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.
I'd love to see a change (to the FOC maybe) that could help reverse the trend of deathstars/spams. From the tone of the forums it seems like that would make many people happy.
Sanguine Fist Lion's Claw
Gitsplitta wrote:Yes, please note that the arrival of the cat coincided with my complete failure militarily. Cats not only suck the breath out of little babies, they sucked the life out of my counter attack!
I expect all the W40k forumites to cry out in rage and disappointment when it's unveiled to be just a roll-up of the expansions into the main rulebook, with no other notable changes.
I'm expecting more of a v6.5 rather than v7, but here's what I'm expecting:
- Changes to the Allied matrix
- Vehicles become more durable
- I'm expecting that Escalation/Stronghold will be condensed into the rulebook but I can see this having some criticism from those who've forked out £60+ for both the books.
- If they make Lords of War 100% legal, a dramatic toning-down of Destroyer weapons.
- More variety in scenarios rather than just "variations in deployment and how many objectives you have to capture"
Kain wrote: I expect nothing more than a bundling of all the "expansions" into the main rulebook.
...which of course will still be more expensive.
Gotta rip off the player base somehow.
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Think of a daemon incursion like a fart you don't quite trust... you could either toot a little puff of air, bellow a great effluvium, or utterly sh*t your pants and cry as it floods down your leg.
Id rather they didnt add escalation lords of war are apoc for a reason: to remove masses of units off the table to quicken a long and drawn out game. Dont get me wrong im an IG player but the first time i roll into my FLGS with two Baneblades as part of my list, ill be avoided like the plague. I would like it if vehicles were a bit more durable. Next ed should take its time im ok with 6th my armies dont instant die and its easy to make lists on the fly for any situation. The only thing i hate are melta-spammers just a mass of idiots coming at me with meltas. So ridiculous. Maybe an update to assault and make overwatch hit on a 5+ not snapshots i would think that flyer rules could use some work. I find it ridiculos that a land raider could ever shoot down a zooming valkyrie.
All in all litle things nothing wrong with current ed to release a new one so soon. And i remind everyone not everyone likes stronghold/escalation thats why they are supplements if anyone wants to play it they will but pushing it on people that was is just wrong. Learn to play without ridiculous walls and superheavies.
Makumba wrote: I hope that if 7th ed realy happens soon , the AM codex won't suffer from last in the old edition syndrom .
you mean like necrons suffered coming into 6th edition?
id be hoping that the first codex out isnt as lame as CSM.
BB to be nerfed to death
it should include the new stuff, escelation and fortifications, because the couple that were in there were woefully inadequate.
folding the FAQ and errata in.
spelling mistakes fixed.
i could keep going on haha
Necrons suffered coming into 6th edition? Have you played 40k in the past two years?
Makumba wrote: I hope that if 7th ed realy happens soon , the AM codex won't suffer from last in the old edition syndrom .
you mean like necrons suffered coming into 6th edition?
id be hoping that the first codex out isnt as lame as CSM.
BB to be nerfed to death
it should include the new stuff, escelation and fortifications, because the couple that were in there were woefully inadequate.
folding the FAQ and errata in.
spelling mistakes fixed.
i could keep going on haha
Necrons suffered coming into 6th edition? Have you played 40k in the past two years?
I believe that Yen is being sarcastic.
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Think of a daemon incursion like a fart you don't quite trust... you could either toot a little puff of air, bellow a great effluvium, or utterly sh*t your pants and cry as it floods down your leg.
Makumba wrote: I hope that if 7th ed realy happens soon , the AM codex won't suffer from last in the old edition syndrom .
you mean like necrons suffered coming into 6th edition?
id be hoping that the first codex out isnt as lame as CSM.
BB to be nerfed to death
it should include the new stuff, escelation and fortifications, because the couple that were in there were woefully inadequate.
folding the FAQ and errata in.
spelling mistakes fixed.
i could keep going on haha
Necrons suffered coming into 6th edition? Have you played 40k in the past two years?
sorry sarcasm was not in there haha that was EXACTLY my point..
edit: ninjad.
but yeah i feel for the first codex.
something i did just htink of though,
what if Matt Ward writes a large portion of 7th ed rules, and thats why we havent seen much of him because he is all into this new book?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/29 15:05:37
Apologies for being out of the loop, as I usually am, but is there any confirmation that it is actually a new edition? I was under the impression that it was more going to be a conglomeration of supplements into one book, or is that woefully out of date information?
curran12 wrote: Apologies for being out of the loop, as I usually am, but is there any confirmation that it is actually a new edition? I was under the impression that it was more going to be a conglomeration of supplements into one book, or is that woefully out of date information?
