PDA

View Full Version : Is it true that 7th Edition 40k may be coming out htis year?



Grand Master Azrael
23-02-2014, 02:05
I haven't seen any new 7th Ed rumours since January. This gives me hope that 7th Edition won't be out this year. I don't want it to come out as I enjoy 6th Edition and I can't afford a new Rulebook every 2 years and continue buying my armies at quickly. I hope we don't see a new edition till 2016 at least.

Ssilmath
23-02-2014, 02:09
Maybe.

Words for the Word God.

Menthak
23-02-2014, 02:40
Maybe.

Words for the Word God.

Bingo.

As far as I know, Faeit said there would be a 7th edition, and he's full of *****, so there is a chance he guessed right, there is a chance he guessed wrong.

IcedCrow
23-02-2014, 02:42
Considering sixth was released last year, the odds of a 7th edition are about as high as you seeing a real unicorn tonight if you step out on your porch.

Losing Command
23-02-2014, 03:14
A MRB with expansions (escalation etc.) included or a edition 6.2 seems more likely. Or just a different starter set and MRB for the sake of it.

Grand Master Azrael
23-02-2014, 03:51
I've heard rumours that the rumoured Blood Angels and Orks set might in fact be for a remake of Epic. If this is true, we can rejoice as that may mean no 7th Edition yet.

The Emperor
23-02-2014, 04:39
Bingo.

As far as I know, Faeit said there would be a 7th edition, and he's full of *****, so there is a chance he guessed right, there is a chance he guessed wrong.

Faeit was quoting 40k Radio, which is a solid rumor source, so I'd say 7th edition in a few months is pretty much a certainty.

Dkoz
23-02-2014, 04:42
It would be nice to get a new Blood Angles codex sooner rather than later they certainly need it pretty bad.

Grand Master Azrael
23-02-2014, 07:16
Faeit was quoting 40k Radio, which is a solid rumor source, so I'd say 7th edition in a few months is pretty much a certainty.
I don't want a new edition. Please have mercy, Games Workshop....

budman
23-02-2014, 08:12
Yes there needs to be a 7th ed stat as right now the hot new 85 quid toy is "Optional" with a cc weapon with no rules in the core book. strength D what's that then

and It would sell like hot cakes

when It does becomes legal to use in a game I'd buy 3-5 of the knights

Grand Master Azrael
23-02-2014, 08:16
I've just read an article online saying that the new rules may have been misinterpreted as a new edition when in reality it turned out to be Escalation/Stronghold Assault.

The Emperor
23-02-2014, 08:17
Well, per Escalation it is legal. Although yeah, with Escalation being put into core, I can see the need for a new edition. Not just to integrate the rules but to also provide a starter set which has all the necessary templates for starting players, including all the relevant Apocalypse/Escalation blast templates (Apocalyptic Blast, Hellstorm. etc.). And personally, I welcome our 7th edition overlords, particularly if it means they release a new starter set for me to get my grubby little mitts on.

Dkoz
23-02-2014, 08:19
I've just read an article online saying that the new rules may have been misinterpreted as a new edition when in reality it turned out to be Escalation/Stronghold Assault.

most likely this is a really good edition, so hopefully no new edition any time soon.

Grand Master Azrael
23-02-2014, 08:26
most likely this is a really good edition, so hopefully no new edition any time soon.

I'm kind of worried that the next edition won't be as good because I actually really like 6th Edition

Spiney Norman
23-02-2014, 08:28
I haven't seen any new 7th Ed rumours since January. This gives me hope that 7th Edition won't be out this year. I don't want it to come out as I enjoy 6th Edition and I can't afford a new Rulebook every 2 years and continue buying my armies at quickly. I hope we don't see a new edition till 2016 at least.

Its true that it may be coming out this year. The rumour originated with 40k radio, who have a great track record with dark elves, space marines and now Imperial Knights (as I recall they called knights way before everyone else around 4-6 months ago) and we on course for another huge success with their "Astra-Militarum/Imperial Guard" rumour. They are are sticking to their guns over this one and Darnok has also commented a few times that he is also convinced we are getting 7th edition this year, so for me the smart money is on definitely yes, we are getting 7th edition this year.

On the other hand its all rumours so who knows.

Menthak
23-02-2014, 09:39
Faeit was quoting 40k Radio, which is a solid rumor source, so I'd say 7th edition in a few months is pretty much a certainty.

No rumours source is ever reliable, just lucky.


I've heard rumours that the rumoured Blood Angels and Orks set might in fact be for a remake of Epic. If this is true, we can rejoice as that may mean no 7th Edition yet.

Ahaha! Yeah, no, there is more chance of my Minis coming to life. Epic won't be redone, especially not now.

Grand Master Azrael
23-02-2014, 09:55
I am a little Suspicious of 40k Radio-almost as though they have a spy inside of GW itself...
I don't trust 40k Radio and it's not a matter of if but when it will screw up. And the 7th Edition rumours may be a screw up (hopefully)...

Dkoz
23-02-2014, 10:11
Hopefully this is just GW screwing with 40K radio after sending them that cease and desist letter a while back.

Marked_by_chaos
23-02-2014, 11:56
I think there is a great amount of credibility to this. Not only on account of 40k radio's recent record.

Why? Look at the recent financial results. Good results when 6th came out but sales have gone down substantially since then, despite the new marine release.

Apocalypse v2 sank pretty quickly and escalation and stronghold assault seem like they were rushed out accordingly to drive Christmas sales of the big kits.

I went to the 40k open day at warhammer world around the time of apocalypse being released and a big emphasis was being placed on the anticipated longevity of the 6th edition rule set. To normalise super heavies so soon after suggests a change of direction.

As per the recent "internal re-emphasis training" on selling models based on cool looks rather than rules, the response to falling sales of the flagship game is to allow everything and developments of data-slates, formations etc have perhaps changed the game enough to warrant a new edition.

That and the prospect of a new edition/starterset (if true) would be predicted by gw to result in a sales jump - significantly before financial year end (if May rumours are true).

Beppo1234
23-02-2014, 13:52
I've heard rumours that the rumoured Blood Angels and Orks set might in fact be for a remake of Epic. If this is true, we can rejoice as that may mean no 7th Edition yet.

hhahaha... why would GW release EPIC? Now that they have only just recently got the 40k scaled game, up to EPIC proportions?

Navar
23-02-2014, 14:12
Yes there needs to be a 7th ed stat as right now the hot new 85 quid toy is "Optional" with a cc weapon with no rules in the core book. strength D what's that then

and It would sell like hot cakes

when It does becomes legal to use in a game I'd buy 3-5 of the knights

I just want to be clear about a mistake that you and others in this thread have made.

I picked up White Dwarf 4 yesterday here in the states and the rules are very clear.

The Knight isn't a Lord of War. The Knight cannot be part of your primary detachment.

3-6 knights can form your primary detachment.

In addition, 1-3 Knights can form an allied detachment.

The rumor is that they will be getting their own codex, but at that point they will be as legal as any other GW Codex.

The Knights being legal have nothing to do with 7th edition.

The only thing odd about 7th edition and Knights is that they have the relentless special rule for seemingly no good reason.

The only mention of any supplements or expansions is that for the rules for D strength weapons and the "Invincible behemoth" special rule you would have to consult one of a few supplements/expansions.

But I fail to see any reason why you, budman, couldn't go pick up 5 Knights and field them as your army now.

I don't think you SHOULD do this because I don't think it would be a very effective fighting force, but you COULD do it.

The Emperor
23-02-2014, 14:16
But I fail to see any reason why you, budman, couldn't go pick up 5 Knights and field them as your army now.

You mean aside from the lack of rules to determine which model is your Warlord or if any of your Knights are Scoring Units, nevermind Battlefield Role which might determine if the model hands out extra Victory Points in certain scenarios or not?

Navar
23-02-2014, 14:29
You mean aside from the lack of rules to determine which model is your Warlord or if any of your Knights are Scoring Units, nevermind Battlefield Role which might determine if the model hands out extra Victory Points in certain scenarios or not?

I would use the KISS method.

You have an army with no warlord. You have an army with no scoring units.

There is no FOC so they wouldn't use any slots (So they are never troops, they are never HQ, etc.)

It is pretty simple. You are always playing for the wipe.

Your opponent may be trying to score objectives, or you may play a scenario where you are both trying to kill as many opposing points as possible.

MagicHat
23-02-2014, 14:44
The only thing odd about 7th edition and Knights is that they have the relentless special rule for seemingly no good reason.


It is a copy paste from the superheavy walkers rule, which state the same special rules in the same order as the knight. So it is not something specific to Knights.

The Emperor
23-02-2014, 14:50
I would use the KISS method.

You have an army with no warlord. You have an army with no scoring units.

