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.

Christ I hope Warseer comes back soon.

Ahem, anyway; it's unlikely given the source, but everyone said that about AoS as well and, well, here we are. Honestly I mostly feel for Xenos players if it happens, Imperial players who like proper wargames with actual army construction rules in the older 40K style can resort to the excellent Heresy army lists from FW. I suspect if GW go through with this you'll find a lot of gaming groups hacking together 6th or 7th edition alien codices with those. Providing they don't just say f-it and walk away, of course, ET/AoS proved there are in fact things GW can do to drive away even its most ardent fans.

OP, do you get a % every time someone click on the link, it quite common on ad heavy site like his.

If this does happen it will be great for every other miniature company.

As anyones who knows a GW rep can attest, AOS is a disaster salewise. If they had plans to AOSify 40k, it went out the window after they saw the terrible reception AOS got. Couple this with an unknown source from a know charlatan, and I can confidently say that this is bullgak

 streetsamurai wrote:
As anyones who knows a GW rep can attest, AOS is a disaster salewise. If they had plans to AOSify 40k, it went out the window after they saw the terrible reception AOS got. Couple this with an unknown source from a know charlatan, and I can confidently say that this is bullgak

No offense, but the "anyone who knows X can attest" line doesn't make you as reliable as you might think.

I think, if it happens, GW would do it differently to what they did with WHFB I would be interested to see what they will do

Maybe it won't be drastic, just a continuing of the story with campaign books which would be cool

I like formations as they give more fluffy options for army lists but getting rid of points would be a bad move in my opinion

 Kanluwen wrote:

 streetsamurai wrote:
As anyones who knows a GW rep can attest, AOS is a disaster salewise. If they had plans to AOSify 40k, it went out the window after they saw the terrible reception AOS got. Couple this with an unknown source from a know charlatan, and I can confidently say that this is bullgak

No offense, but the "anyone who knows X can attest" line doesn't make you as reliable as you might think.

None taken Rule 1 is the first rule for a reason, let's keep it polite

Well what we do know is that the fluff is on the move going by the recent novel.

 streetsamurai wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 streetsamurai wrote:
As anyones who knows a GW rep can attest, AOS is a disaster salewise. If they had plans to AOSify 40k, it went out the window after they saw the terrible reception AOS got. Couple this with an unknown source from a know charlatan, and I can confidently say that this is bullgak

No offense, but the "anyone who knows X can attest" line doesn't make you as reliable as you might think.

None taken, since you're pretty much the most insignifiant poster on this site.

You spelled "insignificant" wrong.

If you want to be insulting at least have the decency to spell your insult correctly.

Wow, I see some posters are losing their maturity level to have adult discussions. Let's rign in it and stop personal attacks on other posters (I think there are dakka policies on that....) But hell I am not a mod, just trying to keep the peace.

I agree about AOS, blanket statements are far inaccurate and show inept bias. AOS has raised fantasy sales in central and northern Wisconsin. Maybe it wasn't accepted well everywhere, but it was accepted better than fantasy (which had died here due to balance issues, etc). However, this is not an AOS thread so.....

I don't think they would ever turn 40k into an AOS skirmish type game. In fact, the formations have turned 40k from a medium scale skirmish game into a higher points wargame. 40k and space marines are GW's bread and butter, I don't think they would do anything like that.

Moving the story forward? I have heard rumors of this for a year now. Rumrs of Primarchs returning, chaos exploding, etc. Will it happen? Who knows, I just hope 40k doesn't delve further into formation hammer. I'd be fine if 40k stays in it's scale but either goes back to a FOC or becomes more of an unbound style (with minimal restrictions) for list building purposes.

@455_PAR: as you said, they wouldn't turn 40k into a skirmish game, but then having it formation-based would most likely increase the scale of the game even more. I think in this regard, it would fit GW's MO.

I could see this happening with points being something the company doesn't have any interest in anymore. It's all about *forging the narrative and cooperative games (whatever the hell that means in a competitive game). GW could leave the points behind and tell fans to use the formations for rough army building, and repeat what they did with AOS except they could still sell books of formations. The new Space Wolves book seems to be going this direction.

Forgeworld could then be left to do the "legacy" points thing. Mind you, I think this a terrible plan, but I don't see it outside the realm of possibility.

Edit: phone didn't like *forging

*edit*

I don't think they'll move forward with something that drastic with the product that keeps them in business. And I really don't think they will move this direction now that Roundtree is in the drivers seat.

