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.

If anything, I could see them just restructuring the Allie matrix into:

Imperium
Chaos
Order Xenos (Eldar & Tau)
Malevolent Xenos (Necrons, Orks & Nids)

With any luck they get rid of Battle Bros and just make everyone allies of Convenience within each "Alliance" and Desperate/Apoc allies with the other 3 "Alliances"

-

 Alpharius wrote:
What's the actual rumor here?

As with Age of Sigmar, there is a desire to reduce the number of 40K factions in the game to a very small number (AoS has 4 for comparison).

I edited the OP to quote this rumor.

So, first thing I think is that at the moment any discussion of the rumour is difficult because players use lots of terms that are not reflective of terminology that GW uses. So for some the suggestion of fewer factions means less armies, where there is no indication that if the rumour proves true it will lead to fewer armies. In fact, looking at AoS the result of a consolidation to Grand Alliances was an explosion of different armies. Continuing this point there was a really limited reduction in the range (*nod of acknowledgement to the Bretts and the Tomb Kings*) but even then GWs official response has been to provide rules and points costs to support playing with all the models available at the launch of AoS. Based on this I think we can be safe in saying that fewer factions is most likely to mean a small number of very broad alliances, that then have a large number of smaller 'factions' or 'armies' of whatever underneath them that encourage playing focused armies or groups and no significant range reduction.

Again, continuing with the assumption that AoS is providing a model and that the rumour is true, you would expect to see 'factions' in the same alliance that may seem counter intuitive. As an example I could play an order army with High Elves supported by a Darf Elf Sorceress and Dwarf war machines. This is mitigated however by the game system rewarding playing in-faction through key word interactions. Continuing my previous example, you can play it, but key word interactions make it less effective than a pure army of one of the factions. In support of this I would say that from looking at Tournament lists most players choose to play within faction with occasional cross faction support pieces. So, I would not discount there being armies in the same alliance that currently we would not think of as natural allies.

A nice model might be the structure of the three inquisitorial Ordos and then the Imperium as a fourth faction.

As others have said, AoS doesn't have less factions than WHFB is has about 10x more. There are tons of factions, and then 4 overarching alliances.

A similar thing might happen to 40k and again it will result in more factions, not less. But there will not be 4 grand alliances because the 40k races cannot be grouped into 4 teams. I think some of the guesses like Kan's guess seem very possible.

I liked that "Space marines vs not Space marines" guess.

It'd throw the lore out the window but boy would it be cool to see everyone take on the marines. OP elite faction vs multiple factions that can now combine forces.

If anything, current sales successes seem to be borne of releasing mini-factions. AdMech, GS Cult, plus repackaging Marines with Chapter sprues every now and then to stimulate core line sales. Having lots of mini-factions isn't great for stock turn after a while though, so I can see them wanting to trim the bloat. But that flies in the face of the nostalgia wave they're riding... would be an interesting choice to get off that gravy train with PLASTIC SISTERS yet to come. I jest, but they could do them and make a mint, and likely will now they can do most anything in plastic. Likewise, make a Deathguard force with modern plastics aesthetic and quality and hoooo boy I'd be so in. MOAR FORCES PLS.

The article was completely flawed since it ignored the fact AoS has more factions now than fantasy used to have. It was utter hogwash clickbait nonsense.

In Age of Sigmar you don't even have to stay within one's own grand alliances. You can have chaos marauders, skeletons, goblin spider riders, and high elf warriors as your army,

So if there is a new edition to 40K to follow AoS direction. you will have the opportunity to make your normal 40K restricted armies, in addition to have options to make armies from every miniature line that they have.

i do like that the basic rules for individual miniatures are free to download. It makes the faction/army/codex books to be completely optional purchases.

 akai wrote:
In Age of Sigmar you don't even have to stay within one's own grand alliances.

Unless you're using the Matched Play rules, then you do have to stay within one's own Grand Alliance.

 Ghaz wrote:

 akai wrote:
In Age of Sigmar you don't even have to stay within one's own grand alliances.

Unless you're using the Matched Play rules, then you do have to stay within one's own Grand Alliance.

And since matched play is default mode for many, if not, most AoS games that would probably roll over to 40k if AoS-style is adopted.

 privateer4hire wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 akai wrote:
In Age of Sigmar you don't even have to stay within one's own grand alliances.

Unless you're using the Matched Play rules, then you do have to stay within one's own Grand Alliance.

