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.

 CoreCommander wrote:

The whole new GW business is dust in the eyes - don't expect matters to change for they cannot change fundamentally.

The change just needs to be in ways that matter to people (crazy idea, I know). You can sell a premium product in a way people will respond negatively or you can do it in a way that people will like. You can have your legal team send threatening letters to fan sites or you can host their efforts on your community site like with scrollbuilder.com's integration into the warhammer community site. Those are fundamentally different approaches. Customer communication is a business fundamental.

The only thing that matters if they are the changes that people actually want. That the customers respond to positively. Though there is something actually fundamentally different about giving people the base rules and free unit stats to play in open gaming compared to charging for all the rules all the time. That goes beyond just PR, that's a real difference in terms of game content being given away for no money.

past 40k approach = high up front costs and paid downloadable content
AoS appraoch = free rules and then optional premium purchases

40k is going freemium.

To some that will be a very scary statement. To others it will be exactly what they are looking for.

It is though, a very fundamental difference.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 the_nightlord wrote:
Um really guys/gals. You really believe that GW is just gonna hand over all the rules and rules/points systems to ALL the 40 armies in production for free on a website??

No one said anything about points systems. In fact they specifically said the update books will be for money.

GW isn't going free with 40k, they're going freemium.

ONLY the introductory rules will be free.

Is anyone really saying otherwise? Does anyone who actually plays Age of Sigmar actually think otherwise? Is this an argument against a position no one is holding?

And I promise you there will be an FAQ with in 6 months of the release of the majority of the game.

Are FAQs good now or bad now? It's so hard to tell whether or not a company either answering questions or clarifying or ammending rules is good or bad these days.

too blind to whats going on

Why can't they see!? Why can't they just get my brilliant insight and open their eyes! They wouldn't like this if they knew what I do! If they only knew... if they only knew... You remind me of me.

But I didn't think they would go to this extreme with what they learned from the ABORTION called AOS.

GW has their internal sales data for Age of Sigmar. You don't. Maybe they did learn from Age of Sigmar. Maybe Age of Sigmar, despite your colourful metaphor, accomplished the goals GW had for it. It's also possible GW learned:

1) If you're going to drastically change the setting, do it in stages, not blow up the world all at once
2) In your launch of the new edition, don't make army lists that make a joke out of people's factions during a time of uncertainty about your new product
3) Have support for multiple ways to play rather than launching an edition that doesn't have the points value and matched play support that your customers want

The Age of Sigmar launch had some seriously major errors and they seem to have recovered from them and the game is working for them going forward. So much so that pretty much everything that was said about new 40k could be said about Age of Sigmar as it currently is. From the freemium approach to the rules to specific game mechanics like bravery/battleshock. AoS is working well enough for them as a product they want to bring the approach to 40k.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
In many arguments in the past, I enjoyed holding the position of being a critic of GW. To the point where I've called their customers chumps and suckers-- for which I now apologize. I must admit it is refreshing to actually have a positive appraisal of what they are doing for once. It's almost surreal.

Cerebrate64 wrote:
And I just got my codexes. damn.

Old codex's are often worth holding on to for the background IMO. One of the things that does have me concerned in the 8th announcement is the mention of "handy low cost books" for all armies. Hopefully these will be a temporary measure and full sized books complete with plenty of fluff will be on there way.

Also just noticed that the Ynnari have there own faction listing on the new site. Will GW be doing more with the spooky Eldar than making them Craftworld/Harlie/Dark Eldar combo list?

I've seen on FB they are recommending contacting customer services for recently bought codexes. Has anyone done so? Curious if they would honour a refund.

I've had traitor legions for like.. 4 months? After waiting years for good chaos rules. Invalid after 6 months is harsh. And there's not much background in it, mostly rules.

Captyn_Bob wrote:
I've seen on FB they are recommending contacting customer services for recently bought codexes. Has anyone done so? Curious if they would honour a refund.