I'd love to see them evolving the story line bit by bit. Campaign books that actually mean something. I've enjoyed the Baal, Damacoles, and I'll probably enjoy the Fenris campaign books. It's one of my few regular purchases from GW now that I'm happy with my enormous Iron Warrior/Dark Mechanicus army.

 Hulksmash wrote:
I don't think they'll move forward with something that drastic with the product that keeps them in business. And I really don't think they will move this direction now that Roundtree is in the drivers seat.

I'd love to see them evolving the story line bit by bit. Campaign books that actually mean something. I've enjoyed the Baal, Damacoles, and I'll probably enjoy the Fenris campaign books. It's one of my few regular purchases from GW now that I'm happy with my enormous Iron Warrior/Dark Mechanicus army.

What you say is wise, but then again, all those decisions GW have made before are mind boggling, so who knows what GW will do. This seems something that GW would do.

Who knows this is something GW would do, "don't like Unbound, then here you go." Remember the words "be careful what you wish for, for you may just get it, but not in the way you want."

Davor wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
Oh look, it's natfka! Making more crap up!

Prove it. I mean PROVE IT. I haven't seen one rumour from Natfka yet that is made up. He never gives out rumours, just collects them and relays from what others say. If I am wrong please show me a rumour that Natfka made, MADE, not what he got from others, and I will believe you.

You understand that by continually citing things as "anonymous sources" that's impossible to prove or disprove, right?

I can start posting things that I've made up as "having gotten from anonymous sources", you'll never be able to prove or disprove it.

Davor wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Oh look, it's natfka! Making more crap up!

Prove it. I mean PROVE IT. I haven't seen one rumour from Natfka yet that is made up. He never gives out rumours, just collects them and relays from what others say. If I am wrong please show me a rumour that Natfka made, MADE, not what he got from others, and I will believe you.

I don't see Natfka do anything wrong, he just collects rumours just like Dakka does. Are you going to start bad mouthing Dakka now?

You are comparing a blog run by one person who posts rumors to a forum with many users who post rumors.

Yes, he does relay stuff from their sources, but so do many of the other rumour mongers on the tracker. Ultimately if their sources are wrong they are wrong, and if those sources are 'anonymous' as his always are they can't be tracked themselves so instead the one who relayed the information for them is tracked in their stead.

When it comes to Dakka, users who post rumours are also tracked if Petre knows. If they have an anonymous source they are tracked in their stead.

So while Natfka may not be making up the rumours himself, his sources almost certainly are and he should know by now not to trust everything he's told by them; and yet he still posts their stuff for the views and ad revenue.

 Accolade wrote:
@455_PAR: as you said, they wouldn't turn 40k into a skirmish game, but then having it formation-based would most likely increase the scale of the game even more. I think in this regard, it would fit GW's MO.

I could see this happening with points being something the company doesn't have any interest in anymore. It's all about for in the narrative and cooperative games (whatever the hell that means in a competitive game). GW could leave the points behind and tell fans to use the formations for rough army building, and repeat what they did with AOS except they could still sell books of formations. The new Space Wolves book seems to be going this direction.

A "competitive" game can still have cooperative elements. To use an example, look at things like the Terrorist Hunt mode in the Rainbow Six games. They don't NEED to track scores as the objective is for the players to cooperatively eliminate the AI.

By tracking scores though, you introduce an element of competition.

It's not a 1:1 comparison mind you, but I could see GW referring to "cooperative" gameplay meaning that players have to engage each other more beyond just "I have X points of my army. Let's play a game". AoS is a game where more often than not I've been texting the person I'm playing a game with days in advance, discussing which mission we want to play or the armies we want to use.

*Squeeeee*

In one stunning swoop, invalidation of whole armies unless they are lucky in the bingo sweep stakes and happen to own a formation from a dataslate.

Well, if this doom-speaking happens... which I'm not entirely convinced by. I would be incensed, nay outraged! but I'm beyond caring at this point. I have pretty models from a number of uncompetitive armies, I doubt more rule-abuse will cause anything more then a shrug, a thoughtful pout and a tut as I pick up the Saga rulebook.

Davor wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
I don't think they'll move forward with something that drastic with the product that keeps them in business. And I really don't think they will move this direction now that Roundtree is in the drivers seat.

