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.

 Mezmerro wrote:

 nintura wrote:
Then why even bring it up?

To piont out that vague claims made by GW should not be trusted because they're clearly not trustworthy.
Tyranid players still remember how GW claimed they made an "extensive playdesting" of trainwreck of a Nid codex
All we can trust are some solid rules and mechanics they so far rvealed.

And the word of 3rd party individuals that can attest their affirmation.

The word of 3rd party individual is kinda the point of a Forum

I think its painfully obvious that they are making 40k into AoS Deluxe. A few more rules but generally the exact same format so that people can play both and have a jolly good time without investing too much conversion time.

Were'nt people saying that they didnt want 40k to be aosified? I feel that some of these changes are welcome but they are taking it way too far.
I liked the complexity. When an opponent could surprise me i thought the game was interesting.
I'm afraid the psychic phase will be gutted as well. It will just be like shooting weapons except with 2d6 and a variable to hit like in AoS... Double ones are perils? No wait thats a table you have to remember, thats probably gone then...

Tyranid Players are not Important, thats all.

Yonasu wrote:
I think its painfully obvious that they are making 40k into AoS Deluxe. A few more rules but generally the exact same format so that people can play both and have a jolly good time without investing too much conversion time.

Were'nt people saying that they didnt want 40k to be aosified? I feel that some of these changes are welcome but they are taking it way too far.
I liked the complexity. When an opponent could surprise me i thought the game was interesting.
I'm afraid the psychic phase will be gutted as well. It will just be like shooting weapons except with 2d6 and a variable to hit like in AoS... Double ones are perils? No wait thats a table you have to remember, thats probably gone then...

It will be almost as complex, just everything will be consistent and have less bloat and power creep.

"we have playtested the rules" means nothing as it does not implies that the critique of the testers was taken into account

playtesting can also be that the testers said the rules are crap and the devs say we won't change to rules, just the points the unit costs

the we have a playtested system with crap rules and balanced point values

without any notes from the testing what was changed and adjusted or if testing was just about balancing the points, it means nothing at all


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Rippy wrote:

It will be almost as complex, just everything will be consistent and have less bloat and power creep.

Maybe

So this is saved as "New Hero Banner" on the GW website. Who is the new hero? :O

 Rippy wrote:
It will be almost as complex, just everything will be consistent and have less bloat and power creep.

Bloat is kind of a point of 40k. It's powercreep, formations and "decurions" that are killing 40k, and guess what - I haven't heard a word about droping formanions. Moreso I can see that AoS have them too, and new 14+ FoCs (wiith faction-specific FoCs on top) look dangerously close to another decurion BS.

 Mezmerro wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
It will be almost as complex, just everything will be consistent and have less bloat and power creep.

Bloat is kind of a point of 40k. It's powercreep, formations and "decurions" that are killing 40k, and guess what - I haven't heard a word about droping formanions. Moreso I can see that AoS have them too, and new 14+ FoCs (wiith faction-specific FoCs on top) look dangerously close to another decurion BS.

We are using the word bloat for different things. I mean bloat in what you just described; formations and decurions and special rules etc etc

 Rippy wrote:
So this is saved as "New Hero Banner" on the GW website. Who is the new hero? :O

I hope you're joking... ;-)

 Mezmerro wrote:

 nintura wrote:
Then why even bring it up?

To piont out that vague claims made by GW should not be trusted because they're clearly not trustworthy.
Tyranid players still remember how GW claimed they made an "extensive playdesting" of trainwreck of a Nid codex
All we can trust are some solid rules and mechanics they so far rvealed.

Except that this time the playtesting was done by competitive players and tournament organizers, not a handful of GW people on lunchbreak. It's like you're not even reading the thread.

I can't wait to see what info they serve up today! Has it already started?

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I can't wait to see what info they serve up today! Has it already started?

Nope just checked.

 Rippy wrote:
special rules

And I meant special rules and complex mechanics.
For my liking having one universal special rule is superior to 9000 different names for re-roll to hit for each different unit like in AoS

Requizen wrote:

Except that this time the playtesting was done by competitive players and tournament organizers, not a handful of GW people on lunchbreak. It's like you're not even reading the thread.

and we still don't know what exactly was tested and if the suggestions of the testers were considered in the final version

Requizen wrote:

 Mezmerro wrote:

 nintura wrote:
Then why even bring it up?

