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.

Voss wrote:
I'm just fascinated with new edition marketing material that's avoiding the word primaris (or shrugging it off in the case of terminators) and referencing classic stuff like Cassius rather than the recent BT kit.

I'm not suggesting they're going away, but there's a significant tilt on the marketing angle from 7th & 8th.

Were you fascinated of same thing during 9th ed?

You DO know there are stuff like "captain in phobos armour"? Familiar naming pattern? Lietnaunt in phobos armour, captain in phobos armour. Neither has word primaris.

Hardly a new thing...It's been a thing already. So nothing to be concluded from there except GW continues existing naming standard. Big news! GW continues to do as they have done before!

No wolves on Fenris wrote:
So it looks like “shock assault” might be gone and baked in to melee stats as the close combat weapon “data sheet” on the article for the SM was listed as three attacks. This is similar to what they did in the CSM book last year isn’t it? They baked in the extra attack from “Hateful assault”?

I certainly hope so, a flat +1 Attack is preferable to +1 Attack under these conditions. It's minor, but still one less thing to remember, and one less thing to teach when doing demo games for new players.

 AduroT wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 AduroT wrote:
I’m glad LD rolls are being changed to rolling high, so I don’t have to explain to people why setting aside your bad dice that believe roll low for LD tests is actually cheating.

Superstition isn't cheating...so setting aside dice you believe roll isn't any more cheating as reserving dices you believe roll good for saving for clutch moments.

Now having loaded dice is but roll low, roll good doesn't matter as such. All same actually makes cheating easier.

If you keep separate dice that roll low vs roll high depending on what results you need, that is absolutely cheating.

Even if they don't actually roll differently? HOW?

I have 2 dice. Both roll 100% same. How is it cheating if I put red dice to use as damage dice and blue one for LD? Both roll exact same odds.

How is that cheating? Go on. Point me rule that says I can't use any dice I want(as long as it's not loaded dice) I want?

TRY TO POINT OUT SUCH A RULE!

Your next post better have such a rule quote or admission of being wrong or you publicly admit you are liar

Again. Superstition isn't cheating. Wargamers are funny thing as despite people supposedly know odds are odds they still have superstition. I know people who roll again dices that rolled high because they are hot. I know people who don't roll high rolling dice needing high because that dice already used up their high roll and are now expected to roll low.

Superstition...isn't...cheating.

Using loaded dice is.

But superstition isn't same as loaded dice.

Anybody who claims otherwise is liar.

It's not cheating.

It is someone mistakenly believing that "red wunz" do actually go faster and that they are machining an advantage.

I'd love to have the photographic memory to identify and remember which dice have rolled which numbers over a period of time.

I wouldn't be wargaming. I'd be trying to decide if I should risk a "Casino" style cattle-prodding from casino security staff.

I recall reading long ago on... here? or Warseer? somewhere anyway, someone had an exhaustive post where they claimed to have done the testing and maths to prove that GW dice certainly do have flawed odds on a roll. Compared to casino compliant dice.

 AduroT wrote:
If you keep separate dice that roll low vs roll high depending on what results you need, that is absolutely cheating.

That's not what he meant.

 Nevelon wrote:
Knife in each hand, one more for the bug at his feet.

Stab stab stab….

Hopefully we can get some consolidation. Need more data before we get the whole picture. Fingers crossed. Not expecting everything at once, but heading in the right direction would be nice.

The usual trappings of a juvenile delinquent: A healthy amount of shivs.

 RustyNumber wrote:
I recall reading long ago on... here? or Warseer? somewhere anyway, someone had an exhaustive post where they claimed to have done the testing and maths to prove that GW dice certainly do have flawed odds on a roll. Compared to casino compliant dice.

Quite possible. Exact even is super hard anyway. And if you have 100 GW dice what's the odds they are all uneven on different ways? They presumably aren't hand made.

Myself I use dice I have available though if I need 1-2 dice for something specific(say ld test, priority rolls in AOS) I do have tendency to roll dice whose colour match my army colour if one is. Red for khorne, white for my gloomspite gits, purple is common for quite a few of my order armies as they have purple generally...

