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.

What if the bigness is actually Cordenesque?

Definitely big, but unpleasant, unwelcome and seemingly unavoidable?

I mean TBH if it's just the silent King's return that's proably the biggest news in 40k since Gulliman.

Aren't these just paraphrased excerpts from the Imperial Creed?

No new edition.

New Primaris Space Marines and and a new faction to be unveiled. I'm predicting Lost and the Damned.

People need to let go of the new edition fixation.

 oni wrote:
No new edition.

New Primaris Space Marines and and a new faction to be unveiled. I'm predicting Lost and the Damned.

People need to let go of the new edition fixation.

GW would be nuts to launch a new edition smack bang in the centre of a global pandemic. Right now people are happy to keep buying models and supplements in the hopes of being able to play again in a few months. A new edition that no one can play, would jeopardise sales at a time of economic recession. They’d lose half the benefit of a new edition bounce in sales.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
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.

They made some pretty radical changes in second ed AoS, and released updates for all of the existing faction books as Errata. AoS seems to have been the testing ground for a lot of stuff for 40k, so I wouldn't be surprised to see similar command point style changes pushed in a similar manner. They also could change many rules without having to update every codex, like they could change the to wound chart (because the current system really favors mid strength weapons), or release better cover rules, make bolter discipline part of how rapid fire weapons work, etc.

 Nostromodamus wrote:
Inquisition?

I never picked up the White Dwarf Inquisitor rules, but a combined codex for the three branches and retinue would be awesome.

 ratmkith wrote:

 Nostromodamus wrote:
Inquisition?

I never picked up the White Dwarf Inquisitor rules, but a combined codex for the three branches and retinue would be awesome.

And some plastics...

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/05/18/psychic-awakening-gone-dark/

I read the story posted on Warhammer community and I wonder if it's a hint at a potential new unit. Could a combo flayed one/pariah kit be released?

 lord_blackfang wrote:
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.

Seeing GW isn't moving toward some ultimate balanced edition anyway but just changing things they can easily change things enough for new edition without invalidating codexes.

Bit more rules for terrain, maybe alter way CP is gained, incorporate faq's, done.

People need to stop thinking new edition=big changes.

Some terrain rules that make sense would be welcome. This kinda gak has to go away, pronto.

 Red Corsair wrote:

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.

IMO, the lockdown would have been a perfect time to revisit all the FAQs and work on related content. The number of FAQs would likely have dropped substantially during this period, giving them an excellent opportunity to get up to date.

That said, I doubt said opportunity was taken advantage of.

 ingtaer wrote:

 Sherrypie wrote:
Funniest part about this is comparing the Ragnar vs. Ghaz box to a starter kit. They are not meant for the same demographic as such nor do they fill the same purpose.

No, the funniest bit about it is that people were told to drop it and yet haven't.

Just because the mod note was not coloured does not mean one can just ignore it.

In fairness to the above poster (whose argument I disagree with), mod notes are best in red so that regular users can differentiate between an actual mod note and mods participating in the regular conversation, else it creates a chilling effect and an unsurety of discussion when a mod is involved in making an argument for or against something (as opposed to an "argument"). There's one mod here who I will not interact with in conversation for this very reason.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

 Azazelx wrote:

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.
.

Hows that?

it was sarcasm. Sorry, I was probably being too flat/dry in my response to the other poster.

 General Kroll wrote:

 oni wrote:
No new edition.

New Primaris Space Marines and and a new faction to be unveiled. I'm predicting Lost and the Damned.

People need to let go of the new edition fixation.

GW would be nuts to launch a new edition smack bang in the centre of a global pandemic. Right now people are happy to keep buying models and supplements in the hopes of being able to play again in a few months. A new edition that no one can play, would jeopardise sales at a time of economic recession. They’d lose half the benefit of a new edition bounce in sales.

People are currently buying models generally for 1 of 2 reasons right now –
1. Expanding their collection and to give them some hobby to do whilst on lockdown, or,
2. Based off any form of TTS meta/experience.

Releasing “shiny new models”, will always generate big sales for GW, especially if the rules are semi decent to excellent. Even centre piece models that are terrible still draw in sales.

The fact that no one would be able to “play” the new edition in stores right now, wouldn’t be a reason for it not to get released, nor would it have too much of an impact on sales – with the exception of the remaining PA books (if they are not compatible with the update).

It is part of the reason why I think, if there is a big change coming this summer, then the remaining PA books will get released at a faster pace to catch back up to the schedule.
Most people will buy into a new edition, lockdown or not. It might be more of a drawn out, extended sale, rather than a single “big hit” followed by a drop off, but the sales will be there, though this will likely be a result of people being on 80% of their wages for several months, or, in a fair few cases, currently finding themselves without the disposable income at point of release.

