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 believe something like that will happen. There are still wargamers who don't like to see 40K "streamlined" like what happened with WFB when it changed to AoS.

AoS was a response to Fantasy dying (no thanks to gak like that daemon book) and the results for AoS so far have been far from stellar. The release of the generals handbook and the community being a bit more on board now that there is more structure which is a very strong indicator that the way fantasy and 40k did things is more appealing that the gakfest that is shouting "For the lady" or having the biggest beard being part of the rules.

40k is not fantasy as 40k is the golden goose that keeps laying GW eggs they profit off of. While 40k is a bloated mess of janky rules in need of trimming, GW is going to be extra cautious about messing with the goose as a significant drop in 40k sales will be devastating to GW's stock value and profit margins. GW as of recently has show a lot more wisdom in their decision making (start collecting, generals handbook, FAQs, community outreach, getting involved in events and tournaments, etc) and its highly unlike they will shake things up too much. I forsee the changes to be closer to a 5th to 6th sort of change where some major things change (hopefully vehicles and maybe terrain/LoS) but its not going to completely gut the system like AoS did and it won't nuke the fluff.

Also speak of a conflictmallet is heresy *BLAM*

 Vankraken wrote:
AoS was a response to Fantasy dying (no thanks to gak like that daemon book) and the results for AoS so far have been far from stellar. The release of the generals handbook and the community being a bit more on board now that there is more structure which is a very strong indicator that the way fantasy and 40k did things is more appealing that the gakfest that is shouting "For the lady" or having the biggest beard being part of the rules.

40k is not fantasy as 40k is the golden goose that keeps laying GW eggs they profit off of. While 40k is a bloated mess of janky rules in need of trimming, GW is going to be extra cautious about messing with the goose as a significant drop in 40k sales will be devastating to GW's stock value and profit margins. GW as of recently has show a lot more wisdom in their decision making (start collecting, generals handbook, FAQs, community outreach, getting involved in events and tournaments, etc) and its highly unlike they will shake things up too much. I forsee the changes to be closer to a 5th to 6th sort of change where some major things change (hopefully vehicles and maybe terrain/LoS) but its not going to completely gut the system like AoS did and it won't nuke the fluff.

Also speak of a conflictmallet is heresy *BLAM*

FB salkes dropped because GW screwed up. First in pricing, then dropping support when it was still top selling games. AOS design was started when it was still top #3 selling game...

Just because 40k generates more money doesn't automatically mean it's sale figures are rising or even stable. And in western economic system even slight growth is _bad_. Everything needs to grow. Fast.

GW sale #'s are dropping steadily(sale incomes aren't increasing at the same rate as prices are increasing=sale #'s are dropping). Unless you put in 100% of drops on AOS side it means 40k sales are also dropping.

And if they are dropping then sooner or later something needs to change. Dropping sales are obviously not sustainable. Even if starting point is higher.

But in any case this is not even what the thread questioner is asking. He's asking IF(note the word if. Conditional) it happens will players do same as they did in FB.

And I hope so! That's THE ONLY WAY players can get ruleset that's good and not designed to direct more and more money to GW. Price of 40k is going up because GW is deciding so. Not just miniature prices but because they keep changing rules so that you need to buy more and more. I switched to 2nd ed and just like that my armies became much more cheaper to buy.

Players complain but as long as they follow GW's rules nothing changes. Players could fix all the issues if they wanted. So far they haven't wanted. Except in FB side. Good for them!

I brought up the whole AoS release and reaction because I feel it's a different situation to what is currently happening in 40k. GW was reacting to a declining product like that was very extensive and didn't have the sales numbers to justify it and they went with the AoS system to give fantasy a shot in the army. 40k is not in such a state so an 8th edition 40k isn't going to be a giant departure from 7th which such a departure would be a primary reason for a fan/alternate ruleset to exist. A lot of people currently like 40k but aren't a huge fan of some of the more broken systems in the game. That said the fundamental game is solid enough and the fluff is good enough to keep people playing for a while. AoS caused the 9th age type reaction because of its massive departure from its established roots and gutting the fluff.

