PDA

View Full Version : Why are you so blah about 7th ed?



Pages : [1] 2

Commissar Merces
20-05-2014, 18:51
There seems to be an epidemic of apathy about the new edition, not only on here, but in my community as well. I don't know if it is just the quick turnover, unhappiness with rumors or the price, but people seems genuinely apathetic about the new changes. Personally, I like some of the rumored changes, but I also dislike some. It's kind of like a stocking at christmas. Some bits good, some bits bad. Despite the give and take nature of a new edition, I can never say I have been uncaring about it the way I am now.

I know that for me, it all comes down to GW making money. It's always about making money with them (and to a certain degree, it should be, they are business after all). I can't help but feel this slight announce when I hear the shop manager boast about how awesome these new changes are going to be in order to forge a narrative and that GW developers are just trying to give players a new way to play. It just seems hollow to me.

Does anyone else feel apathetic towards the new edition or just me?

NealSmith
20-05-2014, 18:56
For me, it's just that 6th edition was not good. It has killed 40K gaming in the group I was playing before.

I'm waiting to see if gaming picks up before I do any more "investing" in it...

Theocracity
20-05-2014, 18:59
I'm pretty excited about it, but I understand the sentiment. I think it comes down to two semi-contradictory things:

1: Knowing it's mostly an evolutionary change

2: Not really knowing how things will change

What I mean by that is that while it seems like the outlines of the game aren't going to change much, the details could change a lot. And since we don't know what those details are yet, there's not much point getting excited about it until we do - and under that mindset, the game feels like more of the current edition with some new bells and whistles and a polishing.

I'm sure that'll change once the edition is out and we start actually getting into the fun details.

Kung Fu Hamster
20-05-2014, 19:18
I'm holding off on any judgment of 7th as a whole until after reading the rulebook and playing a few games. I think a good amount of the apathy you're seeing comes from others doing the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

dangerboyjim
20-05-2014, 19:20
I think for me it's the 2 year update. Just ridiculous.

Also a lot that the rulebook, the codices and everything else produced is made to a much better standard than is needed and the cost of keeping up with the rules is getting out of hand.

Plus most of the rumoured early rule changes, especially around army composition seemed very stupid. Some of the more recent things seem sensible but we'll see.

dangerboyjim
20-05-2014, 19:20
I think for me it's the 2 year update. Just ridiculous.

Also a lot that the rulebook, the codices and everything else produced is made to a much better standard than is needed and the cost of keeping up with the rules is getting out of hand.

Plus most of the rumoured early rule changes, especially around army composition seemed very stupid. Some of the more recent things seem sensible but we'll see.

HelloKitty
20-05-2014, 19:20
Its group speaks non stop about the new edition in its message forums. Its group is largely excited about it. It is waiting to see what the changes are before it commits to any line of thought.

Navar
20-05-2014, 19:30
I am crazy excited about it.

Sexiest_hero
20-05-2014, 19:38
I sat out 6th. Has it only been a two year cycle? I never wanted to be the "I left and you should to guy" nor did I want to be this killed 40k guy. I left quietly and went to fantasy. I thought it was just not for me. Did it not do so well? I havent been keeping up with 7th but Unbound seems to be a big thing. It may scare people already put off by allies.

Sephillion
20-05-2014, 19:39
For starters, it happened way too soon.
I didn’t hate 6th edition. I think it worked fine (though the work done on Codex is a bit disappointing). Many improvements could have been done via FAQs/erratas.
I’m not sure 90$ for a rulebook that lasted not even two years is a good investment. I don’t mind paying for the rules, but being forced to buy yet another book detailing the hobby is squarely robbery.
I don’t like Unbound. I think it creates a lot of unbalance. Yea yeah, I don’t have to play against Unbound armies, but honestly, I’d rather not refuse a game or ask a player to conform to how I play.
I don’t like summoning being seemingly available to everyone. Yea yeah, I know, my Dark Angels don’t have to use it, I just think it’s pointless to add something to the game that is potentially fluff-breaking just so that you can simulate all the possible exceptional circumstances where Zeke suddenly falls to Chaos.
I’m not sure I’ve read many rumours that seem to correct the flaws of 6th edition, that will make me field units that I did not field before or that will help some units perform better. In fact, some of my units are probably going to take a hit, even though I use nothing that is really OP or even very competitive.
I’m worried about my friend’s Nids force; how will Nid powers fare under the new edition, now that there is a new phase? Will they be on par with the powers they, stupidly, have no access to?
I’m worried that GW now will speed up editions. Maybe 6th will be exceptional and 7th will last 4-5 years. Maybe not – that means that in two years, I might have to, yet again, purchase rules.
GW did not communicate beforehand. There were vague rumours that 7th was coming, but it was often considered more of a 6.5 edition. Then, suddenly, one month before release, “hey guys, we have a new edition coming! Rejoice!”.

Killgore
20-05-2014, 19:44
About the two year update.

Computer games get updates every year, Call of Duty, FIFA etc, real popular games that most gamers own. These games cost around the same as the 40K rulebook and do not last half as long. Which is better value for money?

And the whole, gotta buy an army which costs X amount is a poor excuse, you have to do the same with a PC or a games console. I'm still using models that I bought in the 90's, whilst my Megadrive and Dreamcast have sat in a bag in the back of the cupboard for nearly a decade.


More people I know are getting interested in 7th edition, the momentum is growing in my area.

Bloodknight
20-05-2014, 19:47
I think it's too early, the predecessor wasn't so hot and they're still doctoring on a 30 year old system for platoon sized armies that should probably get a full rewrite to accomodate real squad based play with the army sizes of today, or at least a full commitment to the RPG style gaming of the early editions instead (you know, when you could shoot drivers out of vehicles, where the Gunner would then try to take control, where you then shoot the gunner, the vehicle veers off into a random direction, crashes into the objective and blows it up...- that happened to me in a 2nd edition game where a squad of Ratlings fired at an Ork buggy in 2 consecutive turns and hit the crew).
I find the 2nd edition revival that's going on there a bit charming, but tbh I'd rather play the actual 2nd edition then. It was often ridiculous, but it was also fun and while there was a lot of randomness, that led to fun results which the current charts tend not to (they tend to feel tacked on for randomness's sake), the game is more like glorified Yahtzee. If I look at my gaming career, I remember tons of funny situations in games from 2nd ed and hardly anything memorable from 3rd onwards apart from a few incredible dice rolls like a Guard sergeant shooting a Carnifex in both eyes with his laspistol (2 wounds, dead).

So yeah, I'm probably going to pick it up at some point, but at the moment I doubt it will rekindle my love for 40K that kind of faded away somewhere between late 5th edition and early 6th.



Which is better value for money?


Both are a waste of money, really. I never understood why anybody would buy a football game every year unless they really worked on the visuals.

hobojebus
20-05-2014, 19:50
About the two year update.

Computer games get updates every year, Call of Duty, FIFA etc, real popular games that most gamers own. These games cost around the same as the 40K rulebook and do not last half as long. Which is better value for money?

And the whole, gotta buy an army which costs X amount is a poor excuse, you have to do the same with a PC or a games console. I'm still using models that I bought in the 90's, whilst my Megadrive and Dreamcast have sat in a bag in the back of the cupboard for nearly a decade.


More people I know are getting interested in 7th edition, the momentum is growing in my area.

You dont have to buy this years game or you can wait two months and the price will drop, if your playing in a GW store or with friends that want to shift to 7th you must buy the rule book and there is no point waiting because it wont drop in price.

And the models to megadrive comparison does not work, if the console still works then you can still use it just like you can still use your 2nd ed models in 7th for the most part, only thing stopping you playing strider is you.

Sexiest_hero
20-05-2014, 20:07
Also this is less like buying a new game and more like buying a new system to play those games on. I would be upset if the Xbox 2 (Codenamed nextbox) came out just two years after the current gen.

insectum7
20-05-2014, 20:10
Two year turn around was pretty quick, and puts me off a bit.

But I already have an extensive enough collection that I can easily get through an edition change without buying a bunch of new models, so it will likely be the only major gaming expense for a while. The cost of the book is high, but if they're trying to get me to buy more models, an edition change isn't likely to do it.

Every edition comes with a little tuning, and every edition has a couple problems in it. 7th just might put to rest some of my issues with 6th, but it might introduce a couple more. The cycle continues to turn, but so far I've seen nothing to get too excited about.

Unbound and Daemonic disciplines, I don't have much of an opinion until I see how they actually manifest. My Marines have the potential to go traitor, which might be entertaining for a game or two. The bonuses for Battle Forged seem decent enough for me to get by on a traditional list, as I welcome the capacity to score uncontested VP's. People can poo-poo Tac marines all day, they still work for me.

Sephillion
20-05-2014, 20:13
About the two year update.

Computer games get updates every year, Call of Duty, FIFA etc, real popular games that most gamers own. These games cost around the same as the 40K rulebook and do not last half as long. Which is better value for money?

And the whole, gotta buy an army which costs X amount is a poor excuse, you have to do the same with a PC or a games console. I'm still using models that I bought in the 90's, whilst my Megadrive and Dreamcast have sat in a bag in the back of the cupboard for nearly a decade.


More people I know are getting interested in 7th edition, the momentum is growing in my area.

Really poor analogy. You buy a game, it is complete. No more investments needed. In fact, they have little in common, apart from the fact that they’re both games. Someone should call the analogy police…

Compare to other game systems, which have more stable rule sets. Compare the price of the 40K rule set with that of Malifaux, Warmahordes or Infinity or historicals… 40K: We pay more, more often!

It is too soon. Period.

Theocracity
20-05-2014, 20:15
Also this is less like buying a new game and more like buying a new system to play those games on. I would be upset if the Xbox 2 (Codenamed nextbox) came out just two years after the current gen.

Amusingly, this is sort of backwards. In this metaphor, if the Xbox platform is equivalent to the 40k rules platform, you'll note that the 40k rulebook is under a hundred dollars and the Xbox is several hundred dollars. Similarly, a game for the Xbox is less than a hundred dollars, while an army for 40k comes to several hundred.

So if you were forced to buy a new army every two years, it'd be like buying a new Xbox. Instead, the 40k rulebook is closer to the price point of a game - which are bought much more frequently.

gwarsh41
20-05-2014, 20:16
This is the first edition change where I have actively been playing. I started when 5th came out, quit, then started again with 6th, and held strong. I don't like the thought of spending so much on the rulebook. Aside from the initial cost and not having a cool starter box right out of the gate, I am freaking

ihavetoomuchminis
20-05-2014, 20:36
For me it's that 6th made me lose all the interest in playing....and 7th seems to be in the same road, but even worse. I love most of GW models and i'll keep buying some (Orks soon), but just because i like to paint armies visually appealing. Not interested in the game....not anymore.

I hope this doesn't disturb tiger g the inquisitor.

underscore
20-05-2014, 20:41
Well this thread just got a bit creepy.

Personally I'm blah because 1) I don't think that the GW designers are going to make the kind of game that I want 40k to be. Too much bloat for me in all aspects.

2) Unbound and Daemonology taking a bit of a dump on the fluff.

Saunders
20-05-2014, 20:44
I'm very excited.

Lanacane
20-05-2014, 20:45
About the two year update.

Computer games get updates every year, Call of Duty, FIFA etc, real popular games that most gamers own. These games cost around the same as the 40K rulebook and do not last half as long. Which is better value for money?



But you dont have to pay for a new ruleset to play your games every two years either.

Say i wanted to play MW2, all i have to do is boot up my 360, do a free update install and away i go.

I wont be charged 50 to play the game.

on topic:

I am not really peeved that there is a new edition so early.. i have been getting burned out on the hobby as of late, with 100% of the stuff i bought this year unfinished and at least 60% of last 3years not done. i took a break from the hobby early 4th and came back late 5th..

I feel like all the new stuff is a midlife crisis for GW, so I'll wait until the company has finished balding and might just sit out 7th.

I mean the idea of facing Unbound lists of psykers summoning greater daemons and unkillable MC spam.. i just feel meh.

Voss
20-05-2014, 20:52
Unenthusiastic because:

a) reported changes so far are minimal, except for the returned psychic phase, which is a hot mess of fluff murder and pure mechanical failure (the comprehension of probability is absurdly low- ML bonus to dispel direct powers shuts them down completely against units with psykers, and the lack of the bonus against any indirect powers means dispelling higher warp charge powers is essentially like winning the lottery). Oh and the crazy daemon sales boost. Exponential Growth Daemon lists (straight or as allies) are going to be an absurdly common thing.
b) The full push to The Hobby rather than the game. Insane marketing gibberish.
c) I see zero indication that they are applying anything they learned to actually fix the weak areas of 6th edition.
d) More ways to throw random buckets of crap on the table. Less 40k and more mini-Apocalypse, which was invariably a horrible experience.
e) The ever onward push from flyers to super heavies and formations and so on (while inviting back shades of RT and 2nd) tells me they should have brought back epic and gone back to a skirmish game for 40k proper. Throwing it all together in one system is probably the worst idea ever.
f) I have no idea what the point of the edition is. Why here, why now? Why so soon? 2nd, 3rd and 6th were legitimate efforts to change the system and improve the game, even if 4th and 5th seemed like minor updates to stay on the marketing cycle. This is just... off. A reprint of 6th with last years supplements and Dark Millennium built in. Huzzah.

So far, I haven't seen a single thing to be positive about.

Gorsameth
20-05-2014, 20:53
The most plain answer is that we have seen this dance to many times already. To many editions that did not improve things (enough). To many changes for change sake that turned out bad.
There is no good will left in the 40k community after it has been pissed on by GW for years and years and without good will there is no hype for there latest thing.

To be more precise there is not enough word of fixes to the problems of 6e edition and yet sweeping changes were made for no other reason then to have change.
-The psychic phase when all the mechanic needed was a way to stop Blessings (like the old psychic hood)
-No assaults from vehicles still leaves combat armies dead
-Codex balance is a huge problem that a new edition will not fix
-Unbound
Just to name a few.

Add in this cycle being half the length of any previous one and not every codex has had an update yet again despite the new speed having allowed it on a normal schedule.

I have no interest in a new edition when it doesn't solve the problems of the old one that is already making me reconsider playing the game.

nosebiter
20-05-2014, 21:01
There seems to be an epidemic of apathy about the new edition, not only on here, but in my community as well. I don't know if it is just the quick turnover, unhappiness with rumors or the price, but people seems genuinely apathetic about the new changes. Personally, I like some of the rumored changes, but I also dislike some. It's kind of like a stocking at christmas. Some bits good, some bits bad. Despite the give and take nature of a new edition, I can never say I have been uncaring about it the way I am now.

I know that for me, it all comes down to GW making money. It's always about making money with them (and to a certain degree, it should be, they are business after all). I can't help but feel this slight announce when I hear the shop manager boast about how awesome these new changes are going to be in order to forge a narrative and that GW developers are just trying to give players a new way to play. It just seems hollow to me.

Does anyone else feel apathetic towards the new edition or just me?

I am not blah about it.

I am excited about it. It offers more options, and seem to adress some of the issues i had with 6th. I cant wait to get stuck in.

The missions with the tactical cards seem like loads of fun, and i am looking forward to the psychic phase.

And being blah about a set of rules that no oneof us have read or tried yet, is just a waste of energi.

Ruination Drinker
20-05-2014, 21:03
My reason?

Sixth ed. was blah, verging on blech. Seventh promises to greater magnitude of blech. Several other miniature games are out that are better and have thriving communities and more importantly, don't have a $1000 buy in.

Sephillion
20-05-2014, 21:05
To be more precise there is not enough word of fixes to the problems of 6e edition and yet sweeping changes were made for no other reason then to have change.


Spot on. Thanks for putting into words my overall impression.

Ssilmath
20-05-2014, 21:07
I am not blah about it.

I am excited about it. It offers more options, and seem to adress some of the issues i had with 6th. I cant wait to get stuck in.

The missions with the tactical cards seem like loads of fun, and i am looking forward to the psychic phase.

And being blah about a set of rules that no oneof us have read or tried yet, is just a waste of energi.

Now I know that I'm still asleep, because I'm 100% in accord with nosebiter.

Voss
20-05-2014, 21:08
Oh. Right. I forgot about the random objectives.
The incomprehensible silliness of a military force performing a random task generator.
"Commander! Shoot down those planes!"
"They haven't got any."
"What?"
"No planes, sir"
"Oh. Uh. Kill the Big Bug then"
"They haven't got any of those either."
"Well. Huh. Grab those crates then."
"I'd rather take their command center, but.... Whatever. I don't want to know."

Commissar Merces
20-05-2014, 21:14
I am not blah about it.

I am excited about it. It offers more options, and seem to adress some of the issues i had with 6th. I cant wait to get stuck in.

The missions with the tactical cards seem like loads of fun, and i am looking forward to the psychic phase.

And being blah about a set of rules that no oneof us have read or tried yet, is just a waste of energi.

Understanding of course that blah and apathy mean there is no energy going either way right? As I have said, I like some things being rumored, dislike others. Apathy is lack of caring or interest, not at all negative or positive. Another word I would maybe use is acceptance.

Therefore, I am not spending energy positively or negatively, just in limbo.

Gorsameth
20-05-2014, 21:15
Oh. Right. I forgot about the random objectives.
The incomprehensible silliness of a military force performing a random task generator.
"Commander! Shoot down those planes!"
"They haven't got any."
"What?"
"No planes, sir"
"Oh. Uh. Kill the Big Bug then"
"They haven't got any of those either."
"Well. Huh. Grab those crates then."
"I'd rather take their command center, but.... Whatever. I don't want to know."

And ofc the classic "Firewarrior, go defeat an enemy sergeant in a challenge!"

nosebiter
20-05-2014, 21:17
Oh. Right. I forgot about the random objectives.
The incomprehensible silliness of a military force performing a random task generator.
"Commander! Shoot down those planes!"
"They haven't got any."
"What?"
"No planes, sir"
"Oh. Uh. Kill the Big Bug then"
"They haven't got any of those either."
"Well. Huh. Grab those crates then."
"I'd rather take their command center, but.... Whatever. I don't want to know."

You have failed anyways if you thing that tabletob science fiction wargaming in the 40k universe in ANY way makes logical sense in a real life perspective.

Voss
20-05-2014, 21:23
You have failed anyways if you thing that tabletob science fiction wargaming in the 40k universe in ANY way makes logical sense in a real life perspective.
Never said I did: there are lots of games that effectively model objectives. But from a _game_ perspective, this random number generator crap is pure garbage. A symptom of lazy and incoherent design, with once again, an inability to understand how dice mechanics actually function.