To piont out that vague claims made by GW should not be trusted because they're clearly not trustworthy.
Tyranid players still remember how GW claimed they made an "extensive playdesting" of trainwreck of a Nid codex
All we can trust are some solid rules and mechanics they so far rvealed.

Except that this time the playtesting was done by competitive players and tournament organizers, not a handful of GW people on lunchbreak. It's like you're not even reading the thread.

Plus the context of talking about how much they playtested it was in response to a question about balance, which implies the playtester critiqued the game to help the balance as opposed to saying "this is unbalanced" to which GW said "ah but it is playtested."

Again, another of a million hypothetical situations but context is incredibly important, they didn't just declare it as if it was a good thing, they used it as a qualifier for their response about balance.

Requizen wrote:
Except that this time the playtesting was done by competitive players and tournament organizers, not a handful of GW people on lunchbreak. It's like you're not even reading the thread.

Which still doesn't mean gak if they didn't do a good job at analyzing playtesting results.
And we all know GW suck at math.

 kodos wrote:

Requizen wrote:

Except that this time the playtesting was done by competitive players and tournament organizers, not a handful of GW people on lunchbreak. It's like you're not even reading the thread.

and we still don't know what exactly was tested and if the suggestions of the testers were considered in the final version

Yes, I'm sure they flew all these people from the states and across EU to Nottingham, playtested for days, took all the feedback, called them out by name on stream in front of everyone... And then just threw all their thoughts out the window and took a dump on the new rules.

Especially after they worked closely with the SCGT organizers to make TGH the hit that it was. Makes sense.

Thing i'll say about playtesting as they'v specifically mentioned a generals handbook approach with updates and they are quite obviously seriously engaged with the community now.

So if they have cocked up there is a good chance amendments will be made.

Yonasu wrote:
I'm afraid the psychic phase will be gutted as well. It will just be like shooting weapons except with 2d6 and a variable to hit like in AoS... Double ones are perils? No wait thats a table you have to remember, thats probably gone then...

Thank the gods for that IMO - adding the magic rules from WFB to 40k was a terrible idea - time consuming, finincky and (as usual) badly unblanced - AOS magic is a breath of fresh air compared to the abomination of the psychic phase in 7th ed.

Requizen wrote:

 kodos wrote:

Requizen wrote:

Except that this time the playtesting was done by competitive players and tournament organizers, not a handful of GW people on lunchbreak. It's like you're not even reading the thread.

and we still don't know what exactly was tested and if the suggestions of the testers were considered in the final version

Yes, I'm sure they flew all these people from the states and across EU to Nottingham, playtested for days, took all the feedback, called them out by name on stream in front of everyone... And then just threw all their thoughts out the window and took a dump on the new rules.

Especially after they worked closely with the SCGT organizers to make TGH the hit that it was. Makes sense.

You might as well not try. These people are looking for reasons to bitch and moan. They always will.

"They haven't told us EXACTLY what they did and how they tested it and every single minute detail, so it MUST suck" etc etc etc.

I honestly wouldn't bother folks, you're not going to win an argument with someone who responds to a reasonable counter backed up by official information with "yeah, but they're probably just lying."

There's still folk in the nuMarine thread claiming an image pulled from GW's own site is fake, some people just need to be smacked in the face with something before they accept it.

Ninjad.

 DynamicCalories wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 Mezmerro wrote:

 nintura wrote:
Then why even bring it up?

To piont out that vague claims made by GW should not be trusted because they're clearly not trustworthy.
Tyranid players still remember how GW claimed they made an "extensive playdesting" of trainwreck of a Nid codex
All we can trust are some solid rules and mechanics they so far rvealed.

Except that this time the playtesting was done by competitive players and tournament organizers, not a handful of GW people on lunchbreak. It's like you're not even reading the thread.

Plus the context of talking about how much they playtested it was in response to a question about balance, which implies the playtester critiqued the game to help the balance as opposed to saying "this is unbalanced" to which GW said "ah but it is playtested."

Again, another of a million hypothetical situations but context is incredibly important, they didn't just declare it as if it was a good thing, they used it as a qualifier for their response about balance.

GW will tell you everything is awesome they have said that about everything they have ever made from AoS at launch to Bomerz over..eww I cannot go there, Dreadfleet is a good example anyway there trying to sell you it they will say whatever they think you want to hear it's there job.

Now I not saying it's not going to be awesome but you should wait for someome who is not from the company or has been reimbursed forl there time testing it to say it is awesome.

