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.
2017/04/22 15:34:43
Subject: Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site
No madam, 40,000 is the year that this game is set in. Not how much it costs. Though you may have a point. - GW Fulchester The Gatling Guns have flamethrowers on them because this is 40k - DOW III
2017/04/22 15:34:48
Subject: Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site
Draccan wrote: Oh and changing 40k scale is a dealbreaker in my book...
Sure you can play with your old miniatures, but what happens when you want new unit types and new models?
Changing the scale to invalidate 20+ years of space marine models is just............... [no words]
I have two words. Bull gak.
They have been steadily increasing for 20+ years. Where have you been?
Left to right:
1. Assault on Black Reach starter set (5th edition)
2. Space Marines vs Tyranid box set (3rd edition?)
3. Old metal marine (3rd edition)
4. Death Watch Marine (7th edition)
5. Space Marines vs Tyranid box set (3rd edition?)
6. Dark Vengeance Chaos Marine (7th edition)
Which one is the right and proper scale that is being "invalidated"? 3rd edition was invalidated with the 4th edition Tactical Squad box. That was "invalidated" with Death Watch. And so on.
Further:
Which Rhino is the proper scale?
There is much to complain about, I suppose. But this complaint is the silliest. The marines have not been steady state for 20 years, they have been INCREASING STEADILY for 20 years.
I agree that scale has been creeping up for years. That doesn't make it okay to give it a considerable notch up. You can't go to new "true scale" and expect vehicles not to change once again. With the amount of models produced and in people's possession by now it is a huge deal. Now if you just have static armies that is not a problem, but when new vehicles and units are needed or even whole new ones produced only in the true scale it undermines people's collections.
There is a huge difference between adding new scale upgrades to skirmish armies where people had 20-40 marines and a vehicle or two or three. Now many people have much larger arrays of vehicles and models and to change the scale on them is just ................................. [insert your favorite expletive here]
2017/04/22 15:35:10
Subject: Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site
And how many people buy ALL battletomes? You generally have 1, 2 or 3 armies per player so again it's.
The fact that you mention Mighty Battles in the Age of Sigmar just goes to show how little you know, same going for the realmgate wars, which are fore the campaigns, narrative play, not actual matches play rules.
How many people buy all the Codexes or Army books?
It's more lack of understanding of what I am trying to say. I never once mentioned only matched play, that's your driver for a game. I'm looking at it from a much wider perspective. I'm less interested in playing just straight up equal match ups compared to having a wider hobby experience, so the campaigns etc and knowing the background and the story. If you want that to be included in your hobby then you need all the background books/campaign books and so on. Not everyone just plays/enjoys the game simply for showing how easily they can smash their opponent...
And not everyone is eager to know everything...
And those players that do will be happy to pay less. Deathwatch is one of the cheapest books and it costs 33 euros. AoS cheapest book? 20 euros, and there's quite a few of those. Currently all material for AoS is 650 euros, which is far less in pounds. And trust me, 40k almost doubles the cost in material currently.
That's an unreasonable comparison. You are comparing 4-6 years (when was the last version released?) worth of material to less than two years of material for AoS. I did a rough tally of the costs over the *same* timescale and AoS is roughly 50% more expensive if you are into the background/campaign style of things.
As I've pointed out multiple times if the hobby for you is just rolling lots of dice and trying to smash the opponent with ultra combo then yes it can be cheaper, but if it is more than that then the cost is questionable. However there seems to be argument that 40k is really expensive with all the books etc but AoS style will be really cheap is a completely unrealistic comparison because you need to compare equally what you get across both regimes.
Ok, my apologies as I was confusing you with someone on another forum I'm currently posting on. My bad.
However...
You *did* say that the rules are drip fed more which is categorically false as any Chaos Space Marine player will tell you.
2017/04/22 15:35:25
Subject: Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site
Tsilber wrote: I was in their corner for years, supported them for year. Making all current codexs non-compatible just breaks it for me.
Cmon GW, i thought you learned your lesson by now...
Were you around for the Age of Sigmar launch?