And since matched play is default mode for many, if not, most AoS games that would probably roll over to 40k if AoS-style is adopted.

Sounds like Battle-Forged and Unbound to me.

 General Kroll wrote:
The article was completely flawed since it ignored the fact AoS has more factions now than fantasy used to have. It was utter hogwash clickbait nonsense.

This. They will likely keep adding factions into 40k as well with Sisters and an inevitable Xenos faction.

If anything's happening, it would be just creating a condensed concept for the allies chart...which frankly has become insane. It's about 8 different marines factions showing how they're all battle brothers with each other. Super redundant, and ever-expanding, it would make sense to condense the forces down to particular large factions (more numerous than what we have in AOS).

It won't necessarily condense the factions any more than they already are, it'll just be more simple to structure the idea of players subscribing to particular factions: Imperial, Eldar, Tyranid, Necron, Tau, or Ork (+ any other alien races that may appear). Of course none of this has to do with the BOLS article, the thoughts above can be gleaned (and have by posters above!) by anyone with a little awareness of what GW has been up to: attempting to make the game more accessible than it's been over the last 10 years.

 Accolade wrote:

It won't necessarily condense the factions any more than they already are, it'll just be more simple to structure the idea of players subscribing to particular factions: Imperial, Eldar, Tyranid, Necron, Tau, or Ork or Chaos(+ any other alien races that may appear). Of course none of this has to do with the BOLS article, the thoughts above can be gleaned (and have by posters above!) by anyone with a little awareness of what GW has been up to: attempting to make the game more accessible than it's been over the last 10 years.

You forgot chaos.

 Ghaz wrote:

 akai wrote:
In Age of Sigmar you don't even have to stay within one's own grand alliances.

Unless you're using the Matched Play rules, then you do have to stay within one's own Grand Alliance.

I'm quite sure there are multiple places in the Matched Play sections, that emphasize on the rules as being guidelines for you to tweak and do what else as needed for you and your opponent agree upon (for example, Points-Only games).

You said nothing about a house rule.

Don't have to say anything about a house rule

 Bottle wrote:
As others have said, AoS doesn't have less factions than WHFB is has about 10x more. There are tons of factions, and then 4 overarching alliances.

A similar thing might happen to 40k and again it will result in more factions, not less. But there will not be 4 grand alliances because the 40k races cannot be grouped into 4 teams. I think some of the guesses like Kan's guess seem very possible.

Consider the fact Warriors of Chaos have been split into 10 factions alone.

Everchosen, Slaves of Darkness, Khorn Bloodbound, Nurgle Rotbringers, Tzeentch Arcanites, Hosts of Slaanesh, Chaos Monsters and Thunderscorn. Well you can play these factions and any others from the chaos grand allience as a single army, many have benefits given if you play the faction "pure".

If this was going to happen in 40k for example, I could see the same logic used to split Codex: Imperial Guard into the follwing sub factions:
Imperial Navy, Imperial Guard, Storm Troopers and Ab-Human Auxillaries

Chaos would be:
Astartes, Humans/mutants, Slaanesh deamons plus Mortal Cults, Khorn deamons plus Mortal Cults, Nurgle deamons plus Mortal Cults, Tzeetch deamons plus Mortal Cults, Deamon Engiens/Warpsmiths


Changes like that would be some substantial changes to 40k, that no rumour monger worth their salt has suggested this is the case yet. TBH this all feels more like speculation ATM.

Do we really need to discuss BoLS BS here?

close this thread already

 RedFox wrote:
Do we really need to discuss BoLS BS here?

close this thread already

Amen

 Carnikang wrote:

Spoiler:

 privateer4hire wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 akai wrote:
In Age of Sigmar you don't even have to stay within one's own grand alliances.

Unless you're using the Matched Play rules, then you do have to stay within one's own Grand Alliance.

And since matched play is default mode for many, if not, most AoS games that would probably roll over to 40k if AoS-style is adopted.

Sounds like Battle-Forged and Unbound to me.

Except that they are different ways to play, so "unbound armies" are not legal in the same game as "battle-forged".