It is very likely that this is the case.
And if that is the case, I will be upset since I don't play the expansions and do not enjoy the idea of having superheavies shoehorned into the main game. Plus the idea of again having to pay upwards of $75 only two years after the release of 6th, etc. etc. etc.
Prescience pulled out of the primaris (possible Warp Charge 2 = more unlikely but feasible)
Snap Shots are BS-3
Different rules for challenges
A very different vehicle Damage table to mimic the escalation damage tables.
Run in the movement Phase
USR overhauls. (Making different ones transferable and nontransferable)
prescience at 1 isnt too bad really.. its not the core problem there..
BS 3 snap shots? so orks get better when snap shooting? nope sir orks already gain from snap shooting, anything can fire at flyers, and they can move and fire heavy weapons with little real loss..
other things id like i spose would be AV removed, and vehicles going to a tougness value with ignores poisen bla bla,
i already do the runs in the movement phase, though i spose making it official wouldbe ok, i mean it just flat out makes the game faster,
curran12 wrote: Apologies for being out of the loop, as I usually am, but is there any confirmation that it is actually a new edition? I was under the impression that it was more going to be a conglomeration of supplements into one book, or is that woefully out of date information?
It is very likely that this is the case.
And if that is the case, I will be upset since I don't play the expansions and do not enjoy the idea of having superheavies shoehorned into the main game. Plus the idea of again having to pay upwards of $75 only two years after the release of 6th, etc. etc. etc.
Why? Nothing would have changed, as the expansions are all legal in normal games as is. Seems like getting mad at nothing to me.
But I'm glad to hear that what I thought was still true, and that most of this is all just so much hot air and bluster.
BS 3 snap shots? so orks get better when snap shooting? nope sir orks already gain from snap shooting, anything can fire at flyers, and they can move and fire heavy weapons with little real loss..
It's subtle in my comment, but BS minus 3.
So BS4 things still hit things on 6s...but my Autarch can still hit a flier on a 4+.
prescience at 1 isnt too bad really.. its not the core problem there..
BS 3 snap shots? so orks get better when snap shooting? nope sir orks already gain from snap shooting, anything can fire at flyers, and they can move and fire heavy weapons with little real loss..
other things id like i spose would be AV removed, and vehicles going to a tougness value with ignores poisen bla bla,
i already do the runs in the movement phase, though i spose making it official wouldbe ok, i mean it just flat out makes the game faster,
I think he means -3BS. so a marine would snap at BS 1 , but someone with higher BS would snap better. On the other hand armies like tau or IG would be almost un able to snap fire at all , because most of their stuff would drop to bs 0 , everything ork would be unable to snap too
BS 3 snap shots? so orks get better when snap shooting? nope sir orks already gain from snap shooting, anything can fire at flyers, and they can move and fire heavy weapons with little real loss..
It's subtle in my comment, but BS minus 3.
So BS4 things still hit things on 6s...but my Autarch can still hit a flier on a 4+.
sorry i can see that now i thought you meant it as BS-3 not BS -3 ... my bad
i think maybe -2.. as it makes MEQ as bad as orks at shooting snap shots.. the catch with a 10 level system for stats i spose.
edit : because you cant be BS 0. on the down its to a min of 1 and max of 10 with the stat values
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/29 15:22:55
The Orks were the last book of 4e and did quite well in 5e. I'm sure anyone who remembers the terror of musical wounds nob bikers can recall those days with a fierce shudder.
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Think of a daemon incursion like a fart you don't quite trust... you could either toot a little puff of air, bellow a great effluvium, or utterly sh*t your pants and cry as it floods down your leg.
curran12 wrote: Apologies for being out of the loop, as I usually am, but is there any confirmation that it is actually a new edition? I was under the impression that it was more going to be a conglomeration of supplements into one book, or is that woefully out of date information?
It is very likely that this is the case.
And if that is the case, I will be upset since I don't play the expansions and do not enjoy the idea of having superheavies shoehorned into the main game. Plus the idea of again having to pay upwards of $75 only two years after the release of 6th, etc. etc. etc.