You do realize that if one player randomly gets easily achievable objectives and the other gets randomly gets hard objectives (or ones that aren't even achievable), the game is broken on first principles, right?

Ssilmath
20-05-2014, 21:26
I dunno, maybe it's a failure on the part of certain people to understand how the game is intended to actually function.

Voss
20-05-2014, 21:27
I dunno, maybe it's a failure on the part of certain people to understand how the game is intended to actually function.

Oh, please, I do so want to be shown the True Way. I beg you to enlighten me on how the game is intended to function.

Ssilmath
20-05-2014, 21:29
Oh, please, I do so want to be shown the True Way. I beg you to enlighten me on how the game is intended to function.

Been doing that for months, and get mocked, abused and/or ignored for my troubles. Go look in past threads.

Voss
20-05-2014, 21:31
Been doing that for months, and get mocked, abused and/or ignored for my troubles. Go look in past threads.

Ah, same old, same old, then. Good to know.

Ssilmath
20-05-2014, 21:32
Ah, same old, same old, then. Good to know.

Well, one of us is having fun with the game, and the other isn't. Take that how you will.

Gorsameth
20-05-2014, 21:33
Oh, please, I do so want to be shown the True Way. I beg you to enlighten me on how the game is intended to function.

Fine ill bite.

Random objectives that are drawn whenever the previous once is completed have a giant drawback. They always favor the winning player.
It is more likely for the player who is winning at the time to complete these objectives (he has more units/is in better positions) and because they keep refreshing he is likely to score more and more objectives compared to his losing opponent.

For a fun game there has to be comeback potential. Currently that comes from last turn denies and the fact that objectives only really matter in the last turn. However this system lets someone get ahead and keep getting further ahead throughout the game.

tiger g
20-05-2014, 21:34
Oh. Right. I forgot about the random objectives.
The incomprehensible silliness of a military force performing a random task generator.
"Commander! Shoot down those planes!"
"They haven't got any."
"What?"
"No planes, sir"
"Oh. Uh. Kill the Big Bug then"
"They haven't got any of those either."
"Well. Huh. Grab those crates then."
"I'd rather take their command center, but.... Whatever. I don't want to know."

Not sure why it is incomprehensible. How many stories/movies/battles where the commander gets orders that make no sense. As you state it is a military force and the Imperium tends to makes lots of mistakes.

From a tactical standpoint you still have to decide which card to discard (and therefore guess if there are reserves and why type) because tossing the wrong card could cost you in future turns.

Or you takes a few minutes (even thought many on this forum thing it takes way to long to talk to your opponent) and decide what cards should not be in the deck for this game. (done all of the time in card games and other games. That is why there are so many variants of card games.).

Voss
20-05-2014, 21:35
Well, one of us is having fun with the game, and the other isn't. Take that how you will.

I could list a huge number of horrible things that other people have 'fun' with, from watching paint dry to genocide. I'll take it as the least convincing argument ever.

salamandercaptain
20-05-2014, 21:35
Personally, I started playing ini 1st Ed Rt days, and prior to 6th Ed had probably mostly played 2nd ed.

I've really enjoyed 6th ed, when it came out i thought it was almost the mature ruleset- flyers were obviously version 1.0 but other than that the whole system worked well and i have to say I've enjoyed as a result played more 6th ed games than anything else (and given that I now have a job and are no longer 15-16 as I was when playing 2nd ed) that's saying a lot.

PS Ignore sig at bottom, since having triplets stuff like that doesn't get updated

leopard
20-05-2014, 21:53
Random missions are something I like, represents the level of 'wtf?' and confusion, you have your force and a range of 'helpful suggestions' from higher commanders to cope with. Plus these are hidden from the enemy (I assume, until you play the card to claim the points), so a chance for feints and some mind games.

I'm looking forward to it, Have never viewed 40k as a serious game, it isn't and I doubt it will ever be, what it is though is an enjoyable way of spending an evening after work that provides a bit of spectacle without requiring as much thinking as WHFB or other games.

If I want something that makes slightly more sense I have Flames of War, various historical games etc, If I want something closer to chess will run Star Fleet Battles and try to take down a starbase with a minefield (and emerge weeks later wondering what month it is). 40k is something to just play with mad models in a more relaxed atmosphere.

sturguard
20-05-2014, 21:54
I could list a huge number of horrible things that other people have 'fun' with, from watching paint dry to genocide. I'll take it as the least convincing argument ever.

Voss, for some reason this made me laugh- from the contents of this thread that is an amazing feat.

As far as 7th goes, I think Gorsameth did a fantastic job compiling a list of reasons 7th seems unappealing at the moment even though I did order the rulebook.

In my opinion, as was stated, they didn't address some of the issues that really needed fixing, which I would have gladly paid money for them to do. Instead what they did change seems to be driven by financial gains over gameplay. There wasnt a whole lot wrong with the current psychic phase, and even if you wanted to fix the mechanics why change the spell decks- this to me just screams of, "hey we can make this quick change to the system, that really takes no playtest or work and we can sell new psychic decks to everyone". What if people are using armies with no psychics? Obviously this means their games have changed little. The changing objectives I think will once again further randomize and imbalance the game, winning isn't the most important thing, but some of us do actually like to be able to compete and have a chance to pull out a victory on any given game. Really for me it comes down to them focusing on things that weren't really broken to begin with, but have the likelihood of producing the most profit, over really trying to improve game play.

Theocracity
20-05-2014, 22:04
I could list a huge number of horrible things that other people have 'fun' with, from watching paint dry to genocide. I'll take it as the least convincing argument ever.

From your sour posting style, it seems like your version of fun is biting into lemons and attempting to make people feel bad for enjoying themselves differently than you.

leopard
20-05-2014, 22:11
Well thats a question for the kids over the weekend, "so what are we doing today? watching paint dry or genocide?", probably followed by a moan about how we did genocide last weekend and can we do something different this time?

Wonder if forcing people to watch paint drying could be considered a form of genocide? you know if done to extreme, perhaps adding a 'z' to it ala 'genocidez' or something?

Competitive paint drying... could be a hit, and perhaps easier to do year after year than competitive genocide, after all give it a few years and whos left to clean up the mess?

Tyches Lament
20-05-2014, 22:15
More random mechanics, to remove the burden of balance from the design team.
Rumored psychic changes, and the supposed need for a phase of it's own.
Unbound lists.

That's about it really.

AngryAngel
20-05-2014, 22:17
I dunno, maybe it's a failure on the part of certain people to understand how the game is intended to actually function.

So all that is random and nonsense, is how the game should be played. The objectives need not make a lick of sense, yet random pointless objectives are supported by historical precedent and completely logical. I love the warhammer double speak.

Gungo
20-05-2014, 22:19
People are apathetic because to little is known to accurately make an assumption rules changes. Further fueled by negative pessimistic commentators who don't have the facts about the new edition and down talk Everything as some overarching conspiracy based upon gw only wanting to milk money from players.

for instance mission cards given the fact tournaments use their own missions, and friendly games can chose their own missions. There is no problem. What are people doing going into dark Allies having random games with strangers. Mission cards are cool because you can have dozens of ways to use them.

You can preselect mission cards for the table. The requirements on those cards can persist the entire game.
You can preselect mission cards for the table. You discard those cards once either player meets those conditions.
You can preselect the same mission cards for each player. Each player discards those cards once they meet the condition.
All of the above options remove the randomness of objective cards and allows for more victory point conditions during a game.


You can randomly select 6 mission cards for each player. Each player selects 3 cards to keep for the game to complete. Do not show the other player your mission. You discard the mission card once the condition is met.
You can randomly select 6 mission cards for each player. Each player selects 3 cards to keep for the game to complete. Each player can see your mission. You discard the mission card once the condition is met.
You can randomly select 6 mission cards for each player. Each player selects 3 cards to keep for the game to complete. Do not show the other player your mission. The mission card persists persists throughout the game.
You can randomly select 6 mission cards for each player. Each player selects 3 cards to keep for the game to complete. Each player can see your mission. The mission card persists throughout the game.


These setups limits randomness and useless cards draws and allows for more vicotry points.


I am sure there are several more ways to use objective cards. Heck you can even create your own objective cards, such as slay the unit that slayed your warlord or Slay the unit that got first blood.


Personally i like the idea of randomly selecting 6 objective cards and keeping 3 and Do not show the other player your mission and you discard the mission once the condition is met. It sounds extremely fun and limits the useless cards and has me trying to figure out what my opponents armies missions are in the middle of the battle without going overboard w victory points. Then again we still don't fully know how everything works.

Gorsameth
20-05-2014, 22:19
So all that is random and nonsense, is how the game should be played. The objectives need not make a lick of sense, yet challenges are supported by historical precedent and completely logical. I love the warhammer double speak.

But its Cinematic man!

Vaktathi
20-05-2014, 22:19
There seems to be an epidemic of apathy about the new edition, not only on here, but in my community as well. I don't know if it is just the quick turnover, unhappiness with rumors or the price, but people seems genuinely apathetic about the new changes. Personally, I like some of the rumored changes, but I also dislike some. It's kind of like a stocking at christmas. Some bits good, some bits bad. Despite the give and take nature of a new edition, I can never say I have been uncaring about it the way I am now.

I know that for me, it all comes down to GW making money. It's always about making money with them (and to a certain degree, it should be, they are business after all). I can't help but feel this slight announce when I hear the shop manager boast about how awesome these new changes are going to be in order to forge a narrative and that GW developers are just trying to give players a new way to play. It just seems hollow to me.

Does anyone else feel apathetic towards the new edition or just me?For me personally, it's a combination of things. First and foremost, it doesn't feel like they're really fixing most of the problems with 6th (at least from the rumors we've seen), they're just making change for changes sake, throwing everything and the kitchen sink in without any rhyme or reason to do so. Second, it hasn't been very long since 6E came out, if it were a genuine fix for 6E's issues, I'd welcome it, but a lame rehash so soon just doesn't feel necessary. Third, taking points two and three, it feels like a desperate cash grab from a company that has been seeing declining sales volume for some time.

Overall it feels like there's someone at GW saying "uh, make it as easy as possible for people to use anything and everything we sell, that'll help sales!" without really understanding their own product and playerbase. Much as the digital releases and increased pace of releases were, it's like they got *part* of the message the customer base was sending them, but only a part of it.

Ssilmath
20-05-2014, 22:20
So all that is random and nonsense, is how the game should be played. The objectives need not make a lick of sense, yet challenges are supported by historical precedent and completely logical. I love the warhammer double speak.

How do the objectives not make a lick of sense? You've never been in the middle of an important task and had one of your superiors suddenly task you with something completely different? Or you've never completed a task and immediately get sent on another one?

Or are we talking about Tau drawing a challenge card? Oh darn, if only you could discard it and get another one that makes more sense for your army.

Lanacane
20-05-2014, 22:20
I could list a huge number of horrible things that other people have 'fun' with, from watching paint dry to genocide. I'll take it as the least convincing argument ever.

You dont paint your models and take enjoyment from a finished product?

As that is the literal example of having fun watching paint dry.

Gorsameth
20-05-2014, 22:21
People are apathetic because to little is known to accurately make an assumption rules changes. Further fueled by negative pessimistic commentators who don't have the facts and down talk Everything.

for instance mission cards given the fact tournaments use their own missions, and friendly games can chose their own missions. There is no problem. What are people doing going into dark Allies having random games with strangers. Mission cards are cool because you can have dozens of ways to use them.

You can preselect mission cards for the table. The requirements on those cards can persist the entire game.
You can preselect mission cards for the table. You discard those cards once either player meets those conditions.
You can preselect the same mission cards for each player. Each player discards those cards once they meet the condition.
All of the above options remove the randomness of objective cards and allows for more victory point conditions during a game.


You can randomly select 6 mission cards for each player. Each player selects 3 cards to keep for the game to complete. Do not show the other player your mission. You discard the mission card once the condition is met.
You can randomly select 6 mission cards for each player. Each player selects 3 cards to keep for the game to complete. Each player can see your mission. You discard the mission card once the condition is met.
You can randomly select 6 mission cards for each player. Each player selects 3 cards to keep for the game to complete. Do not show the other player your mission. The mission card persists persists throughout the game.
You can randomly select 6 mission cards for each player. Each player selects 3 cards to keep for the game to complete. Each player can see your mission. The mission card persists throughout the game.


These setups limits randomness and useless cards draws and allows for more vicotry points.


I am sure there are several more ways to use objective cards. Heck you can even create your own objective cards, such as slay the unit that slayed your warlord or Slay the unit that got first blood.


Personally i like the idea of randomly selecting 6 objective cards and keeping 3 and Do not show the other player your mission and you discard the mission once the condition is met. It sounds extremely fun and limits the useless cards and has me trying to figure out what my opponents armies missions are in the middle of the battle without going overboard w victory points. Then again we still don't fully know how everything works.
The random missions isn't the problem, well it is a problem and prevents/limits balance but that aside, the main issue is that you draw new ones when you complete your mission. That prevents comebacks and lets a winner win more which is never fun.

duffybear1988
20-05-2014, 22:33
My club mates have this fun side game where they take the most fluff destroying broken combos and then play me one after the other and bet on when I'm going to flip out and start passive aggressively destroying plastic bottles and stuff. Appatently it's fun.

The worst thing about 7th will likely be the worst thing from 6th - allies. Nothing has done more to ruin 40k in my opinion. Having played against broken armies with allies every week since 6th ed appeared, I cannot believe I was such a massive supporter of allies when we first heard about the 6th edition rules. Removing allies from battle forged lists would have gone a long way to solving many of the problems. Without allies I think I could even swallow my dignity/pride/self respect and go along with the cinematic vibe...

Bloodknight
20-05-2014, 22:57
I beg you to enlighten me on how the game is intended to function.

It most likely isn't - and hasn't been for most of its life cycle. It says it's a strategy game on the box, but really isn't, at least not a good one (that part flew out of the window when arcs of vision were removed with 3rd edition, since outmaneuvering makes hardly any difference when practically every unit can act to full capacity in a 360 arc). It's a way to shove miniatures around, make pewpew noises and one guy can claim he won in the end, for whatever reason after rolling tons of unnecessary dice rolls. *
I just can't collect enough energy for that stuff anymore, it's not intellectually stimulating enough as a wargame/conflict simulation. It's half wargame, half RPG, but does not have the good parts of either; for a good wargame it lacks elegance, for a good RPG feeling it's too shallow. There's always that hope that it gets better (turning into either a better RPG or a better wargame), but apart from becoming more beautiful to look at while lamer to play, there's not much happening from edition to edition.

If I had to start playing 40K again from scratch today (I've got about 30,000 points of stuff for 40K, IG, Dark Eldar and 2 CSM armies), I'd probably decline politely and spend my money on something else.

* tbh, of the current rulesets they sell, LotR is the best of the bunch. Never got into it because the miniatures are not as good as the rest of GW's offerings, but it reads very nicely and the games I watched looked good as well. Epic was great, too.

ihavetoomuchminis
20-05-2014, 22:58
Well....i guess some people finds fun in playing a game played by no-one else.

Commissar Merces
20-05-2014, 23:34
Pretty much every 7th edition thread has dissolved into personal attacks. Sad really.

Look, all I am saying is that myself and many other hobbyists are extremely apathetic about this release. I was just wondering why that was or if ppl were actually excited about it.

Scammel
20-05-2014, 23:37
For me personally, it's a combination of things. First and foremost, it doesn't feel like they're really fixing most of the problems with 6th (at least from the rumors we've seen), they're just making change for changes sake, throwing everything and the kitchen sink in without any rhyme or reason to do so. Second, it hasn't been very long since 6E came out, if it were a genuine fix for 6E's issues, I'd welcome it, but a lame rehash so soon just doesn't feel necessary. Third, taking points two and three, it feels like a desperate cash grab from a company that has been seeing declining sales volume for some time.

Overall it feels like there's someone at GW saying "uh, make it as easy as possible for people to use anything and everything we sell, that'll help sales!" without really understanding their own product and playerbase. Much as the digital releases and increased pace of releases were, it's like they got *part* of the message the customer base was sending them, but only a part of it.

Word-for-word my thought process. I'd be all over this like a bad rash if it reversed the game from the current state of dross even if it came out one year after 6th, that's how much I want to play a good 40k game. This is 6.5 and therefore likely to see me sit out 40k for at least 2 years.

Kung Fu Hamster
20-05-2014, 23:47
Pretty much every 7th edition thread has dissolved into personal attacks. Sad really.

Look, all I am saying is that myself and many other hobbyists are extremely apathetic about this release. I was just wondering why that was or if ppl were actually excited about it.

There's really very little solid information to go on; most of the "facts" I see bandied about in these threads are rumors from other sites. Without anything of actual value to gripe about, people are taking their frustrations out on each other.

Give it a few more days. Once people start getting their new rulebooks and pour over it, the real fun will start. :)

Sephillion
21-05-2014, 00:00
People are apathetic because to little is known to accurately make an assumption rules changes. Further fueled by negative pessimistic commentators who don't have the facts about the new edition and down talk Everything as some overarching conspiracy based upon gw only wanting to milk money from players.


The fact that they release an edition 2 years after the last makes it hard to see it as anything but GW trying to milk us for all our worth.

But otherwise I agree with you, the random objectives may (depending on how they are implemented) be actually tons of fun. It's the only part of the rumoured edition that I'm really excited about.

Lanacane
21-05-2014, 00:58
Not sure why your posts annoy me but every time I see your avatar pop up my heads starts hurting.

You deserve a game that makes you happy to play and maybe it is 40k but not if you are looking for something competitive. (although 40k is competitive and will still be but need to think differently than mathhammer).

The way your buddies talk about you, you are a great guy just need to ease up a little and enjoy life as a game should not continuously get you depressed.

193582


​words for words god

hobojebus
21-05-2014, 01:06
The fact that they release an edition 2 years after the last makes it hard to see it as anything but GW trying to milk us for all our worth.

But otherwise I agree with you, the random objectives may (depending on how they are implemented) be actually tons of fun. It's the only part of the rumoured edition that I'm really excited about.

Imagine the joy as a necron player gets the cast a psychic power card, oh what fun.

RanaldLoec
21-05-2014, 01:08
Posted I'm error

Amnar
21-05-2014, 02:17
I'm blah about 7th because 40k is now an awful ruleset. 7th won't fix it. It needs to be overhauled from the bottom up. The kicker is that I know GW can produce good rules, as proved by epic Armageddon, warmaster, and 2nd edition 40k.

40k shouldn't be a company level wargame. It's absurd that I can have as many individual 28mm guys as 15mm guys in flames of war on the same sized table.