The OP said he thinks it will happen and I disagree for the reasons stated above. There might be a tiny part of the population that breaks off to do their own thing but I don't foresee having anywhere near the traction as the 3rd party fantasy game systems/rules had in the wake of AoS. That is unless GW really go crazy with the rules and the proverbial snorting hits the shock attack gun.

 Vankraken wrote:
I brought up the whole AoS release and reaction because I feel it's a different situation to what is currently happening in 40k. GW was reacting to a declining product like that was very extensive and didn't have the sales numbers to justify it and they went with the AoS system to give fantasy a shot in the army.

3rd best selling game didn't justify itself? Sheesh. FB management was pretty screwed if being 3rd best selling game still means time to write it from scratch...

It's pretty damn unlikely 40k sales are not dropping(that would have to mean AOS sales would be tanking even faster than anybody here thinks). This means sooner or later they have to come up with SOMETHING. Simply small tweaks won't be doing it. They have been doing just small tweaks 4 editions in a row without success!

Nobody cares that FB was GW's "third best" selling game. That's like being the third place winner in a US presidential election. Space Marines alone were outselling the entire WHFB line. It doesn't matter if FB was selling better than Blood Bowl and Battlefleet Gothic. GW wisely decided that FB was becoming a specialist game, and deserved only a specialist game's level of support.

 Real News wrote:
Nobody cares that FB was GW's "third best" selling game. That's like being the third place winner in a US presidential election. Space Marines alone were outselling the entire WHFB line. It doesn't matter if FB was selling better than Blood Bowl and Battlefleet Gothic. GW wisely decided that FB was becoming a specialist game, and deserved only a specialist game's level of support.

Well. That logic will mean eventually 40k will be getting similar treatment as well. Falling sales is not sustainable so since they couldn't come up with better plan than redesign game from scratch then what makes 40k safe from that? It only had longer headstart...

And btw not 3rd best selling game in GW. 3rd best selling in the world...

I think GW learnt a lot with AoS. Although it got off to a very bad start it's now looking very healthy and has picked up massive amounts of momentum. I think the release of the GHB will now mark the death of 9th Age and players will likely migrate back or instead play KoW to get their fix.

I don't think GW are going to repeat the missteps of AoS's launch. So there's no need to be worried about an unstructured 8th edition. As someone sitting on the side lines with quite a few painted 40k models, I do hope they release free rules for the next 40k.

AoSification of 40k was planned but they scrapped it seeing AoS sales figures, they'd already set up the end times.

They don't know how to make good games anymore they just bolt on to what came before I really couldn't trust them to make a streamed down version.

I hope 8th is bad I'm sure the fans can make a superior version.

 Bottle wrote:
I think GW learnt a lot with AoS. Although it got off to a very bad start it's now looking very healthy and has picked up massive amounts of momentum. I think the release of the GHB will now mark the death of 9th Age and players will likely migrate back or instead play KoW to get their fix.

I don't think GW are going to repeat the missteps of AoS's launch. So there's no need to be worried about an unstructured 8th edition. As someone sitting on the side lines with quite a few painted 40k models, I do hope they release free rules for the next 40k.

I disagree. I think 9th Age will still be around because it's still a better game and is also a different kind of game.

I think you're being overly optimistic there.

At some point soon, we'll see 8th drop, and my gut tells me it will take much inspiration from AoS. Which will, of course, spawn players making their own version.

We are already seeing several companies attempting to set up their own "far-flung futuristic setting" and nibbling at GW's heels.

For 40K, the dissent is already present, but the rebellion is still in its infancy. We haven't seen a killer replacement for 40K because GW is still milking the corpse. But that corpse can only be drawn out so far. One a 40K ruleset drops that seriously shakes up the current game, we'll start to see earnest effort for a replacement.