With the webstore and factory back open, and the lockdown restrictions getting lifted more and more each week, there is a strong chance that things will be dramatically different in 4-6 weeks’ time. The only thing that could case a setback, is all the morons ignoring the current advice and causing a secondary spike.
I’ve been back at work for 2 weeks now, and every day I’m seeing more and more traffic on the road. Most people and big businesses have adapted, and the pace of this will likely continue to increase.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Some terrain rules that make sense would be welcome. This kinda gak has to go away, pronto.

The kicker is that anything that can see that sliver of the baneblade can shoot it without any sort of benefit to the baneblade due to cover or lack there of. I understand why the terrain rules were written the way they were; they are trying to streamline and standardize the game which includes removing as many opportunities for particularly... competitive rules lawyers from exploiting any sort of grey area. Or trying to create grey areas to exploit. Nevertheless, decent terrain rules would probably be the biggest announcement by GW indeed.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Some terrain rules that make sense would be welcome. This kinda gak has to go away, pronto.

If i'm honest, things like this don't really bother me too much. It might not be realistic, but, it does make things easy and simple. I'd rather not go back to the days of weapon arcs and vehicle facings.
That said, terrain could always use the update - it just won't happen outside of a new rulebook though.

I don’t get why people are convinced there won’t be a new edition anytime soon. We’ve known since late 2019 that 9th ed would arrive in summer 2020, now it’s just a matter of how long it will be delayed by the pandemic.

The same rumormongers that were talking about 9th ed next summer also correctly predicted the content of PA Faith and Fury 2 months in advance, the Ghaz+Ragnar box, that we’d have no new codex until the last Psychic Awakening in May/June and both the Illuminor and Silent King new models. All this between November and December of last year.

Only reason I would say that this could be a new starter(and maybe rules) are:

* 6th, 7th, and 8th all had 2-3 years interval. Same for AoS 1.0 to 2.0. So there is an established pattern.
* The current starter is stale and probably not moving many units. That's bad business so GW has an incentive to refresh the box.
* The current rulebook in Dark Imperium and booklets are woefully outdated and bad. There is no sense for GW to keep printing them to infinity and this would provide a chance to refresh it a bit.
* A lot of people seem to be stuck in 7th-to-8th mindset. Before that we had 6th-7th which was a minor change except for battalions that came in the codexes. AoS is currently at 2.0 and Daughters of Khaine, Maggotkin of Nurgle, and Idoneth Deepking players still have their 1.0 tomes, 2 years into the 2.0 ruleset. They could do with an update but have still been winning games here and there, especially DoK and IK, with Maggotkin getting a little lease with the last FAQ. So a new rulebook and rule tweaks don't necessarily mean your current codex is going to be invalidated.

Again, an edition change doesn't mean they are revamping the rules completely. 6-7th was a minor change. 1.0 to 2.0 AoS was not a 7th to 8th big. A new edition can just be a slight tweak for the most part, which is why some people have been referring to this more as an 8.5 edition if it happens.

 Eldarsif wrote:
* A lot of people seem to be stuck in 7th-to-8th mindset. Before that we had 6th-7th which was a minor change except for battalions that came in the codexes.

And before that we had 5->6, 4->5 and 3->4 which were also minor without invalidating codexes. Wonder if you could even use 3rd ed codex technically in 5th? 6th? 7th? (apart from sucking up big time)

In 40k there's been 2 editions where all previous codexes were invalidated. In FB that happened once(5->6th). In AOS so far never.

Codex invalidations are very rare for GW.

 Aenar wrote:
We’ve known since late 2019 that 9th ed would arrive in summer 2020,

Have we? I haven't heard anything like that but I wouldn't be too surprised if it was real.

 Nostromodamus wrote:

 ratmkith wrote:

 Nostromodamus wrote:
Inquisition?

I never picked up the White Dwarf Inquisitor rules, but a combined codex for the three branches and retinue would be awesome.

And some plastics...

what's the point in inquisition when their main adversary might aswell not exist...

 kastelen wrote:

 Aenar wrote:
We’ve known since late 2019 that 9th ed would arrive in summer 2020,

Have we? I haven't heard anything like that but I wouldn't be too surprised if it was real.

I remember reading it from the same sources that correctly predicted a lot of stuff, months in advance. AFAIK, they were French or French-speaking.

 Aenar wrote:

 kastelen wrote:

 Aenar wrote:
We’ve known since late 2019 that 9th ed would arrive in summer 2020,

Have we? I haven't heard anything like that but I wouldn't be too surprised if it was real.