Most 40k game winners can be predicted at the end of the deployment phase. The amount of options for actions each player has is really quite limited. My chaos will likely sit in eternal carrying case limbo until 40k gets properly revamped (if ever) or if anyone wants to play second edition :)

Ventus
21-05-2014, 02:24
I am not excited about the 7th edition release for many of the reasons mentioned previously. Sure we don't know if 7th will be worse, the same as or better than 6th yet, but we have gone through this so many times there is no reason too expect much from GW. As a tyranid player I was burned by the crappy 5th ed nid dex, the very late and then poor errata that did more damage than good, then 6th edition's many obvious broken and unbalanced rules the day of release, the lack of a proper errata to fix messed up dexes with many poor units or rules such as nids and the crappy/bland/lazy 6th ed nid dex that didn't put much effort into trying to make most of the units decent choices. Now I hope 7th edition is far better than 6th with better balance to make a better game to be accompanied with errata seriously correcting the mess of so many dexes but after years and years of the poor quality rules and lack of concern for their product, why would I expect different this time?

The rumours and bits of info that have come out, while some things seem good and interesting, will depend on the entire ruleset. As GW so often poorly implements ideas even when they have potential there really isn't a reason to be positive. It will just be a matter of waiting for the release to see what actually comes out and to then decide if it is worth continuing with this game and buying the BRB.

Just Tony
21-05-2014, 02:54
I'm blah about 7th because 40k is now an awful ruleset. 7th won't fix it. It needs to be overhauled from the bottom up. The kicker is that I know GW can produce good rules, as proved by epic Armageddon, warmaster, and 2nd edition 40k.

40k shouldn't be a company level wargame. It's absurd that I can have as many individual 28mm guys as 15mm guys in flames of war on the same sized table.

Most 40k game winners can be predicted at the end of the deployment phase. The amount of options for actions each player has is really quite limited. My chaos will likely sit in eternal carrying case limbo until 40k gets properly revamped (if ever) or if anyone wants to play second edition :)

I was on board until you used 2nd Ed as your benchmark. My problem with/apathy towards everything SINCE 6th is that they are trying to shove 2nd Ed up 3rd ed's ass essentially, and take what is universally considered to be the antithesis of balance and fair gaming and burst it from a more rigid game's chest. THAT is what I don't like. Just think, in another two more years we'll have that sexy librarian with displacer field bouncing across the fild again while artillery batteries fire over blind and smoke grenade fields. I can't *********** wait...

Wolf Lord Balrog
21-05-2014, 02:56
People are apathetic because to little is known to accurately make an assumption rules changes. Further fueled by negative pessimistic commentators who don't have the facts about the new edition and down talk Everything as some overarching conspiracy based upon gw only wanting to milk money from players.

for instance mission cards given the fact tournaments use their own missions, and friendly games can chose their own missions. There is no problem. What are people doing going into dark Allies having random games with strangers. Mission cards are cool because you can have dozens of ways to use them.

You can preselect mission cards for the table. The requirements on those cards can persist the entire game.
You can preselect mission cards for the table. You discard those cards once either player meets those conditions.
You can preselect the same mission cards for each player. Each player discards those cards once they meet the condition.
All of the above options remove the randomness of objective cards and allows for more victory point conditions during a game.


You can randomly select 6 mission cards for each player. Each player selects 3 cards to keep for the game to complete. Do not show the other player your mission. You discard the mission card once the condition is met.
You can randomly select 6 mission cards for each player. Each player selects 3 cards to keep for the game to complete. Each player can see your mission. You discard the mission card once the condition is met.
You can randomly select 6 mission cards for each player. Each player selects 3 cards to keep for the game to complete. Do not show the other player your mission. The mission card persists persists throughout the game.
You can randomly select 6 mission cards for each player. Each player selects 3 cards to keep for the game to complete. Each player can see your mission. The mission card persists throughout the game.


These setups limits randomness and useless cards draws and allows for more vicotry points.


I am sure there are several more ways to use objective cards. Heck you can even create your own objective cards, such as slay the unit that slayed your warlord or Slay the unit that got first blood.


Personally i like the idea of randomly selecting 6 objective cards and keeping 3 and Do not show the other player your mission and you discard the mission once the condition is met. It sounds extremely fun and limits the useless cards and has me trying to figure out what my opponents armies missions are in the middle of the battle without going overboard w victory points. Then again we still don't fully know how everything works.

See all that work you just went to, to try and make random objective cards into something fun and useful in a game? It shouldn't have been necessary. The people that want you to pay $85 US for a rulebook should have done that for you.

Commissar Merces
21-05-2014, 03:05
193582


​words for words god

New avatar

Fallencarcass
21-05-2014, 03:06
In two years I haven't played enough 6th edition to feel like buying a new rulebook would be anything other than being prodded forward at this point. I plan to play 6th until the people around me switch because its a better rule set or until I get bored of 6th.

Part of me really wants to wait until next year to even consider buying it just so I can vote with my dollar that 2 year rule cycles are too fast. I'd prefer 4 or more, but 3 would work if there's actually something worth buying in the new rule set.

Commissar Merces
21-05-2014, 03:13
Maybe but if you click on your profile and read all of your recent and not so recent posts you might see where I am coming from. Funny thing is some of your buddies write me to tell me what a good guy you are, how your posts in the tactical area are great, but they wish you would stick to posting in the tactical area. These are they only in forum messages I get. So maybe think about your posts in general are they doing more harm than good. If you gave some good ideas instead of using words like stupid, money grab, idiotic your posts would give me a reason to think about what you are trying to say.

Not sure why your posts annoy me but every time I see your avatar pop up my heads starts hurting.

You deserve a game that makes you happy to play and maybe it is 40k but not if you are looking for something competitive. (although 40k is competitive and will still be but need to think differently than mathhammer).

The way your buddies talk about you, you are a great guy just need to ease up a little and enjoy life as a game should not continuously get you depressed.

Sent you a PM. Hope you get a chance to respond.

Back on topic: Glad to know I am not the only one or that my community isn't the only one experiencing 40k apathy.

Voss
21-05-2014, 03:26
How do the objectives not make a lick of sense? You've never been in the middle of an important task and had one of your superiors suddenly task you with something completely different? Or you've never completed a task and immediately get sent on another one?


And where you work, the task is random and not in keeping with company's overall objectives? Really? No plan, strategic assets, agreement, fields of responsibility, areas of expertise or anything of the kind? The local landscapers take up computer hacking, and the programmers take up plumbing at the drop of a hat? No? Surprise, your comparison is invalid.


You dont paint your models and take enjoyment from a finished product?

As that is the literal example of having fun watching paint dry.

No it isn't. It isn't even close. I know of zero people who play the game while the paint on the models is still wet. 'Watching paint dry' would involve sitting at your painting table and staring at the models until the paint is entirely dry. The fun starts after they're painted, dry, usually sealed, and you find someone else to actually have a game with. I know (and am) one of many people that enjoys the process of painting, but watching the paint dry falls into neither painting nor gaming.

Ssilmath
21-05-2014, 03:37
And where you work, the task is random and not in keeping with company's overall objectives? Really? No plan, strategic assets, agreement, fields of responsibility, areas of expertise or anything of the kind? The local landscapers take up computer hacking, and the programmers take up plumbing at the drop of a hat? No? Surprise, your comparison is invalid.

How that compares with the new objectives system, I have no idea. But I have gone from one task to a completely unrelated one at the drop of a hat. I've gone from inputting data into spreadsheets to fixing light fixtures to doing disciplinary paperwork to acting as a courier all in one day. Hazards of being an NCO (In the past).

You, the player, can assign the tasks your units have. Obviously, you would assign to them the objectives that best suit their tasks. The cards you draw are the tasks your superiors have assigned, or that may help with the current battlefield situation. If you think that your superiors are out of their minds (Like Tau drawing one that has you issue challenges), you discard and draw a new one. There's nothing at all unintuitive, unrealistic or even unbalanced about it.

Wolf Lord Balrog
21-05-2014, 03:47
How that compares with the new objectives system, I have no idea. But I have gone from one task to a completely unrelated one at the drop of a hat. I've gone from inputting data into spreadsheets to fixing light fixtures to doing disciplinary paperwork to acting as a courier all in one day. Hazards of being an NCO (In the past).

You, the player, can assign the tasks your units have. Obviously, you would assign to them the objectives that best suit their tasks. The cards you draw are the tasks your superiors have assigned, or that may help with the current battlefield situation. If you think that your superiors are out of their minds (Like Tau drawing one that has you issue challenges), you discard and draw a new one. There's nothing at all unintuitive, unrealistic or even unbalanced about it.

What happens when your opponent draws an easily-achieved objective for his force, and you draw a difficult one? He completes his objective, gets the point(s), then draws another objective. You either try to complete your objective and likely fail, or you discard the objective card for another one at the end of your turn. Either way, your opponent got a point and you didn't, simply because of a random card draw. He now has an advantage that he gained completely randomly that you have to overcome somehow. How is that fun, with all the other random stuff the game already includes?

Voss
21-05-2014, 03:48
How that compares with the new objectives system, I have no idea. But I have gone from one task to a completely unrelated one at the drop of a hat.
To you, the individual trooper. Not the organization (army), in the person of the commander.


There's nothing at all unintuitive, unrealistic or even unbalanced about it.
And, wrong, wrong, wrong.
If there are no objectives of <type> on the battlefield, getting an objective card to kill capture <type> makes zero sense. If your force is good at X and bad at Y (say an artillery battery versus a close assault force, or the opposite) getting tasks suited for one battle group but not the other, makes zero sense.

Simply giving up (discarding) an objective and gaining a new one is both unintuitive and unrealistic. 'Commander, you must capture Echo Beach.' 'Eh, don't feel like it. Gimme another!' 'What? Men, have the Commander shot.'

Unbalanced, however, wow, the biggest issue of all and you don't even see it.
Player 1 gets capture objective 1 (which is in his deployment zone) and objective 2 (which is 12" out, in a nice ruin) and to kill a vehicle (of which there are 5 light transports).
Player 2 gets kill a flyer (which there are none), capture objective 1 (which is in his opponent's deployment zone), and objective 5 which is in the empty space in the middle of the board.
Not unbalanced? Sure, this kind of result won't come up every game, but it and all the various random permutations of it can, and have the potential to come up every single game.

Ssilmath
21-05-2014, 03:51
What happens when your opponent draws an easily-achieved objective for his force, and you draw a difficult one? He completes his objective, gets the point(s), then draws another objective. You either try to complete your objective and likely fail, or you discard the objective card for another one at the end of your turn. Either way, your opponent got a point and you didn't, simply because of a random card draw. He now has advantage that he gained completely randomly that you have to overcome somehow. How is that fun, with all the other random stuff the game already includes?

Good thing we draw more than one card, eh? And I can discard the hard ones while completing easier ones. And they could draw a hard one. Hell, you know what the cards are in advance, why not plan your army out so that you have a good chance of achieving any of them? Or you go for broke and try to use some tactics to go for the more valuable d3 VP options. Or if it really comes down to it, not be altogether that upset that you lost, give your opponent a good natured ribbing for pulling an easy objective, and move on to the next game.

Oh wait. Not being 100% concerned about winning. Wrong bad fun. Nevermind, as you were.


To you, the individual trooper. Not the organization (army), in the person of the commander.

You don't think that military commanders give bad, confusing or outright contradictory orders?


If there are no objectives of <type> on the battlefield, getting an objective card to kill capture <type> makes zero sense. If your force is good at X and bad at Y (say an artillery battery versus a close assault force, or the opposite) getting tasks suited for one battle group but not the other, makes zero sense.

See above.


Simply giving up (discarding) an objective and gaining a new one is both unintuitive and unrealistic. 'Commander, you must capture Echo Beach.' 'Eh, don't feel like it. Gimme another!' 'What? Men, have the Commander shot.'

See above, but even more so. Commanders on the ground do what they can with what they have. If they can't take an objective, they'll either die trying (Fanatical armies) or find something else to do that will help. In your example, the reply would be "Sir, we don't have the means of completing that objective. Please reassess." Sometimes, the orders just went to the wrong people.



Not unbalanced? Sure, this kind of result won't come up every game, but it and all the various random permutations of it can, and have the potential to come up every single game.

I don't see how "might maybe possibly happen" is such a major concern. I'll wait to see what the actual objectives are, and some people are going to get easier or harder things over the course of a game. They're also going to find themselves in bad matchups, or they'll roll all ones when they need a single 2, or anything like that. Don't stress out over the "might happen". Hell, I'd say don't stress out over losing a game either.

Voss
21-05-2014, 04:12
I don't see how "might maybe possibly happen" is such a major concern. I'll wait to see what the actual objectives are, and some people are going to get easier or harder things over the course of a game. They're also going to find themselves in bad matchups, or they'll roll all ones when they need a single 2, or anything like that. Don't stress out over the "might happen". Hell, I'd say don't stress out over losing a game either.
It isn't 'might maybe possibly happen'. It's a set of 36 and each player has 3 each, and draws more throughout the game. It is a statistical probability that it will happen a regular basis.

As for the rest, there is a big difference between meaningful military objectives and random filler crap. Chapter Master Marneus Calgar isn't going to send himself to his death so 10 men can seize control of random stack of crates #6. Nor is he going to get any particular sense of satisfaction or strategic or tactical security for randomly blowing up a single plane.

No idea why're you are so focused on losing, either*. Personally, I'd hate winning a game like that even more.

*well, unless, perhaps its a complete strawman.

Ssilmath
21-05-2014, 04:16
As for the rest, there is a big difference between meaningful military objectives and random filler crap. Chapter Master Marneus Calgar isn't going to send himself to his death so 10 men can seize control of random stack of crates #6. Nor is he going to get any particular sense of satisfaction or strategic or tactical security for randomly blowing up a single plane.

So don't make it "random stack of crates #6. Make it a comms relay, or an electrical substation, or archeotech you need to recover. It's not a random plane, their aircraft have been strafing the rear echelons and you need to thin their number before they get by.

You asked me the secret of enjoying the game? Treat it as a story that is unfolding, not just pushing counters around and applying a random result generator to decisions made in a vacuum.

HelloKitty
21-05-2014, 04:19
So don't make it "random stack of crates #6. Make it a comms relay, or an electrical substation, or archeotech you need to recover. It's not a random plane, their aircraft have been strafing the rear echelons and you need to thin their number before they get by.

You asked me the secret of enjoying the game? Treat it as a story that is unfolding, not just pushing counters around and applying a random result generator to decisions made in a vacuum.

Its mind is blown.

Voss
21-05-2014, 04:22
So don't make it "random stack of crates #6. Make it a comms relay, or an electrical substation, or archeotech you need to recover. It's not a random plane, their aircraft have been strafing the rear echelons and you need to thin their number before they get by.

You asked me the secret of enjoying the game? Treat it as a story that is unfolding, not just pushing counters around and applying a random result generator to decisions made in a vacuum.

Yeah, no. As it lacks pretty much every single element of good storytelling, all it would produce are rubbish stories with random results. That would make the game infinitely worse as a game, and still be utter trash as a story. Lose-lose situation at its finest.

Ssilmath
21-05-2014, 04:26
Yeah, no. As it lacks pretty much every single element of good storytelling, all it would produce are rubbish stories with random results. That would make the game infinitely worse as a game, and still be utter trash as a story. Lose-lose situation at its finest.

It's your loss that you won't even try. It's your attitude that is killing your enjoyment more than anything.

Wolf Lord Balrog
21-05-2014, 04:38
Good thing we draw more than one card, eh? And I can discard the hard ones while completing easier ones.
As described in the WD extract, its not a free mix-and-match process. You draw three cards, but you can only discard one, and only at the end of your turn. And what happens if you get a 'mulligan' of completely irrelevant/impossible objectives?


And they could draw a hard one.
And you could draw an easy one, which just reverses the problem. What are the odds that both players will draw a set of objectives of roughly equal difficulty? I bet no better than 50/50.


Hell, you know what the cards are in advance, why not plan your army out so that you have a good chance of achieving any of them?
There are what, 36 different tactical objective cards? I'm willing to bet that its impossible to design an army capable of fulfilling more than a handful of them, let alone all of them.


Or you go for broke and try to use some tactics to go for the more valuable d3 VP options.
From the cards we've seen, its 'Achieve X objective, get 1 VP. Achieve X times 3, get D3 VPs'. Do you know the term 'diminishing returns'?


Or if it really comes down to it, not be altogether that upset that you lost, give your opponent a good natured ribbing for pulling an easy objective, and move on to the next game.

Oh wait. Not being 100% concerned about winning. Wrong bad fun. Nevermind, as you were.
Ah, so we're back to 'If you disagree with Ssil you are a WAAC-hole.' That's persuasive.


You don't think that military commanders give bad, confusing or outright contradictory orders?

See above.

See above, but even more so. Commanders on the ground do what they can with what they have. If they can't take an objective, they'll either die trying (Fanatical armies) or find something else to do that will help. In your example, the reply would be "Sir, we don't have the means of completing that objective. Please reassess." Sometimes, the orders just went to the wrong people.
I'm sure those things do happen in real life. But this isn't real life. Its a game that occasionally uses realistic-ish justifications for its game mechanics. What's fun about getting random, nonsensical objectives in a game?


I don't see how "might maybe possibly happen" is such a major concern. I'll wait to see what the actual objectives are, and some people are going to get easier or harder things over the course of a game. They're also going to find themselves in bad matchups, or they'll roll all ones when they need a single 2, or anything like that. Don't stress out over the "might happen". Hell, I'd say don't stress out over losing a game either.
Its not about stressing over winning or losing. I don't care particularly if I win or lose. I do care if the game is fun or not. And I don't find it particularly fun to be fighting an uphill battle for 90-120 minutes just because of a random event going against me at the beginning of the game. Which happens all too often already in 40K, without additional randomness being added.

Ssilmath
21-05-2014, 04:41
I'm sure those things do happen in real life. But this isn't real life. Its a game that occasionally uses realistic-ish justifications for its game mechanics. What's fun about getting random, nonsensical objectives in a game?

You do realize that people were arguing that it wasn't "realistic", right?

spaint2k
21-05-2014, 04:42
It's your loss that you won't even try. It's your attitude that is killing your enjoyment more than anything.

It's really nothing to do with attitude. The fact is that 40k's game design simply isn't very good. Bloodknight posted earlier in the thread that 40K is marketed as a "strategy wargame" but in fact there's very little strategy about the thing at all.