And all of that is a problem.


It is pretty simple. You are always playing for the wipe.

So the only way you can win is to totally table your opponent? And you still don't think there's any reason why someone would want to have more rules? Nevermind the Allies matrix! God help the poor bastard who bought a Knight thinking his army might be able to take it only to get the full rules later and discover that his army can't take the Knight at all.

Navar
23-02-2014, 15:04
And all of that is a problem.
I agree, but it doesn't prevent you from playing a game.

That game may not be fun, in point of fact it may be a game that it is impossible for you to win before the game even starts or it may be a game that is impossible for you to lose before the game begins.

None of that prevents you from playing a game with them now though.

So the only way you can win is to totally table your opponent?

In some scenarios. I was being a bit hyperbolic when I said "Always." As I said in my next sentence you could also be playing kill points, or even some other scenario that uses points. (Like a scenario where you are tying to move your knights longways over the entire board and they earn points for how many knights they kill and you earn points for how many knights you get to leave the opposite table edge.)


And you still don't think there's any reason why someone would want to have more rules? Nevermind the Allies matrix! God help the poor bastard who bought a Knight thinking his army might be able to take it only to get the full rules later and discover that his army can't take the Knight at all.

And I agree with you here entirely. I want more rules for many reasons.

I just don't think there is any reason to assume that Knights are not "core."

I am VERY excited for Codex:Imperial Knights (or whatever it may be called.) I am getting a Knight ASAP and then rewarding myself for getting it assembled and painted with a second ASAP. I cannot wait for the codex to come out.

My point was only that games can be played with them now. We have rules on how to incorporate them into games now.

They do not require Apocalypse.
They do not require Escalation.

And I predict that once the Codex comes out they won't require any books but the BGB and their Codex to play a game using an army of 3-6 knights.

I still hope that once the codex comes out they will be able to be taken as a Lord of War as well, or at least they will contain some rule that allows me to taken them with Chapter Tactics: Iron Hands :evilgrin:

Mandragola
23-02-2014, 20:59
The WD said there would be more stuff next week. Maybe then we will get the rest of the rules. Hope so, as we do kind of need to know who can take them as allies. Apparently everyone can so far, which is a bit odd.

DoctorTom
23-02-2014, 21:57
Considering sixth was released last year, the odds of a 7th edition are about as high as you seeing a real unicorn tonight if you step out on your porch.

6th wasn't released last year, it was the year before.

Given the major changes that have happened with Escalation and Stronghold Assault, it wouldn't be surprising to get a new edition (whether they call it 7th or 6.5 or whatever) that consolidates all of this. With the release of Knights this month having D weapons but being allowed to be a primary detachment, it looks like Escalation wasn't just a one off optional expansion.

EDIT: In the rules section someone reported the GW development team reporting on Facebook that all members of the Knights primary detachment are scoring and that you choose one to be your Warlord (I don't know if they're scoring if they're allied).

Also, it's might seem odd but isn't really suprising if anybody can take them as allies (or, what might turn out to be anybody but Nids) - they want to sell a lot of these models to as many people as they can, no matter what army they're playing.

Porkus Pigu
23-02-2014, 22:48
And all of that is a problem.



So the only way you can win is to totally table your opponent? And you still don't think there's any reason why someone would want to have more rules? Nevermind the Allies matrix! God help the poor bastard who bought a Knight thinking his army might be able to take it only to get the full rules later and discover that his army can't take the Knight at all.


Would not like to be that guy! :D

Greyhound
23-02-2014, 22:49
Allies:
- All imperium, I'm ok with that.
- CSM: why not. Traitors will defect, what else can you expect.
- Tau, Eldars, Hell, I can swallow that, they might have "local" alliances in some parts of the galaxy.
but:
- Necrons... mmh, I struggle, feed me that back story
- Orks... right, blood axes with too much money? Pirates? I'm stretched here.
- Daemons: so that knight was held in the warp for thousands of years and... No actually it's a daemon construct which is... oh screw it, just have it.
- Nids: the pilot is actually infected and works for a genestealer cult.

I don't get the last ones, but GWS might trample my thoughts with their heavy-handed "global" rule that everyone can take them as allies.

7th edition might have everyone can ally with everyone?

IcedCrow
23-02-2014, 22:52
6th wasn't released last year, it was the year before.

Yeah June 2012. That its 2014 keeps slipping my mind. Still the edition is less than 2 years old. For a new edition to pop up two years after the last one to me seems like wishful thinking for those that hate 6th.

I can see a "6.5" which is all of the supplements etc rolled into one book easy enough but I wouldn't consider that 7th edition.

AngryAngel
23-02-2014, 22:53
Faeit was quoting 40k Radio, which is a solid rumor source, so I'd say 7th edition in a few months is pretty much a certainty.

This, I'm going to have to trust that the rumor mongers are right. If people want to argue it doesn't count as a new edition even if they call it such, that's on them. Perhaps if it happens we'll all see unicorns, or find the end of a rainbow ? And for fact 6th edition will be about 2 years old if they replace it this year, not 1 year old as Iced Crow for some reason stated.

IcedCrow
23-02-2014, 22:56
not 1 year old as Iced Crow for some reason stated.

See my above.

A two year old system has never been replaced in this history of the game by a new edition that fast. I realize some people desperately want random psyker powers and charge distances to go away but anything more than 6.5 with combined rulebooks in one spot is as likely as unicorns dancing in the highway.

AngryAngel
23-02-2014, 23:15
They're doing a lot they've not done yet in their history, I don't see why this would be any different. Especially if they want to rapidly place super heavies into regular core games, which I think they do.

Edit : So if they call it 7th edition you'll argue it is just 6.5 and then go dance with the unicorns ?

Spiney Norman
24-02-2014, 00:09
Edit : So if they call it 7th edition you'll argue it is just 6.5 and then go dance with the unicorns ?

Naturally, the first rule of being that guy is that you're never wrong

7th edition is coming as assuredly as we'll have Imperial knights in march and Astra Militarum in April, the fact that some folk still dismiss 40K radio's rumours out of hand only goes to demonstrate their ignorance of their ťpťe cent rumour record.

IcedCrow
24-02-2014, 00:24
They're doing a lot they've not done yet in their history, I don't see why this would be any different. Especially if they want to rapidly place super heavies into regular core games, which I think they do.

Edit : So if they call it 7th edition you'll argue it is just 6.5 and then go dance with the unicorns ?

No if gw calls it 7th then why would i "argue that its 6.5"? I don't argue against an edition number that is placed out. Doubting 7th edition will be released two years after 6th because a rumor mill says so, and blatantly ignoring an edition number are two totally different worlds of thought there guy.

However i am keeping note of all the sweet personal attacks so that when it isnt 7th ill be able to reference how i was that guy, and stupid for not accepting rumor as the gospel :-)

Spiney Norman
24-02-2014, 00:51
No if gw calls it 7th then why would i "argue that its 6.5"? I don't argue against an edition number that is placed out. Doubting 7th edition will be released two years after 6th because a rumor mill says so, and blatantly ignoring an edition number are two totally different worlds of thought there guy.

However i am keeping note of all the sweet personal attacks so that when it isnt 7th ill be able to reference how i was that guy, and stupid for not accepting rumor as the gospel :-)

And I imagine that if it does turn out to be true it'll all go quiet over there...

One of the things that turns people off posting rumours on warseer is when other members who have no actual sources of information themselves decide they know better and pop up and urinate all over their efforts to enlighten the community by posting sarcastic responses like


Considering sixth was released last year, the odds of a 7th edition are about as high as you seeing a real unicorn tonight if you step out on your porch.

IcedCrow
24-02-2014, 00:54
That of course flies both ways. Arguing over rumors is ... Well...

Charistoph
24-02-2014, 01:16
I agree with IcedCrow in having a 'wait-and-see' attitude towards 6.5 or 7th Edition this summer. The rumours are just a little too wonky and out of character, for one, and feels a lot like the 'Pancake 6th Edition'.

If it happens, it happens. But if there was any GW system that needed a revamp, Fantasy would be first. 8th Edition angered as many people as 6th did in 40K (no surprise, written by the same group), but Fantasy has had a far smaller population, so it affected them more, proportionally.

AngryAngel
24-02-2014, 01:20
Sure thing, just so you remember to do the same if it is 7th. I also expect to see a post of dancing with Unicorns, in the streets.

Spiney Norman
24-02-2014, 01:22
I agree with IcedCrow in having a 'wait-and-see' attitude towards 6.5 or 7th Edition this summer. The rumours are just a little too wonky and out of character, for one, and feels a lot like the 'Pancake 6th Edition'.