They made the books non-compatible, but had "get you by" lists ready at launch.
Would those be the get you by lists that 93% of armies are still using 2 years later?
Your last point is especially laughable and comical, because not only the 7th ed Valkyrie shown dumber things (like being able to throw the troopers without parachutes out of its hatches, no harm done) - Irbis
2017/04/22 15:35:30
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site
And how many people buy ALL battletomes? You generally have 1, 2 or 3 armies per player so again it's.
The fact that you mention Mighty Battles in the Age of Sigmar just goes to show how little you know, same going for the realmgate wars, which are fore the campaigns, narrative play, not actual matches play rules.
How many people buy all the Codexes or Army books?
It's more lack of understanding of what I am trying to say. I never once mentioned only matched play, that's your driver for a game. I'm looking at it from a much wider perspective. I'm less interested in playing just straight up equal match ups compared to having a wider hobby experience, so the campaigns etc and knowing the background and the story. If you want that to be included in your hobby then you need all the background books/campaign books and so on. Not everyone just plays/enjoys the game simply for showing how easily they can smash their opponent...
And not everyone is eager to know everything...
And those players that do will be happy to pay less. Deathwatch is one of the cheapest books and it costs 33 euros. AoS cheapest book? 20 euros, and there's quite a few of those. Currently all material for AoS is 650 euros, which is far less in pounds. And trust me, 40k almost doubles the cost in material currently.
That's an unreasonable comparison. You are comparing 4-6 years (when was the last version released?) worth of material to less than two years of material for AoS. I did a rough tally of the costs over the *same* timescale and AoS is roughly 50% more expensive if you are into the background/campaign style of things.
As I've pointed out multiple times if the hobby for you is just rolling lots of dice and trying to smash the opponent with ultra combo then yes it can be cheaper, but if it is more than that then the cost is questionable. However there seems to be argument that 40k is really expensive with all the books etc but AoS style will be really cheap is a completely unrealistic comparison because you need to compare equally what you get across both regimes.
Depends massively on the Codex - there is only one Deathwatch Codex btu some have been released in quick succession like Codex Knights - others are complete trash - Guard, Dark Eldar, Orks. Why should those players have to wait another year or moer to have crap or wiat that long before the (over) power dexes are reworked.
There is a possibility that with all the army ruels coming out at the same time they might be vaguely balanced, If they had used the same crappy codexes that churned out over the last few years then there would have been zero possibility of a proper reset.
I used to collect the Codexes for the fluff and background but this has been increasingly diluted even as prices climbed. Hopefully I can now focuss on campaign books if the basic army books are covered cheaply
I AM A MARINE PLAYER
"Unimaginably ancient xenos artefact somewhere on the planet, hive fleet poised above our heads, hidden 'stealer broods making an early start....and now a bloody Chaos cult crawling out of the woodwork just in case we were bored. Welcome to my world, Ciaphas."
Inquisitor Amberley Vail, Ordo Xenos
"I will admit that some Primachs like Russ or Horus could have a chance against an unarmed 12 year old novice but, a full Battle Sister??!! One to one? In close combat? Perhaps three Primarchs fighting together... but just one Primarch?" da001
3 in six years, but don't let facts ruin a good rant.
I think a new edition is welcome as I bailed on 7th. before it was even out. I think it is really needed. As long as the relaunch is the right one. As long as they get rid of the same old diseases of churning out supplement after supplement with rules that people need.
That said; GW shouldn't come with three editions in three years. We aren't just talking about replacing a book or two. Many people will have had a dozen book for each edition. I can understand the frustration even though I didn't jump on the 7th. train...
BTW. GW only promised free core rules, not army lists. Everyone assumes there will be AoS free army lists but they didn't say that. They said CHEAP not free army lists. So the paper mill will probably continue to churn and churn....
2017/04/22 15:39:27
Subject: Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site
Only 8 pages of whining and speculating over exactly what the Mk IV armour half-and-half loyal/Chaos marine is other than just that?
C'maaaan guys, you're slipping.
