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.

Take a look at this:


The same unit (Helblasters) but one was released on the warhammer community site and the other was a picture taken of the new book, why have they got different power levels and why do the plasma incinerators have different statlines?

I have noticed this on a couple of other things they have released compared to pictures taken (mostly it is just power level differences).

So what gives? Are the books wrong/fakes/preliminary copies? Have GW released falty datasheets (and if so why)?

It all seems rather odd.

Well, the edition isn't out yet.

If they're playtesting the starter box they are probably making balance adjustments fairly frequently.

Probably is leaks form playtesters in previous editions.

Most likely playtesting.... still enough time before release to make tweaks

Most likely the faction focuses were written a long time ago, and have been gathering dust on the shelves waiting to go. In this case we probably have a last minute change to the hell blasters to make them more competitive.

It's that or there are minor changes like these hidden throughout all of the playtest data sheets, that way if any of them leaked they could figure out who leaked it. My bets on the first though.

I have a feeling one of the profiles comes from the index and the other comes from the little pamphlets that comes with the starter box. The starter box is going to be designed to be played with specific scenarios to learn the game and points costs in that pamphlet are probably based entirely around those specific unit compositions.

Likewise, the weird shape of the pages for the core rules makes me think that comes from the core rules pamphlet instead of the actual rule book.

 Grimgold wrote:
Most likely the faction focuses were written a long time ago, and have been gathering dust on the shelves waiting to go. In this case we probably have a last minute change to the hell blasters to make them more competitive.

It's that or there are minor changes like these hidden throughout all of the playtest data sheets, that way if any of them leaked they could figure out who leaked it. My bets on the first though.

Could be them tweaking the game. With print runs and time to gear up production systems you need to finalise fairly early, get printed, get boxes assembled and ready for shipment on mass plus global shipping..

The rules willl have likely been set in stone a while ago for release date.

 Aetare wrote:
Most likely playtesting.... still enough time before release to make tweaks

Oh really? Starter boxes were done and produced ages ago like several months ago. As it is people are already in possession of them!

Any playtesting going on like past 2 months are already on future products.

Though you are sorta correct but the playtest version was mostly taken like months before.

the starter set thus might have a cost differant from the index book, and I suspect the index will have the more "up to date" points value

Notice there are also different page references for "And They Shall Know No Fear."

 mrhappyface wrote:
why have they got different power levels

Don't know that one. Balance changes post-printing?

and why do the plasma incinerators have different statlines?

They're the same, as far as I see. They're just worded differently.

As for page numbers, there's the starter box codex/indexes, and the main codex/index, with different page numbers for the same unit.

The leaked images are almost certainly from old playtest books that have been superseded by the ones GW published openly. If in doubt I think it's evident that the rules openly published by GW are correct and the leaks are not.

Demantiae wrote:
The leaked images are almost certainly from old playtest books that have been superseded by the ones GW published openly. If in doubt I think it's evident that the rules openly published by GW are correct and the leaks are not.

Doubtfull playtesters had real books to go on. They change during playtest too often. And leaks started to appear when stores started to get copies...
More likely community articles have been done in advance and have older version.

The Plasma Incincerators actually have the same statlines, but one is clearer about it than the other. The split profiles amounts to the same as the "add 1 to strength and damage at the risk of killing yourself on a roll of 1 to hit." The split profiles are also clearer about when the models are removed.

The differences in power levels are probably due to tweaking during play testing. Alternatively, power levels may vary for units depending on the source book. Considering its only designed as a rough balancing tool for narrative games, it might make sense that the power levels of certain units change depending on the narrative scenario presented.