Of course even for same colour I have various dices in my dice bag

But according to that guy I'm thus a cheater

tneva82 wrote:

 RustyNumber wrote:
I recall reading long ago on... here? or Warseer? somewhere anyway, someone had an exhaustive post where they claimed to have done the testing and maths to prove that GW dice certainly do have flawed odds on a roll. Compared to casino compliant dice.

Quite possible. Exact even is super hard anyway. And if you have 100 GW dice what's the odds they are all uneven on different ways? They presumably aren't hand made.

Myself I use dice I have available though if I need 1-2 dice for something specific(say ld test, priority rolls in AOS) I do have tendency to roll dice whose colour match my army colour if one is. Red for khorne, white for my gloomspite gits, purple is common for quite a few of my order armies as they have purple generally...

Of course even for same colour I have various dices in my dice bag

But according to that guy I'm thus a cheater

I heard that GW dices go trough intense testing done by world class expert engineers in a high security lab in Nottingham. Buy with confidence and be happy that the prices are so competitive. GW dices are cheater proof.

Hopefully better experts than the proof readers they have ;-)

 RustyNumber wrote:
I recall reading long ago on... here? or Warseer? somewhere anyway, someone had an exhaustive post where they claimed to have done the testing and maths to prove that GW dice certainly do have flawed odds on a roll. Compared to casino compliant dice.

Which is true for most non casino compliant dice.

If you want good quality dice, you really don't have that much of a choice:
- Casino (expensive and too big to roll many at once)
- Backgammon (expensive and less accurate than Casino)
- Metal (expensive and heavy)

After that is basically everything else, but some manufacturers are better than others. Clear dice from Koplow for example are affordable, got the right size and are somewhat decent. Chessex is supposed to be really bad.

a_typical_hero wrote:
- Casino (expensive and too big to roll many at once)

Also need cushioned wall to bounce to work properly.

And even then casino's regularly replace them to ensure they are random. Wear alters probabilities

Not most feasible options...Myself don't have means to carry proper throwing area for casino dices

So I settle for the big pile of dices I have accumulated during years. I don't need perfect randomness. The one these dices provide is good enough.

 RustyNumber wrote:
I recall reading long ago on... here? or Warseer? somewhere anyway, someone had an exhaustive post where they claimed to have done the testing and maths to prove that GW dice certainly do have flawed odds on a roll. Compared to casino compliant dice.

I believe that guy's experiments were ultimately discredited. iirc some people pointed out some gaping flaws in his methodology and testing, and instead of addressing them he just dipped on the conversation... forever.

Which is not to say that GW dice are accurate, because there's no way they are. But the crazy numbers that dude was posting ended up looking pretty bogus.

When is the release date for 10th ed anyway? Seems to be in about a month?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
When is the release date for 10th ed anyway? Seems to be in about a month?

June 24th is best estimate atm.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
When is the release date for 10th ed anyway? Seems to be in about a month?

Bit further off than that. Like Dudeface said, June 24 is the best estimate. GW will be running demo games and showing off the full launch box at Warhammer Fest on April 29, so we'll probably have all the core rules and the box set reveals done before then. (I'd guess they'll probably spend the month of May doing rules previews for each faction.)

 Asmodai wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
When is the release date for 10th ed anyway? Seems to be in about a month?

Bit further off than that. Like Dudeface said, June 24 is the best estimate. GW will be running demo games and showing off the full launch box at Warhammer Fest on April 29, so we'll probably have all the core rules and the box set reveals done before then. (I'd guess they'll probably spend the month of May doing rules previews for each faction.)

Seems to fit pretty nicely, April for core rules and launch box reveals, May for faction previews and maybe some reveals for what will come after the box and June 10th for the 2 week preorder with release on the 24th

Yeah if they are previewing the whole core box end of April they really don't want to leave it too long before people can actually get their hands on it to play.

End of April to end of June is a 2 month window. That leaves them 2 months to release more in-depth information online to those who don't attend Warhammer Fest as well as extras that aren't included in the core boxed set and such.