Having spent several games trying to play 7th, I for one welcome a ground-up rewrite. Rebuying army books is naughty, mind, unless they mean free rules for all a la AOS launch then Battletome-esque Codex books going forward. Meh. Regardless, a reset was sorely needed.
Now, to echo others online and get into the spirit of the thread... FIX MY TYRANIDS.
Stormonu wrote: For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
2017/04/22 15:40:47
Subject: Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site
The small amount of truscale fanatics are a god send to GW as there going to let them invalidate there best ever selling range while saying it is what people wanted.
Your last point is especially laughable and comical, because not only the 7th ed Valkyrie shown dumber things (like being able to throw the troopers without parachutes out of its hatches, no harm done) - Irbis
2017/04/22 15:42:47
Subject: Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site
warboss wrote: Or Bell Cawl turns his attention to his other 10,000 year old side project (diversifying the marine genome to accept a wider range of humans) and SOB are folded into their own space marine chapters to make femstartes just like some fans have wanted for decades (and others have abhored for equally as long).
Oh that's what HBMC said to me. I had him on ignore.
I would be simultaneously furious and laughing my ass off if that femstartes event happened tho.
Caederes wrote: Narrative play in Age of Sigmar is all player driven, it gives you a template to build up an army from a small warband (i.e. a single leader and two-three basic units) to a full on warhost based on your match results. I'm pretty sure it gives you character progression stuff but I might be wrong there. It gives you example battleplans but you're expected to make your own. It's pretty much tailor made for army builder challenges and is a nice simple system for those wanting to run campaigns.
If that's all it is, fine, but GW's "campaigns" and narrative battles so far have been very marine-centric (assault on black reach, battle for macragge, and shadow war: armageddon all come to mind here), and I don't see much of a reason why this would be much different...
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/04/22 15:43:17
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2017/04/22 15:45:28
Subject: Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site
SeanDrake wrote: The small amount of truscale fanatics are a god send to GW as there going to let them invalidate there best ever selling range while saying it is what people wanted.
Let's face it: Who here hasn't dreamt of getting a new scale for your marines, rhinos, terminators, motorbikes, assault bikes, predators, land raiders and hell even drop pods?
Not to mention the joy of seeing this creep into 30k. I am sure all the people buying those cheap, discounted 30k armies will rejoice in a new scale....
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/04/22 15:46:21
2017/04/22 15:45:51
Subject: Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site
And how many people buy ALL battletomes? You generally have 1, 2 or 3 armies per player so again it's.
The fact that you mention Mighty Battles in the Age of Sigmar just goes to show how little you know, same going for the realmgate wars, which are fore the campaigns, narrative play, not actual matches play rules.
How many people buy all the Codexes or Army books?
It's more lack of understanding of what I am trying to say. I never once mentioned only matched play, that's your driver for a game. I'm looking at it from a much wider perspective. I'm less interested in playing just straight up equal match ups compared to having a wider hobby experience, so the campaigns etc and knowing the background and the story. If you want that to be included in your hobby then you need all the background books/campaign books and so on. Not everyone just plays/enjoys the game simply for showing how easily they can smash their opponent...
And not everyone is eager to know everything...
And those players that do will be happy to pay less. Deathwatch is one of the cheapest books and it costs 33 euros. AoS cheapest book? 20 euros, and there's quite a few of those. Currently all material for AoS is 650 euros, which is far less in pounds. And trust me, 40k almost doubles the cost in material currently.
That's an unreasonable comparison. You are comparing 4-6 years (when was the last version released?) worth of material to less than two years of material for AoS. I did a rough tally of the costs over the *same* timescale and AoS is roughly 50% more expensive if you are into the background/campaign style of things.
As I've pointed out multiple times if the hobby for you is just rolling lots of dice and trying to smash the opponent with ultra combo then yes it can be cheaper, but if it is more than that then the cost is questionable. However there seems to be argument that 40k is really expensive with all the books etc but AoS style will be really cheap is a completely unrealistic comparison because you need to compare equally what you get across both regimes.