If it happens, it happens. But if there was any GW system that needed a revamp, Fantasy would be first. 8th Edition angered as many people as 6th did in 40K (no surprise, written by the same group), but Fantasy has had a far smaller population, so it affected them more, proportionally.

Iirc Fantasy is rumoured to be getting its new edition next year, I guess they decided they wanted to fix their more profitable game first. Also I don't know how things roll where you live, but 8h edition has been the most popular edition of fantasy I have ever known in my local area, and the factions have never been so well balanced since I started the game.

I actually don't think there is any problem with the core 40k rules either, its just the horrendous, bloated, overgrown mess that 6th edition has grown into that makes the game such a strategy-less chore to play.

Charistoph
24-02-2014, 02:15
Iirc Fantasy is rumoured to be getting its new edition next year, I guess they decided they wanted to fix their more profitable game first. Also I don't know how things roll where you live, but 8h edition has been the most popular edition of fantasy I have ever known in my local area, and the factions have never been so well balanced since I started the game.

That is one rumor, as there was one for this year. But, I'm going by both the experience here as well as my LGS. But, as we all know, hyperbole is always present in both cases. I can say, of a surety, that I see a third or fewer of the games being played of Fantasy since 8th Edition came out.

This is not a criticism from me of 8th Edition, just an observation.


I actually don't think there is any problem with the core 40k rules either, its just the horrendous, bloated, overgrown mess that 6th edition has grown into that makes the game such a strategy-less chore to play.

6th Edition has its problems. There is nothing more horrendous and bloated about this edition, either. Some of the options available have expanded, and there are some options that people treat as core, but that's always been the case.

Darnok
24-02-2014, 05:25
I've heard rumours that the rumoured Blood Angels and Orks set might in fact be for a remake of Epic. If this is true, we can rejoice as that may mean no 7th Edition yet.

This one is wrong.


Faeit was quoting 40k Radio, which is a solid rumor source, so I'd say 7th edition in a few months is pretty much a certainty.

This one is right.


No rumours source is ever reliable, just lucky.

And wrong again...

Hawkkf
24-02-2014, 05:28
Here are my thoughts and speculations:

I think 6th was just a first step toward GW's goal. It introduced fliers, allies, core psychic powers, and a few other things. I believe that all of those things were just introduced in the manner they were as a stepping stone for thier ultimate goal. I expect fliers to get advanced rules (which could not be easily done if they skipped straight from skimmers). I expect we will see special detachments, lords of war, and formations as standard rules with specific ways of taking them (which would have been hard to adjust to if they hadn't introduced us to allies first). Maybe I am just being hopeful, but the point is that if 7th is coming out this year, that they set to work on it very quickly after they finished 6th, they didnt just go 'oh sales are down' a couple months ago and put it together in a week.

I truly hope I am not giving them too much credit, but only time will tell.

Wakerofgods
24-02-2014, 05:28
7th edition might have everyone can ally with everyone?

That would be cool!
Although while I'd appreciate getting to pick what was and wasn't fluff-acceptable for my army, I bet some people would hate it when others showed up with armies whose fluff they didn't like.
That being said, I'm of the opinion that more player control of their own army = win.

The Emperor
24-02-2014, 05:35
For a new edition to pop up two years after the last one to me seems like wishful thinking for those that hate 6th.

The 40k Radio guys, from what I've gathered, think 6th edition is the best iteration of the game to date, so why would they risk their credibility on a lie about a new edition when they love the current edition as-is and probably wouldn't want to see it replaced?

Charistoph
24-02-2014, 06:44
The 40k Radio guys, from what I've gathered, think 6th edition is the best iteration of the game to date, so why would they risk their credibility on a lie about a new edition when they love the current edition as-is and probably wouldn't want to see it replaced?

Who said THEY were the ones who hate it. Yes, they are the ones spreading the rumor, but who's giving them the information?

But I also disagree in thinking that this is just wishful thinking on a hater's part. I find it more likely that this is looking for a leak than a hater trawl.

Spiney Norman
24-02-2014, 07:01
Who said THEY were the ones who hate it. Yes, they are the ones spreading the rumor, but who's giving them the information?

But I also disagree in thinking that this is just wishful thinking on a hater's part. I find it more likely that this is looking for a leak than a hater trawl.

That was iced crow not you, apparently the guys at 40k radio made this up because they hate 6th edition so much and just threw it in with their other rumours to add to its credibility fo some reason I can't quite work out yet.


Yeah June 2012. That its 2014 keeps slipping my mind. Still the edition is less than 2 years old. For a new edition to pop up two years after the last one to me seems like wishful thinking for those that hate 6th.

Rob
24-02-2014, 11:22
7th edition?! I haven't even played 6th yet. If this is true then GW is starting to get a bit stupid.

OuroborosTriumphant
24-02-2014, 11:59
40k radio is almost certainly not wrong. They haven't been wrong yet.

Beyond "rolling in the Stronghold Assault building rules update and the Lord of War rules from Escalation" all the other rumours of concrete rules I've seen sound pretty wishlisty, so I can believe it's more of a 6.5 than a true 7th. That said, I don't think GW labels their editions, at least not hugely prominently. So whether it's 7th or 6.5 may come down more to what the community as a whole calls it, rather than any material fact about its contents.

*shrugs* It will be what it will be.

The Emperor
24-02-2014, 12:05
Who said THEY were the ones who hate it. Yes, they are the ones spreading the rumor, but who's giving them the information?

I get the impression that they're not picking their rumors up from random passerby's on the street, but from somebody who's in the know, and probably works at GW. Why would that person feed them false information in the hopes of trashing a product whose success his livelihood depends on? Has there been anything in 40k Radio's reporting that indicates any sort of "anti-6th edition" bias and isn't just straight up reporting of the facts? Because so far I've detected nothing of the sort, just a source saying "Check out all the stuff that we're putting out the next couple of months." I don't see how anyone can look at the rumors and assume a "6E Hater" is somehow behind them all, and in this case is feeding 40k Radio a line of bull just because.

IcedCrow
24-02-2014, 13:18
Ill comment more when there is actual proof. I cant count how many times "solid rumors said this" over the past 16 years and them having been nothing or grossly overblown.

This is no different to me

Spiney Norman
24-02-2014, 14:18
Ill comment more when there is actual proof. I cant count how many times "solid rumors said this" over the past 16 years and them having been nothing or grossly overblown.

This is no different to me

If you are willing to glibly ignore 40k radio's track record in accurately predicting dark elves, space marines, Tyranids, imperial knights and Astra Militarum then I seriously doubt you would believe it if you were to hold a new updated rulebook in your sweaty palms.

There is a mountain of proof out there, but the determined always find a way to stick their proverbial fingers in their ears and sing "la la la".

AngryAngel
24-02-2014, 14:25
To be fair we haven't seen the Astral Military yet. If that happens, I'll be assured for the 7th ed. Though I doubt it'll come without talk of it being 6.5 regardless of how they bill it. There is a mountain of proof in consistent rumors being accurate. as well as logical reasoning, that being folding in optional things all as standard to sell more models. I also hope some rule fixing and stream lining is in store. As is I'm 90 percent sure in the upcoming 7th ed, on Astra drops I'm all in certain.

IcedCrow
24-02-2014, 14:26
I don't have sweaty palms :)

When there are actual pictures of "Warhammer 40k 7th edition" or articles showing it, I will believe it. I don't believe any rumors until then. I don't care how "reliable" they are.

InstantKarma
24-02-2014, 14:30
when It does becomes legal to use in a game I'd buy 3-5 of the knights

And this is why I'm moving over to Fantasy.

Surgency
24-02-2014, 14:39
There is a mountain of proof out there, but the determined always find a way to stick their proverbial fingers in their ears and sing "la la la".

There is actually no proof at all for it being a correct and accurate rumor. There is, however, supposition and precedent.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

Gungo
24-02-2014, 14:41
Putting aside the crying about paying for another book by people. I hope gw moved towards a yearly rule book the incorporates all the rules and errata each year. I hope they make the digital versions a yearly subscription that updates that book with errrata. I hope they release all the errata online for those for those who feel the changes are not worth paying for a new rule book. I hope they release a new hard copy version every two years. People who want a book with all the rules in one place wil still buy the book and people who want 10 PDFs and 4 books with the same rules costing more seperately then in one place can keep those.

This is game needs the rules to change and be fluid. Right now it needs an extensive errata incorporating escalation, fortifications, allies, dataslates, formations, supplements and strength d weapons explained and the rules balanced better.

IcedCrow
24-02-2014, 14:53
There is actually no proof at all for it being a correct and accurate rumor. There is, however, supposition and precedent.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

Correct. If there was actual proof that it was correct, I would not be debating it. If there was proof that it was correct it would no longer be a rumour.

