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.
2020/07/01 12:11:35
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
H.B.M.C. wrote: The Bolt Sniper Rifle is on the list of blast weapons.
Seems that from GW's perspective that anything that can fire an explosive round is now a "blast" weapon, even if its other firing mode/s are decidedly not explosive (Krak, Executioner Rounds, etc.). Par for the course really...
probably just got someones kid to find all weapons with random numbers and said - yeah that will do
I AM A MARINE PLAYER
"Unimaginably ancient xenos artefact somewhere on the planet, hive fleet poised above our heads, hidden 'stealer broods making an early start....and now a bloody Chaos cult crawling out of the woodwork just in case we were bored. Welcome to my world, Ciaphas."
Inquisitor Amberley Vail, Ordo Xenos
"I will admit that some Primachs like Russ or Horus could have a chance against an unarmed 12 year old novice but, a full Battle Sister??!! One to one? In close combat? Perhaps three Primarchs fighting together... but just one Primarch?" da001
H.B.M.C. wrote: The Bolt Sniper Rifle is on the list of blast weapons.
Seems that from GW's perspective that anything that can fire an explosive round is now a "blast" weapon, even if its other firing mode/s are decidedly not explosive (Krak, Executioner Rounds, etc.). Par for the course really...
So you would have preferred them to list them by weapon mode?
Bolt rifle - hyperfrag round...
Seeing it fires basically frag grenades which are blast weapons not that weird it's blast weapon too.
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2020/07/01 12:22:04
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
tneva82 wrote: So is twin lascannon that isn't going up.
Maybe it's GW's bone it throws for hordes that are getting otherwise murdered in 9th
Is your middle name stretch armstrong? Or did you forget lascannons were kind of meh? Or do you not realize heavy bolters are way up? Did you also see the WW went from 65 to 125?
2020/07/01 12:44:00
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
If it came from someone who maybe got his hands on a copy of indomitus, that could be a thing, but:
1) It's too early for someone to have a copy.
2) The watermarks clearly say that this is not the indomitus book.
We are looking at the images of a random document that could be or could not be official.
Forging something like that would be extremely easy.
The warter mark is "mournival" which is the name of one of the GW test brackets, it could add some credibility to it and means it's not related to the indomitus box.
2020/07/01 12:52:09
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
H.B.M.C. wrote: Hey wait a sec... why isn't the Particle Whip on the list of blast weapons?
And the more I think about it, the more it seems that this edition of 40K was written for the tournament crowd. It has smaller boards, ITC-style secondary objectives, 5 turn hard-limit for matched play games, rules that punish any unit above 5 models, a strat that gets you out of tri-pointing, more command points (and everyone starts with the same amount of command points). New rules that make hordes less viable. Everything's going up on points to make smaller games.
Really overall this edition is a fantastic example of two common GW phenomena:
1. Pendulum swinging - They've swung the pendulum hard to tournament gaming, so much so that everything is too focused on it.
2. Hanlon's Razor - Again GW prove that they are not evil, just stupid, or rather gullible and too trusting in this instance, as they brought on a lot of big name tournament players for play testing and then apparently just reformed the game to suit their preferred way of playing.
All we need now is a big FAQ to change things out of this mess to demonstrate GW's third major attribute (changing horses mid-race) and we'll have completed the cycle). In the meantime we have to suffer through what should best be called Warhammer 40,000: Tournament Edition for a little while longer.
Now I'm certain some big brain is going to come in here and say "But HBYMCA! Haven't you always said that the game should be geared towards tournaments? Now you're complaining about the thing you wanted!!!eleven" to which the answer of course is no, what I've always said is that a balanced game with a tight set of rules benefits everyone. Never said that writing the game for tournaments would benefit everyone. Certainly doesn't benefit horde armies, as we've seen. Or really anyone who isn't a Marine (and I'm a Marine player!!!).
But that is good right? Narrative will have different missions, will probably still be played on 6x4 tables, not worry too much about CPs (I often played solo games with fixed 10CP per side so that it didn't hamstring my list building and I could theme accordingly)
A ruleset designed for tournament play needs to be tighter, and that should trickle down as a better result for casual/narrative play. I'm all on board for that.
2021/07/13 13:35:13
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
The warter mark is "mournival" which is the name of one of the GW test brackets, it could add some credibility to it and means it's not related to the indomitus box.
