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.

 Overread wrote:
GW used to allow stores to split box content, that was what kept the bits-stores running. At some stage GW decided they didn't want that happening any more and shut it down so trade stores buying from GW can't split up box content. It killed the bits stores in general and those that are left are higher priced for parts. Ok for one or two but once you want a halfdozen bits from a single box its cheaper to just get the box from GW/retail.

That's my love affair with the Pistoliers boxes.

Buy boxes from GW, remove the feathered helmet heads for Ventrillian Noble conversions, resell what is a 95% complete set via eBay. Never failed yet.

Bearblu wrote:
The "big news" can also be a wordplay like they do with the reveal of the new giants in AoS.

Oh I'd love it to be that. Can you imagine the reaction?

"In the darkness between the stars, the weak and the faithless find no delivarance."

Sounds awfully lot like a fancy way to say "the lost and the damned".
New traitor guard faction would be pretty big, and also more than hinted at with the BSF models.

Kdash wrote:

Finally, I’d just expect pre-order dates for the PA books. There is a potential that they will release them all rapid fire, rather than risk their future release timetable crossing over with them.

That would require them knowing when factory restarts which would require either future knowledge of how corona goes or at least what uk goverment plans to do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Bearblu wrote:
The "big news" can also be a wordplay like they do with the reveal of the new giants in AoS.

Oh I'd love it to be that. Can you imagine the reaction?

My dog that works at GW says it's space giants, an upgrade sprue that you can add to the new AOS giants that gives them a buzz lightyear helmet and a big giant boltgun so you can run them as Ogryns made out of Primaris Marines.

Lol that would be a) expensive ogryns b) one hell of a size up for ogryns the warhammer giant dwarfs ogryns and new giants dwarf old giant.

Would be better for orks with stats around imperial knight. Size would fit better.

The silence (pun intended) on the spring FAQ kind of lends a bit more fuel to the 9th edition speculation IMO. Why would they bother with a Spring FAQ if they are launching a new edition?

But who knows, Saturday will help a bit.

 Red Corsair wrote:
The silence (pun intended) on the spring FAQ kind of lends a bit more fuel to the 9th edition speculation IMO. Why would they bother with a Spring FAQ if they are launching a new edition?

But who knows, Saturday will help a bit.

It kind of doesn't though. Assuming that the last 2 months hadn't happened, multiple events would still be taking place. Those would be going on until the summer rules refresh anyway (if that is what's happening). They absolutely could have done a smaller FAQ that tidies up some codex interactions but that doesn't change anything fundamental with the game.
Thing is there are no events happening (not even local/club level meetings) so the need for a FAQ is minimal at best because no-one can realistically use it.

I wondered why they used the term 'fans of the Adeptus Mechanicus' in the description and then i saw the pic underneath it.
Really disappointed at the 'Pteraxii' - Thallax are so much better, in both intent and in image

tneva82 wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 EnTyme wrote:

This is probably the most logical comment in this thread. GW wouldn't announce a new edition while they are still trying to sell campaign book for this edition. It would be bad marketing to announce that upcoming releases are about to be obsolete.

How on earth supplement that will be 100% usable in 9th ed would be obsolete? That doesn't make ANY sense.

You and several other seem to be hung up on my use of the word "obsolete", and it honestly probably isn't the term I should have used. "Outdated" would have been a better descriptor. That said, it honestly doesn't matter how compatible the theoretical new edition would be with current supplements. The second you announce a new edition, a significant portion of the playerbase (i.e. GW's target market) will view everything 8th edition as invalid. Hell, there are people who declare a codex obsolete the second the FAQ is released. Announcing a new edition while you are still trying to sell supplements for the current edition is just bad business.

 Red Corsair wrote:
The silence (pun intended) on the spring FAQ kind of lends a bit more fuel to the 9th edition speculation IMO. Why would they bother with a Spring FAQ if they are launching a new edition?

But who knows, Saturday will help a bit.

FWIW, the last few months nobody has really been playing, so how many people are gonna submit questions for the FAQ/Errata?

 Azazelx wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

JWBS wrote:
Yes, how wonderful - I get a whole new army of Necrons with my new Space Marines. Two armies - two for the price of two - because to get the units for my army I also need to buy the units for another army. Please do this again GW.

You're really going to complain about a starterbox having two armies? Or any GW big box having two armies? It's not hard to just get what you want.

Back in my day, we used to split these boxes. Or even two people would buy one each and trade the unwanted force to the other person. It's so disappointing that GW apparently made it enforcably illegal to do so, worldwide.

Apparently.

I really doubt I'll have the opportunity though, I'm going to buy some apples this week, so most of my spare time will be taken up trying to sell all the oranges and bananas that I'm also required in to buy with the apples. I know, it seems like a really strange way to obtain apples, but it actually works out quite well if you know people that want to buy oranges and bananas but not apples.

Please keep on the thread topic, lets leave the concerns about hypothetical box sets for another discussion.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
The silence (pun intended) on the spring FAQ kind of lends a bit more fuel to the 9th edition speculation IMO. Why would they bother with a Spring FAQ if they are launching a new edition?

But who knows, Saturday will help a bit.