I've had traitor legions for like.. 4 months? After waiting years for good chaos rules. Invalid after 6 months is harsh. And there's not much background in it, mostly rules.

They literally have to, if you purchased recently. And not even because of 8th edition.

They have to honour the refund, at least here in Australia. Just tell them you are contacting the ombudsman, and they will give you a refund, no questions asked. It's consumer laws.

 Rippy wrote:

Captyn_Bob wrote:
I've seen on FB they are recommending contacting customer services for recently bought codexes. Has anyone done so? Curious if they would honour a refund.

I've had traitor legions for like.. 4 months? After waiting years for good chaos rules. Invalid after 6 months is harsh. And there's not much background in it, mostly rules.

They literally have to, if you purchased recently. And not even because of 8th edition.

They have to honour the refund, at least here in Australia. Just tell them you are contacting the ombudsman, and they will give you a refhnd, no questions asked. It's consumer laws.

Depends on the timeframe though, surely. 4 months is quite a while.

well looking forward to the codex reset.. as it will hopefully get rid of power creap

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

Captyn_Bob wrote:
I've seen on FB they are recommending contacting customer services for recently bought codexes. Has anyone done so? Curious if they would honour a refund.

I've had traitor legions for like.. 4 months? After waiting years for good chaos rules. Invalid after 6 months is harsh. And there's not much background in it, mostly rules.

They literally have to, if you purchased recently. And not even because of 8th edition.

They have to honour the refund, at least here in Australia. Just tell them you are contacting the ombudsman, and they will give you a refhnd, no questions asked. It's consumer laws.

Depends on the timeframe though, surely. 4 months is quite a while.

Oh sorry, missed the 4 months. Yeah that is a stretch. More a reference to the people who purchased in last week

GoatboyBeta wrote:

Cerebrate64 wrote:
And I just got my codexes. damn.

Old codex's are often worth holding on to for the background IMO.

I bought the Genestealer Codex on the same day I got Shadow War specifically because I believed the Codices would be going the way of the Squats.

Don't regret it at all.

I think it is still too early for a fanbase freakout. We have been give some vital info, but everything is still up in the air for now. I think in a couple months we will have their exact plan and we can judge from there. Until then, keep playing 7th and prepare your final game before the change-over.

 biggie_reg wrote:
I think it is still too early for a fanbase freakout. We have been give some vital info, but everything is still up in the air for now. I think in a couple months we will have their exact plan and we can judge from there. Until then, keep playing 7th and prepare your final game before the change-over.

Yes, everyone does tend to freak out at the mention of change. And nothing is stopping people from still playing 7th edition if they hate 8th so badly.

 ncshooter426 wrote:

 Maréchal des Logis Walter wrote:
GG games workshop, thanks to three edition in as many years, not forgetting all codices and obviously supplements, you basically robbed several millions of people! Enjoy your daylight robbery!

Seriously, I'm glad i stuck with 6th anyway, otherwise i would have had to sell my house and family to follow up...

Let's hope they'll manage to change their behavor or at least produce something worthwhile.

It's such a shame that you're being forced to play a new game, and that your old models and books spontaneously caught fire this morning. :(

This is the same mentality that makes developing new OS's fething impossible. "I REFUSE TO MOVE FROM XP BECAUSE I LIKE IT" -- Fine, then use it "OH NOEZ! I'VE BEEN HAXORED! MICRO$OFT SUX" ...sigh. I deal with that gak every god damn day.

Except so far from sounds of it more apt compare would be move from windows 10 to dos 6.22

 Rippy wrote:
And nothing is stopping people from still playing 7th edition if they hate 8th so badly.

Well, other than the fact that 7th ed is rubbish.

That's the disappointment, for me. I didn't want a new game... I wanted them to fix 40K. And this, so far, is sounding like a new game.

GodDamUser wrote:
well looking forward to the codex reset.. as it will hopefully get rid of power creap

Not a chanc, will be back within a couple of codexs.