Well, now you have my attention. Test brackets?
2020/07/01 12:58:54
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
BrianDavion wrote: another reason to be skeptical is the ATV and turret are listed as part of the indomatus set, but they're specificly NOT from the indomatus set and are something else coming down the line (presumably with a codex and a multipart release of the indomatus units)
diepotato47 wrote: Interesting that the ATV and Turret are listed with the Indomitus box...
makes me IMMEDIATLY skeptical about that being legit
Warhammer Community wrote:Oh, you thought we were done showing you awesome stuff for today? Think again. Now that you’ve seen all the amazing miniatures crammed into the best Warhammer 40,000 boxed set ever made, we wanted to show you some of the other goodies that we couldn’t fit in…
Warhammer Community wrote:Who do you think is winning the battle of the big guns? All of these kits will be available as push fit models – which is good because you’re going to want a lot of them. We can safely say these are hardly the last new kits you’ll see for both Primaris Space Marines and Necrons, including multipart kits, big centrepiece models, and more vehicles. Stay tuned for more information as soon as we have it!
I'd be shocked if these things weren't available at the same time as the Indomitus set. The points values are likely contained within the "Edge of Silence" booklet that is in the Indomitus set as well.
The warter mark is "mournival" which is the name of one of the GW test brackets, it could add some credibility to it and means it's not related to the indomitus box.
Well, now you have my attention. Test brackets?
Playtester groups. Mournival is one of two(Infinity Circuit being the other) that tend to get a "Thanks to..." note in the front of books.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/07/01 12:59:37
2020/07/01 13:04:27
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
If it came from someone who maybe got his hands on a copy of indomitus, that could be a thing, but:
1) It's too early for someone to have a copy. 2) The watermarks clearly say that this is not the indomitus book.
We are looking at the images of a random document that could be or could not be official.
Forging something like that would be extremely easy.
The warter mark is "mournival" which is the name of one of the GW test brackets, it could add some credibility to it and means it's not related to the indomitus box.
Thank you for the info, this confirms that this is a fake.
You just need to apply a bit of logic and it is clear at this point.
Applying a watermark with the name of a testing group is a nice move from a forger to lend credibility to the fake document but...
If GW is really sending watermarked versions to each different test group to avoid leaks, it means that she is doing a different print run of these for each testing group? Lol, seriously?
This is clearly impossible. What could be is that they only distribute the test rules digitally to the groups and apply a watermark to each different file sent to trace leaks. This is more likely, but...
... our nice forger here thought that it was cool to send the leaks as photos of printed documents, Printed in colors to booth.
If the leak had been a digital image, then I could still have a doubt, but since the leak is a photo then this is 100% fake, because for it to exist it implies the existence of a print run for that specific watermark.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/07/01 13:05:56
2020/07/01 13:05:24
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
BrianDavion wrote: another reason to be skeptical is the ATV and turret are listed as part of the indomatus set, but they're specificly NOT from the indomatus set and are something else coming down the line (presumably with a codex and a multipart release of the indomatus units)
diepotato47 wrote: Interesting that the ATV and Turret are listed with the Indomitus box...
makes me IMMEDIATLY skeptical about that being legit
Warhammer Community wrote:Oh, you thought we were done showing you awesome stuff for today? Think again. Now that you’ve seen all the amazing miniatures crammed into the best Warhammer 40,000 boxed set ever made, we wanted to show you some of the other goodies that we couldn’t fit in…
Warhammer Community wrote:Who do you think is winning the battle of the big guns? All of these kits will be available as push fit models – which is good because you’re going to want a lot of them. We can safely say these are hardly the last new kits you’ll see for both Primaris Space Marines and Necrons, including multipart kits, big centrepiece models, and more vehicles. Stay tuned for more information as soon as we have it!
I'd be shocked if these things weren't available at the same time as the Indomitus set. The points values are likely contained within the "Edge of Silence" booklet that is in the Indomitus set as well.
The warter mark is "mournival" which is the name of one of the GW test brackets, it could add some credibility to it and means it's not related to the indomitus box.
Well, now you have my attention. Test brackets?
Playtester groups. Mournival is one of two(Infinity Circuit being the other) that tend to get a "Thanks to..." note in the front of books.