From other companies downward spirals, I think we're on the cusp of 40K blowing itself out - if not 8th, then by 9th expect 40K as we know it from GW being true and finally dead - and open to replacement by its fanbase.

First of all, it will not get it. 40k already has something similar and not only one but several different kind of community rules it everyone can find something he likes but nobody wants to use it (for several different reasons).
Main difference here is that while WHFB was always open for houserules and changes, 40k is not and house rules are not really accepted.

So even if 40k get a much worse treatment than WHFB got, people will still play it.

A lot of people are unhappy with current rules and will celebrate everything new from GW as the best 40k rules ever.

Um but there's a whole thread about how the dog fighting rules suck and no one's using them.

Because it is an additional set of rules.
Some people don't like this, they also are against FW stuff because it is not written in the Core Rules and Codex books

It was the same situation with the first flyer book, No one used it, all said they are bad and now they are within the core rules and I haven't heard a lot of people complaining about them.
With 8th 40k will include the Death from the Skies rules in the core rules and most people will like them say that the new rules are much better than the old ones....


PS:
Playing 40k since end of 3rd edition, I have seen a lot of changes and house rules and it was more or less always the same.
You try to add or change a rule, everyone is against it would brake the game and after GW changed the rule by themselves, everyone said that this is the best rule ever made.
And additional rules have ever been a problem, as long as there was somewhere a sign that they are optional, players were against them. No matter if it was an additional book, WD articles or an Errata. Everything that does not clear say "you must use it" is ignored.

 kodos wrote:
First of all, it will not get it. 40k already has something similar and not only one but several different kind of community rules it everyone can find something he likes but nobody wants to use it (for several different reasons).
Main difference here is that while WHFB was always open for houserules and changes, 40k is not and house rules are not really accepted.

So even if 40k get a much worse treatment than WHFB got, people will still play it.

A lot of people are unhappy with current rules and will celebrate everything new from GW as the best 40k rules ever.

People in FB circles were dead set against unofficial rules before AOS hit as well...

Just because people are against them now doesn't matter if existing game is completely gone. FB players didn't even have choise. It was create own or don't play FB since there WASN'T ANY MORE FB!

There are 3 options when GW updates 40k to a edition that I really don't like.

- I continue playing. This is not likely if I really don't like the ruleset.
- I quit playing and might dump all my models on the market. Curing me from my plastic crack addiction. This might happen if I find no good alternative.
- I switch to an alternative rule system, that I do like. This will only happen if I am able to play a game in the alternative rule system. My guess would be that I would just migrate to 30k since that is actually getting quite popular.

tneva82 wrote:

People in FB circles were dead set against unofficial rules before AOS hit as well...

Not were I played (Germany/Austria/Switzerland/Italy/Slovenia/Czech), were community rules for tournament were there and accepted by everyone since 4th edition.

If they would have been against them before AoS, the tournament scene in Germany/Austria wouldn't have existed after second halve of 6th edition (in 7th was only so popular here because there was an overall accepted community set of rule changes and restrictions).
This changed with 8th edition, because the opinion came up that GW finally listens to players, this is the best game ever and no house rules and restrictions are needed any more. While some players organized tournaments with over the top restrictions to keep their favoured faction on top. This killed the scene here very fast and 40k became the tournament system of choice.

 kodos wrote:

Main difference here is that while WHFB was always open for houserules and changes, 40k is not and house rules are not really accepted.

I would consider the ITC a bunch of houserules, myself.

We also have the streamlined rules that show up in Battle for Velardos (sp?), and the game in Stormcloud Attack and Renegade. While those aren't meant for 40K proper, all three show that GW is far less married to the rules as they are having reasons to encourage owners to do more than have one mdoel on shelf (why have one on a shelf when you can play a game with 3?). And I really think that mode of thinking will carry over to the next ruleset - Q:"How can we get people to buy more models?"; A - "Make it easier to play with more on the table at once!"