I remember reading it from the same sources that correctly predicted a lot of stuff, months in advance. AFAIK, they were French or French-speaking.

That's still not same as knowing though. There's been plenty of things rumoured by reputable sources that havent' come forth yet. Angron for example was rumoured by then so far reliable rumour monger(this around time Guillimann was revelead. Did get Mortarion right. Not the other 2 at least so far). Also ork vs black templar box never materialized...

Once GW stopped leaking things in secret reliable rumours have dried up a lot.

Just because there's strong rumours for something doesn't mean it's quaranteed enough you can say "we've known". Suspected is better word.

Suspicion would be deducting it from clues (like 3 years from the launch of 8th, bloated faq/erratas, etc), while here we've had a source who's been 100% correct so far that said 9th would come out in the summer. They've established their credibility imho.
Anyway, 3 more days and we'll probably know for sure.

The "deliverance" part of the quote could suggest we're getting something Raven Guard, maybe Corax? We know the Silent King is coming and we know Corax basically upped and left after the Crusade and is potentially somewhere "out there". Deliverance is the name of the Raven Guard homeworld so it might be a carefully chosen use of that word.

I guess revealing both the Silent King and the second Imperium Primarch would be a pretty big reveal. Not sure I'd really like that tot be the case though as more Space Marines is not what the game needs right now.

Kdash wrote:
If i'm honest, things like this don't really bother me too much. It might not be realistic, but, it does make things easy and simple. I'd rather not go back to the days of weapon arcs and vehicle facings.

Manoeuvre and positioning should have meaning. If you can shoot anything just by seeing a sliver of a wing-tip, antennae, banner pole, claw, tail, etc., then it makes things too simplistic.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Kdash wrote:
If i'm honest, things like this don't really bother me too much. It might not be realistic, but, it does make things easy and simple. I'd rather not go back to the days of weapon arcs and vehicle facings.

Manoeuvre and positioning should have meaning. If you can shoot anything just by seeing a sliver of a wing-tip, antennae, banner pole, claw, tail, etc., then it makes things too simplistic.

I agree but at the same time it is very hard to define facings and in general it makes vehicles much less desirable when unlike everything else on the game they can't fire all the weapons they are paying for. Specially when GW makes vehicles by how cool they are and puts weapons everywhere.
And, yeah, with boxy imperial vehicles is easy to define facings but with eldar, dark eldar, tau ones, etc... is harder, and then arguing comes.

I mean, if it's really an issue you encounter frequently, it's not a hard solve - get some acrylic arc templates, and define a centrepoint and forward direction point on the model before the game with your opponent, then just hold the template over the model any time you need to check arcs. If your opponents want to get really retentive about it, mark them permanently on the base like they do in SW Legion.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Some terrain rules that make sense would be welcome. This kinda gak has to go away, pronto.

Exalted for clarity.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Kdash wrote:
If i'm honest, things like this don't really bother me too much. It might not be realistic, but, it does make things easy and simple. I'd rather not go back to the days of weapon arcs and vehicle facings.

Manoeuvre and positioning should have meaning. If you can shoot anything just by seeing a sliver of a wing-tip, antennae, banner pole, claw, tail, etc., then it makes things too simplistic.

Exalted for emphasis.

To this I would like to emphasize realism also in another direction, targeting line of sight.
IMO, if you can see an antenna, then play should proceed something as follows:
Player A: "This unit will target the tank. I can see that it can draw direct line of sight <pointing with laser pointer> and can see the antenna. It will shoot at the tank's antenna."
Player B: "Sure - awesome! - shoot at the antenna!"
Player A: "Hit. Armor pen... check."
Player B: "Oh no... the antenna! Good thing that it is magnetized."
Player A: "Yeah, I can't hit anything else but I rolled a 6 for that antenna!"

tneva82 wrote:

 Eldarsif wrote:
* A lot of people seem to be stuck in 7th-to-8th mindset. Before that we had 6th-7th which was a minor change except for battalions that came in the codexes.

And before that we had 5->6, 4->5 and 3->4 which were also minor without invalidating codexes. Wonder if you could even use 3rd ed codex technically in 5th? 6th? 7th? (apart from sucking up big time)

In 40k there's been 2 editions where all previous codexes were invalidated. In FB that happened once(5->6th). In AOS so far never.

Codex invalidations are very rare for GW.

Exactly.

I used the 4th edition Asuryani codex until it got updated in 6th. Same with the 5th edition Drukhari codex that got a horrible update in 7th. An update like going to 8th is not going to happen any time soon. A small marketable update that just sells more models is however more likely.