Mournival is the narrative focused group I believe as well
If it came from someone who maybe got his hands on a copy of indomitus, that could be a thing, but:
1) It's too early for someone to have a copy.
2) The watermarks clearly say that this is not the indomitus book.
We are looking at the images of a random document that could be or could not be official.
Forging something like that would be extremely easy.
The warter mark is "mournival" which is the name of one of the GW test brackets, it could add some credibility to it and means it's not related to the indomitus box.
Thank you for the info, this confirms that this is a fake.
You just need to apply a bit of logic and it is clear at this point.
Applying a watermark with the name of a testing group is a nice move from a forger to lend credibility to the fake document but...
If GW is really sending watermarked versions to each different test group to avoid leaks, it means that she is doing a different print run of these for each testing group? Lol, seriously?
This is clearly impossible. What could be is that they only distribute the test rules digitally to the groups and apply a watermark to each different file sent to trace leaks. This is more likely, but...
... our nice forger here thought that it was cool to send the leaks as photos of printed documents, Printed in colors to booth.
If the leak had been a digital image, then I could still have a doubt, but since the leak is a photo then this is 100% fake, because for it to exist it implies the existence of a print run for that specific watermark.
Or they printed the digital document out for ease of reference? Not saying it isn't a fake but the amount of mental backflips you needed to do there is a bit extreme.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/07/01 13:07:03
2020/07/01 13:08:56
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
H.B.M.C. wrote: The Bolt Sniper Rifle is on the list of blast weapons.
Seems that from GW's perspective that anything that can fire an explosive round is now a "blast" weapon, even if its other firing mode/s are decidedly not explosive (Krak, Executioner Rounds, etc.). Par for the course really...
So you would have preferred them to list them by weapon mode?
Bolt rifle - hyperfrag round...
Seeing it fires basically frag grenades which are blast weapons not that weird it's blast weapon too.
The introduction at the top covers multiple mode weapons, saying that those models that make a random number of attacks gain blast. I don't see the problem.
2020/07/01 13:09:46
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
If it came from someone who maybe got his hands on a copy of indomitus, that could be a thing, but:
1) It's too early for someone to have a copy.
2) The watermarks clearly say that this is not the indomitus book.
We are looking at the images of a random document that could be or could not be official.
Forging something like that would be extremely easy.
The warter mark is "mournival" which is the name of one of the GW test brackets, it could add some credibility to it and means it's not related to the indomitus box.
Thank you for the info, this confirms that this is a fake.
You just need to apply a bit of logic and it is clear at this point.
Applying a watermark with the name of a testing group is a nice move from a forger to lend credibility to the fake document but...
If GW is really sending watermarked versions to each different test group to avoid leaks, it means that she is doing a different print run of these for each testing group? Lol, seriously?
This is clearly impossible. What could be is that they only distribute the test rules digitally to the groups and apply a watermark to each different file sent to trace leaks. This is more likely, but...
... our nice forger here thought that it was cool to send the leaks as photos of printed documents, Printed in colors to booth.
If the leak had been a digital image, then I could still have a doubt, but since the leak is a photo then this is 100% fake, because for it to exist it implies the existence of a print run for that specific watermark.
All the images are photos of screens or did I miss something?
Besides, getting copies printed for the different groups is one digital printrun. Did you never receive a mailed ad with your name on it? This is pretty basic.
2020/07/01 13:09:57
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
If it came from someone who maybe got his hands on a copy of indomitus, that could be a thing, but:
1) It's too early for someone to have a copy.
2) The watermarks clearly say that this is not the indomitus book.
We are looking at the images of a random document that could be or could not be official.
Forging something like that would be extremely easy.
The warter mark is "mournival" which is the name of one of the GW test brackets, it could add some credibility to it and means it's not related to the indomitus box.
Thank you for the info, this confirms that this is a fake.
You just need to apply a bit of logic and it is clear at this point.
Applying a watermark with the name of a testing group is a nice move from a forger to lend credibility to the fake document but...
If GW is really sending watermarked versions to each different test group to avoid leaks, it means that she is doing a different print run of these for each testing group? Lol, seriously?
This is clearly impossible. What could be is that they only distribute the test rules digitally to the groups and apply a watermark to each different file sent to trace leaks. This is more likely, but...