I'd love to see them evolving the story line bit by bit. Campaign books that actually mean something. I've enjoyed the Baal, Damacoles, and I'll probably enjoy the Fenris campaign books. It's one of my few regular purchases from GW now that I'm happy with my enormous Iron Warrior/Dark Mechanicus army.

What you say is wise, but then again, all those decisions GW have made before are mind boggling, so who knows what GW will do. This seems something that GW would do.

Who knows this is something GW would do, "don't like Unbound, then here you go." Remember the words "be careful what you wish for, for you may just get it, but not in the way you want."

Meh, like I said. I have more faith in what we've seen out of GW since about 3 months after Roundtree took over (enough time for his changes to start being implemented). So while I could see Kirby and his yes men being stupid enough to do something like this I can't see it out of the current CEO as his current track record is solid. Let's look at it;

-Discounted starter boxes
-Formation of a "Specialist" studio under FW (yes, more for one off board games but still a departure and a good one)
-Reimplementation of easy starter hobby kits coming in the fall
-Actual advertisement outside of their current method of doing business
-A not ridiculous financial statement from the CEO that doesn't sound like he's burying his head in the sand or crazy

There are other things that might be an extension of previous direction or his direct impact but we can't be sure. Most of the above though seems to be things implemented. Essentially going the no points AoS route seems unlikely with Roundtree in charge.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Davor wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
Oh look, it's natfka! Making more crap up!

Prove it. I mean PROVE IT. I haven't seen one rumour from Natfka yet that is made up. He never gives out rumours, just collects them and relays from what others say. If I am wrong please show me a rumour that Natfka made, MADE, not what he got from others, and I will believe you.

You understand that by continually citing things as "anonymous sources" that's impossible to prove or disprove, right?

I can start posting things that I've made up as "having gotten from anonymous sources", you'll never be able to prove or disprove it.

Yeah once I figured out that was the answer, I deleted my post after realizing, why you may have said it. I guess I didn't delete my post fast enough.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hulksmash wrote:

Davor wrote:

 Hulksmash wrote:
I don't think they'll move forward with something that drastic with the product that keeps them in business. And I really don't think they will move this direction now that Roundtree is in the drivers seat.

I'd love to see them evolving the story line bit by bit. Campaign books that actually mean something. I've enjoyed the Baal, Damacoles, and I'll probably enjoy the Fenris campaign books. It's one of my few regular purchases from GW now that I'm happy with my enormous Iron Warrior/Dark Mechanicus army.

What you say is wise, but then again, all those decisions GW have made before are mind boggling, so who knows what GW will do. This seems something that GW would do.

Who knows this is something GW would do, "don't like Unbound, then here you go." Remember the words "be careful what you wish for, for you may just get it, but not in the way you want."

Meh, like I said. I have more faith in what we've seen out of GW since about 3 months after Roundtree took over (enough time for his changes to start being implemented). So while I could see Kirby and his yes men being stupid enough to do something like this I can't see it out of the current CEO as his current track record is solid. Let's look at it;

-Discounted starter boxes
-Formation of a "Specialist" studio under FW (yes, more for one off board games but still a departure and a good one)
-Reimplementation of easy starter hobby kits coming in the fall
-Actual advertisement outside of their current method of doing business
-A not ridiculous financial statement from the CEO that doesn't sound like he's burying his head in the sand or crazy

There are other things that might be an extension of previous direction or his direct impact but we can't be sure. Most of the above though seems to be things implemented. Essentially going the no points AoS route seems unlikely with Roundtree in charge.

I would wish Roundtree would tell his team to make a clear comprehensive balanced rule set. I guess time will tell if he has indeed did this. I have hope as well with the changes being done, but with hope leads to disappointment. (Nid player. ) So it's just wait and see.

 Yodhrin wrote:
Christ I hope Warseer comes back soon.

Ahem, anyway; it's unlikely given the source, but everyone said that about AoS as well and, well, here we are. Honestly I mostly feel for Xenos players if it happens, Imperial players who like proper wargames with actual army construction rules in the older 40K style can resort to the excellent Heresy army lists from FW. I suspect if GW go through with this you'll find a lot of gaming groups hacking together 6th or 7th edition alien codices with those. Providing they don't just say f-it and walk away, of course, ET/AoS proved there are in fact things GW can do to drive away even its most ardent fans.

This! Your points mirror my own thoughts on this. No one figured WFB would get the "make over" that it did and yet, here we are. GW is so blind to their own folly, they will continue to drive customers and players away by making foolish decisions like AOS...