Why? Nothing would have changed, as the expansions are all legal in normal games as is. Seems like getting mad at nothing to me.
But I'm glad to hear that what I thought was still true, and that most of this is all just so much hot air and bluster.
I don't like the idea because I'm essentially being...encouraged... to pay another $70 to stay current with 40k. That compounded with the fact that it has only been two years since 6th edition came out.
Yes, Stronghold Assault and Escalation are considered to be core to the main rules (as opposed to other expansions like Cities of Death), but a lot of people don't necessarily like the idea of superheavies being always allowed in games and don't buy these books (because again, you're spending like $140 just in core rules).
If it is 6.5, then the playing fee for this edition effectively becomes $140 unless of course you're just joining up when 6.5 would come out.
I just think the whole thing screams of GW trying to snatch any money they can from me at this point, so I'm a bit annoyed (maybe mad was too strong a word).
is it a 0 or a - ? though in BRB page 3 explains what a 0 means... it means you cannot shoot, are auto hit in CC, and cant take leadership test, (explanation mine)
and cannot be modified beyond those, its in the BRB...page 2 has how modifiying stats goes
curran12 wrote: Apologies for being out of the loop, as I usually am, but is there any confirmation that it is actually a new edition? I was under the impression that it was more going to be a conglomeration of supplements into one book, or is that woefully out of date information?
It is very likely that this is the case.
And if that is the case, I will be upset since I don't play the expansions and do not enjoy the idea of having superheavies shoehorned into the main game. Plus the idea of again having to pay upwards of $75 only two years after the release of 6th, etc. etc. etc.
Why? Nothing would have changed, as the expansions are all legal in normal games as is. Seems like getting mad at nothing to me.
But I'm glad to hear that what I thought was still true, and that most of this is all just so much hot air and bluster.
I don't like the idea because I'm essentially being...encouraged... to pay another $70 to stay current with 40k. That compounded with the fact that it has only been two years since 6th edition came out.
Yes, Stronghold Assault and Escalation are considered to be core to the main rules (as opposed to other expansions like Cities of Death), but a lot of people don't necessarily like the idea of superheavies being always allowed in games and don't buy these books (because again, you're spending like $140 just in core rules).
If it is 6.5, then the playing fee for this edition effectively becomes $140 unless of course you're just joining up when 6.5 would come out.
I just think the whole thing screams of GW trying to snatch any money they can from me at this point, so I'm a bit annoyed (maybe mad was too strong a word).
But, if it proves to be a consolidation, you do not need those books. If the core rules remain, and the only change is the addition of supplemental material, why get the new book?
Sorry, but this whole thing just reminds me why I get exasperated with the online wargaming community. There is never any voice of calm, and it -guarantees- more histrionics and upset talk. This thread shows that there is absolutely no happy situation:
If it proves to be nothing more than a rules consolidation, people are upset for "raaa cash grab" even though it is an unnecessary purchase.
If it proves to be a rules tweak, people are upset for "raaa cash grab" as well as the limited scope of rules changes.
If it proves to be a rules overhaul, I think you know where this is going.
Am I the crazy in not letting this get to me until I actually have information other than the hot air of the internet to go by?
curran12 wrote: Apologies for being out of the loop, as I usually am, but is there any confirmation that it is actually a new edition? I was under the impression that it was more going to be a conglomeration of supplements into one book, or is that woefully out of date information?
It is very likely that this is the case.
And if that is the case, I will be upset since I don't play the expansions and do not enjoy the idea of having superheavies shoehorned into the main game. Plus the idea of again having to pay upwards of $75 only two years after the release of 6th, etc. etc. etc.
Why? Nothing would have changed, as the expansions are all legal in normal games as is. Seems like getting mad at nothing to me.
But I'm glad to hear that what I thought was still true, and that most of this is all just so much hot air and bluster.
I don't like the idea because I'm essentially being...encouraged... to pay another $70 to stay current with 40k. That compounded with the fact that it has only been two years since 6th edition came out.
Yes, Stronghold Assault and Escalation are considered to be core to the main rules (as opposed to other expansions like Cities of Death), but a lot of people don't necessarily like the idea of superheavies being always allowed in games and don't buy these books (because again, you're spending like $140 just in core rules).
If it is 6.5, then the playing fee for this edition effectively becomes $140 unless of course you're just joining up when 6.5 would come out.
