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.

I'll probably be getting it and selling the Necron half unless the new Primaris units are not usable by Dark Angels. I really like the look of the new Primaris stuff. I like how they are moving away from the "tacticool" look of the early Primaris stuff and back to the gothic look. A lot of the new units, especially the Bladeguard, remind me of Horus Heresy units. I'm cautiously optimistic that 9th will be an improvement, but I will be getting it regardless as I know everyone else in my group of friends and local club will be. I really do like the new Necron stuff, but I already have my fingers in too many pies to start a Necron army.

From what I've seen it looks like the best starter set in the history of 40k.

Yes, I'm getting it. Obviously I want the rulebook as well.

I strongly doubt that GW care about making a good game anymore. They know that they have enough rabid fans who will lap up anything with a GW logo slapped on it. So there is no incentive for them to try and produce a good well balanced game.

I'd love to be wrong, and if I were I'd happily eat my hat as the expression goes. But after playing GW games for over 3 decades, I have come to used to their crap.

If the box is reasonably priced that may tempt me to pick one up to use the models in OPR Grimdark Future.

 stonehorse wrote:
I strongly doubt that GW care about making a good game anymore. They know that they have enough rabid fans who will lap up anything with a GW logo slapped on it. So there is no incentive for them to try and produce a good well balanced game.

I'd love to be wrong, and if I were I'd happily eat my hat as the expression goes. But after playing GW games for over 3 decades, I have come to used to their crap.

If the box is reasonably priced that may tempt me to pick one up to use the models in OPR Grimdark Future.

GW still contains more than one person designing their rules and produces multiple gamesystems that are, in fact, very good. Like Middle-Earth, Adeptus Titanicus or Blood Bowl. This is often because they are smaller projects propelled by singular people with vision than the commitee designed behemoth their 40k studio is, but attributing that to GW as a whole is, as it has always been, simply false.

 stonehorse wrote:
I strongly doubt that GW care about making a good game anymore. They know that they have enough rabid fans who will lap up anything with a GW logo slapped on it. So there is no incentive for them to try and produce a good well balanced game.

I'd love to be wrong, and if I were I'd happily eat my hat as the expression goes. But after playing GW games for over 3 decades, I have come to used to their crap.

If the box is reasonably priced that may tempt me to pick one up to use the models in OPR Grimdark Future.

I am not sure I agree. It seems like Geedubs is trying to expand their fanbase (more diversity, kids novels, Conquest...) and make Warhammer a bit more mainstream rather than rely on the "rabid fanbase". I'd like to think that 7th and the start of AOS taught them they can't just do what they like and expect people to be ok with it. And while the effectiveness of the FAQs is debatable, it does seem like they are doing more than in previous editions to fix problems. The fact that close combat and cover, two things people have complained a lot about this edition, are quite prominent in what we have seen of 9th edition so far gives me a bit of optimism.

 CatachanDevil wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:
I strongly doubt that GW care about making a good game anymore. They know that they have enough rabid fans who will lap up anything with a GW logo slapped on it. So there is no incentive for them to try and produce a good well balanced game.

I'd love to be wrong, and if I were I'd happily eat my hat as the expression goes. But after playing GW games for over 3 decades, I have come to used to their crap.

If the box is reasonably priced that may tempt me to pick one up to use the models in OPR Grimdark Future.

I am not sure I agree. It seems like Geedubs is trying to expand their fanbase (more diversity, kids novels, Conquest...) and make Warhammer a bit more mainstream rather than rely on the "rabid fanbase". I'd like to think that 7th and the start of AOS taught them they can't just do what they like and expect people to be ok with it. And while the effectiveness of the FAQs is debatable, it does seem like they are doing more than in previous editions to fix problems. The fact that close combat and cover, two things people have complained a lot about this edition, are quite prominent in what we have seen of 9th edition so far gives me a bit of optimism.

....I mean, in that close combat looks to be worse, if anything, from the changes....by quite a lot.

Vehicles get to shoot while in melee, and weapons that get random numbers of shots (which probably includes flamers) get max shots against "horde" units, whatever that turns out to mean.

Neither of those things particularly spell to me "melee will be improved". Also, since we know that rules will not be invalidated, it seems unlikely to me that the things that really make melee suck, like Overwatch, random charge distance, or having to charge 9" out of deep strike to do anything at all as a deep striking melee unit, will be changing. All those bad things are on unit datasheets.

the only thing that would help melee out from the currently previewed rules is a massively reworked, highly powerful cover system. I suppose they could also do something like allow you to disembark from a transport after it moves, or give you a new way to avoid overwatch somehow as a melee unit, or make it less of a nightmare to try and make melee attacks against a unit in cover or at a higher elevation, but that's definitely not what they previewed.