Depends massively on the Codex - there is only one Deathwatch Codex btu some have been released in quick succession like Codex Knights - others are complete trash - Guard, Dark Eldar, Orks. Why should those players have to wait another year or moer to have crap or wiat that long before the (over) power dexes are reworked.
There is a possibility that with all the army ruels coming out at the same time they might be vaguely balanced, If they had used the same crappy codexes that churned out over the last few years then there would have been zero possibility of a proper reset.
I used to collect the Codexes for the fluff and background but this has been increasingly diluted even as prices climbed. Hopefully I can now focuss on campaign books if the basic army books are covered cheaply
Except that if they follow AoS then the only sure balance will be old armies are trash against new releases/armies.
Your last point is especially laughable and comical, because not only the 7th ed Valkyrie shown dumber things (like being able to throw the troopers without parachutes out of its hatches, no harm done) - Irbis
2017/04/22 15:46:16
Subject: Re:Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site
Looks like I will be building tanks, drop pods, and dreadnoughts for the foreseeable future. And terrain. But I don't want to get screwed over by good options in 7th becoming bad options in 8th.
And how many people buy ALL battletomes? You generally have 1, 2 or 3 armies per player so again it's.
The fact that you mention Mighty Battles in the Age of Sigmar just goes to show how little you know, same going for the realmgate wars, which are fore the campaigns, narrative play, not actual matches play rules.
How many people buy all the Codexes or Army books?
It's more lack of understanding of what I am trying to say. I never once mentioned only matched play, that's your driver for a game. I'm looking at it from a much wider perspective. I'm less interested in playing just straight up equal match ups compared to having a wider hobby experience, so the campaigns etc and knowing the background and the story. If you want that to be included in your hobby then you need all the background books/campaign books and so on. Not everyone just plays/enjoys the game simply for showing how easily they can smash their opponent...
And not everyone is eager to know everything...
And those players that do will be happy to pay less. Deathwatch is one of the cheapest books and it costs 33 euros. AoS cheapest book? 20 euros, and there's quite a few of those. Currently all material for AoS is 650 euros, which is far less in pounds. And trust me, 40k almost doubles the cost in material currently.
That's an unreasonable comparison. You are comparing 4-6 years (when was the last version released?) worth of material to less than two years of material for AoS. I did a rough tally of the costs over the *same* timescale and AoS is roughly 50% more expensive if you are into the background/campaign style of things.
As I've pointed out multiple times if the hobby for you is just rolling lots of dice and trying to smash the opponent with ultra combo then yes it can be cheaper, but if it is more than that then the cost is questionable. However there seems to be argument that 40k is really expensive with all the books etc but AoS style will be really cheap is a completely unrealistic comparison because you need to compare equally what you get across both regimes.
Depends massively on the Codex - there is only one Deathwatch Codex btu some have been released in quick succession like Codex Knights - others are complete trash - Guard, Dark Eldar, Orks. Why should those players have to wait another year or moer to have crap or wiat that long before the (over) power dexes are reworked.
There is a possibility that with all the army ruels coming out at the same time they might be vaguely balanced, If they had used the same crappy codexes that churned out over the last few years then there would have been zero possibility of a proper reset.
I used to collect the Codexes for the fluff and background but this has been increasingly diluted even as prices climbed. Hopefully I can now focuss on campaign books if the basic army books are covered cheaply
Except that if they follow AoS then the only sure balance will be old armies are trash against new releases/armies.
I'm pretty sure that's not true. Tomb Kings and Skaven are both really strong.
2017/04/22 15:50:11
Subject: Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site
As to your second paragraph...what?
Why are you saying Deathwatch would be split up into different books when they are listed as their own faction on the new website?
I'm not saying Deathwatch specifically would have this treatment - in fact I'm pretty sure they wouldn't because they're a relatively small faction - but I'm rather pointing out AoS' tendancy to split the traditional armies into several battletomes, e.g. Flesh Eater Courts. So if I wanted to play a Vampire Counts army like I could back before AoS, I'd have to buy several battletomes.
