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.

yeah, he doesn't answers all the questions, cause answering some of them would spoil some of the future daily infos.

But don't worry, with so much time to go, they'll go through pretty everything, and everything will be fine and great according to them

BTW, I'm not blaming them, nor saying that they are deliberatively trying to mislead us, but le'ts be serious for a second, these are worthless marketing claims

Or they're people genuinely excited about a product and enthusiastic to share as much as they can.

which would make it equally worthless, since they lack the detachment to be objective about it

 adamsouza wrote:
if you have to:
1.) Pay points for the models
2.) Keep a Pysker alive to summon them
3.) Then succesfully roll a psychic power to summon then.
It's effectively a worse version of reserves.

Who's to say it won't work like 3.5 where icons or sorcs aren't basically built in with free demon teleport homers? That's a lot of assumptions- yes, if they do stack a bunch of requirements and costs on something without buffs, it will be worse than the current form, but that makes a lot of assumptions, based on no information. Unless we have the whole picture, jumping to conclusions doesn't mean anything, since we don't know what the balance will be. What if every summoner gives you 50 free points for reserves for summoning, or 200? Or what if they have 4 kinds of utility and summoning is the icing? What if they're bizarrely underpriced? What if their stats suck? What if things get a heinous buff when they arrive from summoning?

streetsamurai: you get how marketing, promoting a forthcoming product you want to sell, and working for a company and wanting to keep your job work, right? Yes?

 JohnnyHell wrote:
streetsamurai: you get how marketing, promoting a forthcoming product you want to sell, and working for a company and wanting to keep your job work, right? Yes?

Absolutely, since I happen to be a prof in marketing at an university. But I fail to see what this have to do with my post?

 streetsamurai wrote:
which would make it equally worthless, since they lack the detachment to be objective about it

Pure supposition.

 Azreal13 wrote:

 streetsamurai wrote:
which would make it equally worthless, since they lack the detachment to be objective about it

Pure supposition.

Absolutey not, one has to be gullible to think that someone who is involved in the developement of something will be as objective as someone who wasn't. This is a well known thing in psychology

Ah, but that's different from not being able to be objective about it to the point of dismissing it as worthless.

Being less objective =\= not objective at all.

when a claim on a subjective matter is made by someone who is involved in the developement of something and who also want to sell it to you, it is indeed rather worthless.

Anyways, this is boring and rather OT. If you guys want to get excited cause the developpers are saying this will be the greatest thing ever, go ahead. Me, I'll wait till we have some credible facts before forming an opinion

I only want to use my Sentinels. They are so Star Wars, but a Snotling spitting at them is enough to destroy them

But now that I think about it, in the movies, Ewoks destroy the AT-ST with logs and rocks so... I suppose is fluffy

 streetsamurai wrote:
when a claim on a subjective matter is made by someone who is involved in the developement of something and who also want to sell it to you, it is indeed rather worthless

Remember when people were getting worried about assault sounding weaker than before and they claimed that the daily reveal on the combat phase would make assault units seem way better, and then it had only one new piece of information that didn't in fact make assault units seem way better?

Then it leaked that weapons mostly have a 1 inch range now so horde assaults have a much harder time getting a lot of hits in?

changemod wrote:

 streetsamurai wrote:
when a claim on a subjective matter is made by someone who is involved in the developement of something and who also want to sell it to you, it is indeed rather worthless

Remember when people were getting worried about assault sounding weaker than before and they claimed that the daily reveal on the combat phase would make assault units seem way better, and then it had only one new piece of information that didn't in fact make assault units seem way better?

Then it leaked that weapons mostly have a 1 inch range now so horde assaults have a much harder time getting a lot of hits in?

I honestly don't underststand your point here ?

Can the discussion of marketing psychology head to another thread maybe?

 streetsamurai wrote:
when a claim on a subjective matter is made by someone who is involved in the developement of something and who also want to sell it to you, it is indeed rather worthless.

Anyways, this is boring and rather OT. If you guys want to get excited cause the developpers are saying this will be the greatest thing ever, go ahead. Me, I'll wait till we have some credible facts before forming an opinion

Which is fine, in the meantime, perhaps don't come in to threads intimating that people are being stupid or naive for being optimistic about stuff and I won't pick holes in your shonky justifications for your cynicism?

 Azreal13 wrote:

 streetsamurai wrote:
when a claim on a subjective matter is made by someone who is involved in the developement of something and who also want to sell it to you, it is indeed rather worthless.

Anyways, this is boring and rather OT. If you guys want to get excited cause the developpers are saying this will be the greatest thing ever, go ahead. Me, I'll wait till we have some credible facts before forming an opinion

Which is fine, in the meantime, perhaps don't come in to threads intimating that people are being stupid or naive for being optimistic about stuff and I won't pick holes in your shonky justifications for your cynicism?