Spiney Norman
24-02-2014, 15:05
There is actually no proof at all for it being a correct and accurate rumor. There is, however, supposition and precedent.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

Past record is still a form of evidence or proof, otherwise why bother calling a character witness in a court case? Dismissing the rumour because the proof offered is not watertight is not at all logical. There is a tonne of circumstantial evidence to suggest that 40kR are a trustworthy source wephether you want to admit it or not.

Granted the record of past correct information is entirely circumstantial, but basing your entire conclusion on the assumption that this will be one time 40k radio have been wrong in the last 6 months appears to be a rather illogical deduction.

Experience tells me that 40kR have an accurate source and that they are not liars, just because you do not like the rumour does not make it more or less likely to be true. The does not seem to be any reason to doubt the information 40kR are supplying, no-one in the know has gone on record as refuting them, usually if a rumour is way off someone like Harry will pop up and say 'yeah, not happening' this has not happened, there is just a knot of folk who like 6E and are resolved to bury their head in the sand as long as possible.

AngryAngel
24-02-2014, 15:16
I don't think it's burying their heads in sand, more like building sand castles of distrust.

The Emperor
24-02-2014, 15:18
I don't think it's burying their heads in sand, more like building sand castles of distrust.

LOL! Thanks for that one. :D

Surgency
24-02-2014, 15:24
Past record is still a form of evidence or proof, otherwise why bother calling a character witness in a court case? Dismissing the rumour because the proof offered is not watertight is not at all logical. There is a tonne of circumstantial evidence to suggest that 40kR are a trustworthy source wephether you want to admit it or not.

It is still not proof. Character witnesses in a court case are offered so the jury can determine if the person on trial is guilty of what they are tried for. Just because someone says its true does not make it true.

Circumstantial evidence is not proof either. The definition of proof (as applies to this topic) is here:


proof
1. evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, or to produce belief in its truth.
4. the establishment of the truth of anything; demonstration.

Right now, we only have a single source saying that its true. We cannot, at this point in time, demonstrate that it is true, nor can we provide evidence sufficient to establish that it is true. What we have is a hypothesis that has evidence supporting it at this point in time.


Granted the record of past correct information is entirely circumstantial, but basing your entire conclusion on the assumption that this will be one time 40k radio have been wrong in the last 6 months appears to be a rather illogical deduction.

No one said 40k Radio is wrong. What Iced is saying is to wait, and that theres no point in getting worked up over something that we have no actual information on.


Experience tells me that 40kR have an accurate source and that they are not liars, just because you do not like the rumour does not make it more or less likely to be true. The does not seem to be any reason to doubt the information 40kR are supplying, no-one in the know has gone on record as refuting them, usually if a rumour is way off someone like Harry will pop up and say 'yeah, not happening' this has not happened, there is just a knot of folk who like 6E and are resolved to bury their head in the sand as long as possible.

No one is calling 40k Radio liars. No one is saying that its not an accurate rumour. No one is burying their heads in the sand. What we're saying is that thus far we have a single source reporting this information, and that is not of itself enough to confirm the rumour and start discussing the ramifications of a new release. Particularly when there is NO data whatsoever regarding what could be in the release.

Also, Not denying a source is NOT a confirmation of the veracity of that source. Just because no one has bothered to say "yeah, thats just wrong" doesn't make it correct (the reverse is also true: no one has confirmed it, thus the rumour is not inherently false). Rumours are contradictory things. Don't get caught up in the "well, the rumour HAS to be true because XXXXXXX posted it" trap.


There is NO proof whatsoever of a pending 7th Edition release. Just wishful thinking at this point. Is it a possibility? Absolutely. Is it likely? Hard to say.

Charistoph
24-02-2014, 15:25
Past record is still a form of evidence or proof, otherwise why bother calling a character witness in a court case? Dismissing the rumour because the proof offered is not watertight is not at all logical. There is a tonne of circumstantial evidence to suggest that 40kR are a trustworthy source wephether you want to admit it or not.

Granted the record of past correct information is entirely circumstantial, but basing your entire conclusion on the assumption that this will be one time 40k radio have been wrong in the last 6 months appears to be a rather illogical deduction.

Experience tells me that 40kR have an accurate source and that they are not liars, just because you do not like the rumour does not make it more or less likely to be true. The does not seem to be any reason to doubt the information 40kR are supplying, no-one in the know has gone on record as refuting them, usually if a rumour is way off someone like Harry will pop up and say 'yeah, not happening' this has not happened, there is just a knot of folk who like 6E and are resolved to bury their head in the sand as long as possible.

Which is why IcedCrow mentioned "precedent". They have been remarkably accurate so far, but there comes a time when it becomes called in to doubt. Even the much (deservedly so) vaunted Harry and Hastings have been inaccurate at times.

But this, by no means, makes information that 40K Radio presents as facts or prophecy. Rumor is simply that, rumor, and should be treated as such until officially verified, no matter the veracity of the source.

So please get off your high unicorn. It's rainbow droppings are discoloring the gravel on my front lawn, and the HOA REALLY hates that.

AngryAngel
24-02-2014, 15:29
Well you best get used to them unicorns, I hear they will be dancing in the streets soon, while Iced Crow watches with his sweaty palms and we all enjoy the sand castles of distrust, I know the Emperor approves.

Theocracity
24-02-2014, 15:51
It's possible to fully trust 40K Radio's flawless record and still 'believe it when you see it.' Especially for something as currently vague as 7th edition. I'm not putting much thought into that rumor until it gets a bit clearer, even though I always give credence to then.

Theocracity
24-02-2014, 16:16
I think part of the problem is that GW's new release paradigm is baffling all of our predictive abilities. None of us would randomly guess that 7th would come this year because we have no idea what it would even entail if it were the old release system (because it wouldn't make sense then), much less whatever they're intending to do under the new one. Therefore we only have 40K Radio's record to fall back on, and even then our only reasonable response is to say 'Let's wait for more information, because right now we have nothing to go on.'

Ozendorph
24-02-2014, 16:32
I'm guessing the decision to release 7th this year was the result of a die-roll. Perhaps GW's game mechanics have now extended to the business unit.

Surgency
24-02-2014, 16:35
Therefore we only have 40K Radio's record to fall back on, and even then our only reasonable response is to say 'Let's wait for more information, because right now we have nothing to go on.'

Which apparently amounts to sticking your head in the sand

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

AngryAngel
24-02-2014, 16:38
I'm looking at like this.

Trends, a new edition every 5 years, there about. What goes against that is their recent rapid release schedule and press to weekly releases, showing they can and will mix things up.

Full on information, we have none, that is why it is a rumor. The only proof it isn't coming, or lead up to believe it won't I should say, is previous track record of the company which their release designs are somewhat in flux for predictability lately. So that leaves a gut feeling for most, that it won't. I wouldn't believe it either if not for..

The fact, a so far very reliable source, that has recently been dead on is saying it will happen, hasn't retracted this and we grow ever closer. Is it proof positive, no. However the only credible evidence to hint to it being true, is the say so of people who have so far been very right on. The fact against, previous business policy and just gut feeling it won't happen.

Now if it does happen will it be a full new edition or a .5 ? Who can know, they spilled such so far back it may not have been fully known or explained to them.

I think more hints to it being accurate, then hints away from it being the truth. Of course we won't know for sure until we get actual proof. However I think if the Astra Militarium prove to be true, and happen in April, that doubt I would imagine would have to lessen. All opinion of course and simply putting down what we do know so people can judge for themselves if they haven't already.

Hawkkf
24-02-2014, 16:47
This rumour is like an accurate weatherman calling for a blizzard in summer. It's never happened before and seems incredible. It's ok to be sceptical as its just a forecast, but most people will still prepare for the blizzard just in case.

I for one appreciate the rumors from 40K Radio. It has given me a heads up on the possibility of change that could affect my hobby greatly. I look forward to more detailed rumors as we get closer to the rumored release.

AngryAngel
24-02-2014, 16:54
Now, if it is true, I think that will throw such skepticism in the future on its ear. It will also hint to even more drastic releases changes to come.

Charistoph
24-02-2014, 17:20
Now, if it is true, I think that will throw such skepticism in the future on its ear. It will also hint to even more drastic releases changes to come.

Quite likely. But that doesn't mean one hast to be militant about trying to pound it in to someone's face before any proper substantiation can be made. And that's where this discussion has gone to. 40K Radio isn't Noah, and you and Spiney Norman aren't Ham and Shem (you two are definitely not acting like it). 7th Edition is hardly a worldwide flood, nor require the changes in the 40K game as such an event would cause.

So please, calm the militant reactions to people placing proper doubt on a rumor. I'm sure the rest of us would like to calm our choler against those who try to treat 40K Radio as the Last Prophet, as well.