If they update annually the power level can be balanced if they want it ofc.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:


For me, it's worked out pretty well for AoS, but of course other opinions are available (just be aware there's those weighing in who've never actually played AoS. They're pretty evident to someone that has played it). So in theory, the days of 'look it's been six years. Please just update my Nids' are gone - and importantly it's all so far been based on player feedback.

I'm not sure that's fully correct and is more of an urban myth than anything. I've never found anyone with an opinion on AoS that hadn't at least tried it when it came out. I think a fairer representation would be that there are people commenting on it that only play it infrequently or only played a few times on release (and hence don't have a full understanding of the current rules). But then that's not really a surprise. After all I play Badminton but don't like Tennis, they are fundamentally the same but I find badminton more subtle than tennis so I rarely play it (I still know I don't like it though even though I may not be completely up to date with the current details of the rules). I think comments like these don't actually help some of the frothing madness that goes on when ever AoS is critically reviewed from either side. Personally I'm not a fan of AoS because it is too simplified and that I find it does not challenge the brain cells enough (but that is me and if other people enjoy it then it's all good) and *I* fear that 40k is going the same way (but I agree currently it is a bloated mess and needs streamlining). However I do understand why GW might be doing this. When I grew up, computers were rare and limited to things like a BBC and hence as child/teenager there was vastly more time to read rules, talk about with them with friends, play the games over a weekend at your friends house and so on. Today there are vastly more distractions and spending an afternoon reading a lot of rules and trying to understand how they synergise is unlikely to appeal to a large number of older children/teenagers/young adults (trying to get them to read any book is hard enough!) when there are so many other distractions available that simply weren't available in the 80's and early 90's (or were only limited to the very wealthy). Therefore GW simplifying the rules to "you can read them in half an hour" does make sense because it allows quick understanding/games in an hour or so and favours their current target audience.

It does look like that at least the core rules are going to be effectively the same as AoS given the information we have (I assume the 'rulebook' will expand on things like vehicles, flyers, bikes etc). It's interesting to note that if the picture was of the new box set that there are no vehicles/bikes/walkers etc that there have been in previous sets. That would favour the idea that the core rules might only have information on infantry (and perhaps monstrous creatures).

My main concern is that I'm wondering just how sustainable two games that are almost identical are. I don't think 40k will have to worry and isn't likely to have the same blowback as for WFB - it is still going to be a skirmish game, but if they are fundamentally the same game then I'd question why people would start AoS instead when there is a larger gaming group of 40k players to join. There's a risk that the two games cannibalise off each other.

Captyn_Bob wrote:
I've seen on FB they are recommending contacting customer services for recently bought codexes. Has anyone done so? Curious if they would honour a refund.

I've had traitor legions for like.. 4 months? After waiting years for good chaos rules. Invalid after 6 months is harsh. And there's not much background in it, mostly rules.

I'm a glass half full person.

Depending on an individual's gaming circumstances, the rules section of any codex, army book, sourcebook from any company only becomes truly invalid in official competitions or, in the case of GW, their stores.


I still know people who play 40K 2nd Ed. Blood Bowl never went away. I can't find anyone willing to indulge my GorkaMorka fixation but I'm sure there are people out there who still like the rolling table scenario.

I get your point if there wasn't much background in the books you mention but some players may not want to switch to 8th Ed. Try to find or build a new community.

Good luck.

GoatboyBeta wrote:

Cerebrate64 wrote:
And I just got my codexes. damn.

Old codex's are often worth holding on to for the background IMO. One of the things that does have me concerned in the 8th announcement is the mention of "handy low cost books" for all armies. Hopefully these will be a temporary measure and full sized books complete with plenty of fluff will be on there way.

Also just noticed that the Ynnari have there own faction listing on the new site. Will GW be doing more with the spooky Eldar than making them Craftworld/Harlie/Dark Eldar combo list?