I started playing 40K in 1988. I've got loads of lovely models and for the longest time this hobby was my biggest obsession. After 6th came out, I made a real effort to enjoy it and play it, but in the end the sheer amount of random got to me. Everything is random - including the rule changes from 5th edition apparently. The changes made it perfectly obvious that the game designers were not taking the game FORWARDS in an attempt to improve it, they were merely shuffling things around SIDEWAYS in the same damn space without any vision on how to make the game fundamentally better.

The last game of 40K I played left a bitter taste in my mouth. My opponent was playing with the then-new Daemon codex. Almost everything in his army was random. Random gifts and random wargear - the poor guy couldn't keep track of what his army was supposed to be doing. Random events happened during the game that were neither fun nor interesting - I believe Khorne rained skulls on my land raider at one point. The whole farce boiled down to a last-turn objective grab and when it was over we both realized that the game had been a few hours of double-plus unfun.

I'm blah about 7th ed because I know that the game designers will not improve the fundamental game in any way. Once again, we'll see some sideways shuffling around in the 3rd edition gamespace, and there'll be a plethora of minor changes that will need to be memorized in order to play. None of the changes will actually be improvements to the game. The overall lack of in-game options and "things to do" will leave me bored and wishing I was spending my time playing Netrunner or Epic 40K - games that have real player involvement, a plethora of options, tension, challenge and a sense of accomplishment in either victory or a hard-fought defeat. Warhammer 40K is simply grotesquely dull in comparison.

Voss
21-05-2014, 04:43
You do realize that people were arguing that it wasn't "realistic", right?
As an analogy, which would require you to complete ignore the frequent references to the game, and the balance thereof.
But a war-game should be able to effectively model basic and fundamental things like military objectives, and not just turn them into a random chart full of garbage because it's easy.

But I guess you were too busy with self-righteous preaching about my lifestyle to notice fundamental problems in game design, yeah?

For the record, I've seen and tried a lot of games trying to be storytelling devices. They're invariably poor at both. This isn't a new concept, let alone one that has never been tried. Its an abysmal failure every single time. People can either get on with the game (if the mechanics are functional) or drop it like a hot plate of ****.

Scribe of Khorne
21-05-2014, 04:45
My group is looking forward to it quite a bit.

Either

1. GW does a decent job (and we enjoy 6th while skipping idiotic random objectives/terrain).

OR

2. We all jump to Forge World's Horus Heresy, and enjoy a setting where the writers actively care and respect the setting they create for us to play in.

Win win.

EDIT: Chaos can no longer ally with Imperial Guard. Because there is no precedent whatsoever for Guard to fall to chaos (HEY THERE 13th BLACK CRUSADE).

Dont count on GW, they will fail you.

Wolf Lord Balrog
21-05-2014, 04:46
You do realize that people were arguing that it wasn't "realistic", right?

Somebody else might have been, I was making a completely different point.

Ssilmath
21-05-2014, 04:53
Somebody else might have been, I was making a completely different point.

Fair enough. Thing is, if you don't like the random missions, you don't have to play them. There's the regular 6 missions from 6th (maybe tweaked a bit, no way to know) that you can play as well. One again, it's the options to play the game that you like, the way you like it. If you think that random objectives skew the balance (Which is something I disagree, obviously), then don't use them. Nice and simple solution.

Scribe of Khorne
21-05-2014, 04:54
Your objective blows up, your opponents grants skyfire.

Balance? Give your head a shake man, thats a stretch even for you.

Ssilmath
21-05-2014, 04:56
Your objective blows up, your opponents grants skyfire.

Balance? Give your head a shake man, thats a stretch even for you.

This is for the cards, not the random effects of objectives in 6th. I'll agree that those were a bit odd. A cool idea, but a bit odd in practice.

Scribe of Khorne
21-05-2014, 04:58
Ah well then carry on good sir, I personally like the concept of the cards and will see how it rolls out!

Wolf Lord Balrog
21-05-2014, 04:59
Fair enough. Thing is, if you don't like the random missions, you don't have to play them. There's the regular 6 missions from 6th (maybe tweaked a bit, no way to know) that you can play as well. One again, it's the options to play the game that you like, the way you like it. If you think that random objectives skew the balance (Which is something I disagree, obviously), then don't use them. Nice and simple solution.

Oh, I definitely won't, as at this point I don't think I will be playing 7th Edition at all. Maybe all the leaks we've seen so far have been completely wrong (not likely, but possible), so I will reserve final judgment for when I can actually hold somebody else's copy in my hands and read it. But almost everything I've seen so far is discouraging me from wanting to play 7th Edition.

On the upside, it is encouraging me to continue my work on my own version of the rules. I estimate its around 25-30% complete now.

Scribe of Khorne
21-05-2014, 05:02
HH Balrog, HH.

Lanacane
21-05-2014, 05:18
You don't think that military commanders give bad, confusing or outright contradictory orders?


I dont think he reads, watches or have listened to accounts of battles and wars, if he thinks that CO's know half the **** they are meant to.. or that confusing, stupid and/or contradictory orders happen.

Voss look up Field Marshall Haig.. or if you prefer an American flavour, Custer or Patton.. Some fine examples of leaders not knowing their **** from their elbow

Ssilmath
21-05-2014, 05:26
On the upside, it is encouraging me to continue my work on my own version of the rules. I estimate its around 25-30% complete now.

Can't wait to see it, and I mean that with sincerity. I hope the process goes well for you.

Spare Change
21-05-2014, 05:28
I dont think he reads, watches or have listened to accounts of battles and wars, if he thinks that CO's know half the **** they are meant to.. or that confusing, stupid and/or contradictory orders happen.

Voss look up Field Marshall Haig.. or if you prefer an American flavour, Custer or Patton.. Some fine examples of leaders not knowing their **** from their elbow

Right, lets use mediocre arguments about supposed "realism" to justify trash changes to the game.

Ssilmath
21-05-2014, 05:31
Right, lets use mediocre arguments about supposed "realism" to justify trash changes to the game.

If somebody is going to use realism as the basis for an argument, they should at least be sticking to reality.

As for not having control, you've got plenty of that. You've got a choice of which objectives to go for, and can work towards them while discarding the ones that you don't like. Now, if you had a single objective that randomly changed each turn, that would be completely absurd.

Spare Change
21-05-2014, 05:38
If somebody is going to use realism as the basis for an argument, they should at least be sticking to reality.

I'm calling both examples out as being stupid.

These cards are just another example of them removing any remaining hints of actual strategy from the game, and relying on 'random' to balance the game for them, as they're too ********** lazy to take the responsibility to do so themselves.

Why even play this game, at this point? Let's save two hours, a few hundred bucks, and just flip a coin. Man, what a blast!

SideshowLucifer
21-05-2014, 05:38
I'm worse then blagh about the new edition, I'm flat out not going to play it. I didn't want a roleplaying lite minis game, I wanted a strategy game. I have no desire to run around like a chicken with its head cut off chasing down random missions for no good reason. I detest Unbound and the Daemon summoning rules. If, as people keep saying, we are free from rules, than I also don;t need to spend $80 to buy a book telling me that. I fully expect this new edition to kill the game in my area since so many people are already turning to other games and even stores are no longer going to be carrying GW products due to to the effect this is having on our player base.
On the up side though, last time GW did something this stupid, we got a couple good game companies out of it, so maybe we will get some fresh ideas or some good old ones after a bit.

Scribe of Khorne
21-05-2014, 05:39
Whoa whoa WHOA.

I cant handle this hate for the cards at this point. For all we know 'average' games will have VP in the double digits easily!

Spare Change
21-05-2014, 05:42
Whoa whoa WHOA.

I cant handle this hate for the cards at this point. For all we know 'average' games will have VP in the double digits easily!

I liked you better when you didn't have this apologist enthusiasm about you, heathen. :skull:

Ozendorph
21-05-2014, 05:48
@OP - 6th was a massive let down for our group - basically snuffed out 40K for us, which I would have thought impossible. Hearing about the changes in 7th is a bit like hearing about management changes at a job you left two years ago. I'll be interested to see the finished product (and hope to be pleasantly surprised), but I'm certainly in no hurry to drop money on it

Amnar
21-05-2014, 05:48
I was on board until you used 2nd Ed as your benchmark. My problem with/apathy towards everything SINCE 6th is that they are trying to shove 2nd Ed up 3rd ed's ass essentially, and take what is universally considered to be the antithesis of balance and fair gaming and burst it from a more rigid game's chest. THAT is what I don't like. Just think, in another two more years we'll have that sexy librarian with displacer field bouncing across the fild again while artillery batteries fire over blind and smoke grenade fields. I can't *********** wait...

Mixing and matching 2nd edition with editions 3+ is an awful idea.

2nd edition was complex, 3rd edition was super streamlined. Every edition after that has been an abomination mix of the two, and that's why we're in the fix that we are now.

Scribe of Khorne
21-05-2014, 05:48
I liked you better when you didn't have this apologist enthusiasm about you, heathen. :skull:

Listen brother. We all know if its busted I'll start fires with you, but already??! Seems premature. Rage out on the loss of traitor guard, thats worthy of our ire.

Theocracity
21-05-2014, 05:53
Listen brother. We all know if its busted I'll start fires with you, but already??! Seems premature. Rage out on the loss of traitor guard, thats worthy of our ire.

Pfft, only apologists refuse to pre-condemn anything related to an unreleased optional variation of a game. If you look forward to trying out new ideas, you might end up enjoying yourself like some common criminal.

Spare Change
21-05-2014, 05:55
Listen brother. We all know if its busted I'll start fires with you, but already??! Seems premature. Rage out on the loss of traitor guard, thats worthy of our ire.

Search your feelings; you know it to be true.

Wolf Lord Balrog
21-05-2014, 05:58
Can't wait to see it, and I mean that with sincerity. I hope the process goes well for you.

Thanks Ssil, sometimes you are actually a sorta nice guy. :)

Weazel
21-05-2014, 06:20
6th felt like a nice breath of fresh air when it came out, but then came the 6th edition codices. Namely Codex: Eldar which totally ruined 40k for me (incidentally my mate plays Eldar). I'm totally excited about the new edition and keeping my fingers crossed for Eldar nerfs across the board. But yeah, I'm not 'blah' about the new edition.

AngryAngel
21-05-2014, 07:13
But its Cinematic man!

I know, trust me I was thinking it, I just didn't want to say it.



How do the objectives not make a lick of sense? You've never been in the middle of an important task and had one of your superiors suddenly task you with something completely different? Or you've never completed a task and immediately get sent on another one?

Or are we talking about Tau drawing a challenge card? Oh darn, if only you could discard it and get another one that makes more sense for your army.

In the midst of an overly important task, No. I would call their heated battle a somewhat important task.




You do realize that people were arguing that it wasn't "realistic", right?

But, it doesn't need to be realistic as its the far future. You said earlier it needed to be all random and we've already discovered random is realistic in our previous crazy talk. I in fact was who protested to the madness of having " Realism " trotted out each time a stupid rule comes along. This game is pretty far from real.



This is for the cards, not the random effects of objectives in 6th. I'll agree that those were a bit odd. A cool idea, but a bit odd in practice.

These random objectives, I fear will end up just as poorly thought out and worked. The objectives doing different things was not only random, but dumb and overly lazy, as was random terrain but, you know, random is real and great.




I dont think he reads, watches or have listened to accounts of battles and wars, if he thinks that CO's know half the **** they are meant to.. or that confusing, stupid and/or contradictory orders happen.

Voss look up Field Marshall Haig.. or if you prefer an American flavour, Custer or Patton.. Some fine examples of leaders not knowing their **** from their elbow

So, the commanders of the far future would be just as given to confusion or are we equating all of our selves to Custers each in our own private last stands each game ? I'd love to discuss all the odd/stupid rules and see how many of them get justified by the " Real " stamp, and if they aren't real be told how such doesn't matter, more random needed. So I guess what I am saying is I get all my fill of contradictory logic here in these arguments, no room left for the actual game. Though the objectives, random pulls, bad to me, I'd like less random in the game and not more.



Right, lets use mediocre arguments about supposed "realism" to justify trash changes to the game.

Now, that only happens sometimes, sometimes the realism is tossed aside to explain why the lack of it is needed, it is never just one way or the other.




Pfft, only apologists refuse to pre-condemn anything related to an unreleased optional variation of a game. If you look forward to trying out new ideas, you might end up enjoying yourself like some common criminal.

Now we both know that isn't all this is. If you hold great optimism in GW's rule design, that is the question. Some choose to not swallow the pill to leave the GW matrix, others wish freedom from un realistic ideals and expectations. I think the random objectives will end up like the random objective effects from this edition, poorly implemented and a wasted opportunity.

Slayer-Fan123
21-05-2014, 07:37
I'm not "blah" about anything because the rules haven't actually come out yet and I have yet to actually do a game with them.

Kakapo42
21-05-2014, 07:46
Assuming blah/apathetic means 'neutral' or 'indifferent', which I think is right, then yes I am very blah/apathetic about 7th edition, but that is largely because I am currently focusing on Fantasy more than 40k at the moment and so what's going on in the world of 40k is of lesser concern to me, for now at least.

I do think that there might be a bit much heat in this thread. I have read through all of it (6 pages at the time of writing this), and I've noticed a lot of condescending or overtly negative comments from a number of parties. It's all well and good to have differing opinions on a subject, this is after all a discussion forum, which is intended to facilitate debate and, well, discussion, but I'd like to think that we can do so while being reasonable and constructive.

I think the key thing to keep in mind in this hobby, and something that has already been touched upon a couple of times, is that you don't actually have to follow the newest rules to the letter, and as long as you don't do it in a GW store and do so with the agreement and consent of those you're playing a game with, you're free to pick and choose rules as you see fit. For example, I was left considerably unhappy with the new Wood Elf army book that was just released (yes yes heresy I know, but it just doesn't do it for me like the previous one did), but I've found a solution to continue enjoying my Wood Elf army by simply continuing it as a primarily hobby-based project and using it in friendly games where I'm allowed to keep using the 6th edition book, and I can continue enjoying my hobby and being happy about it that way. I think the same thing could be done with 40k. Think second edition was the best thing to happen since sliced bread? Keep playing using the 2nd edition rules then (possibly with a few house rules for units and factions that didn't exist when 2nd edition was published). Want a more competitive ruleset for your 40k? Switch back to 4th or 5th edition (which I've been informed are the most competitive-friendly versions, though this could be wrong), with a couple of house-rules for any big glaring weaknesses of those rulesets. Genuinely can't find an official incarnation of 40k you're happy with? Do what Wolf Lord Balrog is doing and create your own. Like the idea of tactical objectives but don't like the added randomness? House-rule it so they're not randomly selected. I think the idea is to treat the rules like a giant model kit, and put together a gaming experience you enjoy from the bits available. I remember reading on a blog called Realm of Chaos 80's about how one of the great things about the older incarnations of Warhammer (in reference to Fantasy, but I'd imagine a similar thing would hold true for 40k as well) was the large amount of creative freedom present. It seems to me however that that freedom is still there, we as hobbyists simply need to take it into our own hands a bit more. I think perhaps in this instance you should be the change you want to see in GW.

That's just my thinking at least.

Sanai
21-05-2014, 07:48
People on the internet are apathetic, pessimistic, negative, etc about every edition. As they are about everything Games Workshop does. It isn't confined to the hobby either- Video Games get the same treatment. The internet is just a really negative place for some reason.

Voss
21-05-2014, 07:51
I dont think he reads, watches or have listened to accounts of battles and wars, if he thinks that CO's know half the **** they are meant to.. or that confusing, stupid and/or contradictory orders happen.

Voss look up Field Marshall Haig.. or if you prefer an American flavour, Custer or Patton.. Some fine examples of leaders not knowing their **** from their elbow

Uh, OK. Are there bad commanders and bad decisions? Yes, obviously. There are some fairly fantastic military histories that hinge on people making bad decisions. But the bad decisions are based on bad intelligence, poor training, poor education and various other points of human fallibility. They are not based on being randomly assigned to stand on a box while shooting a plane and looking for horsemen while the enemy holes up in a strongpoint, cripples your transports and puts a bullet in your commander's brain.
Randomly assigned objectives are terrible game mechanic, and they are also terrible for making a game out of military battles. I'm not sure why this is confusing- they don't even emulate the kind of bad decisions that people actually make.

ihavetoomuchminis
21-05-2014, 07:58
Soooo.....as i can see from some 7th ed defenders, the way to enjoy the game is to make rules of your own and not to follow the written ones. Why do i need a rulebook (wich costs a good amount of money) at all?

And if i decide to follow the rules as written....ill have ALL the special uncommon snowflake situations that come up in 1 of 10 battles (eldars summoning daemons, unexpected events that completely change the battle objectives and make them unknown for all the army as if the commander was a monkey on drugs, marines with riptides amongst orks in land raiders commanded by a farseer, etc) ALL AT ONCE.....EVERY SINGLE BATTLE.

You people can make up whatever fluff raping 1 in a million explanation for any given success, but when theres the need to do it with many events that happen in the same battle...ala planetary alignment...something is wrong.

In the far future of the 40th millenium....there is only random uncommon events.

Dr.Clock
21-05-2014, 08:00
I think Kakapo's got the right idea...

I'll be trying out the new 'random objectives' thing, but if it doesn't work like I want it to, I'll just use them 'structure' games in a more interesting way by 'building decks' of objective cards to be drawn in a specific order.

This means that you could have players switch from focusing on objectives to focusing on attack later in the game, or vise verse, and at opposing times... this will be great for me and my regular opponent because we play much larger games, and thus developing a 'narrative' (I know... a dirty word) over the course of the game rather than simply biding our time for last-minute objective grabs seems like plenty of fun.

This new edition does seem to be more like they're heading in the 'sandbox' direction. Generally I'm fine with that, as I have very strong ideas about what I want out of a game, and these are shared with my regular opponent... I mostly just feel sorry for people whose gaming group is too diverse to find regular like-minded opponents. I've pretty much NEVER played a 'casual game' against an unknown opponent. I hope, if nothing else, this edition results in groups 'taking the power back' and having some kind of discussion about what is and isn't appropriate to 'casually' bring to the table.

Cheers,

The Good Doctor.

Voss
21-05-2014, 08:06
if nothing else, this edition results in groups 'taking the power back' and having some kind of discussion about what is and isn't appropriate to 'casually' bring to the table.

The problem is, who is going to take the power? Is it going to be people who think like you do? People who want to work you into their own personal story? People who want the most brutal and unforgiving cheeseball lists imaginable? The default assumption should certainly be that whatever is in the rulebook is fair game for casual use at the table. But the game designers have, for whatever reason, bailed out on actually making a decision and just said 'Eh, whatever.' So in a lot of groups its going to be a fun little power struggle to dictate how people are going to play, barring those happy few that are going to magically generate instant agreement on the 50+ areas of personal preference that now need to be decided because the designers passed on their obligations.