Why are you saying you would need to now buy a book for "every single" Imperial army? Isn't that what the current situation is? You have to buy a book for Astra Militarum if you want to ally them to your Deathwatch (which you also have to buy a book for). That's CURRENT 40k. In what way would it be different now with the new system?
Because if this new 40k is anything like AoS - and it looks like it - then there will be a single book for "Imperium" which will contain all the traditional imperial armies, Deathwatch, Astra Militarium, Blood Angels etc etc. So even though I may only be interested in the Deathwatch stuff, I still have to buy this massive book with all the armies and info I don't want.
Why are you assuming the rules won't be free?
Why are you assuming there won't be an App that has all the rules for all the units on it, saving you the book-lugging that 40K GROSSLY suffers from which is NOT the case with Age of Sigmar?
You're right, there probably will be an app. But if I go on my AoS app now I have under "my units", or whatever it's called, the entry for every single unit I'm likely to use in an AoS game, so it's very time consuming to find the different ones I'm using in any particular game. And yes I know you can print the basic rules out because they're free etc, but you still have to buy the better formations from the battletomes. It may be a minor gripe but to me there was nothing wrong with the codex system, especially the ones that made it to paperback so why fix it?
Why would you need to buy several codices to use your Deathwatch army? The entire Khorne range is in one book. The entire Sylvaneth range is in one book. Hell, at the time of printing the entire Chaos range was in its own Grand Alliance book. What on earth are you going on about?
See above for my clarification on buying several codices to use a Deathwatch army. It's also perhaps a bad example being a relatively small army. Orks are a much better example. If this turns out to be similar to AoS, it's not unlikely that there'll be a Speed Freeks Battletome (containing only stuff on bikes or in transports), a Bad Moonz Battletome (containing only meganobz, 'eavy armoured boyz, flash gitz) etc etc. If I want to use my entire ork army, or even just cherry pick certain units, I will likely have to buy several battletomes. And before you say I can use the free rules, the free rules are not going to be as powerful. Not a huge deal for some, but I personally feel I'm getting shafted.
And that's exactly my point. The entire Sylvaneth range IS in one book. But Sylvaneth aren't the entire traditional range. The old Wood Elf army book had loads more units that aren't included in the Sylvaneth book. If I had a Wood Elf army from pre-AoS and wanted to use it all in a game, I now need separate books.
Why are you saying you'll need an over-expensive battletome just to get your faction wide rules, warlord traits, background, etc when YOU NEED TO BUY A CODEX IN 40KTO DO THE SAME THING!? Also, why are you saying the battletomes are over-expensive when they have oft been CHEAPER than the 40K codices?
Yes but my point, as I've stated multiple times now, is that I now have to buy a battletome containing all units in that FACTION rather than the army. So yes, in 40k I needed, for example, my Ork Codex, but at least that Codex doesn't contain the entry for every single other xenos unit that I'm never going to use. And at least that Ork codex contains Ork-specific rules rather than just Xenos-specific rules, making the army much more tasteful and enjoyable. I could be proved wrong on that last point, but I think the army-specific rules and warlord traits won't be making a re-appearance until the battletomes start coming out
You people honestly just confuse me and make me laugh.
Please, for the love of the Emperor, THINK BEFORE YOU TYPE.
I agree that scale has been creeping up for years. That doesn't make it okay to give it a considerable notch up. You can't go to new "true scale" and expect vehicles not to change once again. With the amount of models produced and in people's possession by now it is a huge deal. Now if you just have static armies that is not a problem, but when new vehicles and units are needed or even whole new ones produced only in the true scale it undermines people's collections.
There is a huge difference between adding new scale upgrades to skirmish armies where people had 20-40 marines and a vehicle or two or three. Now many people have much larger arrays of vehicles and models and to change the scale on them is just ................................. [insert your favorite expletive here]
If you prefered the 5th edition SM sizes, I can respect that. I prefer the newer 7th edition sizes, though. I don't think they're terribly taller than the 5th edition ones.
I think we can all agree that, nostalgia aside, 3rd edition marines suck!