Charistoph
24-02-2014, 17:20
Now, if it is true, I think that will throw such skepticism in the future on its ear. It will also hint to even more drastic releases changes to come.

Quite likely. But that doesn't mean one hast to be militant about trying to pound it in to someone's face before any proper substantiation can be made. And that's where this discussion has gone to. 40K Radio isn't Noah, and you and Spiney Norman aren't Ham and Shem (you two are definitely not acting like it). 7th Edition is hardly a worldwide flood, nor require the changes in the 40K game as such an event would cause.

So please, calm the militant reactions to people placing proper doubt on a rumor. I'm sure the rest of us would like to calm our choler against those who try to treat 40K Radio as the Last Prophet, as well.

AngryAngel
24-02-2014, 17:30
Felt that needed to be said twice eh ? If my own responses were upsetting, I do apologize, such isn't the intention. Some mild comedy, appreciated or not is all it was.

MajorWesJanson
24-02-2014, 17:40
Apocalypse v2 sank pretty quickly.

Because some of the major changes (Superheavies simply ignore 5/6 of the damage chart, Destroyer weapons became more stupidly powerful and simplified when many people wanted them less powerful and more granular, adding more random tables that kill stuff randomly, adding yet larger templates into the game) were bad ideas.

itcamefromthedeep
24-02-2014, 17:50
Destroyer weapon rules look more complicated to me now. These days, games I play and games that include the modern Destroyer mechanic are mutually exclusive.

In the latest version of Apocalypse, the only thing that improved ib my experience is the Flank March asset. I don't like it, but it's better. I disagree with literally every other decision in that book.

Ozendorph
24-02-2014, 18:05
The new Apoc book was the final nail in this edition for me, removing any doubt of the design team's incompetence. I'd be much more excited for the rumored new edition if it was accompanied by some major upheaval in the design team.

Sephillion
24-02-2014, 18:13
I'm kind of worried that the next edition won't be as good because I actually really like 6th Edition

Pretty much agree.

Now I know the edition is far from perfect. There are actually a lot of tweaks and changes Iíd like to see. But none warrants a new edition so shortly after the 6th. I feel a lot of issues could have been avoided had the various codices been designed differently; some units seem to have been designed for another edition in mind, or have not been given consideration for the 6th edition environment.

And itís too soon for GW to have worked out a 7th edition already that isnít rushed and a response to Internet whining.

Spiney Norman
24-02-2014, 18:33
No one said 40k Radio is wrong. What Iced is saying is to wait, and that theres no point in getting worked up over something that we have no actual information on.


No, what Iced said was the rumours were as likely to be true as seeing a "real unicorn on your porch", now if I am logicing that sentence out properly, he did in fact say 40k radio were lying. Unless you want to suggest the change of encountering a live mythological creature in the real world is any greater than zero. He did not in any sense say "wait and see", he said, "this is definitely not happening".

Equating 40kR's reliability record to the existence of a unicorn is extremely insulting to them, and exactly the kind of abusive garbage that drives rumour sources away from the site.


I'm kind of worried that the next edition won't be as good because I actually really like 6th Edition

I wouldn't worry too much, I don't see it changing that much, they haven't had long enough to work on it. I'd expect the greater part of the core mechanics to stay the same, I think this will be mainly about the escalation and stronghold assault rules being brought properly into the fold. I would expect a LoW slot to become a permanent addition on to the FOC and that the advanced fortification rules will be added too.

AngryAngel
24-02-2014, 18:44
Now, if he had said, it was the same chance as seeing say the Loch Ness Monster or Big foot, well the jury is still out on if they exist. So then he would be saying a definite, maybe for a new edition this summer.

UglyTater
24-02-2014, 19:05
So now this thread stops being about will 7th happen this year but turns into are unicorns real...

IcedCrow
24-02-2014, 20:23
I'm not saying anyone is "lying". I'm saying that I highly doubt that the rumors are true. That means that 40k radio guys heard a rumor, and posted it / broadcast it. That doesn't make them out to be liars unless dude flat out said he's seen 7th edition and has read it and is reporting what he has seen / read (which is not what I've heard) and it turns out false. THAT would be lying.

My avatar is the perfect example of the face many warhammer players make after finding out the current rumor of the month or whatever turned out to be false after putting all of their hopes in it being true. For years.

IcedCrow
24-02-2014, 20:24
I'm not saying anyone is "lying". I'm saying that I highly doubt that the rumors are true. That means that 40k radio guys heard a rumor, and posted it / broadcast it. That doesn't make them out to be liars unless dude flat out said he's seen 7th edition and has read it and is reporting what he has seen / read (which is not what I've heard) and it turns out false. THAT would be lying.

My avatar is the perfect example of the face many warhammer players make after finding out the current rumor of the month or whatever turned out to be false after putting all of their hopes in it being true. For years.

The Emperor
24-02-2014, 20:42
And itís too soon for GW to have worked out a 7th edition already that isnít rushed and a response to Internet whining.

I wouldn't worry if I were you. From all accounts, the changes will be minor tweaks to the system, not a major overhaul.

Navar
24-02-2014, 20:47
I wouldn't worry if I were you. From all accounts, the changes will be minor tweaks to the system, not a major overhaul.

From everything I hear from a couple of sources it will be 6th edition + Stronghold Assault, and Escalation all in 1 book.

Theocracity
24-02-2014, 21:10
From everything I hear from a couple of sources it will be 6th edition + Stronghold Assault, and Escalation all in 1 book.

To be fair, is that something we've heard, or just something we assume because there's so little information and we can't believe the changes would be bigger than that?

I mean, it makes sense to me that this would be an iterative update instead of a transformative one, but GW doesn't base its decisions off of what makes sense to me.

dangerboyjim
24-02-2014, 21:22
I think there was a suggestion that a combo book would make sense then a wholly new edition. Which it would. And the rumour ran from there.

Since a 7th edition makes almost no sense and most people don't really want it, I'd say GW are almost certain to do it.

Battles in 7th edition will at least be easy, you just take a random selection of models from you collection, then you and your opponent select a model each, roll a dice, add the year it was released and the highest wins.

DoctorTom
24-02-2014, 23:03
I think there was a suggestion that a combo book would make sense then a wholly new edition. Which it would. And the rumour ran from there.

Since a 7th edition makes almost no sense and most people don't really want it, I'd say GW are almost certain to do it.

Battles in 7th edition will at least be easy, you just take a random selection of models from you collection, then you and your opponent select a model each, roll a dice, add the year it was released and the highest wins.

It might be more than just adding Escalation and Stronghold Assault (plus mentioning Dataslates and problably stuff like the Inquisition). I wouldn't be surprised to see some tweaking of the Allies table given some of the complaints. (I suspect Tau and Eldar will slip to "Allies of Convenience" if they don't make another ally category that's somewhere in between AoC and Battle Brothers.) There could end up being tweaks to some of the other special rules and such that are demonstrating abuse now ( 2++ rerollable saves go away?) , things that they might have done in 6th if they had more playtesting done by outside groups beforehand to give them feedback.

Navar
24-02-2014, 23:37
To be fair, is that something we've heard, or just something we assume because there's so little information and we can't believe the changes would be bigger than that?

I mean, it makes sense to me that this would be an iterative update instead of a transformative one, but GW doesn't base its decisions off of what makes sense to me.

They are all Rumors to me to be honest.

From the start when the first 7th in 2014 rumors appeared I heard this one right out of the gate along side.

It may be speculation. I am honestly just passing along rumors I have read other places.

Spiney Norman
25-02-2014, 00:09
I'm not saying anyone is "lying". I'm saying that I highly doubt that the rumors are true. That means that 40k radio guys heard a rumor, and posted it / broadcast it. That doesn't make them out to be liars unless dude flat out said he's seen 7th edition and has read it and is reporting what he has seen / read (which is not what I've heard) and it turns out false. THAT would be lying.


Given the repeated, proven reliability of their informant you may as well have called them liars, either way it doesn't hurt to show a little respect to the people who keep these forums going by giving us something to talk about.

Charistoph
25-02-2014, 00:15
Given the repeated, proven reliability of their informant you may as well have called them liars, either way it doesn't hurt to show a little respect to the people who keep these forums going by giving us setting to talk about.

We don't even know if this is the same informant (likely, I agree, but still possible it's not). And it's not like the 40K Radio people are keeping this forum running. Us clicking on the advertisements are what keep this forum running.

So, I have no real idea what your last point was going on about.

Surgency
25-02-2014, 00:20
it doesn't hurt to show a little respect to the people who keep these forums going by giving us setting to talk about.

