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.

 Gert wrote:
The whole thing is just a big wishlist that people are believing because he's a "content creator".
They want him to be right because you can't buy Mk2 anymore and there's a weird obsession with Saturning that I've never understood.

The decal sheet thing is just a massive joke, one that I've gone over before. Stickers don't mean there's going to be a new starter set.

Is it more that you don't want a new edition, or more that you don't want him to be right?

 Gert wrote:
The whole thing is just a big wishlist that people are believing because he's a "content creator".
They want him to be right because you can't buy Mk2 anymore and there's a weird obsession with Saturning that I've never understood.

The decal sheet thing is just a massive joke, one that I've gone over before. Stickers don't mean there's going to be a new starter set.

Are you one of those people who irrationally hates Valrak because he is somewhat well-known? The dude is chill, he loves the game, and he gets told rumors. Most of which turn out to be spot on. I don't know how at this point you can deny his track record with anything close to a straight face.

Hes had an exceprional track record the past few years, so i dont doubt him at all. That being said, there are details he gets wrong. I can see him thinking its a new edition because he was told a new starter set is coming, but it turns out to just be a battlegroup box like the mk3 release.

I'm irritated by Valrak because at least one person in his information chain doesn't know anything about Warhammer so they just describe what they saw and the next person has to guess what that was.

Would I like a new edition? If GW had a track record of improving rules, I would... As it stands, I'm in no hurry to replace 1200 pages of books (core, good marines, bad marines) for what will inevitably be a random reshuffle of errors and balance at best.

I could see them release an updated or patched rulebook to go with a newer, no doubt smaller starter, not a complete revamp of what we have now in terms of rules. As, don't lynch me if I am wrong, this edition of HH is doing pretty okay, some points aside?




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, hasn't Valrak pretty much said that he knows feth all about anything outside of Marines? He said the scions would come with a something akin to a drop sentinel, which turned out to be a sentry gun instead.

It could be a new board game like Burning of Prospero, or Betrayal at Calth, if it is true that there is going to be the Iron-Warriors vs Salamanders.

If they could sneak that in for December? Was either previous game worth playing? My brother and I would have been just right as Wolves and Sons, respectively...

Didn't play either boardgame, but they were great sources for a lot of minis at a discount.

SamusDrake wrote:
It could be a new board game like Burning of Prospero, or Betrayal at Calth, if it is true that there is going to be the Iron-Warriors vs Salamanders.

If they could sneak that in for December? Was either previous game worth playing? My brother and I would have been just right as Wolves and Sons, respectively...

Betrayal at Calth is really good. The game play is pretty sleek and if you can, pick up a copy of the board and rules. Written by James Hewitt

James Hewitt. The man, the myth, the legend.

And yes, we'd probably be players of 30K if we had a copy of Burning of Prospero. The other one was Ultramarines, wasn't it?

 Matrindur wrote:
...and that there should be something more shown in the next few weeks, probably at the November reveal show that should be next week but could also be a HH Thursday.

Did I miss something, or is there not currently a November reveal show on the cards? Are there any big cons by the end of the month one could be tied to?

SamusDrake wrote:
James Hewitt. The man, the myth, the legend.

And yes, we'd probably be players of 30K if we had a copy of Burning of Prospero. The other one was Ultramarines, wasn't it?

Betrayal at Calth, Ultras vs Word Bearers

 Dysartes wrote:

 Matrindur wrote:
...and that there should be something more shown in the next few weeks, probably at the November reveal show that should be next week but could also be a HH Thursday.

Did I miss something, or is there not currently a November reveal show on the cards? Are there any big cons by the end of the month one could be tied to?

The end of the last reveal show in early October mentioned that there would be a preview at the World Championships/Grand Narrative in November. It's taking place next weekend (22-24 November)

 zedmeister wrote:

SamusDrake wrote:
It could be a new board game like Burning of Prospero, or Betrayal at Calth, if it is true that there is going to be the Iron-Warriors vs Salamanders.

If they could sneak that in for December? Was either previous game worth playing? My brother and I would have been just right as Wolves and Sons, respectively...

Betrayal at Calth is really good. The game play is pretty sleek and if you can, pick up a copy of the board and rules. Written by James Hewitt

Seconding this; its a very, very good boardgame version of 40K and I seriously wish they'd reused the rules for Prospero, just added psychic powers as special weapons similar to how meltaguns and such were handled. Or maybe as part of the card deck.

Damn, I'm gonna have to look into these two games now! Cheers guys!

SamusDrake wrote:
Damn, I'm gonna have to look into these two games now! Cheers guys!

Just checked and the rules, cards and boards go for cheap on ebay. Best thing is that the 2 legions can be painted any colour, not necessarily Ultramarines V Word Bearers. For Minis, all you need as a Terminator Praetor, Chaplain, 30 Marines, 5 Cataphractii and 1 Contemptor. Sides are:

Traitor:
1 Chaplain
2 squads of 10 Veteran marines with Sergeant, Special Weapon Marine (Flamer, Plasma or Meltagun), Heavy Weapon Marine (Heavy Bolter or Missile Launcher) and 7 Bolter Marines
1 Contemptor (Power Fist with Assault Cannon or MultiMelta)

Loyalist:
1 Praetor Terminator
1 squad of 10 Veteran marines with Sergeant, Special Weapon Marine (Flamer, Plasma or Meltagun), Heavy Weapon Marine (Heavy Bolter or Missile Launcher) and 7 Bolter Marines
5 Cataphractii Terminators

 Marshal Loss wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

 Matrindur wrote:
...and that there should be something more shown in the next few weeks, probably at the November reveal show that should be next week but could also be a HH Thursday.