As is the sluggish pace is in part due to them spillieg beans earlier than usual. They still need hype for closer to release so over month longer previews means individual sneak peaks can't be that big.

Gw could of course have continued to pretend no10th

 Matrindur wrote:

 Asmodai wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
When is the release date for 10th ed anyway? Seems to be in about a month?

Bit further off than that. Like Dudeface said, June 24 is the best estimate. GW will be running demo games and showing off the full launch box at Warhammer Fest on April 29, so we'll probably have all the core rules and the box set reveals done before then. (I'd guess they'll probably spend the month of May doing rules previews for each faction.)

Seems to fit pretty nicely, April for core rules and launch box, May for faction previews and maybe some reveals for what will come after the box and June 10th for the 2 week preorder with release on the 24th

You forget that they could be planning an Indomitus style "launch box" with more components to it in May, to be followed by the regular glut of starter product a bit later.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Matrindur wrote:

 Asmodai wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
When is the release date for 10th ed anyway? Seems to be in about a month?

Bit further off than that. Like Dudeface said, June 24 is the best estimate. GW will be running demo games and showing off the full launch box at Warhammer Fest on April 29, so we'll probably have all the core rules and the box set reveals done before then. (I'd guess they'll probably spend the month of May doing rules previews for each faction.)

Seems to fit pretty nicely, April for core rules and launch box, May for faction previews and maybe some reveals for what will come after the box and June 10th for the 2 week preorder with release on the 24th

You forget that they could be planning an Indomitus style "launch box" with more components to it in May, to be followed by the regular glut of starter product a bit later.

They can also easily pad a couple of weeks with previews of different armies/lists/detachments/whatever from their Index book.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Matrindur wrote:

 Asmodai wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
When is the release date for 10th ed anyway? Seems to be in about a month?

Bit further off than that. Like Dudeface said, June 24 is the best estimate. GW will be running demo games and showing off the full launch box at Warhammer Fest on April 29, so we'll probably have all the core rules and the box set reveals done before then. (I'd guess they'll probably spend the month of May doing rules previews for each faction.)

Seems to fit pretty nicely, April for core rules and launch box, May for faction previews and maybe some reveals for what will come after the box and June 10th for the 2 week preorder with release on the 24th

You forget that they could be planning an Indomitus style "launch box" with more components to it in May, to be followed by the regular glut of starter product a bit later.

Indomitus was the june 24 equilavent.

The day new edition is first time available for sale is most likely the day ffor gw, not almost 2 months later.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Matrindur wrote:

 Asmodai wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
When is the release date for 10th ed anyway? Seems to be in about a month?

Bit further off than that. Like Dudeface said, June 24 is the best estimate. GW will be running demo games and showing off the full launch box at Warhammer Fest on April 29, so we'll probably have all the core rules and the box set reveals done before then. (I'd guess they'll probably spend the month of May doing rules previews for each faction.)

Seems to fit pretty nicely, April for core rules and launch box reveals, May for faction previews and maybe some reveals for what will come after the box and June 10th for the 2 week preorder with release on the 24th

You forget that they could be planning an Indomitus style "launch box" with more components to it in May, to be followed by the regular glut of starter product a bit later.

I am talking about the launch box in my comment, the actual starter sets will come later probably in middle/late August

Termies https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/04/04/just-how-tough-are-terminators-in-the-new-edition-of-warhammer-40000/

They’ve released an edition in May once before. That had a March announcement & an April full reveal. Perhaps that could happen again?

Lots to unpack.

Imperium isn't a faction-keyword anymore.

No <Chapter> - just Adeptus Astartes.

T5, 3W, 2+, 4++ is pretty solid with the seeming reduction of AP on most weapons.

Chainfists are unweildy, but Powerfists aren't now.

Critical Hits seem to be just auto-wound on a lower number, while 6's always auto-wound generally.

So much info in this one.

ATSKNF is also gone.

I'm really linking what I see so far. Cautiously optimistic that this edition might make for a really good game.