GW keeps the forum going, and look how much respect they get here. 40k Radio sometimes provides content that other people enjoy, but they by no means are involved in keeping the various forums active

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

Spiney Norman
25-02-2014, 00:27
We don't even know if this is the same informant (likely, I agree, but still possible it's not). And it's not like the 40K Radio people are keeping this forum running. Us clicking on the advertisements are what keep this forum running.

So, I have no real idea what your last point was going on about.

They have repeatedly confirmed that their information all comes from the same source, both on their Facebook page and on these forums as well. The idea that they just started making this stuff up about a new edition because they didn't like 6th ed really has no basis whatsoever. 40kR only have one source, every rumour they post comes from him.

This is a rumour site, we discuss rumours, ok, if we had no rumours the site would still be here, but active discussion would dry up pretty fast with nothing to talk about.

Charistoph
25-02-2014, 00:39
They have repeatedly confirmed that their information all comes from the same source, both on their Facebook page and on these forums as well. The idea that they just started making this stuff up about a new edition because they didn't like 6th ed really has no basis whatsoever. 40kR only have one source, every rumour they post comes from him.

This is a rumour site, we discuss rumours, ok, if we had no rumours the site would still be here, but active discussion would dry up pretty fast with nothing to talk about.

Yeah, there's a lot of rumors here in General, Background, and Rules. :wtf:

As for the Rumor board, there are always people submitting things, and not all are from 40K Radio. I believe Darnok has a source or two with no known connection to the Radio.

Also consider the fact of where their source's source is from. We do not know. And as I've pointed out before, even the best rumor mongers are just sometimes wrong. This is often based on what stage their source is from.

It does seem that 40KR's source does seem to be closer to the book end than the modelling end, though, that's for sure.

Imperialis_Dominatus
25-02-2014, 00:58
No, what Iced said was the rumours were as likely to be true as seeing a "real unicorn on your porch", now if I am logicing that sentence out properly, he did in fact say 40k radio were lying.

Would you suggest that a man who claims to have seen a unicorn is always lying, or could he simply be mistaken? Had said man previously correctly identified a moose, a caribou, a dairy cow, a wild horse, and a musk ox, would you then place all your faith in his claims of having seen a unicorn, or might you take a moment to consider that fate had chosen this moment to prove his lack of omniscience?


Given the repeated, proven reliability of their informant you may as well have called them liars

Oh, so now it's "may as well have." Good to see you're seeking to be slightly less offended on behalf of other people now.

Surgency
25-02-2014, 00:59
This is a rumour site, we discuss rumours, ok, if we had no rumours the site would still be here, but active discussion would dry up pretty fast with nothing to talk about.

I'm not sure where you get this idea from. Warseer (portent before that), BnC, and some of the other smaller sites have been around for a significantly longer time than 40kR

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

WLBjork
25-02-2014, 04:08
As for the Rumor board, there are always people submitting things, and not all are from 40K Radio. I believe Darnok has a source or two with no known connection to the Radio.

This.

I would point out its not just 40kR, but Darnok has also said that there will be a change to the main rulebook for 40K this year.

I'm not sure about Escalation and Stronghold being included in the core rules - those books were released about the same time that the new rulebook should have gone for printing. Historically (and yes, I am aware that this can change at any moment without warning) GW have not performed actions that canibalise their own sales, which putting Stronghold and Escalation into the core rules would do.

Surgency
25-02-2014, 04:24
I would point out its not just 40kR, but Darnok has also said that there will be a change to the main rulebook for 40K this year.

Thats the thing though... A change to the rulebook =/= new edition

Spiney Norman
25-02-2014, 07:14
This.

I would point out its not just 40kR, but Darnok has also said that there will be a change to the main rulebook for 40K this year.
Which I have pointed out more than once, and also makes him the butt of Iced Crows "unicorn" jibe.


I'm not sure about Escalation and Stronghold being included in the core rules - those books were released about the same time that the new rulebook should have gone for printing. Historically (and yes, I am aware that this can change at any moment without warning) GW have not performed actions that canibalise their own sales, which putting Stronghold and Escalation into the core rules would do.

Adding the escalation/stronghold assault rules to the rule book wouldn't make the books obsolete at all, they would still have the data sheets for the various superheavies and fortification networks which almost certainly wouldn't feature in a revised brb. I'm just envisaging them adding LoW to the FOC as a permanent addition (to final get rid of the claim that escalation is somehow a "different way to play 40k" and thus somehow invalid) and including the SH rules in the brb, not including all the Data sheets for every army in the brb.

I imagine they will include SH data sheets in codexes going forward from the new brb and the escalation book will fall out of use when they have cycled through them all, say in about a decade's time.


Thats the thing though... A change to the rulebook =/= new edition

Both Darnok and 40kR have said it WILL be a new edition, in fact they are both calling it "7th Edition"

Darnok
25-02-2014, 08:54
Thats the thing though... A change to the rulebook =/= new edition

I think I was pretty clear in the past. There will be a 7th edition book for 40K this year - I have that coming from a different source than 40K Radio.

Herkamer63
25-02-2014, 13:22
I think I was pretty clear in the past. There will be a 7th edition book for 40K this year - I have that coming from a different source than 40K Radio.
well i'd say it's still hard to say. sometimes, from what i noticed, some of these other sources just spout off what the 1st source says without actually looking into it and make it sound like wishful thinking. a 6.1 or 6.5 ed sounds alot more reasonable than an entirely new one. at this point, however, your guess is as good as mine.

IcedCrow
25-02-2014, 13:26
Which I have pointed out more than once, and also makes him the butt of Iced Crows "unicorn" jibe.

This is kind of like when you called me a sociopath a few weeks ago because I said I wasn't interested in and wouldn't be playing escalation games :D (by far one of my most favorite threads EVER, I have it printed out and framed in my study)

I don't care who says it short of the company itself. If you haven't seen the 7th edition book with your own eyes, and your info is solely "this dude that I really trust told me its going to happen", then I don't believe there will be a 7th edition book this year. That's not calling anyone a liar, that just means that while one may feel that its coming because some dude told them that they trust, I don't believe in rumors because for every 10 rumors where "its going to happen I swear its going to happen count on it", maybe 2 or 3 at most come true.

If i had a nickle for everytime someone "knew someone trustworthy" and then it turned out to not happen, I'd have a new nickle covered Imperial Knight :) With turbo-action punch.

And if it happens? Great! I think it'll go the way of the other dozen or so rumors that were going to happen that never did that caused the face of my avatar to appear before warseer and other forums and rage spewed because the rumor didn't happen.

There are already internet discussions about how 7th edition is happening and random charges and random powers etc should hopefully go away, so I have a feeling the rage storm on this will summon Odin and the Ragnarok may finally happen when this turns out to not be the case.

williamsond
25-02-2014, 14:01
Wasn't Ragnarok last Saturday?

IcedCrow
25-02-2014, 14:11
Wasn't Ragnarok last Saturday?

It was but Odin decided it wasn't the time as the nerd rage hadn't hit its peak levels, and that is what nourishes him most. The tyranid rage almost did it... but he thinks that there is one more event on the horizon that can top it...

Voss
25-02-2014, 14:48
Iced, thats kind of weird. It suggests that you don't discriminate between people who are reliable and people who actively lie. If one person has 10 out of 10 true rumours, and a collection of idiots has 90 out of 90 false rumours, the correct conclusion isn't that 90 out of 100 rumours are false so everything should be ignored, but that one person is reliable and the others aren't.

And on top of that, the speculation that specific things will happen (specifically the random things going away) is... unrelated speculation. And not part of the rumour. What people make up on their own isn't part of the rumour, and if they are disappointed that something no one said doesn't happen, there isn't much you can do for them. Blind faith and optimism should be punished by crushing disappointment.

Spiney Norman
25-02-2014, 14:50
Iced, thats kind of weird. It suggests that you don't discriminate between people who are reliable and people who actively lie. If one person has 10 out of 10 true rumours, and a collection of idiots has 90 out of 90 false rumours, the correct conclusion isn't that 90 out of 100 rumours are false so everything should be ignored, but that one person is reliable and the others aren't.

And on top of that, the speculation that specific things will happen (specifically the random things going away) is... unrelated speculation. And not part of the rumour. What people make up on their own isn't part of the rumour.

I'm not sure that's really true, I think the vitriol has been flowing against this particular rumour primarily because IC doesn't want it to happen/thinks it is unnecessary and hasn't made much of a secret of that fact. I don't recall him going all out offensive when the Imperial Knight rumour hit the net for example.

Its pretty clear to me that 40kR has a reliable source who genuinely does get information from GW one way or another. On that basis I see little reason to doubt them. I can't re ally analyse Darnok's source to the same degree, but my experience of his posts on the site is that he has his heads crewed on and isn't taken in easily. The fact that he is so convinced that it is happening is a major contributing factor.