Being one of the few players who switched from 40k to AoS when it came out last summer, I would say that if GW goes this route with 40k,there will be fan made point systems in place within a few days of the switch over as I'm sure we would have strong rumors of its happening.

AoS is doing just fine with several solid point systems in place like the SDK warscroll builder,Azyr comp,Dakkas own PPC system.I rarely have a club member comment on a point value being "out of wack".The usual issues in setting up games/events is how we will deal with summoning,should we play battleplans or use one of the event comp scenario systems..how big of a point value to set giving the time session...stuff like this.Also a balanced game of AoS can be had on the fly with just a wound count and hero/monster limit.Though for events this is usually not used.

Ive even played the "bring what you want" games and thrown down units by eyeballing it...game was still pretty close.Just have to watch out for the gonads that want to play with all monsters and heros,lol.

Now this going to a "formation only" type system does seem to be really strange...there has to be more to this than just that...even so,it wouldn't be long at all before comp systems were in place.

Minijack wrote:
Being one of the few players who switched from 40k to AoS when it came out last summer, I would say that if GW goes this route with 40k,there will be fan made point systems in place within a few days of the switch over as I'm sure we would have strong rumors of its happening.

AoS is doing just fine with several solid point systems in place like the SDK warscroll builder,Azyr comp,Dakkas own PPC system.I rarely have a club member comment on a point value being "out of wack".The usual issues in setting up games/events is how we will deal with summoning,should we play battleplans or use one of the event comp scenario systems..how big of a point value to set giving the time session...stuff like this.Also a balanced game of AoS can be had on the fly with just a wound count and hero/monster limit.Though for events this is usually not used.

Ive even played the "bring what you want" games and thrown down units by eyeballing it...game was still pretty close.Just have to watch out for the gonads that want to play with all monsters and heros,lol.

Now this going to a "formation only" type system does seem to be really strange...there has to be more to this than just that...even so,it wouldn't be long at all before comp systems were in place.

Here's the thing though - a lot of folk don't play the main GW systems because they're brilliant rules or the ones they most enjoy playing, they play them because they provide a simple, widely-used framework that in theory allows you to walk into a GW store in England, a gaming club in Sweden, or an FLGS in America, and get a reasonably balanced game with no more effort than asking "who wants to play 40k 1.5k points?". Every time GW has moved away from that, they've shed players; they brought in ever larger MCs and FMCs and lost customers, they crammed Apoc and Escalation into standard 40K and lost customers, they brought in decurions and formations that allowed for ludicrous ally shenanigans and lost customers, over in Fantasy they brought out AoS which by most accounts is dying on its arse due to not only abandoning even the pretense of traditional army construction and balance but also throwing away the other main reason people have stuck with GW even when they made bad decisions, the background.

Now you could fix all of those issues if you wanted, but at some point people are going to look at the amount of effort required to essentially rewrite GW's rules(or find someone else's rewrite that you find acceptable), and then persuade the people you game with to adopt your particular take on things, and say "feth it, if I have to deal with hosting a UN summit to get everyone on the same page rules-wise, I'll just use my models and the GW fiction I like with any one of a dozen better rulesets" or "feth it, I'm going to start collecting Darklands/WarmaHordes/KoW/Warpath/etc".

GW should be trying to broaden the appeal of their products, not artificially limit it either through sheer laziness/cost-cutting or because they've decided to go off in a huff if the customers don't have exactly the same attitude towards gaming that the Studio guys do - a fairly balanced set of core rules with a rational and codified army selection system is objectively the best way to write a wargame because it provides the most options, both for the creators and their customers. With a solid foundation to build upon the company can create scenarios and campaign systems that actually work with much less effort, and it gives customers the choice to play the game in a tight, formal way or in a more relaxed or story-focused fashion among friends.

Which is the main thing to think about; certain people keep making this same "Well I actually like searching out a group of like-minded gamers and contacting people days/weeks in advance and negotiating all the aspects of the game, so AoS/all-formation 40K is great for me!" argument, but it's a nonsense, because you could and indeed many did do that perfectly well under a codified points system. That way of gaming functions perfectly well whether you're using a solidly-written tight set of rules with points, a messy blob that once attempted to be the previous but has become too bloated like 40K, a completely incoherent blob like AoS who's motto seems to be "well, see, they's less rules and more guidelines innit guv", or the set of rules your teenage self scrawled down in your school jotters one day while you were bored - people who prefer or who's circumstances necessitate other styles, meanwhile, are steadily excluded/driven off each time the core, baseline, everyone-uses-these-as-a-starting-point rules steps down a rung on that ladder.