I think you can expect more smaller factions and groups than there have been in the past. In some ways this has been happening for a while Genestealer Codex/Harlequins and so on where there are relatively few units per book compared to the old Codexes where you have all the army at once. So Tyranids might be broken down into different tendrils some concentrating on big gribblies, some on horde and so on. I think you should expect that some armies as a whole will be retired though and some units might disappear as they streamline things to fit into the new world. For example I wonder whether how many of the aspect warriors might survive (though it might not be impossible to see a faction based off one of the shrines). I'm suspicious that DE has an independent faction might disappear in time and become merged and so on.

Is there any evidence pointing toward these "nu marines" being something Gulliman has had created?

GoatboyBeta wrote:

Cerebrate64 wrote:
And I just got my codexes. damn.

Old codex's are often worth holding on to for the background IMO. One of the things that does have me concerned in the 8th announcement is the mention of "handy low cost books" for all armies. Hopefully these will be a temporary measure and full sized books complete with plenty of fluff will be on there way.

Also just noticed that the Ynnari have there own faction listing on the new site. Will GW be doing more with the spooky Eldar than making them Craftworld/Harlie/Dark Eldar combo list?

I've been buying up to date codex for years and haven't played since 5th! They are always good to have for the fluff and the artwork. With the timeline moving forward it will be nice to get a book with substantive advances.

I think they definitely will be doing more with Ynnari- Jes was talking about a richer visual style for eldar and one of the reasons driving the plot forward is it lets them bring more brand new stuff out rather than doing a slightly better/plastic version of existing models [which must get boring for the designers] which are in competition with their past incarnations.

 kodos wrote:

 Mymearan wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
"Agile rules development" is not something I really find appealing except in the situation where the first stab at the rules is terrible (or in 40k's case, the first 7 stabs at the rules).

Expensive scenario books like AoS has don't appeal to me at all.

40k already has expensive scenario books, the difference is that in 40k they contain vital info that you need to play a certain army, while in AoS they only have narrative scenarios and battalions which means you won't buy them if you only play Matched Play.

as matched play is the only reason to look at AoS at all, the Battledomes are vital the same way as the campaign books

and for 8th, the Handbook and Nu-Codices will be also vital

I don't really understand what you're saying, but the Battletomes and campaign books are complete opposites. 40k has Matched Play content in both codexes and campaign books. AoS only has Matched play content in Battletomes, not in campaign books.

 Whirlwind wrote:

My main concern is that I'm wondering just how sustainable two games that are almost identical are.

Isn't that the whole Geedubmahordes plan?
A game that players can buy anything GW produce to play against anyone else that plays GW. Complaints that some of the later AoS releases could have been 40k based means it will all mesh nicely together.

As for frozenwastes comment on "freemium". I always thought that was company speak for "pay to win". Just like nu40k will. It's free, but if you buy this book with this OP formation, you can buy more of our models and win.

AoS certainly isn't pay to win, so show your working out regarding 'nu40k' eh champ

 insaniak wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
And nothing is stopping people from still playing 7th edition if they hate 8th so badly.

Well, other than the fact that 7th ed is rubbish.

That's the disappointment, for me. I didn't want a new game... I wanted them to fix 40K. And this, so far, is sounding like a new game.

Yeah, the thing we have here is 3 groups of people....

1. Existing 7th edition fans who are ranging from excited to scared.

2. AoS fans who are jizzing their panties over the idea of 40k becoming like AoS.

3. Old 40k fans who don't like 7th and have been desperately waiting for 40k to be fixed but may or may not think AoS'ing 40k is actually a good option.

A free ruleset is always welcome, but ultimately, the key question will be: is it any good?

AOS rules were free, but AOS turned out to be the biggest load of horsegak I'd ever had the misfortune of playing. Some of the models were quite good, though.

Still, at least I gave it a go before making a judgement.

I would advise everybody else to do the same with these new free rules and reserve judgement until you've played a game.