Wolf Lord Balrog
21-05-2014, 08:21
People on the internet are apathetic, pessimistic, negative, etc about every edition. As they are about everything Games Workshop does. It isn't confined to the hobby either- Video Games get the same treatment. The internet is just a really negative place for some reason.

Its a well-known bias in human behavior. When people are happy about something, they generally just go about their business and don't say anything about it. Negative experiences on the other hand, they motivate us to do something to try and make ourselves feel better about them. Add in community effects like wanting to fit into a particular sub-groups and tribes start forming. And some people that are unhappy with your unhappiness then start arguing back. Voila, Warseer in three easy steps. :)

Spell_of_Destruction
21-05-2014, 08:44
I am sensing doubt among gamers more than anything else.

GW updates the 40k rules every 4-5 years. That's just what it does. By that time, we're usually expecting a change.

With relatively little known about the rules, I don't think anyone has really worked out the core reason for this new ruleset from a gaming perspective (I'll pre-empt anyone who says it's for the $$$ - no need to increase your post count). There has been a mixed reaction to the changes that have been confirmed but I'm more interested in the rest of the rules.

Will it merely be 6th ed + the changes we already know about or will the book be full of other tweaks? I will be sorely disappointed if it's the former as any edition change represents a huge opportunity to improve the game (especially after a release like 6th which was the most radical edition since 3rd - sp this is a chance to evaluate what worked and what didn't).

I've heard all the stuff about the game being ruined before. Those who have been around long enough will remember the very strong reactions from the gaming community to 3rd ed.

Angelwing
21-05-2014, 08:55
Aside from the price complaint (for the other thread of course), its really that its arrived at least 3 years too early. I thought we might actually get a full set of codexes within one edition reducing the edition legacy problems some armies suffer. Sadly not.
All of my group I've spoken to are not bothered by 7th ed, and I've not played a pick up game outside the group in about 5 years, so it looks like I can safely skip an edition out much like I'm having to do with army books.

Szalik
21-05-2014, 09:05
I am negative about this new edition. I like the new idea of magic phase and yes, it might repair some of the problems in 40k (spell based combos) but...

It seems like they haven't addressed the biggest problem of 40k, the assault phase. The only thing they did was to somewhat repair challenge, way not enough.

Either they don't see a problem in having an unreliable charge distance or even worse, they see it but the designer behind it is too stubborn to acknowledge that a complex nerf to the assault based armies in 6th ruined the game for a lot of us.

Making assault distance more reliable and being less strict about charging from vehicles and outflank(provided that the outflanking models don't move onto the board with a normal movement but 2 inches or to just fit in), on the other hand granting ability to shoot overwatch at full bs to the units that weren't shooting in the previous phase, would already make a colossal difference. Still, that would only repair problems from the 6th.

They missed this opportunity, so I will only take a few test games and won't buy the codex (I don't see an interesting starting set to back it up with miniatures and justify the expense).

Cheeslord
21-05-2014, 09:36
None of the changes seem cripplingly bad, at least not for my gaming group where we are unlikely to see Unbound abuse. Some of my best games have been apocalypse weekends, where any of us COULD have taken some horrendous spam list but we didn't...we tried to get out as many models as we could from our collections, even the sub-optimal ones (it matters less taking a few weak units in an absolutely huge battle than in a tiny skirmish where they will really drag you down).

The problem for me is that the wound allocation in 6th edition caused our group to become unable to agree how to play 40k (as some members refused to use it, others insist on it and some don't want compromise rules). 7th edition appears to have made the problems worse from what I can tell (and these are pictures of white dwarf articles so pretty conclusive) so we are unlikely to resume 40k playing due to it, or even buy it. Also, the longer we dont play 40k the more warmachine I buy, adding incentive to go with that...

Mark.

Gorsameth
21-05-2014, 11:30
HH Balrog, HH.

So what do I do with my Tau, my eldar and my Tyranids? Oh right...

Not to mention that HH armies are even more expensive then the already to expensive 40k armies.

hobojebus
21-05-2014, 12:02
So what do I do with my Tau, my eldar and my Tyranids? Oh right...

Not to mention that HH armies are even more expensive then the already to expensive 40k armies.

You can use plastic marines to save money you don't have to buy the resin unless you like the look of them, I doubt many would insist you must have 100% forge world models.

As for eldar and nids there your screwed so you'll have to either play 7th or agree to play an older edition.

Sadly it seems only forge world is interested in preserving the good name of 40k.

frikandel speciaal
21-05-2014, 12:09
It most likely isn't - and hasn't been for most of its life cycle. It says it's a strategy game on the box, but really isn't, at least not a good one (that part flew out of the window when arcs of vision were removed with 3rd edition, since outmaneuvering makes hardly any difference when practically every unit can act to full capacity in a 360 arc). It's a way to shove miniatures around, make pewpew noises and one guy can claim he won in the end, for whatever reason after rolling tons of unnecessary dice rolls. *
I just can't collect enough energy for that stuff anymore, it's not intellectually stimulating enough as a wargame/conflict simulation. It's half wargame, half RPG, but does not have the good parts of either; for a good wargame it lacks elegance, for a good RPG feeling it's too shallow. There's always that hope that it gets better (turning into either a better RPG or a better wargame), but apart from becoming more beautiful to look at while lamer to play, there's not much happening from edition to edition.

If I had to start playing 40K again from scratch today (I've got about 30,000 points of stuff for 40K, IG, Dark Eldar and 2 CSM armies), I'd probably decline politely and spend my money on something else.

* tbh, of the current rulesets they sell, LotR is the best of the bunch. Never got into it because the miniatures are not as good as the rest of GW's offerings, but it reads very nicely and the games I watched looked good as well. Epic was great, too.

Bloodknight, i fully agree with your post. It's exactly how i feel about it. It has become a game for the lazy. It's not a tactical game anymore. Allies ruined it, but so did flyers and TLOS.
The game has become to fast and there is no way to build up a real strategy. It's about having the first turn so you can get First Blood and more of that nonsense. If you go second you can desperately hope you have one of your precious Forgeworld tanks remain on the table. I'm not willing to spend money on another game, because i lack the motivation after the dissapointment 40K has become. I will continue playing 40K, but it's just because i like the fluff and especially the Horus Heresy. But if someone comes up with a stupid unbound list, i won't even bother getting an army of my shelves and just stay home. That's how it is. Fun is gone.

frikandel speciaal
21-05-2014, 12:11
So what do I do with my Tau, my eldar and my Tyranids? Oh right...

Not to mention that HH armies are even more expensive then the already to expensive 40k armies.


They are not expensive if you order them from China/Joymart.

frikandel speciaal
21-05-2014, 12:21
So don't make it "random stack of crates #6. Make it a comms relay, or an electrical substation, or archeotech you need to recover. It's not a random plane, their aircraft have been strafing the rear echelons and you need to thin their number before they get by.

You asked me the secret of enjoying the game? Treat it as a story that is unfolding, not just pushing counters around and applying a random result generator to decisions made in a vacuum.


Allthough i allmost never agree with you, i must say i like your creative way of looking at things. (no sarcasm)

hobojebus
21-05-2014, 12:47
They are not expensive if you order them from China/Joymart.

True but I never really objected to forge world prices they never claimed to be cheap but now GW plastic kits have caught up with forge world prices they are a bargain for the extra quality, and they care alot more for the rules than their parent company.

archie-d
21-05-2014, 13:31
because while it kind of appears theyve admitted 6th was a mistake by rushing out 7th, it would appear theyre doubling down on it and ploughing ahead even further with the mistake rather than attempting to rectify it.

Spell_of_Destruction
21-05-2014, 13:37
@OP - 6th was a massive let down for our group - basically snuffed out 40K for us, which I would have thought impossible. Hearing about the changes in 7th is a bit like hearing about management changes at a job you left two years ago. I'll be interested to see the finished product (and hope to be pleasantly surprised), but I'm certainly in no hurry to drop money on it

Was 5th really so great? Probably the most boring edition of 40k ever.

archie-d
21-05-2014, 13:45
Was 5th really so great? Probably the most boring edition of 40k ever.

Each to their own. i can understand if your 'meta' was 75% GK razorback spam lists youd have been happy 6th rolled around. but i never had that.
personally i thought 5th was the (im loathe to say most elegant) least inelegant version so far. the internal logic was easy enough to follow. Generally, when trying to recall how something worked, if you just played it how it would seem to make sense and then look it up after the fact, it turned out youd got it right anyway. games flowed nicely and we had fun.
I dont feel the same about 6th, 7th isnt out yet, but its not looking promising for me.

Commissar Merces
21-05-2014, 13:55
4th was actually my favorite edition, though I know a lot of people really disliked it. Only a few days left until we know all the changes. Unfortunately, no one in my gaming group* has preordered the book and I am going to be at a funeral on release date so it doesn't look like any of us are going to get our teeth into it until after Memorial day weekend.

*Note people at the local shop have preordered the book, just not the people I play with on a regular basis.

I think the majority of my blahness comes from an annoyance of the rushed edition change, the general lack of excitement in my area and my inability to get to a tournament in 6th months due to work, deaths and wedding planning. I also wasn't able to partake in our community's 40k campaign, which was a double bummer.

march10k
21-05-2014, 14:29
There seems to be an epidemic of apathy about the new edition, not only on here, but in my community as well. I don't know if it is just the quick turnover, unhappiness with rumors or the price, but people seems genuinely apathetic about the new changes. Personally, I like some of the rumored changes, but I also dislike some. It's kind of like a stocking at christmas. Some bits good, some bits bad. Despite the give and take nature of a new edition, I can never say I have been uncaring about it the way I am now.

I know that for me, it all comes down to GW making money. It's always about making money with them (and to a certain degree, it should be, they are business after all). I can't help but feel this slight announce when I hear the shop manager boast about how awesome these new changes are going to be in order to forge a narrative and that GW developers are just trying to give players a new way to play. It just seems hollow to me.

Does anyone else feel apathetic towards the new edition or just me?

Apathy? Like the failure to do cheetah flips and shout "yippee?" I don't think I've ever seen anyone get genuinely excited about a new edition, and I've been hanging around since the very beginning of third...so a lack of enthusiasm doesn't mean much of anything. Me, I'm not apathetic, I'm ambivalent. The idea that my chimeras will get a bit harder to kill and mostly become scoring (even better than in 5th, where you could score from inside, now I just doubled my number of scorers!) is pretty awesome, same for the scoring crusaders in my deathwing list...the space magic phase is kinda meh, except that the bike-mounted power field bearing librarian keeping my crusaders alive can potentially, if you run out of serious antitank threats, zoom off somewhere and turn into a bloodthirster (yay for fluff rape!), but overall, not excited about malefic daemonology, except for how it's great fluff for a guard army, although LatD is not my cup of tea...



For me, it's just that 6th edition was not good. It has killed 40K gaming in the group I was playing before...

Yeah, that's why they did this. Baneblades, 5x Knights, and Wallzomartyrz were not being allowed in tournaments...like, at all. That was really screwing with sales of these expensive new kits, so they had to move all that stuff into the main book to make it harder for TOs to freeze the new kits out. So this will either FORCE those of us who think superheavies (we thought it about fliers, too...) break the game to adapt, or force us out...but the bus is pulling out of the depot, are you on it?

budman
21-05-2014, 14:40
The why is simple...
First It's a age too early for a new edition while 6th has issues the game has not even begun to settle in meta before gw come in and flip the table.
new rules and armies have come out so fast that I don't even know how my nids for example play vs half of them.
there has been no time to settle and think with any depth about the game. and we all know that's key before doing a new edition...
secound
the changes don't stike me as cool just a way to dig out more cash. (buy a demon army or 8 riptides)
this does feel to me like a crazy cash grab edition in before the end of the finacal year for gw.
I want to be wrong but I have been a gamer for 23 years now and can smell the desparation on them... the amout of spin being done by gw staff in stores is crazy and I have to say I work in sales and I would kill for their sales trainer to give the rub to my staff.

also it's 60 quid for three books two THAT I will never use

TheBearminator
21-05-2014, 14:58
Why? Cause I find myself time to play three games every year. That's six games before it's time to buy and learn a new set of rules. If it's better than the last one I can live with it though.

HelloKitty
21-05-2014, 14:58
It feels it is a shame that so many discard the hobby and narrative section but at the same time GW includes it and makes it a part of the game anyway.

NealSmith
21-05-2014, 14:59
Yeah, that's why they did this. Baneblades, 5x Knights, and Wallzomartyrz were not being allowed in tournaments...like, at all. That was really screwing with sales of these expensive new kits, so they had to move all that stuff into the main book to make it harder for TOs to freeze the new kits out. So this will either FORCE those of us who think superheavies (we thought it about fliers, too...) break the game to adapt, or force us out...but the bus is pulling out of the depot, are you on it?

I'm going to have a buddy drive me to the next town and then catch it there... If it seems like they fixed the flat tires and air-conditioning... :)

Haravikk
21-05-2014, 15:06
Quick turnover for me; it's not that I'm not interested by it, I just think it's a slap in the face to release a new edition so soon for what so-far sounds a lot more like an expansion.
That said, if it seems good then I'll happily make the switch; personally I'm someone who generally liked the changes to 6th edition, other than my main gripe on the increasing scale of the game (while I enjoy Flyers and Super Heavies in big games or campaigns, in pick-up games they just don't feel right at all IMO), and I quite liked where Psychic Powers were in 6th, so I'm a bit wary of them going even more towards fantasy's overly random magic, but I'll wait and see for sure.

So yeah, I'm not uninterested by 7th, I just don't feel that 6th has been out long enough.

Vipoid
21-05-2014, 15:23
Well, honestly, most of the changes made by 6th put me off the game - and 7th just seems like more of the same. There seems to be even more randomness (sigh), and considering all the pointless randomness 6th brought in already, that's quite an achievement.

Both my armies are ones with no psykers, so the introduction of a psychic phase is about as thrilling to me as changes to the WHFB magic phase are for Dwarf players.

Really, I'm not enthusiastic because this new edition doesn't really seem to be addressing any of the major problems with 6th. Perhaps it has, and we just haven't heard about it, but none of the rumours have made me think 'Oh, good - I'm glad they finally changed that.'. Mostly I just ended up thinking 'eh?' or 'Seems a bit pointless' or just 'Meh'.

I'm open to the possibility that I might end up enjoying 6th (although, as someone who hates pointless randomness, I doubt it), but so far none of the rumours have made it sound likely.

Still, that's the good think about being cynical - you're rarely disappointed. ;)

Poseidal
21-05-2014, 15:31
Too little too soon. I actually find 6th reasonably enjoyable (better than 5th anyway) if you ignore the outliers (superheavies, allies, FW).

What I've been waiting for is a big change, and the end of the 3rd paradigm which is still running through the edition and finally needs to be put to rest.

Knifeparty
21-05-2014, 15:36
I really hated 6th edition.

I was initially really excited about 7th when it was rumoured because I thought that it might fix all the things I hate about 6th.

Looks like they pretty much left everything untouched with the exception of some minor tweaks and obviously the "magic" phase.

I don't have a problem with unbound because nobody will use it anyway except for fun games. Tournaments won't even look at it. I like that they put in a magic phase, it cleans the game up and I like that they re-worked the alliance matrix because the old one is stupid.

It looks like they didn't fix assault, therefore I will probably be out. I don't understand why they are trying so hard to make almost half of their models obsolete by making assault so undesirable.

budman
21-05-2014, 15:47
It feels it is a shame that so many discard the hobby and narrative section but at the same time GW includes it and makes it a part of the game anyway.

I can't paint or toffee so the hobby is worthless to me as to the fluff I have been playing since stealers had limos. so I know he fluff
I want the rules I'd Pay for the Rules...

Kahadras
21-05-2014, 15:50
Voss look up Field Marshall Haig.... Some fine examples of leaders not knowing their **** from their elbow

I'd disagree about Haig. The historian Gordon Corrigan makes a very good case for how myths of incompetence have created a negative image of the British high command. In fact he puts forward plenty of evidence to suggest that the military leadership of the British was probably the best out of the main participants in the war. They understood how dangerous machine guns were (contrary to popular opinion). They understood that cavalry didn't have much of a role in modern warfare (the British generally used them as mobile infantry). They looked for technological solutions to combat trench warfare (airpower, tanks, artillery etc). Another interesting point Corrigan makes is the fact that the British army was almost non-existant at the start of the war. Haig had to raise an army, organise it, train it, equip it, ship it across the channel and overcome the problems of trench warfare against a German army that had been fighting since 1914.

A bit off topic but interesting none the less

malisteen
21-05-2014, 15:59
Too soon. Seems to move the game further in the direction of the things I didn't like about 6th.

But mostly it's nothing to do with 7th, and everything to do with the current 40k environment has not filled me with any amount of confidence in GW's ability to handle the game. They'll need to earn back that confidence before I start viewing any new 40k content from them without skepticism and cynicism. It's about building trust. Right now I'm excited by new fantasy content, because I've liked and enjoyed the Fantasy content they've put out over the last several years. On the 40k end, I see nothing but a disorganized mess sacrificing game functionality for cheap money grabs. Doesn't help that I play chaos marines, and went from an awesome book of fun to two in a row of terrible blandness, each successively making the things I bought the faction for in the first place - the chaos marines themselves, and big deep striking terminator retinues, progressively less playable.

So yeah, my attitude towards 7th comes more from my general feelings about 40k right now than from the rumors of 7th itself, which I feel ambivalent about (yay mission cards, boo 'unbound' armies, yay new psychic phase and summoning daemons, boo the killing off of traitor guard - but nothing streamlining terrain or objectives, nothing to fix hasslesome wound allocation, nothing to make infantry or rhino-borne assault units functional, basically little that addresses any of the reasons why pick up games have become less fun and harder for me to find since 6e rolled out).

Knifeparty
21-05-2014, 16:06
But mostly it's nothing to do with 7th, and everything to do with the current 40k environment has not filled me with any amount of confidence in GW's ability to handle the game. They'll need to earn back that confidence before I start viewing any new 40k content from them without skepticism and cynicism. It's about building trust. Right now I'm excited by new fantasy content, because I've liked and enjoyed the Fantasy content they've put out over the last several years. On the 40k end, I see nothing but a disorganized mess sacrificing game functionality for cheap money grabs. Doesn't help that I play chaos marines, and went from an awesome book of fun to two in a row of terrible blandness, each successively making the things I bought the faction for in the first place - the chaos marines themselves, and big deep striking terminator retinues, progressively less playable.