There should be a "Duh!" option.

 CatachanDevil wrote:
I am not sure I agree. It seems like Geedubs is trying to expand their fanbase (more diversity, kids novels, Conquest...) and make Warhammer a bit more mainstream rather than rely on the "rabid fanbase". I'd like to think that 7th and the start of AOS taught them they can't just do what they like and expect people to be ok with it. And while the effectiveness of the FAQs is debatable, it does seem like they are doing more than in previous editions to fix problems. The fact that close combat and cover, two things people have complained a lot about this edition, are quite prominent in what we have seen of 9th edition so far gives me a bit of optimism.

Glad someone else is being optimistic about it.

The only thing I'd say is that a 'rabid fanbase' is still a confirmed fanbase, and a few people have gone wrong trying to appeal to a 'speculative fanbase' (some call it a 'phantom fanbase'). So far I've been all for everything they've done with female models and whatnot, but I don't think it's brought in a particularly new fanbase. Yeah, sure, it's anecdotal but I'm not seeing the Sisters go flying off the shelves. And honestly, most guard players could care less if the model is a man or a woman- they'd just like to have more than one or two models that are going for $200.00 on eBay.

Black, white, male, female- doesn't matter when they look at the price tags on some of these models and GW's new price hike might not be the best idea. A new edition is pointless if that new potential player comes in and the first thing he realizes is that a box of Marines is going for nearly $70.00.

Apparently, the part where you're wrong is that it's quite apparent that GW can do exactly what they want and get away with it- because the overall response to their decisions seems to be gleefully throwing money at them but complaining on the internet.

If you scratch your dog behind the ears when he pisses on the carpet, he's going to think it's a good thing to piss on the carpet even if you're complaining about it afterward.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 CatachanDevil wrote:
I am not sure I agree. It seems like Geedubs is trying to expand their fanbase (more diversity, kids novels, Conquest...) and make Warhammer a bit more mainstream rather than rely on the "rabid fanbase". I'd like to think that 7th and the start of AOS taught them they can't just do what they like and expect people to be ok with it. And while the effectiveness of the FAQs is debatable, it does seem like they are doing more than in previous editions to fix problems. The fact that close combat and cover, two things people have complained a lot about this edition, are quite prominent in what we have seen of 9th edition so far gives me a bit of optimism.

Glad someone else is being optimistic about it.

The only thing I'd say is that a 'rabid fanbase' is still a confirmed fanbase, and a few people have gone wrong trying to appeal to a 'speculative fanbase' (some call it a 'phantom fanbase'). So far I've been all for everything they've done with female models and whatnot, but I don't think it's brought in a particularly new fanbase. Yeah, sure, it's anecdotal but I'm not seeing the Sisters go flying off the shelves. And honestly, most guard players could care less if the model is a man or a woman- they'd just like to have more than one or two models that are going for $200.00 on eBay.

Black, white, male, female- doesn't matter when they look at the price tags on some of these models and GW's new price hike might not be the best idea. A new edition is pointless if that new potential player comes in and the first thing he realizes is that a box of Marines is going for nearly $70.00.

Apparently, the part where you're wrong is that it's quite apparent that GW can do exactly what they want and get away with it- because the overall response to their decisions seems to be gleefully throwing money at them but complaining on the internet.

If you scratch your dog behind the ears when he pisses on the carpet, he's going to think it's a good thing to piss on the carpet even if you're complaining about it afterward.

I mean, we don't have the actual stats to go off of from GW but pretty much anything SoB related sold out instantly the second they put it out, and didn't come back into stock until they restocked it.

Maybe they produced much less of it than, for example, the new primaris Phobos stuff that did not sell out, but we do know that GW knew that they were highly requested from the community poll, and then we know that they still sold out.

 stonehorse wrote:
I strongly doubt that GW care about making a good game anymore. They know that they have enough rabid fans who will lap up anything with a GW logo slapped on it. So there is no incentive for them to try and produce a good well balanced game.

I'd love to be wrong, and if I were I'd happily eat my hat as the expression goes. But after playing GW games for over 3 decades, I have come to used to their crap.

If the box is reasonably priced that may tempt me to pick one up to use the models in OPR Grimdark Future.

This patently isn't true. GW started seeing a massive decline during 7th and the initial AOS launch, to the point they replaced the CEO. They were having pretty serious financial issues, in large part because they were pushing the Model First above all else, with very terrible rules. They have literally already gone down the route of slapping a GW logo on poor rules and it nearly cost them the company.