 Rippy wrote:
So this is saved as "New Hero Banner" on the GW website. Who is the new hero? :O

In case you're serious, "hero banner" is a common web design term for a large prominent image on a website.

I think a few posters in this thread need to sit down and actually watch the live stream GW did. The playtesters have not been ignored. They made that very clear.

SeanDrake wrote:

Spoiler:

 DynamicCalories wrote:

Requizen wrote:

 Mezmerro wrote:

 nintura wrote:
Then why even bring it up?

To piont out that vague claims made by GW should not be trusted because they're clearly not trustworthy.
Tyranid players still remember how GW claimed they made an "extensive playdesting" of trainwreck of a Nid codex
All we can trust are some solid rules and mechanics they so far rvealed.

Except that this time the playtesting was done by competitive players and tournament organizers, not a handful of GW people on lunchbreak. It's like you're not even reading the thread.

Plus the context of talking about how much they playtested it was in response to a question about balance, which implies the playtester critiqued the game to help the balance as opposed to saying "this is unbalanced" to which GW said "ah but it is playtested."

Again, another of a million hypothetical situations but context is incredibly important, they didn't just declare it as if it was a good thing, they used it as a qualifier for their response about balance.

GW will tell you everything is awesome they have said that about everything they have ever made from AoS at launch to Bomerz over..eww I cannot go there, Dreadfleet is a good example anyway there trying to sell you it they will say whatever they think you want to hear it's there job.

Now I not saying it's not going to be awesome but you should wait for someome who is not from the company or has been reimbursed forl there time testing it to say it is awesome.

Yeah, because every other company just comes straight out and says "here's our new product, it's a bit gak really, I'd buy something else."

Requizen wrote:
Makes sense.

We're not saying they just ignored bad playtesting results, but there's a word of possibilities between "intentionally making crap" and "doing excelent job", anf GW have a long track record of incompetence and lack of analysis.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Zustiur wrote:
I think a few posters in this thread need to sit down and actually watch the live stream GW did.

I think some people should think for a minute about the fact that that livestream was shot by community managers - the people who's job is to form a positive public opinion of their product.

SeanDrake wrote:

GW will tell you everything is awesome they have said that about everything they have ever made from AoS at launch to Bomerz over..eww I cannot go there, Dreadfleet is a good example anyway there trying to sell you it they will say whatever they think you want to hear it's there job.

Now I not saying it's not going to be awesome but you should wait for someome who is not from the company or has been reimbursed forl there time testing it to say it is awesome.

Of course they have, their prerogative is to sell things to the community. The difference between these people and people selling you a toothbrush is that they play the hobby too, and they don't want it to be a bad game to play for themselves. They're moving away from the process of rebooting the game to turn it into a living, adaptable system that can in effect be updated and FAQd forever as opposed to creating huge paradigm shifts ever 3 years.

There's plenty of reason to be conservative and not go out and buy £1000 worth of models before the new rules launch, but there's also plenty of reason to be optimistic about GW showing us bits and pieces from their rules and openly answering questions and addressing concerns that the community have. It's in their best interest to make a game that they enjoy, and we enjoy.

Just like they did with Age of Sigmar, by adding the GHB and finalising the battletome standard with Sylvaneth, which they have been using to update and fix factions like Stormcast and Khorne. You can assume they have ill intent, but if you look at their treatment of AoS since launch it has only improved, and this is reflected in their approach to 8thEd 40k, which is clearly designed to hit the ground running.

If they had no faith in their product, and no desire to make it better... well they'd announce an edition change, burn down the galaxy, and answer no questions until the £80 rulebook that invalidated your army for 5 years was in your lap. This is the total opposite of that. That's not brainwashing or me being a sycophant, it's their response to the anger that End Times caused. They have clearly learned, to suggest otherwise is to be myopic.

With the experience of AoS, I'm pretty confirmed to say that even with all the playtesting (in effect AoS points were in public playtest for a year), there will be some ups and some downs, eventually forming some archtype armies for a meta. Especially with the stuff released later with less playtesting.

That said, for casual gamers, the end result will most probably be much more enjoyable and level. And on the other hand most likely it will be so for the competitive scene as well, but with less variety.

They said they have done more than 15000 (or was it 15hundred?, cant remember) test games with the new rules.
I'm not sure what that means, but im pretty sure it means that they are full of gak.
If they have done a few hundred games i'd be impressed, but that number they used is utter bullcock.