FWIW, the last few months nobody has really been playing, so how many people are gonna submit questions for the FAQ/Errata?

I thought of that, but the questions for the Spring FAQ generally occur prior to the spring which was before lock down. And one would assume with increased hobby time and a lack of alternative news, a FAQ would be easy for them to release during quarantine. I get that they like waiting until after adepticons results, but I assumed they didn't rely 100% on these tourneys results. I'm probably wrong, which means those FAQ's were influenced way too heavily by single events, which some had already speculated but there wasn't much evidence.

I mean, why wouldn't you release the Spring FAQ with other news slowing so much even if it was small? Seems silly to just skip it without acknowledgment.

It wasn't the results of the events, AFAIK, that were so influential but rather the 'in-person feedback' they got from select individuals.

tneva82 wrote:

Kdash wrote:

Finally, I’d just expect pre-order dates for the PA books. There is a potential that they will release them all rapid fire, rather than risk their future release timetable crossing over with them.

That would require them knowing when factory restarts which would require either future knowledge of how corona goes or at least what uk goverment plans to do.

That’s now.
It happened from the 11th May.

I don’t know if GW specifically have begun up, but they are allowed now.

 Kanluwen wrote:
It wasn't the results of the events, AFAIK, that were so influential but rather the 'in-person feedback' they got from select individuals.

Then those "select individuals" have too much influence.

 Dysartes wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
It wasn't the results of the events, AFAIK, that were so influential but rather the 'in-person feedback' they got from select individuals.

Then those "select individuals" have too much influence.

They really haven't done much wrong outside how Doctrines are being done so...

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
It wasn't the results of the events, AFAIK, that were so influential but rather the 'in-person feedback' they got from select individuals.

Then those "select individuals" have too much influence.

They really haven't done much wrong outside how Doctrines are being done so...

Nerfing the Commissars and the addition of "Raw Recruits" rather than just adding the "Militarum Auxilla" keyword to Conscripts immediately springs to mind as an example of the feedback. Doctrines aren't really an issue, IMO, given that they presented a drawback(having anything that isn't Astartes disables them) and a benefit...unless you'd like to suggest for doctrines giving a flat -1AP as the issue, in which case I'd agree and I would have liked to see something far more interesting.

I doubt it’s going to be a bonafide edition change because they are way too proud of this edition to drop it. I don’t even think they would announce 8.5 since in their eyes there’s no need for it. I doubt it’s a big update because I am also sure they are satisfied with where it’s at now, unless they want to patch some balance issues from the last PA supplement or whatever more recent content they have that never got that. It’s got to be new models. Probably more primaricrap and a Xenos release or if we are really lucky an overhaul of a xenos faction

Heres hoping it's just a new Proper starter set, with a revised Rulebook, incorporating all the errors fixed by the last few FAQs.

And smaller. Noone even brings the rulebook to games where I play. 6th edition may have been terrible, but that softcover mini rulebook was ace.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
It wasn't the results of the events, AFAIK, that were so influential but rather the 'in-person feedback' they got from select individuals.

Then those "select individuals" have too much influence.

They really haven't done much wrong outside how Doctrines are being done so...

Nerfing the Commissars and the addition of "Raw Recruits" rather than just adding the "Militarum Auxilla" keyword to Conscripts immediately springs to mind as an example of the feedback. Doctrines aren't really an issue, IMO, given that they presented a drawback(having anything that isn't Astartes disables them) and a benefit...unless you'd like to suggest for doctrines giving a flat -1AP as the issue, in which case I'd agree and I would have liked to see something far more interesting.

That's more a main rules writer thing you're referring to (and trust me I thought it was lame), but it's been super convoluted on how to go through the Doctrines. They could've just left the Strat alone and just added that it could only be used once per game so that Dark Angels, Iron Hands, and Imperial Fists aren't as gimped to anyone preferring the Tactical Doctrine.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
Heres hoping it's just a new Proper starter set, with a revised Rulebook, incorporating all the errors fixed by the last few FAQs.

And smaller. Noone even brings the rulebook to games where I play. 6th edition may have been terrible, but that softcover mini rulebook was ace.

Big agree on that. Personally I wish gw would make all rule books less expensive softcovers. If you want a hardcover book that's what special editions should be for.

But on what we need in a new edition, just incorporating the FAQs wouldn't do it. They need to address too many things: cover/terrain, fallback, and cp generation just to name a few.

I'm expecting a new edition as we're in pretty much a decade long pattern of three years or less between editions.

It would be nice if it was a linear improvement on 8th but I'm expecting the part update part random ideas shuffling of the deckchairs they normally do.

8th can't be salvaged without invalidating all the codexes again and they won't dare do that.

The second fluff blurb really makes me think a renegade, possibly "enlightened" (possibly possibly "woke") human splinter faction.

I’m thinking these quotes are part of a larger whole.






Automatically Appended Next Post:
Reckon the next will be along the lines of ‘but it’s all a big naughty fib’

I will find you, and I will squat you.

From the 2 blurbs so far, it does sound like heretic guard or lost and the damned. Certainly humanity who has given up on the Emperor.

Inquisition?

Yeah these quotes remind meofthe last time we had a bunch of starry quotes and everyone thought 40K endtimes had come but it was just the Custodes.