So yeah, my attitude towards 7th comes more from my general feelings about 40k right now than from the rumors of 7th itself, which I feel ambivalent about (yay mission cards, boo 'unbound' armies, yay new psychic phase and summoning daemons, boo the killing off of traitor guard - but nothing streamlining terrain or objectives, nothing to fix hasslesome wound allocation, nothing to make infantry or rhino-borne assault units functional, basically little that addresses any of the reasons why pick up games have become less fun and harder for me to find since 6e rolled out)

Couldn't agree with this more if I tried.

duffybear1988
21-05-2014, 16:06
I'd disagree about Haig. The historian Gordon Corrigan makes a very good case for how myths of incompetence have created a negative image of the British high command. In fact he puts forward plenty of evidence to suggest that the military leadership of the British was probably the best out of the main participants in the war. They understood how dangerous machine guns were (contrary to popular opinion). They understood that cavalry didn't have much of a role in modern warfare (the British generally used them as mobile infantry). They looked for technological solutions to combat trench warfare (airpower, tanks, artillery etc). Another interesting point Corrigan makes is the fact that the British army was almost non-existant at the start of the war. Haig had to raise an army, organise it, train it, equip it, ship it across the channel and overcome the problems of trench warfare against a German army that had been fighting since 1914.

A bit off topic but interesting none the less

Don't forget the French. Their use of targeted artillery called in by dedicated observers attached to the infantry, as opposed to the creeping barrage of the British went a long way to making up for other French failings.


Too soon. Seems to move the game further in the direction of the things I didn't like about 6th.

But mostly it's nothing to do with 7th, and everything to do with the current 40k environment has not filled me with any amount of confidence in GW's ability to handle the game. They'll need to earn back that confidence before I start viewing any new 40k content from them without skepticism and cynicism. It's about building trust. Right now I'm excited by new fantasy content, because I've liked and enjoyed the Fantasy content they've put out over the last several years. On the 40k end, I see nothing but a disorganized mess sacrificing game functionality for cheap money grabs. Doesn't help that I play chaos marines, and went from an awesome book of fun to two in a row of terrible blandness, each successively making the things I bought the faction for in the first place - the chaos marines themselves, and big deep striking terminator retinues, progressively less playable.

So yeah, my attitude towards 7th comes more from my general feelings about 40k right now than from the rumors of 7th itself, which I feel ambivalent about (yay mission cards, boo 'unbound' armies, yay new psychic phase and summoning daemons, boo the killing off of traitor guard - but nothing streamlining terrain or objectives, nothing to fix hasslesome wound allocation, nothing to make infantry or rhino-borne assault units functional, basically little that addresses any of the reasons why pick up games have become less fun and harder for me to find since 6e rolled out).

This.

march10k
21-05-2014, 16:11
Ah....I love dumb people. The 6th edition rulebook cost $75, and you got one big lump of paper that nobody wants to haul around...later, and I stress later, you could pay $100 for dark vengeance to get a more portable version of the rules with some models that are worth the extra $25 if you play one of the included armies...This edition, they separated the big lump of paper into three volumes, meaning that you can just leave the fluff and hobby sections at home, and the original rulebook is actually portable, eliminating a need to buy the boxed set, if you don't want either army that's included. And what do we hear? "but I don't want the fluff or hobby sections, why are you making me pay for them?" Glass half empty? I see it as paying an extra $10 for the privileges of a, leaving the unneeded weight at home when I go gaming, and b, not buying the boxed set this summer. knucklehuts, it's not a choice between just buying one book and buying three. It's a choice between buying one HUGE book and buying three reasonable ones. So grow the hell up and quit the wailing and gnashing of teeth. All you're going to accomplish is that GW combines the three books into a freaking tombstone again in 8th edition. Is that what you crybabies want? The fluff and hobby sections are not going to go away. This is an improvement over a single volume. And even if they did take the fluff and hobby stuff out and just sell you a rulebook....A FLIPPING CODEX IS $50!!!! What do you snot-nosed punks think a stripped BRB would cost?

[/rant]

skorczeny
21-05-2014, 16:29
Ah....I love dumb people. The 6th edition rulebook cost $75, and you got one big lump of paper that nobody wants to haul around...later, and I stress later, you could pay $100 for dark vengeance to get a more portable version of the rules with some models that are worth the extra $25 if you play one of the included armies...This edition, they separated the big lump of paper into three volumes, meaning that you can just leave the fluff and hobby sections at home, and the original rulebook is actually portable, eliminating a need to buy the boxed set, if you don't want either army that's included. And what do we hear? "but I don't want the fluff or hobby sections, why are you making me pay for them?" Glass half empty? I see it as paying an extra $10 for the privileges of a, leaving the unneeded weight at home when I go gaming, and b, not buying the boxed set this summer. knucklehuts, it's not a choice between just buying one book and buying three. It's a choice between buying one HUGE book and buying three reasonable ones. So grow the hell up and quit the wailing and gnashing of teeth. All you're going to accomplish is that GW combines the three books into a freaking tombstone again in 8th edition. Is that what you crybabies want? The fluff and hobby sections are not going to go away. This is an improvement over a single volume. And even if they did take the fluff and hobby stuff out and just sell you a rulebook....A FLIPPING CODEX IS $50!!!! What do you snot-nosed punks think a stripped BRB would cost? [/rant]

I would expect to get the 7th edition rule book, (which, as you point out, is one of the three books in the 85$ boxed set) at approximately 1/3 of $85. So approximately $30. I'd be happy to buy a 7th edition 'just the rules' rule book for $30. I doubt that will become an option, so I'll stick with my $75 6th edition BRB I purchased approximately two years ago, with the expectation I'd use it for the next 4 years or so.

- 7th edition is two years too early,
- its rumored fixes could have been handled by errata, and
- the new additions are not appealing.

Lanacane
21-05-2014, 16:32
Ah....I love dumb people. The 6th edition rulebook cost $75, and you got one big lump of paper that nobody wants to haul around...later, and I stress later, you could pay $100 for dark vengeance to get a more portable version of the rules with some models that are worth the extra $25 if you play one of the included armies...This edition, they separated the big lump of paper into three volumes, meaning that you can just leave the fluff and hobby sections at home, and the original rulebook is actually portable, eliminating a need to buy the boxed set, if you don't want either army that's included. And what do we hear? "but I don't want the fluff or hobby sections, why are you making me pay for them?" Glass half empty? I see it as paying an extra $10 for the privileges of a, leaving the unneeded weight at home when I go gaming, and b, not buying the boxed set this summer. knucklehuts, it's not a choice between just buying one book and buying three. It's a choice between buying one HUGE book and buying three reasonable ones. So grow the hell up and quit the wailing and gnashing of teeth. All you're going to accomplish is that GW combines the three books into a freaking tombstone again in 8th edition. Is that what you crybabies want? The fluff and hobby sections are not going to go away. This is an improvement over a single volume. And even if they did take the fluff and hobby stuff out and just sell you a rulebook....A FLIPPING CODEX IS $50!!!! What do you snot-nosed punks think a stripped BRB would cost?

[/rant]

In 6th, the Rulebook was 45 and it was 67.50 (iirc) for the LE DV set, basically giving you 2 armies for 20

The collectors got the brick, while the players got DV and either sold everything but the RB, swapped either army with another person or had a DA/Chaos army already and add units to your lists. Also it was good for new players.

This time around everyone but newbies already have DV, so paying 65 (or more knowing GW) for the RB isnt cost effective.. the only other option is 50 for a rulebook, a warhammer visions compendium and fluff that hasnt changed in 2 years.

There isnt an option to have a cheap way to get the rules yet


Also antagonizing us by calling us crybaby's isnt a way to get ahead.. no need to be a dick.

Sir Didymus
21-05-2014, 16:38
I can't say, that I've liked the rules of 40K since Rogue Trader. Ever since then, they've just seemed unambitious and 'gamey'.

I take a slight interest in rules changes, as sadly most of my gametime come from the odd tournaments these days. And for some reason tournament players insist on playing the latest in broken rules, so they have an excuse to cry 'cheese' instead of just accepting the circumstances and enjoy the game :p

hobojebus
21-05-2014, 16:48
Ah....I love dumb people. The 6th edition rulebook cost $75, and you got one big lump of paper that nobody wants to haul around...later, and I stress later, you could pay $100 for dark vengeance to get a more portable version of the rules with some models that are worth the extra $25 if you play one of the included armies...This edition, they separated the big lump of paper into three volumes, meaning that you can just leave the fluff and hobby sections at home, and the original rulebook is actually portable, eliminating a need to buy the boxed set, if you don't want either army that's included. And what do we hear? "but I don't want the fluff or hobby sections, why are you making me pay for them?" Glass half empty? I see it as paying an extra $10 for the privileges of a, leaving the unneeded weight at home when I go gaming, and b, not buying the boxed set this summer. knucklehuts, it's not a choice between just buying one book and buying three. It's a choice between buying one HUGE book and buying three reasonable ones. So grow the hell up and quit the wailing and gnashing of teeth. All you're going to accomplish is that GW combines the three books into a freaking tombstone again in 8th edition. Is that what you crybabies want? The fluff and hobby sections are not going to go away. This is an improvement over a single volume. And even if they did take the fluff and hobby stuff out and just sell you a rulebook....A FLIPPING CODEX IS $50!!!! What do you snot-nosed punks think a stripped BRB would cost?

[/rant]

We already have the lore section, we already have the hobby section we got both of those a meagre 2 years ago nothing has significantly changed in either area of 40k so getting them again is totally pointless.

They clearly could of just produced the rules book on its own and sold it for 25-30 but that would not gouge us enough so they are making us by stuff we in effect already own all over again thats the objection.

Whats more rumour has it the DV minibook will be missing vehicle and other rules so we cant even just buy the starter and sell the mini's which again we already got from last time.

Gorsameth
21-05-2014, 16:58
Ah....I love dumb people. The 6th edition rulebook cost $75, and you got one big lump of paper that nobody wants to haul around...later, and I stress later, you could pay $100 for dark vengeance to get a more portable version of the rules with some models that are worth the extra $25 if you play one of the included armies...This edition, they separated the big lump of paper into three volumes, meaning that you can just leave the fluff and hobby sections at home, and the original rulebook is actually portable, eliminating a need to buy the boxed set, if you don't want either army that's included. And what do we hear? "but I don't want the fluff or hobby sections, why are you making me pay for them?" Glass half empty? I see it as paying an extra $10 for the privileges of a, leaving the unneeded weight at home when I go gaming, and b, not buying the boxed set this summer. knucklehuts, it's not a choice between just buying one book and buying three. It's a choice between buying one HUGE book and buying three reasonable ones. So grow the hell up and quit the wailing and gnashing of teeth. All you're going to accomplish is that GW combines the three books into a freaking tombstone again in 8th edition. Is that what you crybabies want? The fluff and hobby sections are not going to go away. This is an improvement over a single volume. And even if they did take the fluff and hobby stuff out and just sell you a rulebook....A FLIPPING CODEX IS $50!!!! What do you snot-nosed punks think a stripped BRB would cost?

[/rant]
I know right. Those dumb people who pay for the 7th edition rulebook and 2 paper weights while my infinity rules are utterly free and i can chose to pay for background and pretty pictures.
So dumb.

march10k
21-05-2014, 16:59
I would expect to get the 7th edition rule book, (which, as you point out, is one of the three books in the 85$ boxed set) at approximately 1/3 of $85. So approximately $30. I'd be happy to buy a 7th edition 'just the rules' rule book for $30. I doubt that will become an option, so I'll stick with my $75 6th edition BRB I purchased approximately two years ago, with the expectation I'd use it for the next 4 years or so.

- 7th edition is two years too early,
- its rumored fixes could have been handled by errata, and
- the new additions are not appealing.

Mind-boggling...you just want what you want with no regard for what's reasonable. Core rulebook for 40% less than a codex. Yeah, right. The changes (mostly NOT fixes, but outright changes) are a bit numerous for an FAQ...it'd be 7 pages longer than it is now and modify half of the BRB...that's a reasonable alternative. Not. It doesn't matter if you think stronghold assault, escalation, and crap like mini-titans that you can field as an army in its own right are appealing (I don't, either), what matters is that TOs don't want to allow that stuff, and GW needs to force them to do so in order to keep selling plastic. They're barely making enough profit to stay in business. Anyone who looks at buying GW stock (I did) instantly realizes that almost ANY alternative is more profitable. You might wish that leman russes cost $15 and a squad of space marines $10, but basic economics laughs in your face. If you feel like GW is exploiting you, realize that you have a choice and GTFO. No wonder they call this site Whineseer!


In 6th, the Rulebook was 45 and it was 67.50 (iirc) for the LE DV set, basically giving you 2 armies for 20

The collectors got the brick, while the players got DV and either sold everything but the RB, swapped either army with another person or had a DA/Chaos army already and add units to your lists. Also it was good for new players.

This time around everyone but newbies already have DV, so paying 65 (or more knowing GW) for the RB isnt cost effective.. the only other option is 50 for a rulebook, a warhammer visions compendium and fluff that hasnt changed in 2 years.

There isnt an option to have a cheap way to get the rules yet


Um...news flash...I don't remember GW ever releasing the new boxed set as the same time as the BRB. This isn't new. Nor is it unusual. If the latest Harry Potter book comes out simultaneously as a $25 hardback and a $8 paperback, how many copies of the hardback are sold? The boxed set is attractive to established players only for the more portable rule book, not for the models, unless the models are for an existing or planned army and/or you think you can unload the extra plastic at a rate that brings $100 for the small rulebook down to someting reasonable. Pointing out that the boxed set is ideal for new players is like suggesting that the sun rises in the east. No kidding! And the brick of a rulebook hasn't ever only been bought by collectors. It's always been bought by everyone (other than pirates, but most of those, once they own a photocopy of the rules, won't buy the little rulebook, either!) when the new edition rolled out, for the simple reason that you have to know the rules to play, and there was no other version available. For the same $85, would you rather have one large book or three smaller ones? That's the real choice. There is no choice to get just one volume for $30, or $5, or whatever you've decided you want to donate. Rather than pissing and moaning about the two "extra, unwanted" books, realize that it's just one book, as it always has been, but with the option to leave 2/3 of it at home. That's an improvement!

It is possible that they'll eventually let you buy just the rules volume...but not for $30. It'll probably be the same price as the digital version sells for now...and that won't satisfy you either, I know...

Ozendorph
21-05-2014, 17:14
Was 5th really so great? Probably the most boring edition of 40k ever.

I don't think that's a fair statement. From the release of 4th edition through the pre-GK era of 5th was the most fun I've had playing 40K - a "career" going back to RT. IMO 5th was mechanically superior to 6th in nearly every sense (a whole different topic, which has been argued by myself and others in many different threads over 6th's mercifully short life). Not to put words in your mouth, but if you're talking about the overabundance of mech in 5th (a popular and deserved complaint) I don't blame that on the edition so much as a few poorly designed/costed units - primarily razorbacks and chimeras.

tommmmy555
21-05-2014, 17:24
My tuppence worth.

You don't HAVE to buy the new rulebook. I never bought the 6th edition one. I simply played games with people who had and they pointed out the significant differences as we played and as a result I learnt the rules. Or do what we used to do when we were kids - all go in on a copy and share it round till you know the rules.

Similiarly you don't HAVE to buy a whole new army because there is a new edition of the rules. You can just use your old army...

Bloodknight
21-05-2014, 17:24
.I don't remember GW ever releasing the new boxed set as the same time as the BRB.

In 3rd edition, the BRB was in the box. I think they started selling it on its own later. Not sure if they ever sold the 2nd ed. rulebook as a standalone at all, I don't think so.

Captain Idaho
21-05-2014, 17:37
I wouldn't judge the numbers of people who dislike a GW release by how many people moan about it online. As ever, GW sells to the silent majority rather than the vocal minority. Sales of things prove that. Those hideous Centurions? Everywhere. Uh that Storm Raven? Plenty of people use them. Expensive special edition versions of release? Sold out in 24 hours or less.

(And let's head off the argument that people bought Centurions and Storm Ravens because of game benefits. We have no proof. Only sales)

I for one am glad we are getting a new edition. The choice was play for a few more years a system I didn't like much or bite the bullet and consider a new edition.

And if it drags down Tau and Eldar armies in the process, so be it! ;)

Vipoid
21-05-2014, 17:38
Was 5th really so great? Probably the most boring edition of 40k ever.

It certainly had its flaws, but personally I thought it was one of the best editions - certainly miles better than 6th.

What I really liked about it was that very little about it was random - there were no random charts, no random terrain/objectives, no random charge distance etc.

It just felt like a much more solid system.

hobojebus
21-05-2014, 17:38
In 3rd edition, the BRB was in the box. I think they started selling it on its own later. Not sure if they ever sold the 2nd ed. rulebook as a standalone at all, I don't think so.

I remember them only being in the starter too.

Sephillion
21-05-2014, 17:39
Ah....I love dumb people. The 6th edition rulebook cost $75, and you got one big lump of paper that nobody wants to haul around...later, and I stress later, you could pay $100 for dark vengeance to get a more portable version of the rules with some models that are worth the extra $25 if you play one of the included armies...This edition, they separated the big lump of paper into three volumes, meaning that you can just leave the fluff and hobby sections at home, and the original rulebook is actually portable, eliminating a need to buy the boxed set, if you don't want either army that's included. And what do we hear? "but I don't want the fluff or hobby sections, why are you making me pay for them?" Glass half empty? I see it as paying an extra $10 for the privileges of a, leaving the unneeded weight at home when I go gaming, and b, not buying the boxed set this summer. knucklehuts, it's not a choice between just buying one book and buying three. It's a choice between buying one HUGE book and buying three reasonable ones. So grow the hell up and quit the wailing and gnashing of teeth. All you're going to accomplish is that GW combines the three books into a freaking tombstone again in 8th edition. Is that what you crybabies want? The fluff and hobby sections are not going to go away. This is an improvement over a single volume. And even if they did take the fluff and hobby stuff out and just sell you a rulebook....A FLIPPING CODEX IS $50!!!! What do you snot-nosed punks think a stripped BRB would cost?

[/rant]

Well, that escalated quickly.

The 6th edition book was overcosted if all you wanted was the rules.
Trimmer versions were not available until months later.
The 7th edition book comes at least two years too soon.
We have no choice right now but to buy the only version available of the book: meaning the set including the hobby and the background parts, unless we wait for a few weeks/months and get DV and the trim book. So in effect, we buy 2/3 of a book twice in two years because GW decided it was too greedy to offer a version including the rules only right now.

If you disagree with that, please be civil. No need to bark.