I just think the whole thing screams of GW trying to snatch any money they can from me at this point, so I'm a bit annoyed (maybe mad was too strong a word).
But, if it proves to be a consolidation, you do not need those books. If the core rules remain, and the only change is the addition of supplemental material, why get the new book?
Sorry, but this whole thing just reminds me why I get exasperated with the online wargaming community. There is never any voice of calm, and it -guarantees- more histrionics and upset talk. This thread shows that there is absolutely no happy situation:
If it proves to be nothing more than a rules consolidation, people are upset for "raaa cash grab" even though it is an unnecessary purchase. If it proves to be a rules tweak, people are upset for "raaa cash grab" as well as the limited scope of rules changes. If it proves to be a rules overhaul, I think you know where this is going.
Am I the crazy in not letting this get to me until I actually have information other than the hot air of the internet to go by?
I think you're putting a lot of emotion to my posts that simply aren't there. I'm not fuming, biting at the bit over this upcoming release. But I do think it is completely fair that I find the idea of a new core rulebook at half the lifespan of the previous editions to be a disreputable thing.
Regarding the scenarios you gave:
If it's a rules consolidation, then I imagine people are going to be playing with the expansions because they are in the core rule book they just bought. So I will need to purchase 6.5 to stay current with what others are playing. Sure, maybe a lot of people will stick with 6th, or will ignore the new portions of 6.5 (but then why buy it?), but I don't really see that happening unfortunately.
If it is a rules tweak, then this seems the most indicative of GW's future plans: to release a Call-of-Duty-equse rulebook update every couple of years my making minor changes and expecting people to buy them (and hey, it works well for them).
If it is a rules overhaul, then this could potentially be a good thing. I would have wished they had put more effort into the 6th release since the books cost such a premium amount, but it would be the only option where they put genuine effort into the release, so there is a perceived value (at least from my perspective) there.
They could always have waited for the natural lifespan of the rulebook to have completed before making the update. If it is 6.5 then it does little to change the issues people have with 6, so why bother releasing it?
I think you're right in that GW has little positive options in this scenario. I think they sort of dug themselves into a whole with this release, and more long-term planning could have prevented complaints.
EDIT: and to clarify, the "Sky is Falling!" stuff obviously isn't helpful, I'm not defending that.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/29 15:53:06
3) who gets which table side is determined AFTER both players have placed objectives on the table
4) no more battle brothers. Current allies of convenience rules become rules for 7th edition battle brothers, current desperate allies rules become rules for 7th edition allies of convenience, and 7th edition desperate allies has more negative modifiers,
5) "closest model is allocated wounds till it dies" mechanic is changed to "one wound allocated to each model, starting from closest to furthest" goodbye deathstars
6) in close combat, striking a 2+ save model with an AP3 weapon is no longer as useless as striking it with a stick. The armor save gets modified by -1
7) interceptor is not needed for weapons with skyfire to fire at non-fkyer/skimmer units with their normal BS
This way we can finally play a meta without deathstars having a guy tanking wounds, without allies shenanigans, without banshees sucking, and without flyers dominating
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/29 15:55:44
Ravenous D wrote: 40K is like a beloved grandparent that is slowly falling into dementia and the rest of the family is in denial about how bad it is.
squidhills wrote: GW is scared of girls. Why do you think they have so much trouble sculpting attractive female models? Because girls have cooties and the staff at GW don't like looking at them for too long because it makes them feel funny in their naughty place.
is it a 0 or a - ? though in BRB page 3 explains what a 0 means... it means you cannot shoot, are auto hit in CC, and cant take leadership test, (explanation mine)
and cannot be modified beyond those, its in the BRB...page 2 has how modifiying stats goes
I'm expecting nothing more than a roll in of some of the supplement rules like Escalation and Stronghold. I'm also kind of expecting a minimal amount of rolled in FAQ/Errata that had once existed.
Shame really.
My hopes aren't high, and there's not a lot that can salvage the direction of this game short of a pretty serious overhaul.
Mordian Iron Guard - Major Overhaul in Progress
+Spaceship Gaming Enthusiast+
Live near Halifax, NS? Ask me about our group, the Ordo Haligonias!
Sanguine Fist 
Lion's Claw
6500pts IG mech army
20,000 Pts 
6000+ Pts
2000 l 
2000 l 
2000 l 
1000 l 
1000 l 
Blood Ravens (using Ravenguard CT) 1500 l 
1500 l
