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.

 pretre wrote:

 Agent_Tremolo wrote:
that "pay-for-balance app" rumor is utter bull.

Found your answer.

Track 'em all. Let PRETRE sort 'em out!

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Actually, a living document online that has a monthly charge, like Xbox Live, isn't necessarily a bad thing. Depends on their cost. If it's $5 a month...that's $60 a year. If it's all inclusive on the rules, that means you get EVERY "army book" plus the rules and all point costs for $60/year. That's actually fantastic. Split it among a group of friends, and everyone gets access to the points. There are no surprises on rules or reasons to not know what something does. By GW standards, it's actually a brilliant choice. I'm happy to grump at their decisions when wrongdoings happen. But this online living document to avoid piracy is actually a good thing. Now, if it's $5/month for EACH army book, that's BS.

Except it won't prevent piracy, because preventing piracy is impossible(the end-user has to get the data in the clear at some point, so there's always a way into the "system" for a cracker to exploit), all you can do is make piracy more difficult, and typically the only way to do that is to make things more inconvenient for legitimate users usually in ways that people using the inevitable cracked copy don't have to deal with. GW might be able to keep their little online castle secure for a few weeks or months, but someone will crack it eventually even if only to prove it can be done, and then it'll go up on the usual places for anyone to access and use.

And online living documents have a disadvantage from a consumer perspective that's inherent, regardless of what other ultimately futile measures GW take to try and stop piracy; loss of control. As certain river cruise fans are so keen to point out; GW can't come to your house and tear up your books, they're yours, so if you hate the direction GW is taking the game you can just keep playing 8th, or go back and play any other edition you own. So what happens to AoS subscribers(assuming this rumour is accurate) in a couple of years time when GW decide it's not living up to their expectations and kills it off? At least with the LRBs for the Specialist Games they were PDF documents that could be saved to your own storage media and re-uploaded on other sites once GW took them down from theirs, this has no such failsafe, so if GW take it down without releasing the source code to the community it's gone for good. What if AoS does well enough for them to push forward, but not well enough for them to stick with the current plan, and you hate whatever new direction they choose to take the rules in? Like it or lump it, apparently, since an online-only GW-managed tool isn't going to let you keep an old version of the rules, they'll just replace what you have access to with the new ones and there's nothing you can do about it - no more "I'll just stick with 8th".

Now, if the tool is actually software, it works offline as well as on, or it lets you take backup copies of everything it contains to your own computer that's somewhat mitigated, but it also means that if the intent was to prevent piracy it's even more pointless.

I'll have to see what the actual word is on this, because it's the fine print that will determine whether this is a reasonable service or a naked attempt to wrest control and agency away from players by denying them the rights associated with actually owning the rules.

new pics in /tg

....

The more I see this the more I wince at how terrible this is all looking. I regret selling my Lizardmen...but would have regretted losing my house even more. Had to pay rent somehow...

But now I see this...

Ew. I think I'll stick to 40k. Seems like we're getting silly grand alliances and renames across the board.

Seraphon? Really? Really? MAGIC BUBBLE SPACE LIZARDS

Still not a huge fan of the basing mess either.

Ah well, least it means if I decide to buy some GW stuff for use in roleplaying...I get convenient round bases for them.

Love the nail varnish art.

guru wrote:
new pics in /tg

Blocked at work!

- Salvage

Honest question: I haven't played every tabletop war/skirmish game out there. Is there any other game that doesn't measure from bases or some other uniform spot?

So skaven gets a name drop in Chaos...

Well not surprising and at least they didnt get squatted.

I have to admit that the Ogres (or is it Ogors now?) look pretty cool on round bases.

£75 UK confirmed for the AOS boxed set, so a certain purchase for me and the rules can be damned (maybe that is what they want?).

Assuming they NEED to do on the fly, non stop weighting.
Why?

Update the algorithm as they see fit but do as an update.
Who cares if every single battle/combat is logged as an input.

 Boss Salvage wrote:

guru wrote:
new pics in /tg

Blocked at work!

- Salvage

Rehosting now.

Really liking the look of all this and an interesting new direction.

Renaming everything to make it copyright protectable. Sigh.

 Desubot wrote:
So skaven gets a name drop in Chaos...

Well not surprising and at least they didnt get squatted.

I know they basically decided to bro-fist chaos in Thanquol, but it still feels wrong. Skaven have never really differentiated between the kinds of man-things. There's just man-things, dwarf-things, elf-things and other-things.

Anyway, rehosted the images on imgur:

http://imgur.com/a/X7LS8

let me know if that doesn't work.

the Warscroll "batallion"

I wanna know why some races have different names if there is an explanation. Like 40k is shown from the Imperials perspective, maybe this is how Sigmar interprets the races and calls the Lizardmen Seraphon or the Orks Orruks? Little things like that would bug me especially if they change the fluff to make it seem like they were always called Seraphon.

Also I maintain the "IT'S COOL GUYS BASES DON'T MATTER!' is the biggest PoS cop-out ever. They wanted to change bases but knew the backlash for making everyone rebase would kill their game, so instead just "lol ignore guise!"

Lazy. Just plain lazy.

ORRUKS?!?!?!??


Refused

RacerX wrote:
Assuming they NEED to do on the fly, non stop weighting.
Why?

Update the algorithm as they see fit but do as an update.
Who cares if every single battle/combat is logged as an input.

It wouldn't need to be non-stop, but the only way to generate a reliable weighting system like that is to feed it a lot of real world data to allow it to assign weights to the system or model. So you would want a big bank of playtest data at least to feed it. Once that has been done, it would only need to be recalibrated if there were major changes to the system like the introduction of a new army.