If you take out the emotivity behind whether or not people like 6th edition this rumour is no more nor less likely to come to pass than any other. Its certainly more like to happen than any of us seeing a real unicorn.

IcedCrow
25-02-2014, 14:53
Iced, thats kind of weird. It suggests that you don't discriminate between people who are reliable and people who actively lie. If one person has 10 out of 10 true rumours, and a collection of idiots has 90 out of 90 false rumours, the correct conclusion isn't that 90 out of 100 rumours are false so everything should be ignored, but that one person is reliable and the others aren't.

And on top of that, the speculation that specific things will happen (specifically the random things going away) is... unrelated speculation. And not part of the rumour. What people make up on their own isn't part of the rumour, and if they are disappointed that something no one said doesn't happen, there isn't much you can do for them. Blind faith and optimism should be punished by crushing disappointment.

I don't put faith in any rumors regardless of their source, because most rumors turn out false. I wait to hear from (in this case) GW before I worry about something.


primarily because IC doesn't want it to happen/thinks it is unnecessary and hasn't made much of a secret of that fact. I don't recall him going all out offensive when the Imperial Knight rumour hit the net for example.

I appreciate that I don't have to ever clarify how I feel, because we have such a deep and intimate connection that you are able to relay my thoughts for me. Makes it easier to go on day by day. Someone cue the Titanic soundtrack.

A 6.5 rollup of all the extra rules into one book would be something I'd buy. I just wouldn't consider that "7th edition".

When the imperial knight rumor hit the net there were pictures accompanying it of the models. At least, when I saw the imperial knight rumor (I don't follow rumors so if there was info about knights before the fact I wasn't privy to them because I simply do not care about rumors or keeping up with what's happening in 2015 or whatever) there were pictures with it, so there was nothing to debate. A model existed, it was shown as coming, great.

There are no pictures, images, or anything of "7th edition" other than strong words indicating all of the dataslates, escalation, etc being put into one book (which is great, I'd rather have it in one book). I don't consider rolling the existing rules into one book and incorporating the current FAQ into the rulebook as a new edition though. I consider that "house keeping".

And as of now that's all we know about it.

People are all up in arms about a new edition because that indicates whole new mechanics, such as the much prayed for by the tournament community removal of random charges and powers (one example) or that somehow assaulting from transports is going to come back (as another example of something I've seen being prayed for in this "new 7th edition coming out this summer"). And again to clarify I follow many discussions across the toxic pools of the internet, not just on warseer so that's not quoting someone directly on warseer, tha'ts from other conversations also going on about the new 7th edition that's sure to be coming this summer.

Voss
25-02-2014, 14:59
I don't put faith in any rumors regardless of their source, because most rumors turn out false. I wait to hear from (in this case) GW before I worry about something.

So, yes, then? In that case, you really out to recuse yourself from any sort of rumour discussion at all, since your position is automatically 'I disbelieve!' regardless of anything. You might as well go to the video-games subforum and start posting 'I don't like video-games' in every thread for all the value your contribution has.

IcedCrow
25-02-2014, 15:01
So, yes, then? In that case, you really out to recuse yourself from any sort of rumour discussion at all, since your position is automatically 'I disbelieve!' regardless of anything. You might as well go to the video-games subforum and start posting 'I don't like video-games' in every thread for all the value your contribution has.

No it means that when people talk about rumors as if it is the gospel and is going to happen as if they've seen it for themselves, that I respond.

Voss
25-02-2014, 15:07
No it means that when people talk about rumors as if it is the gospel and is going to happen as if they've seen it for themselves, that I respond.

See, from the outside, it doesn't look that way. It looks like you're the one with a 'gospel' and the ones talking about the reliability of specific rumourmongers seem sane and reasonable.

IcedCrow
25-02-2014, 15:11
That would be because thats how you want to see it.

The "gospel" is that its wise not to put too much faith into rumors until concrete evidence is revealed. That's also what a lot of people call "common sense". Not just with little championship plastic men but in most things in life.

Faith in rumors and then them failing is a good majority of much of the gnashing and wailing that goes on here.

Surgency
25-02-2014, 15:13
I think I was pretty clear in the past. There will be a 7th edition book for 40K this year - I have that coming from a different source than 40K Radio.

That's fine. But other supposedly reliable sources have been completely wrong, and other rumor mongers have gotten things wrong in the past. Rumour isn't gospel.


Iced, thats kind of weird. It suggests that you don't discriminate between people who are reliable and people who actively lie. If one person has 10 out of 10 true rumours, and a collection of idiots has 90 out of 90 false rumours, the correct conclusion isn't that 90 out of 100 rumours are false so everything should be ignored, but that one person is reliable and the others aren't.

A rumor is a rumor, and until proven true every rumor is as likely as every other one to come to pass, regardless of the source

Charistoph
25-02-2014, 15:19
See, from the outside, it doesn't look that way. It looks like you're the one with a 'gospel' and the ones talking about the reliability of specific rumourmongers seem sane and reasonable.

There is a difference between taking in the consideration of the reliability of a source, and treating the words from any rumormongers as direct announcements from God or GW. There are people, who shall remain unnamed in this post, who do that with all the militancy of a convert. I saw it before with the Pancake Edition, and I'm sure that IcedCrow did to. This happened at my LGS as well as here. I actually heard someone telling someone they were playing to start following those rules since they were going to happen anyway (and they didn't).

As IcedCrow and I have said numerous times, if it happens, it happens, but until it is announced by Games Workshop, it is nothing more than rumor and at least a little grain of salt should be applied. This is not meant as any aggression against or dismissal of any words provided by the rumormongers, just simply applying proper logic to the situation.

If someone wishes to believe they are real and factual, great for them, but they should also be aware of the limitations of what a rumor is, and not try to force it down anyone else's throats. And that was happening in this thread.

Voss
25-02-2014, 15:21
That would be because thats how you want to see it.

The "gospel" is that its wise not to put too much faith into rumors until concrete evidence is revealed. That's also what a lot of people call "common sense". Not just with little championship plastic men but in most things in life.

That isn't what you just said though. You didn't talk about reasonable doubt, reliability, track records or anything else, even concrete evidence. You simply said that you disbelieve ALL rumours, because most turn out to be false. That isn't any different from accepting everything completely, simply because someone said it.

The sane thing is reasonable likelihood based on individual track records and reliability. Rumours aren't about faith. They're about proven reliability and rational odds of something happening. New IG including a new stormtrooper kit? Reasonable. Is it from someone with a good track record? That adds to the possibility that it is true. By contrast, the Emperor as a special character in a brand new Sisters relaunch from someone unreliable sounds like total tosh. Treating those two rumours as exactly the same and equal is completely absurd.

IcedCrow
25-02-2014, 15:25
I don't hold any rumors as going to happen. I put zero faith in rumors.

The pancake edition was awesome :) I remember how many people were hellbent that that was the real edition coming out (i myself even believed that rumor, mainly because i liked the pancake edition and wanted it to be true :D) but when it turned out to be fake I also remember the spleens being ruptured, because the rumor providers of that were also very reliable.

What is trying to be persuaded of me is that because 40k radio has an awesome track record, that means that their word is as good as it being in a White Dwarf. To that I say: no.

Surgency
25-02-2014, 15:27
I saw it before with the Pancake Edition, and I'm sure that IcedCrow did to. This happened at my LGS as well as here. I actually heard someone telling someone they were playing to start following those rules since they were going to happen anyway (and they didn't).

Pancake edition... That must have been the "leaked 6th Ed rules." I remember that. All the tournament goers at my store started playtesting their armies in that edition, and modifying their armys to match it. Several new units were purchased, and several new vehicles were purchased. There was even a mock tournament.

Needless to say there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth when that one turned out the way it did. Wasn't that from a "reliable source?"

IcedCrow
25-02-2014, 15:31
Yes. Pancake edition was from a credible source that had nailed several things dead on up to that point.

Voss
25-02-2014, 15:34
Yes. Pancake edition was from a credible source that had nailed several things dead on up to that point.

Or so the rumours would have you believe. :shifty:

IcedCrow
25-02-2014, 15:38
No the rumors didn't have us believe they were credible. They nailed a short list of predicted releases and updates. That made them credible. It made the pancake edition being false that much more fun, especially after people had rushed out and started building 6th edition OP tournament armies based on the ruleset.

Pancake edition is probably the most relevant reason why I won't believe in 7th edition until I actually see a picture of it. That and the mystery box that was guaranteed to be skirmish type game last year, the new blood bowl that was guaranteed, the tyranid codex that was supposed to be the answer to taudar, and the chaos codex which was supposed to be along the lines of dex 3.5. :)

Rumors. Fun to read, more fun to watch people emotionally invest themselves into it and watching it not come true.