DA:70S+G+M+B++I++Pw40k08+D++A++/fWD-R+T(M)DM+
2017/04/22 15:51:46
Subject: Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site
Except that if they follow AoS then the only sure balance will be old armies are trash against new releases/armies.
Tomb Kings and Skaven are THE best solo factions in Matched Play, no Battletomes required (I'm dead serious too, Clan Pestilens isn't even a consideration in top Skaven lists). I dunno what you're on about.
2017/04/22 15:51:59
Subject: Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site
My track record with matters GW is available for anyone to see in my post history, or feel free to ask around amongst some of the more regular posters for a brief summary.
I heartily endorse this move, its the best thing to happen to 40K in years, and I'm now revising my position from "wouldn't play 40K if you paid me" to "optimistic to try out the new rules."
If you'd like to try and call me a "white knight" then come at me.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
And how many people buy ALL battletomes? You generally have 1, 2 or 3 armies per player so again it's.
The fact that you mention Mighty Battles in the Age of Sigmar just goes to show how little you know, same going for the realmgate wars, which are fore the campaigns, narrative play, not actual matches play rules.
How many people buy all the Codexes or Army books?
It's more lack of understanding of what I am trying to say. I never once mentioned only matched play, that's your driver for a game. I'm looking at it from a much wider perspective. I'm less interested in playing just straight up equal match ups compared to having a wider hobby experience, so the campaigns etc and knowing the background and the story. If you want that to be included in your hobby then you need all the background books/campaign books and so on. Not everyone just plays/enjoys the game simply for showing how easily they can smash their opponent...
And not everyone is eager to know everything...
And those players that do will be happy to pay less. Deathwatch is one of the cheapest books and it costs 33 euros. AoS cheapest book? 20 euros, and there's quite a few of those. Currently all material for AoS is 650 euros, which is far less in pounds. And trust me, 40k almost doubles the cost in material currently.
That's an unreasonable comparison. You are comparing 4-6 years (when was the last version released?) worth of material to less than two years of material for AoS. I did a rough tally of the costs over the *same* timescale and AoS is roughly 50% more expensive if you are into the background/campaign style of things.
As I've pointed out multiple times if the hobby for you is just rolling lots of dice and trying to smash the opponent with ultra combo then yes it can be cheaper, but if it is more than that then the cost is questionable. However there seems to be argument that 40k is really expensive with all the books etc but AoS style will be really cheap is a completely unrealistic comparison because you need to compare equally what you get across both regimes.
So your argument is that you did the math wrong and/or didn't check google?
Warhammer 7th edition was published on may of 2014 (3 years). Since then ALL its publications, counting all books and the BRB, have been 1750 euros which is an average of 583 euros per year at, generally, the lowest cost possible.
Age of sigmar was released on July of 2015 (1.75 years). Since then ALL its publications, counting all books GHB and the namesake book, have amounted to 688.5 (forgot one book). That's 393,43 euros per year.
Age of Sigmar is 33% cheaper.
Please try again with a REAL argument.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/04/22 16:03:35
2017/04/22 15:54:36
Subject: Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site
Why whine about these new marine they are only the same marine a bit bigger and well proportion, through years it happens manytimes, no sense at all.
If they were super different and much bigger i understand but it's not like this lol and we don't know exactly what they are yet maybe they are only a sort of new kind of marine.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/04/22 15:57:50
SeanDrake wrote: The small amount of truscale fanatics are a god send to GW as there going to let them invalidate there best ever selling range while saying it is what people wanted.
That's utter nonsense!
These are not "truescale" marines, they are a new unit.
2017/04/22 15:56:46
Subject: Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site
As to your second paragraph...what?
Why are you saying Deathwatch would be split up into different books when they are listed as their own faction on the new website?
I'm not saying Deathwatch specifically would have this treatment - in fact I'm pretty sure they wouldn't because they're a relatively small faction - but I'm rather pointing out AoS' tendancy to split the traditional armies into several battletomes, e.g. Flesh Eater Courts. So if I wanted to play a Vampire Counts army like I could back before AoS, I'd have to buy several battletomes.