I'll continue to post whatever I feel like, as long as a mod doesn't tell me im OT

And if you think you've picked any hole in my argument

 streetsamurai wrote:

changemod wrote:

 streetsamurai wrote:
when a claim on a subjective matter is made by someone who is involved in the developement of something and who also want to sell it to you, it is indeed rather worthless

Remember when people were getting worried about assault sounding weaker than before and they claimed that the daily reveal on the combat phase would make assault units seem way better, and then it had only one new piece of information that didn't in fact make assault units seem way better?

Then it leaked that weapons mostly have a 1 inch range now so horde assaults have a much harder time getting a lot of hits in?

I honestly don't underststand your point here ?

I'm supporting your point.

The language of the previews and answers has been less than perfectly truthful, albeit in many cases because of subjective "this is going to be great and we guarantee you'll love it" rhetoric.

 Galas wrote:
I only want to use my Sentinels. They are so Star Wars, but a Snotling spitting at them is enough to destroy them

But now that I think about it, in the movies, Ewoks destroy the AT-ST with logs and rocks so... I suppose is fluffy

Have you tried the Walking Carpet pilot upgrade?

changemod wrote:

 streetsamurai wrote:

changemod wrote:

 streetsamurai wrote:
when a claim on a subjective matter is made by someone who is involved in the developement of something and who also want to sell it to you, it is indeed rather worthless

Remember when people were getting worried about assault sounding weaker than before and they claimed that the daily reveal on the combat phase would make assault units seem way better, and then it had only one new piece of information that didn't in fact make assault units seem way better?

Then it leaked that weapons mostly have a 1 inch range now so horde assaults have a much harder time getting a lot of hits in?

I honestly don't underststand your point here ?

I'm supporting your point.

The language of the previews and answers has been less than perfectly truthful, albeit in many cases because of subjective "this is going to be great and we guarantee you'll love it" rhetoric.

Tha'ts a given. It is actually incredible that some give some credence to these claims.

and again, I'm not blaming GW for doing so

We can not objective state if the opinions of e designers on how the game is are truly off the mark due to their lowered level of objectivity when we don't have the full ruleset. It is indeed worth taking into consideration in terms of ensuring we don't ride the hype train blindly, but since all information comes out of the studio and is tainted with their point of view it is basically impossible to view any objective "sneak peeks" on 8th's rules.

Basically we should just all carry on with what we know, speculate about what we don't and generally stop worrying on how good or bad everything actually is this early in thte month. We have at least a solid month of teasers left and as we go on we may be able to form a clearer picture but not this soon.

On a different note I'm wonderign if the Hull Point to Wounds conversion was "x2+2" as they did with the Dreadnought. If so 8 wound vehicles would be pretty common.

Alternatively 6 wound Rhinos might be the baseline. Dunno yet. I have a feeling a formula was likely employed and then testing adjusted things up or down, but that's speculation.

It all comes down to optimistic people vs pesimistic people and how they approach the same situation. In this case, a company making promises.
But all of that is a complex theme that can spawn is own thread!

 streetsamurai wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

 streetsamurai wrote:
when a claim on a subjective matter is made by someone who is involved in the developement of something and who also want to sell it to you, it is indeed rather worthless.

Anyways, this is boring and rather OT. If you guys want to get excited cause the developpers are saying this will be the greatest thing ever, go ahead. Me, I'll wait till we have some credible facts before forming an opinion

Which is fine, in the meantime, perhaps don't come in to threads intimating that people are being stupid or naive for being optimistic about stuff and I won't pick holes in your shonky justifications for your cynicism?

I'll continue to post whatever I feel like, as long as a mod doesn't tell me im OT

And if you think you've picked any hole in my argument

You're right. Making assumptions on the motivations of someone and the veracity of a statement you aren't even in a remotely plausible situation to know and implying negative things about people who chose to take it differently is just unsubstantiated opinion, I did it too much credit calling it an argument.

Claiming that the game developpers and/or GW employee want to sell this new edition to us is not an assumption, and neither is stating a well known fact that being involved in the developement of something make you less objective about it.

You seem to be rather confused

 adamsouza wrote:

ERJAK wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:

Wait, what? Summoning is gone?

I don't think we can specifically say that summoning is gone as a concept, but I'm pretty sure we can say it's gone as a way of bringing free models.

Spoiler:

Is it really summoning if I'm paying the points for the models ?

If I'm paying points for the models how is that different from just briging models from reserves ?

I like how getting free models is Literally The Worst, right up until chaos does it.

You have to pay for models.

I don't know who you were responding to. You quoted me, but your responce doesn't make sense in context to what I said.

I get that "free" models was perceived negatively, and I understand why they may do away with it in 8th.

Since you mentioned Chaos, at least Chaos had to work for it in the Psychic phase, which was never guarenteed. SM and AM could get tons of free points worth of stuff during army building. Necrons could get free scarabs, with minimal risk.