And before your mind jumps straight to "yeah, why should I care, I got mine Jack"; less customers for GW means higher prices for you, means less new people to game with, can even mean whole areas going dead for your preferred game as we saw sometimes in the latter days of GW's mismanagement of WHFB.

By crikey, Yodhrin. That was glorious.

Very well put, Yodhrin!

While GW has been making positive strides regarding expanding its marketshare through a variety of new starters and the reawakening of additional systems, there hasn't been anything showing a shift in thinking with the rules for 40k (to which I feel these rumors could be consistent). Of course I realize that there is some time involved with these books (although that period can't be that long when the books drop every couple years now), but judging by the Space Wolves book, we're going full-bore into formation-palooza. Time will tell with future books, but I think 40k is going to go through some more milking attempts before GW notices another udder fall off the cow.

I can't believe their are people here who like Formations and the No-points AoS systems. I'm sorry but anyone who thinks this is a good direction for 40k are not gamers, They were just people who want to put their modles on the table saying "pew pew your dead".


I already had my fill of the disaster that was 5th ed apoc, IMHO a experiment that failed and GW needs to stop trying to force it into all their games. Age of Sigmar sold well when it 1st launched, but at this point all it did was take fantasy out behind the shed and finished the job.

 AlexHolker wrote:

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:
I'd welcome the end times and the removal of points. Makes things much much easier.

Not for you.

It makes things easier for the GW development studio if they don't have to bother with that pesky "making a fair and balanced game" stuff, but there is no benefit to the player base to not have these tools available, when any idiot could simply ignore the points system if they and their opponent really think they're better off without it.

exactly, no point cost is just a lazy management decisions to justify incompetence. As you said, you can simply ignore them if you wish so.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lockark wrote:
I can't believe their are people here who like Formations and the No-points AoS systems. I'm sorry but anyone who thinks this is a good direction for 40k are not gamers, They were just people who want to put their modles on the table saying "pew pew your dead".


I already had my fill of the disaster that was 5th ed apoc, IMHO a experiment that failed and GW needs to stop trying to force it into all their games. Age of Sigmar sold well when it 1st launched, but at this point all it did was take fantasy out behind the shed and finished the job.

Agreed, formations are a disaster imo, and only taking the game down. Would have been so much better with more restrictive (and varied) FOC (for example, a FOC for speed freaks in which you need to take at least 3 bikerz squad and all vehicle need to take the "red paint" upgrade).



BTW, great post Yodhrin. The only reason I "left" Confrontation (a far better game imo) and started a 40k army was that it was too much of an hassle to find players and to balance armies. If I have to argue and bargain (as well as go through them) about which of the numerous fans made supplement to use before each game, then I'm out (though I may very well be out once PP figures out if they want to make plastic, metal or resin mini considering the current emphasis on formations and unbalance)

While I can see why people think that because AOS bombed worse than Tab clear that 40 k is safe, that at best is niave or at worse willfully ignorant.

GW are institutionally unable to admit they have made a mistake as the board beleive they are infallible and this is the one thing that has not changed with the new ceo.

AoS's issues with sales are down to poor store managers is the offical company line with a slight helping of the customers cannot grasp how innovative it is.

Dear Games Workshop,

I want to buy 20 of your Wraithknight models but my friend says it is too much points? Is he right? Please fix this.

Your number #1 fan,
Little Timmy

I could almost believe this and i havent played 40k for few years or bought anything,but i have been still kicking around idea building a All Fw Force.Now i play Historicals.
Here is my thoughts,
1 The whole 30k general rulebook release rules supplement, and with this Gw get the Marine dominated market
2 Deptmart and Hobby shop new box sets with paints, All they would have to do is throw a stat card in it. Then all they have to do is something like this for a new 40k box set . http://www.flamesofwar.com/Default.aspx?tabid=53&art_id=5089
Also this will help them bring in the younger crowd,All they would need would be a kewl cartoon now to go with it. As for the rumor not sure.But i could see it happening.but i will take xtra Salt for now.
Just my thoughts as a old 40k player,

It's disappointing to see Forge World nailing the way lists should be made with the HH series whilst GW Proper flounders around with their increasingly complicated special rule on top of special rule formation nonsense.