PS: And BTW, their 50$ codices are also too expensive.

skorczeny
21-05-2014, 17:53
Mind-boggling...you just want what you want with no regard for what's reasonable. Core rulebook for 40% less than a codex. Yeah, right. The changes (mostly NOT fixes, but outright changes) are a bit numerous for an FAQ...it'd be 7 pages longer than it is now and modify half of the BRB...that's a reasonable alternative. Not. It doesn't matter if you think stronghold assault, escalation, and crap like mini-titans that you can field as an army in its own right are appealing (I don't, either), what matters is that TOs don't want to allow that stuff, and GW needs to force them to do so in order to keep selling plastic. They're barely making enough profit to stay in business. Anyone who looks at buying GW stock (I did) instantly realizes that almost ANY alternative is more profitable. You might wish that leman russes cost $15 and a squad of space marines $10, but basic economics laughs in your face. If you feel like GW is exploiting you, realize that you have a choice and GTFO. No wonder they call this site Whineseer!



Um...news flash...I don't remember GW ever releasing the new boxed set as the same time as the BRB. This isn't new. Nor is it unusual. If the latest Harry Potter book comes out simultaneously as a $25 hardback and a $8 paperback, how many copies of the hardback are sold? The boxed set is attractive to established players only for the more portable rule book, not for the models, unless the models are for an existing or planned army and/or you think you can unload the extra plastic at a rate that brings $100 for the small rulebook down to someting reasonable. Pointing out that the boxed set is ideal for new players is like suggesting that the sun rises in the east. No kidding! And the brick of a rulebook hasn't ever only been bought by collectors. It's always been bought by everyone (other than pirates, but most of those, once they own a photocopy of the rules, won't buy the little rulebook, either!) when the new edition rolled out, for the simple reason that you have to know the rules to play, and there was no other version available. For the same $85, would you rather have one large book or three smaller ones? That's the real choice. There is no choice to get just one volume for $30, or $5, or whatever you've decided you want to donate. Rather than pissing and moaning about the two "extra, unwanted" books, realize that it's just one book, as it always has been, but with the option to leave 2/3 of it at home. That's an improvement!

It is possible that they'll eventually let you buy just the rules volume...but not for $30. It'll probably be the same price as the digital version sells for now...and that won't satisfy you either, I know...

I don't think it's mind-boggling that a book that represents 1/3 of the set would cost 1/3 of the price of the set. It's might be unrealistic, but not mind-boggling!

Many problems in 6th edition (challenges, ordinance sniping) could be errata'd to improve the game. We house ruled them. Sure, I can even imagine 7 pages added to 40k's official faq's and errata - I'd be happy to accept that for the next two years if it improved the game in a meaningful way. But instead GW is offering a new $85 BRB set for 7th edition.

The real choice GW is presenting is: do you want to buy a new rules set for $85? Or do you want to keep using the rules set you bought two years ago for $75. I chose the later.

Gorsameth
21-05-2014, 18:00
I wouldn't judge the numbers of people who dislike a GW release by how many people moan about it online. As ever, GW sells to the silent majority rather than the vocal minority. Sales of things prove that. Those hideous Centurions? Everywhere. Uh that Storm Raven? Plenty of people use them. Expensive special edition versions of release? Sold out in 24 hours or less.

(And let's head off the argument that people bought Centurions and Storm Ravens because of game benefits. We have no proof. Only sales)

I for one am glad we are getting a new edition. The choice was play for a few more years a system I didn't like much or bite the bullet and consider a new edition.

And if it drags down Tau and Eldar armies in the process, so be it! ;)
Yes and the people have spoken when GW's market share shrunk by 30% compared to there direct competition at the last financial report.

Captain Idaho
21-05-2014, 18:08
The share price is influenced by more than just sales.

HelloKitty
21-05-2014, 18:08
It thinks that it is paramount to many creatures that it is playing the most popular thing available and that if it is not then it is wasting its time.

Captain Idaho
21-05-2014, 18:10
Please elaborate?

Ozendorph
21-05-2014, 18:10
Yes and the people have spoken when GW's market share shrunk by 30% compared to there direct competition at the last financial report.

Pay no attention to these "numbers" and their filthy lies. It's just the dozen warseer malcontents and dakka know-nothings manipulating the market

HelloKitty
21-05-2014, 18:13
Often it hears that a game is not worth playing if it is not the dominant game, and that the loss of the creatures' at games workshop share prices indicates that the other games are better because more creatures are playing those games now, which some creatures feel means that its game is failing and not worth its time any longer. That because its way of playing is not the way the design-creatures design so its friends and it leave the game is a global indicator that the masses are leaving the creatures' game since it is leaving the game.

It is not surprised that the creatures' game lost other creatures because it stopped being for their play style and went to the other creatures' playstyle instead. So it does what it does when it doesnt get what it is after, it finds something that gives it what it wants, and then it speculates that other things are like it as well.

MarshalFaust
21-05-2014, 18:15
I really lost a lot of interest in the last 6 months of 6th ed. the game felt like a complete mess almost to the point I can barely even consider it a game anymore. I was hopeful when I first heard rumors of a new addition so soon and that they might recenter the game a bit. I probably won't be selling off all my minis anytime soon and will be reserving my judgment until people have played with the rules a bit but unless this edition turns out to be an about face from the direction that 6th was going, as unlikely as that looks at this point, this seems like a good place to call it quits for me with this hobby.

Gorsameth
21-05-2014, 18:21
Pay no attention to these "numbers" and their filthy lies. It's just the dozen warseer malcontents and dakka know-nothings manipulating the market


The share price is influenced by more than just sales.

http://investor.games-workshop.com/2014/01/16/half-year-results-2013-2014/
http://pinsofwar.com/miniature-wargaming-sales-2012-2013/

There revenue dropped by 10% while the market as a whole grew by 20%. Stick your head in the sand all you want but the people are speaking and there not congratulating GW on a good job.

Konovalev
21-05-2014, 18:35
We have no choice right now but to buy the only version available of the book: meaning the set including the hobby and the background parts

NO CHOICE!

Well other than the digital version wherein the length/size/weight of the book is a non-issue as it takes no longer to get to any one page than another.

Mandragola
21-05-2014, 18:39
I'm meh about 7th edition because I've just picked up a copy of x-wing. Right now I'm playing x-wing a lot, and enjoying it. It has really well defined rules for how to play casual games, tournament games, "epic" games where bigger ships start to appear and so on. The rules work and are supported by a good faq system. You can field any ships you want - there are no berzerkers and no riptides. You don't know who has won when you see the other guy's squadron. Playing the actual game determines who wins.

Actually the more I read about 7th, the better I feel about it. The new psychic stuff looks good to me. People summoning daemons is nonsense of course, but I don't care if the psychic rules overall are made better. Right now the reliability of psychic powers is what makes most death stars possible, and death stars are one of the things ruining the game. It looks like there will be some help for assault armies too. Unbound is bizarre, but you can't have everything, and the environment in which I normally play is almost certain to ban it regardless.

frikandel speciaal
21-05-2014, 18:39
I really lost a lot of interest in the last 6 months of 6th ed. the game felt like a complete mess almost to the point I can barely even consider it a game anymore. I was hopeful when I first heard rumors of a new addition so soon and that they might recenter the game a bit. I probably won't be selling off all my minis anytime soon and will be reserving my judgment until people have played with the rules a bit but unless this edition turns out to be an about face from the direction that 6th was going, as unlikely as that looks at this point, this seems like a good place to call it quits for me with this hobby.


That is what happened to me. Most games i had seemed to be pointless from the start. It's a mess and uninspiring. The new edition doesn't seem to fix those problems. Games Workshop have lost it.

Sephillion
21-05-2014, 18:46
NO CHOICE!

Well other than the digital version wherein the length/size/weight of the book is a non-issue as it takes no longer to get to any one page than another.

Oh right, forgot about this. Are their new digital editions better? I bought Codex: Inquisition (eBook version) and think it’s really terrible. The layout, the presentation, the choice of illustrations, it’s really disappointing for 25$, after this experience I wouldn’t dare try a 60+$ book.

You can also count the grossly overpriced limited edition.

duffybear1988
21-05-2014, 19:03
Pay no attention to these "numbers" and their filthy lies. It's just the dozen warseer malcontents and dakka know-nothings manipulating the market

Oh wow we're malcontents now? When did we evolve from just plain whiners? Do I get a pay rise? How about a forum medal? I'm so happy I'm tearing up here guys!

I'd like to thank my mummy and daddy, AngryAngel, and my good friends IcedCrow and TheEmperor who were sadly terminated earlier this year. Our prayers are with them.

:)

hobojebus
21-05-2014, 19:04
Oh wow we're malcontents now? When did we evolve from just plain whiners? Do I get a pay rise? How about a forum medal? I'm so happy I'm tearing up here guys!

I'd like to thank my mummy and daddy, AngryAngel, and my good friends IcedCrow and TheEmperor who were sadly terminated earlier this year. Our prayers are with them.

:)

I think we WaaC malcontent's need to form us a club duffmeister.

Wolf Lord Balrog
21-05-2014, 19:06
Oh wow we're malcontents now? When did we evolve from just plain whiners? Do I get a pay rise? How about a forum medal? I'm so happy I'm tearing up here guys!

I'd like to thank my mummy and daddy, AngryAngel, and my good friends IcedCrow and TheEmperor who were sadly terminated earlier this year. Our prayers are with them.

:)

Big E got the banhammer? Damn, I thought it had been a while since I saw one of his posts. That sucks.

hobojebus
21-05-2014, 19:11
Big E got the banhammer? Damn, I thought it had been a while since I saw one of his posts. That sucks.

He did? come to think of it yes its been a while but i don't remember him doing anything worth getting the banhammer for.

Find me a squat we have a memorial to raise.

duffybear1988
21-05-2014, 19:14
Big E got the banhammer? Damn, I thought it had been a while since I saw one of his posts. That sucks.

Yes he did. He joined again and got hammered right after for a second time as well.

And yes hobo I do think we need a club.

Also it's gone pretty quiet since the psychic chart was revealed and it's apparent that pretty much everyone can summon daemons. Where are all the defenders? Off licking their wounds? 1-0 to us.

march10k
21-05-2014, 19:15
In 3rd edition, the BRB was in the box. I think they started selling it on its own later. Not sure if they ever sold the 2nd ed. rulebook as a standalone at all, I don't think so.

Um...1998-2014....it's 16 years later, buddy. Did you know that 80% of 40k players are in and out of the hobby in four years or less, and only 10% last past ten years? "But way back in rogue trader" is about as useful as tits on a fish when less than one player in ten remembers fourth edition, let alone before.



Well, that escalated quickly.

The 6th edition book was overcosted if all you wanted was the rules.
Trimmer versions were not available until months later.
The 7th edition book comes at least two years too soon.
We have no choice right now but to buy the only version available of the book: meaning the set including the hobby and the background parts, unless we wait for a few weeks/months and get DV and the trim book. So in effect, we buy 2/3 of a book twice in two years because GW decided it was too greedy to offer a version including the rules only right now.

If you disagree with that, please be civil. No need to bark.

PS: And BTW, their 50$ codices are also too expensive.

It escalated quickly because this is whineseer, and whiners get under my skin :D 7th edition came out when it did to fix the tournament scene. GW was getting feedback that virtually no TOs were allowing escalation, stronghold assault, Knights, or sometimes even allies. To fix that, they have to put that stuff in the main book. It's not because they want $85 a player two years sooner, and it's not as if you'd complain any less about the $85 two years from now. If you can't use the expensive new kits, you're less likely to buy them, and if you do buy them, you're going to be really pissy about not being able to use them. This had nothing to do with selling rulebooks! As for GW not offering the cheap version to early adopters, show me a business that does. Can you buy the paperback of the latest novel the same day that the 3x-as-expensive hardcover is released? Of course not! Do video card manufacturers offer slightly nerfed versions of their next generation of flagship cards the same day as the $1000 version? Natrually, you're not going to get 95% of the benefit for 40% of the price the same day, or nobody would buy the big one. That's simple economics, not evil greed. If you had a choice between the slim rulebook and the big version from day one, they'd have to charge the same for both, and it wouldn't be $30, it'd be more like $75, or they'd make less money and have to raise prices on something else to offset that.




I don't think it's mind-boggling that a book that represents 1/3 of the set would cost 1/3 of the price of the set. It's might be unrealistic, but not mind-boggling!

Many problems in 6th edition (challenges, ordinance sniping) could be errata'd to improve the game. We house ruled them. Sure, I can even imagine 7 pages added to 40k's official faq's and errata - I'd be happy to accept that for the next two years if it improved the game in a meaningful way. But instead GW is offering a new $85 BRB set for 7th edition.

The real choice GW is presenting is: do you want to buy a new rules set for $85? Or do you want to keep using the rules set you bought two years ago for $75. I chose the later. What's mind-boggling is that you think it's reasonable to demand something that you admit is unrealistic. I'm sure you'd be happy to deal with a 20 page FAQ in lieu of spending $85. Who wouldn't? Of course, GW would be equally happy to just update the rulebook on the fly (printed on demand, it's not hard), and then you're stuck with a BRB containing out of date rules, and you have to find someone who just bought his copy yesterday and scribble notes in your copy...I think a reasonably-sized FAQ and a new rule book whenever there are significant changes is a decent enough compromise...As for continuing to play 6th, go for it, I support that. Play 3rd if you want, it's my favorite edition, I love the idea that only DA can have plasma cannons in their tactical squads, and stubborn sergeants for a few points, making them essentially fearless till the sergeant, who can neither be challenged nor precision shotted, goes down. I'm totally cool with older rules, as long as you can find a willing opponent.


The share price is influenced by more than just sales.

Sure, the primary thing affecting the share price, however, is the investor's perception of what return he's likely to get, as compared to all considered alternatives. So is GW's price likely to appreciate significantly? Does the stock pay an attractive dividend? If the answer to both is "no," then why buy the stock? And profits go to one of three places, eventually. R&D (in GW's case new rules and new models), debt repayment, or dividends. So profits are a direct and large influence on the quality of GW stock as an investment. And GW doesn't make any sort of obscene profits that would translate into a healthy dividend. "Sales," by which you must mean gross income don't really influence stock price so much, although relative sales growth or declines certainly do have a huge impact, but net income is a really big deal, and so is investor perception of whether GW is reinvesting enough profits in R&D.


http://investor.games-workshop.com/2014/01/16/half-year-results-2013-2014/
http://pinsofwar.com/miniature-wargaming-sales-2012-2013/

There revenue dropped by 10% while the market as a whole grew by 20%. Stick your head in the sand all you want but the people are speaking and there not congratulating GW on a good job.

...the point being that GW isn't making the obscene profits that most whiners claim?

malisteen
21-05-2014, 19:18
There's little reason, imo, to be upset that only the box set is available so far. It's standard price discrimination. Once they think they've sold the rules to those willing to pay $85 for them, we'll see a release of just the rules in a separate book - though it will likely still be pretty pricey, this is GW after all, probably clocking in at around the cost of a codex. Early adopters will still have the fluff and hobby books.

I'll wait, myself. Can't afford it yet. No biggie.

march10k
21-05-2014, 19:21
Holy guano, Robin...a reasonable voice!

Kung Fu Hamster
21-05-2014, 19:29
Yes he did. He joined again and got hammered right after for a second time as well.

And yes hobo I do think we need a club.

Also it's gone pretty quiet since the psychic chart was revealed and it's apparent that pretty much everyone can summon daemons. Where are all the defenders? Off licking their wounds? 1-0 to us.

What did he do to get banned? He was a great poster.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ozendorph
21-05-2014, 19:32
Oh wow we're malcontents now? When did we evolve from just plain whiners? Do I get a pay rise? How about a forum medal? I'm so happy I'm tearing up here guys!

Seems I need to include more winky-faces in my posts to denote sarcasm.

Konovalev
21-05-2014, 19:34
Are their new digital editions better?

Only if you expect them to be better. If you expect them to be worse they undoubtedly will be. It's all very kafkaesque.


And yes hobo I do think we need a club.

Isn't there already an board dedicated to the edification of GW consumers? A club seems like it would be a step down.

ihavetoomuchminis
21-05-2014, 19:36
THeEmperor banned? I hope so many others were banned too then.

frikandel speciaal
21-05-2014, 19:42
THeEmperor banned? I hope so many others were banned too then.

Indeed, that's a shame. BRING THE EMPEROR BACK YOU HERETICS!

Captain Idaho
21-05-2014, 19:47
Sure 10% loss in sales is a big hit, but what is the actual source of those losses? GW doesn't specifiy which products are failing so they can re market them as a successful brand later (i.e. rescue them and spur growth).

40K is certainly not the failing product that's for sure. But what about Lord of the Rings, the Hobbit, terrain, paint, modelling supplies, operating costs?

The cause is more complex than "10% loss in sales - the Internet moaners are obviously the majority!"

The point is, businesses go up and down. Sony are suffering massive losses whilst Microsoft are taking big hits in their profits, yet both have seen huge sales in their gaming divisions. GW is doing quite well for a time money is tight and they are lumbered with toxic products like LotR and the Hobbit.

Sephillion
21-05-2014, 19:55
It escalated quickly because this is whineseer, and whiners get under my skin file:///C:\Users\Soludoc\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\0 1\clip_image001.png7th edition came out when it did to fix the tournament scene. GW was getting feedback that virtually no TOs were allowing escalation, stronghold assault, Knights, or sometimes even allies. To fix that, they have to put that stuff in the main book. It's not because they want $85 a player two years sooner, and it's not as if you'd complain any less about the $85 two years from now. If you can't use the expensive new kits, you're less likely to buy them, and if you do buy them, you're going to be really pissy about not being able to use them. This had nothing to do with selling rulebooks! As for GW not offering the cheap version to early adopters, show me a business that does. Can you buy the paperback of the latest novel the same day that the 3x-as-expensive hardcover is released? Of course not! Do video card manufacturers offer slightly nerfed versions of their next generation of flagship cards the same day as the $1000 version? Natrually, you're not going to get 95% of the benefit for 40% of the price the same day, or nobody would buy the big one. That's simple economics, not evil greed. If you had a choice between the slim rulebook and the big version from day one, they'd have to charge the same for both, and it wouldn't be $30, it'd be more like $75, or they'd make less money and have to raise prices on something else to offset that.



First, I disagree with the idea that 7th is to fix the tourney scene. GW doesn’t care about that scene, that much is clear. Their games are not tourney friendly and they don’t balance their codices appropriately. It is at best a second thought (and according to some, even some GW white knights, it’s not a consideration at all). Besides, Imperial Knights apparently sold quite well; and allies being in the book did not prevent TOs from banning them… If you’re right on that point and GW released 7th for that reason, their thought process is epileptic.