GW is well aware at this point that their rules systems are just as important as their models. They've started taking steps like Chapter Approved and Fixing Warscrolls, and regularly updating FAQs and erratas to help balance the game better. Now.. could they be tested better? Absolutely.

Absolutely I’m super excited about the new edition!

 Sasori wrote:

GW is well aware at this point that their rules systems are just as important as their models. They've started taking steps like Chapter Approved and Fixing Warscrolls, and regularly updating FAQs and erratas to help balance the game better. Now.. could they be tested better? Absolutely.

The main problem with their rules is not the testing, or their Errata policy but just how they write rules in the first place
they go with a fixed core of rules, than they design factions and put every idea they have into the rules, no matter if it fits the core or the other factions and try to balance it afterwards

there is no plan what they want from the game or were the development for each faction is going

40k is just like the DCU, some good stuff, some bad stuff, but no overall plan/strategy but still making enough money to carry on.

 Sasori wrote:

 stonehorse wrote:
I strongly doubt that GW care about making a good game anymore. They know that they have enough rabid fans who will lap up anything with a GW logo slapped on it. So there is no incentive for them to try and produce a good well balanced game.

I'd love to be wrong, and if I were I'd happily eat my hat as the expression goes. But after playing GW games for over 3 decades, I have come to used to their crap.

If the box is reasonably priced that may tempt me to pick one up to use the models in OPR Grimdark Future.

This patently isn't true. GW started seeing a massive decline during 7th and the initial AOS launch, to the point they replaced the CEO. They were having pretty serious financial issues, in large part because they were pushing the Model First above all else, with very terrible rules. They have literally already gone down the route of slapping a GW logo on poor rules and it nearly cost them the company.

GW is well aware at this point that their rules systems are just as important as their models. They've started taking steps like Chapter Approved and Fixing Warscrolls, and regularly updating FAQs and erratas to help balance the game better. Now.. could they be tested better? Absolutely.

Yet the rules are still awful, while their tone and marketing pitch has changed.

As for 9th, starter box or other, I won't be spending anything because the minis will be even more overpriced and the game will not be something I enjoy playing.

 Sasori wrote:
GW is well aware at this point that their rules systems are just as important as their models. They've started taking steps like Chapter Approved and Fixing Warscrolls, and regularly updating FAQs and erratas to help balance the game better. Now.. could they be tested better? Absolutely.

 kodos wrote:

The main problem with their rules is not the testing, or their Errata policy but just how they write rules in the first place
they go with a fixed core of rules, than they design factions and put every idea they have into the rules, no matter if it fits the core or the other factions and try to balance it afterwards

I'm not trying to be condescending or anything here, but if you knew how GW's 'playtesting' worked... it wouldn't shock you that the feedback they got from the playtesters is often overwhelmingly positive.

Besides, there's no real reason for them to improve the testing process as it is. They can just tidy up a draft set of rules, and if something is broken... they'll ride it out for a few months while people throw money at the 'good toys'. Then once that dwindles a bit, they'll make a correction online.

And then later, they'll sell you a book that fixes it. And you'll pay for it.

Honestly, I'm not shocked that every book has major errors. It's practically printing money.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Blastaar wrote:
Yet the rules are still awful, while their tone and marketing pitch has changed.

As for 9th, starter box or other, I won't be spending anything because the minis will be even more overpriced and the game will not be something I enjoy playing.

And this 'problem' is well over 3 years old, and your account isn't.

I utterly loathe Marvel comics. I've loathed them for a long time. You know what I'm not doing? Posting on a Marvel comics forum.

GW doesn't deserve a cent of money for any printed material as they quickly stop their rules from being current. At minimum I know one guy will purchase the rules and I'll just read them that way. At maximum I'll take to the internet.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
GW doesn't deserve a cent of money for any printed material as they quickly stop their rules from being current. At minimum I know one guy will purchase the rules and I'll just read them that way. At maximum I'll take to the internet.

I'm honestly going to give it a month or two before I actually purchase anything-

...well, I can't even say that. I'm running a narrative thing and the new Necron models do look cool, and the guys do like facing off against different things.. so I can't even promise that.