There's no point in having an algorithm like that if you're going to update it by hand. It defeats the purpose of using data handling to assign your weights.

So the Thunderstrike Brotherhood basically arrives in Drop Pods\

That Khorne Lord with Flesh hound is stunning.

 streamdragon wrote:
Also I maintain the "IT'S COOL GUYS BASES DON'T MATTER!' is the biggest PoS cop-out ever. They wanted to change bases but knew the backlash for making everyone rebase would kill their game, so instead just "lol ignore guise!"

Lazy. Just plain lazy.

The worst part is because ultimately it is just to save money and now we have this silly rule because of it.

 unmercifulconker wrote:
I wanna know why some races have different names if there is an explanation. Like 40k is shown from the Imperials perspective, maybe this is how Sigmar interprets the races and calls the Lizardmen Seraphon or the Orks Orruks? Little things like that would bug me especially if they change the fluff to make it seem like they were always called Seraphon.

So GW can copyright the IP instead of using generic names like "orks" or "lizardmen", most likely.

Kurt Russell and I were pretty close to those four faction names in the end.

I reckon Skaven for Destruction. EDIT: Nope. Wrong. They're nodded to in chaos.

 Thraxas Of Turai wrote:
So the Thunderstrike Brotherhood basically arrives in Drop Pods?

It really is getting harder and harder to see the Simarites as anything other than Fantasy Space Marines.

lightning hammers.

RacerX wrote:
ORRUKS?!?!?!??


Refused

To think they could of just used Orks

There own version or orcs...

 streamdragon wrote:

 unmercifulconker wrote:
I wanna know why some races have different names if there is an explanation. Like 40k is shown from the Imperials perspective, maybe this is how Sigmar interprets the races and calls the Lizardmen Seraphon or the Orks Orruks? Little things like that would bug me especially if they change the fluff to make it seem like they were always called Seraphon.

So GW can copyright the IP instead of using generic names like "orks" or "lizardmen", most likely.

Not copyright, trademark. And that's still a bloody stupid idea, because it means retreating from the tried and tested IP in favour of new IP with zero established fanbase.

More renamed but supposedly the same paints? Ughh...

 gorgon wrote:
I don't think GW's old playtesting formula was ever broken. My understanding was that even when playtesters felt strongly about something, the designers didn't always agree. And to be fair, the playtesters might not have been privy to the entire picture, nor any constraints that the designer(s) had to deal with.

Supposedly those old playtesting groups warned them about Nidzilla being a thing in the 4th edition Tyranid codex, but they had a new plastic carnifex to sell so nothing changed.

So I guess I can see why they moved away from that if that's actually true. They never really gave a gak anyway, the rules are made to sell product...sometimes, anyway.

 gorgon wrote:

 Sidstyler wrote:
I'm starting to think the only thing that would appease you guys demanding "patience" is complete and utter silence until the big day.

So what valuable insights and conversation from you am I trying to "silence," bud?

What valuable insights are there in "Cool models!" and "omg so excited!"?

I'm not fething kidding myself or anything, I don't have any "valuable insight" but I don't see why I shouldn't be able to participate just because I'm not part of the "Everything is fine!" crowd.

 gorgon wrote:

 Sidstyler wrote:
What, are you kidding? Allies were bad for the game, and still are. Hell, especially now, with IoM and Eldar armies being the only ones that can really take advantage of them.

Are you forgetting Taudar, too? The most-hated army build for months, made possible because of allies, and if I'm not mistaken it usually included an aegis line, too, just to annoy people further.

That's all soooooo 6th edition of you. Try and keep up.

Yes, 6th edition. That's what you were talking about, wasn't it? 6th is when allies, fortifications, and all that crap started (and when we starting losing our gak, which is what you were referencing). You were saying that shortly into 6th "opinions shifted" and allies, random charges, and all the other changes people whined about previously were accepted, except they never really were. The most broken armies of the time abused the allies system and that's exactly what everyone was afraid of.



...speaking of fear...oh dear. Steamhead dwarden, seraphon, orruks, ogors...

Orruks? Orruks And ogors, seriously? "Let's just switch this letter here, add a couple more letters there, done! Now it's protectable IP! COPYRIGHT 2015 GAMES WORKSHOP DON'T STEAL!"

Gotta give them credit for seraphon I guess, that one looks like they actually thought about it for a bit. Although...kinda odd because "seraph" instantly puts the image of angels and the divine in my head, not lizards. But whatever, at least it's not freaking "lyzeerds" or something stupid like literally every other name they came up with.

 Da Boss wrote:
Renaming everything to make it copyright protectable. Sigh.

More like *bangs head on desk*

Holy crap i just look at the unit names for the Khorne warband.


Bloodsecrator?


Really GW?

Bloodsecrator? Please let that be a photoshop.

I've avoided this thread or talking on it for fear of not liking what I would say or at least realizing what was deep in my head. However seeing these new pictures of the round bases, use of war scrolls - honestly I can just reserve my dwarves for only 8th edition and move on. It's not like I haven't moved on from games workshop already (downsized my 40k to one large company of marines, sold all my fantasy except my dwarves). I mostly play Spartan games with a nice large crowd of people (firestorm armada being the most popular, followed by planet fall or dystopian) or wrath of kings - which doesn't have a point per model but it's fairly balanced (I guess warhammer is emulating that).

It sucks but I really don't want to play a game that is 40k light - I liked the regiments, the formations, the positioning.... Without it it becomes mordhiem for dummies.

Bah whatever though - let games workshop sink itself. I got a massive amount of other fun games to keeps occupied as they keep growing