No you'd not. You'd just buy GHB and play generic death (because VC is half o that army), also. Splitting armies? You've heard of DoT and blades of khorne, haven't you? Those did the opposite while being cheaper than ANY 40k rulebook (20 and 25 euros).
Why are you saying you would need to now buy a book for "every single" Imperial army? Isn't that what the current situation is? You have to buy a book for Astra Militarum if you want to ally them to your Deathwatch (which you also have to buy a book for). That's CURRENT 40k. In what way would it be different now with the new system?
Because if this new 40k is anything like AoS - and it looks like it - then there will be a single book for "Imperium" which will contain all the traditional imperial armies, Deathwatch, Astra Militarium, Blood Angels etc etc. So even though I may only be interested in the Deathwatch stuff, I still have to buy this massive book with all the armies and info I don't want.
Why are you assuming the rules won't be free?
Why are you assuming there won't be an App that has all the rules for all the units on it, saving you the book-lugging that 40K GROSSLY suffers from which is NOT the case with Age of Sigmar?
You're right, there probably will be an app. But if I go on my AoS app now I have under "my units", or whatever it's called, the entry for every single unit I'm likely to use in an AoS game, so it's very time consuming to find the different ones I'm using in any particular game. And yes I know you can print the basic rules out because they're free etc, but you still have to buy the better formations from the battletomes. It may be a minor gripe but to me there was nothing wrong with the codex system, especially the ones that made it to paperback so why fix it?
Curiously enough, many of the top lists don't work on battallions.
Why would you need to buy several codices to use your Deathwatch army? The entire Khorne range is in one book. The entire Sylvaneth range is in one book. Hell, at the time of printing the entire Chaos range was in its own Grand Alliance book. What on earth are you going on about?
See above for my clarification on buying several codices to use a Deathwatch army. It's also perhaps a bad example being a relatively small army. Orks are a much better example. If this turns out to be similar to AoS, it's not unlikely that there'll be a Speed Freeks Battletome (containing only stuff on bikes or in transports), a Bad Moonz Battletome (containing only meganobz, 'eavy armoured boyz, flash gitz) etc etc. If I want to use my entire ork army, or even just cherry pick certain units, I will likely have to buy several battletomes. And before you say I can use the free rules, the free rules are not going to be as powerful. Not a huge deal for some, but I personally feel I'm getting shafted.
[color=blue] If it's going to be like AoS, you'll do fine with using just one battletome or just using the free rules.
And that's exactly my point. The entire Sylvaneth range IS in one book. But Sylvaneth aren't the entire traditional range. The old Wood Elf army book had loads more units that aren't included in the Sylvaneth book. If I had a Wood Elf army from pre-AoS and wanted to use it all in a game, I now need separate books. [/color]
Why are you saying you'll need an over-expensive battletome just to get your faction wide rules, warlord traits, background, etc when YOU NEED TO BUY A CODEX IN 40KTO DO THE SAME THING!? Also, why are you saying the battletomes are over-expensive when they have oft been CHEAPER than the 40K codices?
Yes but my point, as I've stated multiple times now, is that I now have to buy a battletome containing all units in that FACTION rather than the army. So yes, in 40k I needed, for example, my Ork Codex, but at least that Codex doesn't contain the entry for every single other xenos unit that I'm never going to use. And at least that Ork codex contains Ork-specific rules rather than just Xenos-specific rules, making the army much more tasteful and enjoyable. I could be proved wrong on that last point, but I think the army-specific rules and warlord traits won't be making a re-appearance until the battletomes start coming out
You people honestly just confuse me and make me laugh.
Please, for the love of the Emperor, THINK BEFORE YOU TYPE.
2017/04/22 16:04:37
Subject: Warhammer 40,000 new edition announced & new site
No madam, 40,000 is the year that this game is set in. Not how much it costs. Though you may have a point. - GW Fulchester 
The Gatling Guns have flamethrowers on them because this is 40k 
5250 pts
3850 pts
2500 pts 
Gorkamorka 