 Gimgamgoo wrote:

As for frozenwastes comment on "freemium". I always thought that was company speak for "pay to win". Just like nu40k will. It's free, but if you buy this book with this OP formation, you can buy more of our models and win.

That is the current state of the game competitively. Ditching all formations or introducing formations that you pay points for, like in AoS, would be a huge step forward for competitive play. Competitive play should be about balanced forces, because then it is about who is the better general, not who got 700 points of free stuff through using a formation.

 Gimgamgoo wrote:

 Whirlwind wrote:

My main concern is that I'm wondering just how sustainable two games that are almost identical are.

Isn't that the whole Geedubmahordes plan?
A game that players can buy anything GW produce to play against anyone else that plays GW. Complaints that some of the later AoS releases could have been 40k based means it will all mesh nicely together.

I think its more likely that the plan to produce one core ruleset that applies to both games (which was highlighted by quite a few people back at the early stages of the rumours of AoS) has been in the works for sometime and has always been in the plan (so makes me question just how much feedback they've listened to if this was the plan all along). I'm assuming the thinking is that with the same core ruleset it is easier for people to pick up the models for both games and that two core games was hindering people crossing over and picking up models from both games.

The risk of course with this strategy is that this doesn't happen and gamers see no reason to get into the other game because it is the same and introduces nothing above what they are already playing. It could backfire; one game or the other becomes the default choice and the other one becomes a niche choice that you only play if you happen to like those particular models. For example there is anecdotal evidence from people playing AoS that some 40k players moved across. If this was because the 40k rules were a mess but they preferentially prefer space fantasy then the introduction of the same rules for 40k may just mean these people switch straight back to 40k now it has been 'fixed' from their perspective if they are comfortable with how AoS plays (but would prefer to play with tanks and guns rather than magic/archaic tech etc).

The FAQ gives me hope that the rules won't be dumbed down to the point of AoS simplicity, which has about as much tactical nuance as Hungry Hippo. Interesting that 40K could end up as the tactical choice after Fantasy held that title for so long.

 tyrannosaurus wrote:
The FAQ gives me hope that the rules won't be dumbed down to the point of AoS simplicity, which has about as much tactical nuance as Hungry Hippo. Interesting that 40K could end up as the tactical choice after Fantasy held that title for so long.

It's statements like this that make it seem like people speak out on a game they've never played. I honestly don't see how AoS is less tactical than 40K, maybe less tactical than WHFB, and certainly differently tactical from 40K. Comparing it to hungry hippo or whatever children's game they can come up with just reeks of glanced at the four pages of rules maybe played a game or two before GHB and then said "f it".

Bolt Action is the game 40k should have been.

 Whirlwind wrote:

The risk of course with this strategy is that this doesn't happen and gamers see no reason to get into the other game because it is the same and introduces nothing above what they are already playing. It could backfire; one game or the other becomes the default choice and the other one becomes a niche choice that you only play if you happen to like those particular models. For example there is anecdotal evidence from people playing AoS that some 40k players moved across. If this was because the 40k rules were a mess but they preferentially prefer space fantasy then the introduction of the same rules for 40k may just mean these people switch straight back to 40k now it has been 'fixed' from their perspective if they are comfortable with how AoS plays (but would prefer to play with tanks and guns rather than magic/archaic tech etc).

But maybe if GW had access to their own sales details, maybe they'd seen a drop off in 40k sales and an increase in AoS sales and realised it was just this transference anyway. /silly speculation

I imagine most of the 40k players, despite many complaining about AoS, will be more than happy in a few months with the new rules and defending it as the perfect system and denouncing any heathen who speaks against it. Pretty much like it is with AoS now. I'm all for a new ruleset. Having played 30+ different mini games, and playing about 10 rulesets currently, I still find the latest incarnation of 40k the worst ruleset I've ever come across. Such a shame as GW have produced some really good looking 40k stuff in the year or two since the all time low of the Taurox.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Bolt Action is the game 40k should have been.

On this I agree.