Spiney Norman
25-02-2014, 15:38
When the imperial knight rumor hit the net there were pictures accompanying it of the models. At least, when I saw the imperial knight rumor (I don't follow rumors so if there was info about knights before the fact I wasn't privy to them because I simply do not care about rumors or keeping up with what's happening in 2015 or whatever) there were pictures with it, so there was nothing to debate. A model existed, it was shown as coming, great.


If in doubt, just fabricate the truth, the Imperial Knight rumour was being discussed on the 40k N&R forum for approximately a month before any pictures showed up.

Charistoph
25-02-2014, 16:05
Actually, I didn't see the rumour until the pictures either. Photos, in my mind, constitute a reasonable semblance of proof. I'm just waiting for the rumour that includes very well done scratch-build photos as proof, because I think that would be funny, fooling both rumour disciples and skeptics alike!

Well, that's been done for codices. I remember when the Sisters were rumored to get their own book codex, and a 'leak' was shown showing Sisters and Arbites as Troops. It's not that hard to fake up with a little work.

Of course, that could have been someone's fandex that someone found and thought it was a leaked codex. The internet is such a funny place. probably due to all the time and money spent on porn.

Darnok
25-02-2014, 16:21
A rumor is a rumor, and until proven true every rumor is as likely as every other one to come to pass, regardless of the source

This is pretty far from the truth.

Charistoph
25-02-2014, 16:47
This is pretty far from the truth.

A lot depends on the source and perspective, Darnok. Your source's information may not be rumor to you, but to the rest of us, it is, mostly because we do not know who they are or how they come to have their information so have no correlation with the 'officialness' of the information.

Darnok
25-02-2014, 16:51
A lot depends on the source and perspective, Darnok. Your source's information may not be rumor to you, but to the rest of us, it is, mostly because we do not know who they are or how they come to have their information so have no correlation with the 'officialness' of the information.

If somebody claims that all rumours are equally (un)likely, regardless of the source, then that is pretty far from the truth. Taking the source(s) into account, some rumours are much more likely to be right.

That said, being doubtful until the information is official is never a bad thing. I can only support to never take a rumour as gospel.

IcedCrow
25-02-2014, 16:52
That said, being doubtful until the information is official is never a bad thing. I can only support to never take a rumour as gospel.

This is my stance :)

Charistoph
25-02-2014, 16:59
If somebody claims that all rumours are equally (un)linkely, regardless of the source, then that is pretty far from the truth. Taking the source(s) into account, some rumours are much more likely to be right.

Too True. As I said, a lot depends on perspective. Not everyone is well versed in the Rumor boards of the sites, and don't know who is good, who is questionable, and who is outright insane. The difference between Harry and Bubble Ghost may mean little to someone who only sees the rumor threads that get transferred to the General Forums.

Of course, I can't say for which Surgency is. I for myself have reduced my visits to rumor boards because the information has gotten more sparse over the last couple years, and some of the attitudes are definitely toxic.

Surgency
25-02-2014, 18:19
If somebody claims that all rumours are equally (un)likely, regardless of the source, then that is pretty far from the truth. Taking the source(s) into account, some rumours are much more likely to be right.

That said, being doubtful until the information is official is never a bad thing. I can only support to never take a rumour as gospel.

I'm sorry, but with all the jokes we make about believing the we read on the internet i can't see why you expect us to just blindly follow. No offense, but you're just some guy on the internet to me. You may know your source personally, and may know that he has a legitimate inside scoop, but that means nothing to me, because now it's a situation of "i heard from a guy who knows a guy".

Maybe your experiences are different, but after a decade of working with teams that had their own confidential sources, I've learned that everyone gets it wrong, and a broken clock is always correct at least twice a day. That is why i treat each and every rumour with the same amount of legitimacy until I can either vet the source myself(unlikely) or more information comes out in support of them.



Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

Rated_lexxx
25-02-2014, 19:02
There is actually no proof at all for it being a correct and accurate rumor. There is, however, supposition and precedent.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

You and you big words...and your small difficult words

DoctorTom
25-02-2014, 19:50
Maybe your experiences are different, but after a decade of working with teams that had their own confidential sources, I've learned that everyone gets it wrong, and a broken clock is always correct at least twice a day. That is why i treat each and every rumour with the same amount of legitimacy until I can either vet the source myself(unlikely) or more information comes out in support of them.

So, the way you see it, someone whose record has been good with accurately predicting rumors has the same legitimacy as someone who has continuously been predicting that IG greatcoat troops will be released in the next month, just before the new Squat Codex and a month after a model and rules for the Emperor*, while GW will put out working life size working versions of Land Raiders 3 months after that? Ooooookay.......


* the latter is a hypothetical example, not casting aspersions at any specific rumor posters

Voss
25-02-2014, 19:55
So, the way you see it, someone whose record has been good with accurately predicting rumors has the same legitimacy as someone who has continuously been predicting that IG greatcoat troops will be released in the next month, just before the new Squat Codex and a month after a model and rules for the Emperor*, while GW will put out working life size working versions of Land Raiders 3 months after that? Ooooookay.......


* the latter is a hypothetical example, not casting aspersions at any specific rumor posters

Hey, hey. When I used the Emperor as an example of absurdity vs. legitimate rumours, I was entirely casting aspersions at specific rumour sites.

AngryAngel
25-02-2014, 20:11
This is kind of like when you called me a sociopath a few weeks ago because I said I wasn't interested in and wouldn't be playing escalation games :D (by far one of my most favorite threads EVER, I have it printed out and framed in my study)

I don't care who says it short of the company itself. If you haven't seen the 7th edition book with your own eyes, and your info is solely "this dude that I really trust told me its going to happen", then I don't believe there will be a 7th edition book this year. That's not calling anyone a liar, that just means that while one may feel that its coming because some dude told them that they trust, I don't believe in rumors because for every 10 rumors where "its going to happen I swear its going to happen count on it", maybe 2 or 3 at most come true.

If i had a nickle for everytime someone "knew someone trustworthy" and then it turned out to not happen, I'd have a new nickle covered Imperial Knight :) With turbo-action punch.

And if it happens? Great! I think it'll go the way of the other dozen or so rumors that were going to happen that never did that caused the face of my avatar to appear before warseer and other forums and rage spewed because the rumor didn't happen.

There are already internet discussions about how 7th edition is happening and random charges and random powers etc should hopefully go away, so I have a feeling the rage storm on this will summon Odin and the Ragnarok may finally happen when this turns out to not be the case.

People who are randomly speculating on what changes will happen will obviously be thrown for a loop. That is different then there actually being a new edition. People rage storm about anything, hell even the imperial knights height was a matter of much anger. However the only one who seems obsessed about anger, is you. Lamenting it, then spawning it, then making an avatar of it for yourself. Which I have to say, is fine, for you. I'm glad you enjoy internet forums enough to frame threads from them in your home.

If, it happens to be true, perhaps you and the unicorns could spare a nickel for all those who did believe in " trusted sources ". I think it is only fair really.

IcedCrow
25-02-2014, 20:54
Oh absolutely. If 7th ed drops I'll be the first to spare the nickel.

And if it turns out not to be 7th ed I'll post a list of quotes about how stupid I was for not believing the rumor :D

AngryAngel
25-02-2014, 21:17
Save this if you want, I'll personally apologize if it doesn't. No shame in taking a stance and if it proves false, admitting your wrong. I'd expect the same in return. Time will tell, however I hope we won't have a quibble about what constitutes a new edition i.e if they don't change enough for you to acknowledge it as a new edtion, but it is billed as 7th edition, I'd hope we'd agree it is 7th still.

IcedCrow
25-02-2014, 22:32
Honestly I'm not really paying attention to it at the moment. I've got a commission fellblade to paint and then get my knight done for the armies on parade :D if there is a 7th edition, I will adapt and move on to whatever it is they are pushing.

Ozendorph
25-02-2014, 23:06
Honestly I'm not really paying attention to it at the moment.

You have 25 posts in this thread.

IcedCrow
25-02-2014, 23:32
Yes. This thread. I discussed rumors not being gospel.

AngryAngel
26-02-2014, 00:41
You switched to rumors not being gospel after saying there would be no 7th this summer so you must have had some caring, at some point.

IcedCrow
26-02-2014, 03:36
You switched to rumors not being gospel after saying there would be no 7th this summer so you must have had some caring, at some point.

Other than this thread I am not paying attention to it or participating in any other discussions concerning 7th other than to comment on people wishlisting random charges away and things of that nature.

AngryAngel
26-02-2014, 04:25
I see. I'm not keeping up with what the changes may or may not be. I think some changes are easy enough to guess, like inclusion of super heavies, for instance. The rest, well that is up in the air, they're as likely to destroy something that works fine as actually fix something that doesn't.