... our nice forger here thought that it was cool to send the leaks as photos of printed documents, Printed in colors to booth.
If the leak had been a digital image, then I could still have a doubt, but since the leak is a photo then this is 100% fake, because for it to exist it implies the existence of a print run for that specific watermark.
What are you talking about? The leaks are photos of a computer screen. Because impr screen doesnt exist or something.
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
2020/07/01 13:11:55
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Thank you for the info, this confirms that this is a fake.
You just need to apply a bit of logic and it is clear at this point.
Applying a watermark with the name of a testing group is a nice move from a forger to lend credibility to the fake document but...
If GW is really sending watermarked versions to each different test group to avoid leaks, it means that she is doing a different print run of these for each testing group? Lol, seriously?
This is clearly impossible. What could be is that they only distribute the test rules digitally to the groups and apply a watermark to each different file sent to trace leaks. This is more likely, but...
... our nice forger here thought that it was cool to send the leaks as photos of printed documents, Printed in colors to booth.
If the leak had been a digital image, then I could still have a doubt, but since the leak is a photo then this is 100% fake, because for it to exist it implies the existence of a print run for that specific watermark.
Spoiler:
That isn't a "printed document". There's a toolbar from a computer screen down at the bottom, and it's literally a picture of a computer screen.
Is there a specific image you're referring to? Because all the ones I've looked at in this thread have that kind of look to them--just some crop out the toolbar.
2020/07/01 13:14:31
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
jivardi wrote: Watched the Vanguard Tactics video about "coherency". Took me 5 minutes to understand it.
They did a very good job covering various conga lines, how terrain interacts with the coherency rules and what the best method is to remove models without breaking coherency.
I think people are screeching harder than they need to.
Skared Cast also put up a bat rep using the new coherency rules. Didn't seem to make the game slower or harder to understand.
that video was aweful... "hey no problem loosing 4 models cause of one casualty. rule works really great, no downside at all AND you can still congoline. really fantastic"
and also look at this: "i've trapped 5 scions with 12 Deathguards with jumpacks by perfectly surrounding them. coherency isnt a problem cause look: i've managed the charge and pile in so perfectly, i can alternate between a thunderhammer and a regular marine... and i've also made sure the Thunderhammers are exactly 2" apart from each other. now i can take losses without worrying about coherancy! See?! no problem at all, works really good. You just have to make this perfect charge in a vacuum and make certain 10 things are done in the right way and VOILA! gud rul"
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/07/01 13:15:33
2020/07/01 13:14:52
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
BrianDavion wrote: another reason to be skeptical is the ATV and turret are listed as part of the indomatus set, but they're specificly NOT from the indomatus set and are something else coming down the line (presumably with a codex and a multipart release of the indomatus units)
diepotato47 wrote: Interesting that the ATV and Turret are listed with the Indomitus box...
makes me IMMEDIATLY skeptical about that being legit
Warhammer Community wrote:Oh, you thought we were done showing you awesome stuff for today? Think again. Now that you’ve seen all the amazing miniatures crammed into the best Warhammer 40,000 boxed set ever made, we wanted to show you some of the other goodies that we couldn’t fit in…
Warhammer Community wrote:Who do you think is winning the battle of the big guns? All of these kits will be available as push fit models – which is good because you’re going to want a lot of them. We can safely say these are hardly the last new kits you’ll see for both Primaris Space Marines and Necrons, including multipart kits, big centrepiece models, and more vehicles. Stay tuned for more information as soon as we have it!
I'd be shocked if these things weren't available at the same time as the Indomitus set. The points values are likely contained within the "Edge of Silence" booklet that is in the Indomitus set as well.
The warter mark is "mournival" which is the name of one of the GW test brackets, it could add some credibility to it and means it's not related to the indomitus box.
Well, now you have my attention. Test brackets?
Playtester groups. Mournival is one of two(Infinity Circuit being the other) that tend to get a "Thanks to..." note in the front of books.
Mournival is the narrative focused group I believe as well
If it came from someone who maybe got his hands on a copy of indomitus, that could be a thing, but:
1) It's too early for someone to have a copy. 2) The watermarks clearly say that this is not the indomitus book.
We are looking at the images of a random document that could be or could not be official.
