690? All the special edition codices that are double the price? The constant drip of DLC? People buy it. Why limit these people? Unbound them!

Maybe not all of you can keep up with the wallet hammer, but understand that you are not GW's key demographic.

They may WANT to get rid of you as a customer. They hate complainers and will take zero criticism on Youtube or Facebook. They want the obedient 1% that buys everything they put out who are fanatical and have 1 million point of miniatures, buy every codex as special edition, and enjoy games that include 25 Riptides (someone will buy this many easily).

 Leth wrote:
So if your army of riptides loses because I got one victory point on turn two and you have no scoring units. Is your army of riptides still good?

You can still get points for killing the Warlord and First Blood, etc right? So in the end if no scoring units then only those types of killing points will decide who wins. Right? lol

 Nid Bits wrote:

 Leth wrote:
So if your army of riptides loses because I got one victory point on turn two and you have no scoring units. Is your army of riptides still good?

You can still get points for killing the Warlord and First Blood, etc right? So in the end if no scoring units then only those types of killing points will decide who wins. Right? lol

impossible to say as we wont know till more official rules drop. For all we know with unbound everything counts as scoring

Please GW reallocate the Hull Points.

I actually lost the discount because I moved and my local game store only does 10. I never said it was a pissing contest, he was mentioning his 4 years as if it was more significant than mine. I dont think mine is but he started the pissing contest, I just chugged a beer and found a wall.

Also I have NO problem with someone else getting different value from GW, that is 100% okay for me, but for people to argue that their subjective opinion is anything but and then insult people who have different values is what I have a problem with. I fully support spending your money where you want. I fully support your artistic preferences. Just dont insult people with different ones, or state your preferences as fact.

I have found that the 40k tourney scene is a lot of fun for me, that warmachines rules did not appeal to me, even in casual games. I realized that for the 40k tournament scene the problem was more me than anything else. I can still bring a non optimized list and play to the mission and do okay, which is all I want. I was bringing gak lists and was not very good. Once I fixed that it was a lot more fun.

Personally I like both the Options of Unbound vs. Battle-Forged.

Unbound:
For myself it will allow me to play a few of the armies I always wanted to play.
>Space Wolves with Harlequin Allies and Leman Tanks.
>Space Marine Armored Company
>Paladin/Purifier/Inceptor only Army without taking 2 Special Characters.

For a friend of mine:
>His one squad of Sisters that has without buying more overpriced Models.
>All Dreadnaught Army.
>Genestealer Cult Army.

Battle Forged:
I think little will changed.

40k radio said on their Facebook that battle forged armies gain race specific bonuses. That might be useful enough to help counteract unbound shenanigans. Also scoring units might well be far more important with the new mission cards. We are looking through a very tiny window at a very large animal here. The good thing is we should be getting a bigger picture very rapidly as we are just over 2 weeks from the release.

Cynical me is looking at this and thinking 'is this slightly odd timing?'

IIRC 5th and 6th editions were released in mid July 2008 & late June/early July 2012.
Having 7th edition up for pre-order May 24th seems like it might just be scraping in to the 2013-2014 financial year for what would presumably be their single biggest product release.

Am I reading too much in to that?