 Galef wrote:
If anything, I could see them just restructuring the Allie matrix into:

Imperium
Chaos
Order Xenos (Eldar & Tau)
Malevolent Xenos (Necrons, Orks & Nids)

-

This would work fine, possibly even with Necrons in Good Xenos (and DE in Bad Xenos)

They might just prune the allies chart down a bit. Maybe Eldar/dark elder and harlequins would all ally the same, Tyranids/GSC, CSM/CD/KDK, etc.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
If anything, current sales successes seem to be borne of releasing mini-factions. AdMech, GS Cult, plus repackaging Marines with Chapter sprues every now and then to stimulate core line sales. Having lots of mini-factions isn't great for stock turn after a while though, so I can see them wanting to trim the bloat. But that flies in the face of the nostalgia wave they're riding... would be an interesting choice to get off that gravy train with PLASTIC SISTERS yet to come. I jest, but they could do them and make a mint, and likely will now they can do most anything in plastic. Likewise, make a Deathguard force with modern plastics aesthetic and quality and hoooo boy I'd be so in. MOAR FORCES PLS.

I think based on AoS and recent releases there will be these few big, over arching factions which contain the current factions broken down into smaller forces- Craftworld eldar into craft world elements [aspects, wraith, wind rider etc], Orks into the clans etc. It would allow GW more flexibility with releases - redoing/adding to the ranges in smaller chunks which can be used on their own or in combination to form larger forces. Factions then become composites of these mini armies and GW can add depth to existing elements within armies or add brand new stuff like exodites, Kroot Mercenaries and maybe Squats/demiurg.
Sort of backed up with what Atia has been saying with how GW plan to approach chaos-

Yeah, well it's pretty much just splitting the current range and build upon the different themes. And this is good. The cult legions are too different from normal chaos marines anyways. It also gives the possibility for terminators and other things - really cool

Less factions is the wrong way to think about AoS, its simply that lots of factions are labeled order and you are free to pick whatever formations and units you want from any of them.

This is good for GW because it removes barriers a Nid player might have about adding Gene Cultists for example.

What they have done recently though is add army books which confer strong buffs for just taking a pure army of one type though instead of generic order.

Its a little hard to see the benefit mind as you can already go unbound and take everything you want. Plus I don't like the idea of invalidating recently released and very expensive rule books. Even if the rules are free.

 RedFox wrote:
Do we really need to discuss BoLS BS here?

close this thread already

When are we allowed to ask questions in the News and Rumours forum? I have seen a lot of posts locked because we are not allowed to ask questions here and this is suppose to go in the General section. Either change the title to "40K 8th edition will have fewer factions" or close it. What is this, Warseer, where most people can't do something (ask questions in N/R) but a few people can (ask a question in N/R)? Either say that BoLS or Larry Vellera (spelling?) is the source since he wrote and/or, posted the article, and it's a rumour or put this in 40K general so we can discuss it like we are doing now and saying this is not a rumour but click bait.

Unlikely. If they did that they couldn't sell as many Marine codices and minis.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
No, it's like the AoS Grand Alliance combining ALL of the forces of Order into a single big book, rather than having a half dozen smaller books.

I can see this as a supplement stuffed in with the rulebook like was done back in 3rd. Outside that, what's the point?

Still, as long as we're tossing ideas around, I'd expect things to be organized along broad themes like:

Imperium Grand Alliance
Chaos Grand Alliance
Xenos Grand Alliance

If those are too broad they can be broken down further but once again, other than organizing the GW web site and the allies matrix, what's the point?

Xenos Grand Alliance makes no gorram sense. Imperium and Chaos, yis, but not Xenos.

They should render it down to 12 factions, and then do a fresh monthly release for each one. Take the codex price down slightly, but gouge you for a fresh one once a year. You could have:-

-Adeptus Astartes (Space Marine Chapters)
-Men of the Imperium (Astra Militarum, Militarum Tempestus, Adeptus Arbites)
-Adeptus Mechanicus (Mechanicum flavours and titan lists)
-Tyranids (includes different Hive Fleets, Stealer Cults)
-Orks (Different Ork Klans)
-Necrons (Different Dynasties, soul-less style 'Crons, etc)
-Ancient Remnant (Different Craftworlds, Exodites)
-Traitor Astartes (Chaos Space Marines, & Traitor Marines)
-Chaos (Cultists & Daemons)
-Webway Denizens (Dark Eldar Kabals, Haemonculi, Harlequins)
-Inquisition (Grey Knights/Malleus, Deathwatch/Xenos, SOB/Hereticus)
-Tau (Various Septs, Kroot, Farsight Enclave)

12 Codexes, with multiple lists in each. Everyone gets a yearly update to keep them interested and suck a little extra cash out of their wallets, the rules get tweaked regularly to keep them roughly equivalent/consistent, and there's sufficient scope within it to flesh out a lot of factions over the next decade or so.