Forging something like that would be extremely easy.
The warter mark is "mournival" which is the name of one of the GW test brackets, it could add some credibility to it and means it's not related to the indomitus box.
Thank you for the info, this confirms that this is a fake.
You just need to apply a bit of logic and it is clear at this point.
Applying a watermark with the name of a testing group is a nice move from a forger to lend credibility to the fake document but...
If GW is really sending watermarked versions to each different test group to avoid leaks, it means that she is doing a different print run of these for each testing group? Lol, seriously?
This is clearly impossible. What could be is that they only distribute the test rules digitally to the groups and apply a watermark to each different file sent to trace leaks. This is more likely, but...
... our nice forger here thought that it was cool to send the leaks as photos of printed documents, Printed in colors to booth.
If the leak had been a digital image, then I could still have a doubt, but since the leak is a photo then this is 100% fake, because for it to exist it implies the existence of a print run for that specific watermark.
Or they printed the digital document out for ease of reference? Not saying it isn't a fake but the amount of mental backflips you needed to do there is a bit extreme.
You wouldn't print them in color.
By the way, upon closer inspection they ARE digital. You can see a cursor on the second image, so the image was a photo of a screen. You can also read the page number "5", so it is a document which starts straight with the points.
At best it is a testing document, nothing more.
Edit: Ninjaed multiple times...
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/07/01 13:16:43
2020/07/01 13:15:18
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Spoletta wrote: [
If the leak had been a digital image, then I could still have a doubt, but since the leak is a photo then this is 100% fake, because for it to exist it implies the existence of a print run for that specific watermark.
Now i don't know where you live but here we have these things called "printers". And colour ones at that.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/07/01 13:16:06
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2020/07/01 13:15:24
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
jivardi wrote: Watched the Vanguard Tactics video about "coherency". Took me 5 minutes to understand it.
They did a very good job covering various conga lines, how terrain interacts with the coherency rules and what the best method is to remove models without breaking coherency.
I think people are screeching harder than they need to.
Skared Cast also put up a bat rep using the new coherency rules. Didn't seem to make the game slower or harder to understand.
that video was aweful... "hey no problem loosing 4 models cause of one casualty. rule works really great, no downside at all AND you can still congoline. really fantastic"
and also look at this: "i've trapped 5 scions with 12 Deathguards by perfectly surrounding them. coherency isnt a problem cause look: i've managed the charge and pile in so perfectly, i can alternate between a thunderhammer and a regular marine... and i've also made sure the Thunderhammers are exactly 2" apart from each other. now i can take losses without worrying about coherancy! See?! no problem at all, works really good. You just have to make this perfect charge in a vacuum and make certain 10 things are done in the right way and VOILA! gud rul"
Wait what, are they serious?
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/766717.page A Mostly Renegades and Heretics blog.
GW:"Space marines got too many options to balance, therefore we decided to legends HH units." Players: "why?!? Now we finally got decent plastic kits and you cut them?" Chaos marines players: "Since when are Daemonengines 30k models and why do i have NO droppods now?" GW" MONEY.... erm i meant TOO MANY OPTIONS (to resell your army to you again by disalowing former units)! Do you want specific tyranid fighiting Primaris? Even a new sabotage lieutnant!" Chaos players: Guess i stop playing or go to HH.
2020/07/01 13:32:23
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
"Want to know what's coming on Day 1 of #New40K? Want to know when Day 1 even is? Tune in from 3:30pm (BST) to find out! We'll also be looking at the Thousand Sons in new edition but you don't need to be psychic, it's all on Warhammer TV."
Sounds like they're outlining the release date today and maybe the launch materials/item list.
2020/07/01 13:40:03
Subject: 40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
Dudeface wrote: "Want to know what's coming on Day 1 of #New40K? Want to know when Day 1 even is? Tune in from 3:30pm (BST) to find out! We'll also be looking at the Thousand Sons in new edition but you don't need to be psychic, it's all on Warhammer TV."
Sounds like they're outlining the release date today and maybe the launch materials/item list.
So help me god if they only preview stratagems again...
2020/07/01 13:42:57
Subject: Re:40k preview, May 23 - 9th edition, new Necrons, Marines
4000+
6000+ Order. Unity. Obedience.
Thousand Sons 4000+