But overall, I'm probably just going to buy the Necron models off of a friend and not concern myself with the actual game for a month or so until everything gets straightened out. Because chances are, it's going to be 8th edition with a few slight tweaks (I've been saying that for a while now, and the recent reveals pretty much validate what I said- must be my source being reliable).

the_scotsman wrote:

the only thing that would help melee out from the currently previewed rules is a massively reworked, highly powerful cover system. I suppose they could also do something like allow you to disembark from a transport after it moves, or give you a new way to avoid overwatch somehow as a melee unit, or make it less of a nightmare to try and make melee attacks against a unit in cover or at a higher elevation, but that's definitely not what they previewed.

That's pretty much what I assume they are doing when I saw "big changes to cover + big emphasis on close combat" . Perhaps tanks now have the ability to shoot in combat to counteract the boost of melee armies? We'll just have to see. There's as much evidence it will be better as it will be worse at this point, but at least they appear to be addressing two issues rather keeping everything the same and static. If they didn't care about trying to make a better game, we'd probably be playing something akin to 7th with only minor modifications.

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 Arbitrator wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:
No.

The models and hardcopy of the pointless mini-rules will be available on ebay dirt cheap so I might pick those up sometime later.

The inevitable hardback complete rulebook will be 'available' as soon as the digital version is released.

Dark Imperium contained the full, hardback rulebook though.

Did it? Got my copy cheap off ebay so I wouldn't know.

Yup. Over the course of 8th GW initially only released the A5 version of the full rulebook in the super special limited edition box that cost like £250, and then in typical GW fashion made it on general release around last year, after 90% of it had been errataed.

Hopefully the A5 rulebook will be available to all from day 1 this time around.

 Grimtuff wrote:

Hopefully the A5 rulebook will be available to all from day 1 this time around.

why?
the rules are already confirmed to be free, so no need to sell a book that is not needed to play the game (just for the full experience)

I'll get the rulebook not the box, why do I want extra models when I haven't painted the ones I got.

 kodos wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

Hopefully the A5 rulebook will be available to all from day 1 this time around.

why?
the rules are already confirmed to be free, so no need to sell a book that is not needed to play the game (just for the full experience)

Those last free rules were not the full rules. It was a pain in the arse to lug that massive book to each game. That's why.

I'm very much going to wait and see. It's likely that if I do purchase it, it would be splitting it with someone else, since I'm only interested in the Necron half of the box. But I really do need to see if the rules changes are much of a boost for the army before I drop any cash atm. Their current codex doesn't really provide much, but it's likely that's the reason why they're updating them. Still, since we haven't seen anything yet, I can't also guarantee that the changes will be good or bad either.

 Grimtuff wrote:

 kodos wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

Hopefully the A5 rulebook will be available to all from day 1 this time around.

why?
the rules are already confirmed to be free, so no need to sell a book that is not needed to play the game (just for the full experience)

Those last free rules were not the full rules. It was a pain in the arse to lug that massive book to each game. That's why.

of course those were the rules and everything you ever needed, everything else was optional and you personal decision to use it /s

This exact same question has been asked for every single new edition release.
And I guarantee most people who vote no... Are massive liars who will buy into the game just like they always have...

Yep, and just found a guy to share it too!

 ValentineGames wrote:
This exact same question has been asked for every single new edition release.
And I guarantee most people who vote no... Are massive liars who will buy into the game just like they always have...

Citation needed please

 kodos wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 kodos wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

Hopefully the A5 rulebook will be available to all from day 1 this time around.

why?
the rules are already confirmed to be free, so no need to sell a book that is not needed to play the game (just for the full experience)

Those last free rules were not the full rules. It was a pain in the arse to lug that massive book to each game. That's why.

of course those were the rules and everything you ever needed, everything else was optional and you personal decision to use it /s

Don't get pissy. You're the one who asked why someone hoped the A5 book would be immediately available.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 ValentineGames wrote:
This exact same question has been asked for every single new edition release.
And I guarantee most people who vote no... Are massive liars who will buy into the game just like they always have...

Citation needed please

To be fair

There's no shortage of people who just lurk on 40k pages to complain about every new release, claim they never played since the end of 3rd... but that's not what people do when they're done with a game, y'know.

ccs wrote:
Don't get pissy. You're the one who asked why someone hoped the A5 book would be immediately available.

hoping for a cheap rulebook at the beginning of an edition is like hoping that we get rules for unit activation instead of phases
and GW will bring you that exact argument why they don't sell you a cheap rulebook, as for a "cheap" start there is the box and the free rules

lets just hope that they have a Mini-Rulebook in the starter and not the big one

 kodos wrote:
lets just hope that they have a Mini-Rulebook in the starter and not the big one

I miss having a rulebook that could practically fit into my back pocket, or at least the hands-pocket on the front of a hoodie.