Did I miss something, or is there not currently a November reveal show on the cards? Are there any big cons by the end of the month one could be tied to?

The end of the last reveal show in early October mentioned that there would be a preview at the World Championships/Grand Narrative in November. It's taking place next weekend (22-24 November)

Ah - I don't recall seeing that in the articles (though my memory could be becoming a memory), but if it was only on the video that'd explain me missing it. Cheers!

Personally, I am hoping against a new edition, but I've heard from enough people who should be in the know that a new edition is a distinct possibility. I am hoping it won't be until at least 2026, but I am expecting next year.

Cheers, Zedmeister.

If we do, hopefully it is a 2.5 ed that just cleans up some issues like lascannons, dreadnoughts, blasts, and vehicle/titan balance

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
If we do, hopefully it is a 2.5 ed that just cleans up some issues like lascannons, dreadnoughts, blasts, and vehicle/titan balance

In brief summary form that reads like a tail end comment from any 40k edition pre-8th.

Dudeface wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
If we do, hopefully it is a 2.5 ed that just cleans up some issues like lascannons, dreadnoughts, blasts, and vehicle/titan balance

In brief summary form that reads like a tail end comment from any 40k edition pre-8th.

Lascannons and dreads require a points hike, artillery requires actual bite, which is ironic as that could've been achieved with breaching and the other thing fairly reasonably (e.g. Scorpious beeing effective at 120 pts whilest every other arty piece isn't thanks to 4+ ap2...). Tanks require the squadron rules of dreads and either an increase in HP for mainline tanks alongside a slight points cut though the vindicator falls f.e. into the artillery issue.

Then some legions need to get looked at, cue sallys f.e. on the lower end sans their one trick pony list and on the other hand IF with their one up on everything.

Also we really need a FAQ for blackshield oaths but... that is beside the point. And if you fix blast /artillery weaponry you fix SA and Militia at the same time.
Mechanicum really needs a rewrite though with their convoluted charachter army list interaction rules.... Especially dark mechanicum.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
If we do, hopefully it is a 2.5 ed that just cleans up some issues like lascannons, dreadnoughts, blasts, and vehicle/titan balance

Which could probably done in a 1 page pdf without making you re-buy an expensive, 350 page book. But it won't.

A new edition means, at best, every HH player buys one; but i dont think GW is happy with just that.

I feel ok about a new edition with a big box. If you like current edition just keep playing it and enjoy the new amount of "cheap" miniatures.


Now we have 3 years cycles so better to accept that and enjoy the edition you like the most.

The 3-year cycle only applies to 40k and AoS, a topic that has been discussed to death, resurrected with necromancy, and then discussed to death again.

There's not a shred of evidence to support a new edition.

 Gert wrote:

There's not a shred of evidence to support a new edition.

Well yes, evidence is the difference between a rumour and a leak.

 Gert wrote:
The 3-year cycle only applies to 40k and AoS

So far HH has had precisely one edition as a standalone plastic game, and that was under 3 years ago. It's too early to draw this conclusion.

Using that logic you could also argue that it's impossible to expect plastic Eldar warp spiders, as they've only been previously released as resin.

 Gert wrote:
The 3-year cycle only applies to 40k and AoS, a topic that has been discussed to death, resurrected with necromancy, and then discussed to death again.

There's not a shred of evidence to support a new edition.

And Kill Team since 2nd edition (1st 2016, 2nd 2018, 3rd 2021, 4th 2024)
And Warcry (1st 2019, 2nd 2022, 3rd likely to be 2025 according to rumours)
Underworlds was even faster with yearly new seasons
Necromunda got a new core Rulebook about every two years as far as I can see
Warhammer Quest was also about every three years (Silver Tower 2016, Blackstone Fortress 2018, Cursed City 2021) and while there wasn't anything this year that makes sense after the Cursed City debacle

Blood Bowl was 2016 and 2020 so not quite 3 years and nothing about a new season yet
Old World is too young to know yet
Titanicus from 2018 didn't get a new edition but you can kinda say that Legions Imperialis 2023 is their expansion and as such also include Aeronautica 2019 in the Epic cycle
From what I can see on the wiki MESBG got pushes in 2005, 2012, 2018 and now in 2024 so about 6 year "editions"

So while not everything gets 3 year editions, nearly everything gets 2-4 year editions/seasons/expansions and the rumours support HH falling into the 3 year section.
Of course you can believe what you want but to say only 40k and AoS do 3-year cycles is factually wrong

I really want Gert to be right - the last thing I want is for HH to get sucked into GW's ridiculous 3 year edition churn. It's one of the reasons I dropped out of WH40k (after playing it since its inception). However, while (as Gert says) there is no 'evidence' that this is happening, the post above illustrates how likely it is. Especially if HH is doing well and GW thinks they can push more sales with a new edition. And it's not just Valrak who is passing on rumours of a new edition. I guess a refresh of 2nd Edition would be okay, but I would really rather that (flawed as it may be) the current edition is allowed to mature into the next one, aided by a few FAQs, rather than see another overhaul next year.

Keep in mind that while it's often the case a new edition doesn't necessarily invalidate everything.
It could just be a 2.5 edition that cleans up the rules and comes with a new boxset but doesn't mean all the Libers or even most of the core rules will change.
You might think why not just make it a FAQ then but if GW can sell you an FAQ instead, why wouldn't they.

Of course it can just as likely be a complete reset that changes everything but I don't think HH really fits that strategy

I'm coming from a place of ignorance here, but I would like to know about the difference between Age o' Darkness 1st Edition and 2nd Edition. Was there a huge rules change or was it primarily a clean up?