But my original point, which I may not have explained clearly, was is that if you have to:
1.) Pay points for the models
2.) Keep a Pysker alive to summon them
3.) Then succesfully roll a psychic power to summon then.
It's effectively a worse version of reserves.

If what you summon is not fixed when you pay the points, it offers some versatility over standard army building, but it seems at significantly more risk.

That being said, 8th Edition summoning, which I admit has not been spoiled in any detail, seems at this point D.O.A., or at the very least a suboptimal army building choice included to remain fluffy.

You help to reinforce my point, armies that get free points are considered cancerous BS unless they get the special Chaos forcefield. The fact that there are hoops to jump through doesn't negate the fact that on the other side of those hoops you get a pretty massive advantage. Gladius forces very strict, often suboptimal army building and pretty much locks you out of the best unit in the codex(centurions are too expensive and require another detachment to get a delivery system) Warcon basically builds the army for you and suffers in terms of adaptability because of it, which is why many added libcons for...you guessed it, summoning. Chaos, for it's part did have to bring a Cabal or Tzeentch to be able to summon reliably but once they did it was 100% guaranteed and basically unstoppable.

Free point detachments created some VERY strong feelings and summoning got to sneak under the radar a bit but creates the exact same problems. Side note: why do care about optimal army building in a narrative army?

 ClockworkZion wrote:
On a different note I'm wonderign if the Hull Point to Wounds conversion was "x2+2" as they did with the Dreadnought. If so 8 wound vehicles would be pretty common.

Alternatively 6 wound Rhinos might be the baseline. Dunno yet. I have a feeling a formula was likely employed and then testing adjusted things up or down, but that's speculation.

Does armor rating transfer linearly to toughness? I haven't check/done the math. I'd expect some sort of modifier for open topped vehicles, tanks, etc compared with their equal hull point brethren for instance if they're not taking into account armor values.

 streetsamurai wrote:
Claiming that the game developpers and/or GW employee want to sell this new edition to us is not an assumption, and neither is stating a well known fact that being involved in the developement of something make you less objective about it.

You seem to be rather confused

Not in the slightest.

That one of the designers should choose to answer a question in the positive, while ignoring many others, and choosing to answer in the positive rather than simply give some positive sounding empty answer, on their personal Twitter feed outside of work hours, have it be entirely sales motivated and still be ultimately false is the assumption I'm taking issue with.

That and the slightly snide and condescending tone aimed at the people who simply took it at face value and chose to Ben optimistic about it.

You're putting words in my mouth. II never said it was purely sale motivated, nor that it would prove to be ultimately false

 streetsamurai wrote:
Claiming that the game developpers and/or GW employee want to sell this new edition to us is not an assumption, and neither is stating a well known fact that being involved in the developement of something make you less objective about it.

You seem to be rather confused

An inverse straw man, I like it. Misrepresent your own argument to make it seem more rational than it actually is. The only problem is we can still read the yammering from earlier. Well they can, I block you and only come in once the things other people quote of yours circle around from 'hate-mongering tinfoil hat nonsense' to 'pretending it wasn't totally hate-mongering tinfoil hat non-sense'.

ERJAK wrote:

 streetsamurai wrote:
Claiming that the game developpers and/or GW employee want to sell this new edition to us is not an assumption, and neither is stating a well known fact that being involved in the developement of something make you less objective about it.

You seem to be rather confused

An inverse straw man, I like it. Misrepresent your own argument to make it seem more rational than it actually is. The only problem is we can still read the yammering from earlier. Well they can, I block you and only come in once the things other people quote of yours circle around from 'hate-mongering tinfoil hat nonsense' to 'pretending it wasn't totally hate-mongering tinfoil hat non-sense'.

Care to give an explanation on how I misrepresented my own argument?

I guess not, since you would be unable to do so.

And again with the totaly baseless acusation of hate mongering. Yeah, that's why I claimed numerous times that I liked most of the change of 8th edition and I'm excited about it. It seems that for some, anything else than unbridled enthusiasm is akin to hating.

And if you blocked me, why are you responding to one of my post? That's a completely juvenile thing to do

 Galas wrote:
It all comes down to optimistic people vs pesimistic people and how they approach the same situation. In this case, a company making promises.
But all of that is a complex theme that can spawn is own thread!

I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a company making promises in the example that started this all (will a kan wall be better?)... but rather an employee whose livelihood depends in part on the success of the product offering a highly biased opinion. In the end, reviews are just opinions and we'll all have to form our own in a few weeks. After being misled about how awesome formations and unbound were going to be and how it is what the community wanted (despite by my recollection no one ever did) by employees in similar positions with 7th edition, holding the position of "show, don't tell" is more accurately described IMO as realistic rather than pessimistic. Luckily for us, GW is actually trying to do that this time around unlike with the rollout of 7th where we had to depend on WD leaks to read the marketing spin and find out just how much of a turd it would be.