By reducing the rules overhead - in effect "AoSing" the rules - GW can focus on "cool models", and I worry less about spending on playtesting and balancing the game. Something that makes it a lot easier for them.

NO it will not. Why? It would have been done by now if it could. Since nobody can agree how 40K should be played it will never happen.

Moot point though since I think Mr Roundtree will not let this happen again. From Mr Roundtree in todays GW stock thingy.

In my opinion the greatest risk is the same one that we repeat each year, namely, management. So long as we have the right people in the right jobs we will be fine. Problems will arise if the board allows egos and private agendas to rule. I will do my utmost to ensure that this does not happen on my watch.

So yeah I don't think he will let Kirby anywhere near 40K now.

 Real News wrote:
Nobody cares that FB was GW's "third best" selling game. That's like being the third place winner in a US presidential election. Space Marines alone were outselling the entire WHFB line. It doesn't matter if FB was selling better than Blood Bowl and Battlefleet Gothic. GW wisely decided that FB was becoming a specialist game, and deserved only a specialist game's level of support.

I'm curious. Would you mind posting some solid evidence (numbers, I'd prefer) to back up those claims.

"It's known" does not count as solid evidence.

Davor wrote:
NO it will not. Why? It would have been done by now if it could. Since nobody can agree how 40K should be played it will never happen.

Moot point though since I think Mr Roundtree will not let this happen again. From Mr Roundtree in todays GW stock thingy.

In my opinion the greatest risk is the same one that we repeat each year, namely, management. So long as we have the right people in the right jobs we will be fine. Problems will arise if the board allows egos and private agendas to rule. I will do my utmost to ensure that this does not happen on my watch.

So yeah I don't think he will let Kirby anywhere near 40K now.

Wow. Dude's got some huevos.

 EnTyme wrote:

Davor wrote:
NO it will not. Why? It would have been done by now if it could. Since nobody can agree how 40K should be played it will never happen.

Moot point though since I think Mr Roundtree will not let this happen again. From Mr Roundtree in todays GW stock thingy.

In my opinion the greatest risk is the same one that we repeat each year, namely, management. So long as we have the right people in the right jobs we will be fine. Problems will arise if the board allows egos and private agendas to rule. I will do my utmost to ensure that this does not happen on my watch.

So yeah I don't think he will let Kirby anywhere near 40K now.

Wow. Dude's got some huevos.

Yeah and he state's AOS is selling better than WHFB. I honestly feel the new AOS battle tomes are paving the way for 40k. They have no reason to reboot it to the point of fantasy but I think they will chop some stuff off and reorganize it.

Considering he said that I am not all that worried for 40k for some reason.

 Stormonu wrote:

 kodos wrote:

Main difference here is that while WHFB was always open for houserules and changes, 40k is not and house rules are not really accepted.

I would consider the ITC a bunch of houserules, myself.

It is, but a similar format in Germany is strictly against rule changes (except some strange ones that they think will boost underdog factions) and want to keep the game as original as possible (the argument is that the game is broken anyway and no house rule can fix it, so tournament players just need to accept this and change their armies to fit the game)

 kodos wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:

 kodos wrote:

Main difference here is that while WHFB was always open for houserules and changes, 40k is not and house rules are not really accepted.

I would consider the ITC a bunch of houserules, myself.

It is, but a similar format in Germany is strictly against rule changes (except some strange ones that they think will boost underdog factions) and want to keep the game as original as possible (the argument is that the game is broken anyway and no house rule can fix it, so tournament players just need to accept this and change their armies to fit the game)

Not to be snarky, but that sounds like a regional difference towards the acceptance of house rules - not a case that house rules aren't used/available in a larger community.

It is more an EU/US difference (and I was not aware how deep changes of the ITC are but I have seen that not all players are happy about that)