Second, the difference here is that they released their book a mere two years ago at full price. Now we have to wait or buy another overpriced book. I wouldn’t complain if they had updated the rules, but now I have to pay for the “hobby” part. Hell, I know what the hobby is, I’ve been “hobbying” for years, and I’ve got a now worthless brick telling me all about it – the 6th edition book. The hobby didn’t change all that much since 2012, did it? Same with the fluff, I’ll retract my words if they advanced the fluff considerably. Which I doubt. So yeah, people are pissed about having to pay twice for the same useless 2/3 of the book. If GW had any considerations for its players, it would have offered a Codex-priced version of the rule without any of the material that most players are going to need anyway.

You make the assumption that I wouldn’t complain less if it had been two years, well you’re completely off field. I had just bought the 5th edition of the rulebook when they announced 6th edition and I was really excited about it. It was bad timing, not corporate greed, that made me switch edition so quickly. I love change. I support edition change in other systems/hobbies. You know why? Because other companies don’t charge as much as GW for their rules and they don’t switch edition after only 2 years.


There's little reason, imo, to be upset that only the box set is available so far. It's standard price discrimination. Once they think they've sold the rules to those willing to pay $85 for them, we'll see a release of just the rules in a separate book - though it will likely still be pretty pricey, this is GW after all, probably clocking in at around the cost of a codex. Early adopters will still have the fluff and hobby books.

I'll wait, myself. Can't afford it yet. No biggie.

Yeah, last time it took them more than a year to release the slim rulebook, and lo and behold, here we are and it’s already out of date. Or I may buy the next box set and then end up having to sell the models on eBay. Sweet. In the meantime, I do what? Play 6th? Actually I’ll hope there are enough spoilers on here to make up the rules and hope for the best…


Indeed, that's a shame. BRING THE EMPEROR BACK YOU HERETICS!

Wonder if it’s got anything to do with the drama at the beginning of the thread…

EDIT: Edited for confusion about my sentiments on Emperor's ban. Not happy about that at all!

frikandel speciaal
21-05-2014, 19:58
Sure 10% loss in sales is a big hit, but what is the actual source of those losses? GW doesn't specifiy which products are failing so they can re market them as a successful brand later (i.e. rescue them and spur growth).

40K is certainly not the failing product that's for sure. But what about Lord of the Rings, the Hobbit, terrain, paint, modelling supplies, operating costs?

The cause is more complex than "10% loss in sales - the Internet moaners are obviously the majority!"

The point is, businesses go up and down. Sony are suffering massive losses whilst Microsoft are taking big hits in their profits, yet both have seen huge sales in their gaming divisions. GW is doing quite well for a time money is tight and they are lumbered with toxic products like LotR and the Hobbit.
They better make sure 40K isn't going to become a toxic product. None of the people i know are enthousiastic for this edition and most people i know from different gaming community's allready stopped playing at the end of fith, half way six. The people who remain largely stopped buying from GW. Lot's of these people have played since Roque Trader, but the love just died.

hobojebus
21-05-2014, 20:01
Sure 10% loss in sales is a big hit, but what is the actual source of those losses? GW doesn't specifiy which products are failing so they can re market them as a successful brand later (i.e. rescue them and spur growth).

40K is certainly not the failing product that's for sure. But what about Lord of the Rings, the Hobbit, terrain, paint, modelling supplies, operating costs?

The cause is more complex than "10% loss in sales - the Internet moaners are obviously the majority!"

The point is, businesses go up and down. Sony are suffering massive losses whilst Microsoft are taking big hits in their profits, yet both have seen huge sales in their gaming divisions. GW is doing quite well for a time money is tight and they are lumbered with toxic products like LotR and the Hobbit.

They lost 20% of WFB sales for a start, and in a year with their biggest seller space marines releasing a new codex they actually lost sales.

You only have to look at the LotR forums here to see how little interest there is in even talking about it.

They should never have ditched specialist games, properly supported they could of made money infinity proves people still want a necromunda/mordheim style game, drop zone commander shows people like Epic style games as does battletech alpha strikes growing popularity and X-wing shows there is a market for a good space combat game.

They have empty B&M stores yet insist on alienating the FLGS that used to be a major part of their advertising, now those same stores push X-wing and warmachine.

GW were the big fish in a small pond from the late 90's to the mid 00's but now the ponds grown and they've not adapted to the new situation.

frikandel speciaal
21-05-2014, 20:03
First, I disagree with the idea that 7th is to fix the tourney scene. GW doesn’t care about that scene, that much is clear. Their games are not tourney friendly and they don’t balance their codices appropriately. It is at best a second thought (and according to some, even some GW white knights, it’s not a consideration at all). Besides, Imperial Knights apparently sold quite well; and allies being in the book did not prevent TOs from banning them… If you’re right on that point and GW released 7th for that reason, their thought process is epileptic.

Second, the difference here is that they released their book a mere two years ago at full price. Now we have to wait or buy another overpriced book. I wouldn’t complain if they had updated the rules, but now I have to pay for the “hobby” part. Hell, I know what the hobby is, I’ve been “hobbying” for years, and I’ve got a now worthless brick telling me all about it – the 6th edition book. The hobby didn’t change all that much since 2012, did it? Same with the fluff, I’ll retract my words if they advanced the fluff considerably. Which I doubt. So yeah, people are pissed about having to pay twice for the same useless 2/3 of the book. If GW had any considerations for its players, it would have offered a Codex-priced version of the rule without any of the material that most players are going to need anyway.

You make the assumption that I wouldn’t complain less if it had been two years, well you’re completely off field. I had just bought the 5th edition of the rulebook when they announced 6th edition and I was really excited about it. It was bad timing, not corporate greed, that made me switch edition so quickly. I love change. I support edition change in other systems/hobbies. You know why? Because other companies don’t charge as much as GW for their rules and they don’t switch edition after only 2 years.



Yeah, last time it took them more than a year to release the slim rulebook, and lo and behold, here we are and it’s already out of date. Or I may buy the next box set and then end up having to sell the models on eBay. Sweet. In the meantime, I do what? Play 6th? Actually I’ll hope there are enough spoilers on here to make up the rules and hope for the best…



Wonder if it’s got anything to do with the drama at the beginning of the thread… A victory for Chaos!

Someone getting banned is not something that should be celebrated. There is no honour in that. Even Chaos-Cultists should know that.

Kung Fu Hamster
21-05-2014, 20:08
Someone getting banned is not something that should be celebrated. There is no honour in that. Even Chaos-Cultists should know that.

Yeah. Bad form.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

frikandel speciaal
21-05-2014, 20:09
They lost 20% of WFB sales for a start, and in a year with their biggest seller space marines releasing a new codex they actually lost sales.

You only have to look at the LotR forums here to see how little interest there is in even talking about it.

They should never have ditched specialist games, properly supported they could of made money infinity proves people still want a necromunda/mordheim style game, drop zone commander shows people like Epic style games as does battletech alpha strikes growing popularity and X-wing shows there is a market for a good space combat game.

They have empty B&M stores yet insist on alienating the FLGS that used to be a major part of their advertising, now those same stores push X-wing and warmachine.

GW were the big fish in a small pond from the late 90's to the mid 00's but now the ponds grown and they've not adapted to the new situation.


I fully agree on everything you say.
I'm pretty sure the return of Necromunda would make GW a lot of money. Not everyone is looking for a Baneblade or Stompa in a regular game. A skirmish game would be nice and a great oportunity to draw new people in who don't want to spend a fortune just to play a game.

Wolf Lord Balrog
21-05-2014, 20:09
Um...1998-2014....it's 16 years later, buddy. Did you know that 80% of 40k players are in and out of the hobby in four years or less, and only 10% last past ten years? "But way back in rogue trader" is about as useful as tits on a fish when less than one player in ten remembers fourth edition, let alone before.


...the point being that GW isn't making the obscene profits that most whiners claim?


Holy guano, Robin...a reasonable voice!

You are being unnecessarily confrontational and insulting. Please dial it back a bit.


The cause is more complex than "10% loss in sales - the Internet moaners are obviously the majority!"
A> Surely it is a bit more complex than that. But by the same token, GW has often said that 40K is their #1 product line by a mile. So one must assume that the vast majority of any change in sales is also coming from 40K.
B> Calling everybody with a critique of Game Workshop an 'Internet moaner' is also unnecessarily insulting.


The point is, businesses go up and down. Sony are suffering massive losses whilst Microsoft are taking big hits in their profits, yet both have seen huge sales in their gaming divisions. GW is doing quite well for a time money is tight and they are lumbered with toxic products like LotR and the Hobbit.
LotR used to be a huge cash cow, not a 'toxic product'. Whose fault is it that it lost its former status? And you missed, or ignored, the part where Gorsameth pointed out that GW's sales are down 10%, while the rest of the gaming hobby is up 20%. That clearly indicates GW is not performing as well as its competitors, they are just much bigger so they have room to absorb some losses.

This is a bit off-topic though, except for the part where the lower sales are empirical evidence that GW's customers are a bit blah in general.

hobojebus
21-05-2014, 20:17
LotR used to be a huge cash cow, not a 'toxic product'. Whose fault is it that it lost its former status? And you missed, or ignored, the part where Gorsameth pointed out that GW's sales are down 10%, while the rest of the gaming hobby is up 20%. That clearly indicates GW is not performing as well as its competitors, they are just much bigger so they have room to absorb some losses.

LotR is when the rot set in, when the first trilogy was on it was a massive success with the younger crowd and led to them floating the company but even back then we vets said it would not last and what do you know 6 months after return of the king left the cinema the bubble burst.

2004 onwards its been on a decline, wasting money making the hobbit models has no doubt eaten into their profit margin greatly i dont know anyone who thought 3 ogres were worth 50 or that bard on his own is worth 12.

underscore
21-05-2014, 20:20
Oh right, forgot about this. Are their new digital editions better? I bought Codex: Inquisition (eBook version) and think it’s really terrible. The layout, the presentation, the choice of illustrations, it’s really disappointing for 25$, after this experience I wouldn’t dare try a 60+$ book.
I think this may have something to do with E-Book formating, unfortunately. Buying the e-book Inquisition Codex and Kill Team rules really sold me on the iPad versions.

...

Pity I don't have an iPad.. :(

AngryAngel
21-05-2014, 20:39
Oh wow we're malcontents now? When did we evolve from just plain whiners? Do I get a pay rise? How about a forum medal? I'm so happy I'm tearing up here guys!

I'd like to thank my mummy and daddy, AngryAngel, and my good friends IcedCrow and TheEmperor who were sadly terminated earlier this year. Our prayers are with them.

:)

Ah, WAAC, my win driven mindset, malcontent, is there no end to the injustice ? I haven't even called anyone an apologist in like forever. I appreciate the thanks and it is good form to remember our dearly departed, who fought the fight and in the end, faced end like men. I do miss the Emperor and was sad to hear of his termination. He did give Duffy and I a farewell message, he will be remembered, in the book of deeds, at Malcontent HQ, which we need to build.




I think we WaaC malcontent's need to form us a club duffmeister.

We do, with an HQ and some kind of fiendish global policy.


Big E got the banhammer? Damn, I thought it had been a while since I saw one of his posts. That sucks.

That does suck pretty bad.


He did? come to think of it yes its been a while but i don't remember him doing anything worth getting the banhammer for.

Find me a squat we have a memorial to raise.

He was a man of much passion.


Yes he did. He joined again and got hammered right after for a second time as well.

And yes hobo I do think we need a club.

Also it's gone pretty quiet since the psychic chart was revealed and it's apparent that pretty much everyone can summon daemons. Where are all the defenders? Off licking their wounds? 1-0 to us.

They aren't run off, they are waiting, planning a new offensive. I already see it, no real positive change in psychics, that's fine it was perfect before ( already happening mind you ) Then summoning, proven to be for everyone, ends up being game amazing, for some, eh for others, but then we'll hear how that is totally as it should be, GW should be praised for wisdom and creativity. I mean, who really wanted to every use pyromancy and telekinesis, we have demons now, and our old friends of biomancy, telepathy and divination, they'll never let us down.


Seems I need to include more winky-faces in my posts to denote sarcasm.

I knew you were on our side Oze, just one of us old Malcontents, up to your WAAC ways just like the rest of us.


That said, all the lack of work placed into this new edition has me feeling blah, the more I learn, the more it seems its all has been feared. The things you hoped changed, stayed just the same and its just a re package, with some wonky half fleshed ideas, but a full new edition price tag. Oh with 100 percent more demons for flavor, but no preservatives.

Sephillion
21-05-2014, 20:40
Yeah. Bad form.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh, my comment was badly interpreted (and/or worded...). I positioned myself among the Loyalists there. So sad day instead, and sorry for the confusion!

RanaldLoec
21-05-2014, 20:43
I'm quite happy about 7th.

Divination keeps prescience now warp charge 2.

Go guard.

Some of the new daemon banishing powers are the grey knight powers. Eg hammer hand.

Bonuses to psykers that choose powers from one discipline they get the primrus power on top of there mastery level powers.

Still taking it in but not seen many big game changes.

duffybear1988
21-05-2014, 20:47
Seems I need to include more winky-faces in my posts to denote sarcasm.

I know it was sarcasm. My post was all about glorifying my insanity. :)

@ Konovalev - clubs, boards... I'll take them all. The rage never stops, never sleeps and never quits. :)

@ AngryAngel - too true.

Kung Fu Hamster
21-05-2014, 21:00
Oh, my comment was badly interpreted (and/or worded...). I positioned myself among the Loyalists there. So sad day instead, and sorry for the confusion!

It's cool. I got caught by that earlier today too. :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Theocracity
21-05-2014, 21:45
Also it's gone pretty quiet since the psychic chart was revealed and it's apparent that pretty much everyone can summon daemons. Where are all the defenders? Off licking their wounds? 1-0 to us.

Personally I've been making a conscious effort to dial back the pointless internet cat fights with people who don't want to be convinced. If you like thinking that means a point has been scored, be my guest - the end result is that we're both happier anyway :).

Commissar Merces
21-05-2014, 21:46
The Emperor being banned is certainly unfortunate.

And what earlier drama at the start of the thread? Seems like an average day at warseer to me! :D

Bit odd that someone is getting PMs about me from "friends" but besides that, all is normal for this site in terms of hostility on two warring sides as far as I can tell. :p

frikandel speciaal
21-05-2014, 21:59
[QUOTE=AngryAngel;7167261]Ah, WAAC, my win driven mindset, malcontent, is there no end to the injustice ? I haven't even called anyone an apologist in like forever. I appreciate the thanks and it is good form to remember our dearly departed, who fought the fight and in the end, faced end like men. I do miss the Emperor and was sad to hear of his termination. He did give Duffy and I a farewell message, he will be remembered, in the book of deeds, at Malcontent HQ, which we need to build.


Angry Angel, this is just depressing.
I think i'm done with this company. I was the most passionate gamer in our group, i just loved this game. 6th wasn't good, but 7th looks worse to me. Someone at GW's HQ is changing this game for the sake of change. Why, i don't know, but i don't like it a bit. Maybe it's us. Maybe we are to stubborn to accept all these changes, maybe we've enjoyed former editions to much and are just not ready to let all the good things go.
To me it feels like a good franchise going bad. Didn't we all loved the first and second Hellraiser movies? Freddy was cool, so was Jason...Freddy vs Jason, not so much. The original Starwars movies, great times. But i think Jar Jar Binks has just entered the Realm of 40K(Unbound).

BoggyMan
21-05-2014, 21:59
I can see both sides of it. People are right to resent being sold a rulebook that became obsolete in 2 years, but at the same time I think we can agree that 6th ed was lackluster. At our venue we'll just be playing 6th until the mini rulebook for 7th comes out. (Assuming it's not worse than 6th.) I'm not a child and don't expect anything for free, but it would be nice if GW offered a steep discount to trade in the old books. I'm glad something is being fixed, but don't care to pay for other people's mistakes.

Voss
21-05-2014, 22:03
I can see both sides of it. People are right to resent being sold a rulebook that became obsolete in 2 years, but at the same time I think we can agree that 6th ed was lackluster. At our venue we'll just be playing 6th until the mini rulebook for 7th comes out. (Assuming it's not worse than 6th.) I'm not a child and don't expect anything for free, but it would be nice if GW offered a steep discount to trade in the old books. I'm glad something is being fixed, but don't care to pay for other people's mistakes.

I doubt everyone would agree that 6th was lackluster. Seen quite a few posts to the exact contrary, in fact.

As for something (or indeed, anything) being fixed... I've yet to see any evidence of that.

Gorsameth
21-05-2014, 22:04
I can see both sides of it. People are right to resent being sold a rulebook that became obsolete in 2 years, but at the same time I think we can agree that 6th ed was lackluster. At our venue we'll just be playing 6th until the mini rulebook for 7th comes out. (Assuming it's not worse than 6th.) I'm not a child and don't expect anything for free, but it would be nice if GW offered a steep discount to trade in the old books. I'm glad something is being fixed, but don't care to pay for other people's mistakes.

6e being lackluster is not an argument for 7e when it doesn't look to be fixing the actual issues (tho it cant fix a lot of them since they come from codex problems not core rules.

AngryAngel
21-05-2014, 22:06
[QUOTE=AngryAngel;7167261]Ah, WAAC, my win driven mindset, malcontent, is there no end to the injustice ? I haven't even called anyone an apologist in like forever. I appreciate the thanks and it is good form to remember our dearly departed, who fought the fight and in the end, faced end like men. I do miss the Emperor and was sad to hear of his termination. He did give Duffy and I a farewell message, he will be remembered, in the book of deeds, at Malcontent HQ, which we need to build.


Angry Angel, this is just depressing.
I think i'm done with this company. I was the most passionate gamer in our group, i just loved this game. 6th wasn't good, but 7th looks worse to me. Someone at GW's HQ is changing this game for the sake of change. Why, i don't know, but i don't like it a bit. Maybe it's us. Maybe we are to stubborn to accept all these changes, maybe we've enjoyed former editions to much and are just not ready to let all the good things go.
To me it feels like a good franchise going bad. Didn't we all loved the first and second Hellraiser movies? Freddy was cool, so was Jason...Freddy vs Jason, not so much. The original Starwars movies, great times. But i think Jar Jar Binks has just entered the Realm of 40K.


I agree, it is sad. The more I hear, the less excited I get, as it feels like the exact same thing, with some big changes just for change sake. The psychic phase, addition of un bound, for instance. I haven't even heard much of actual USR changes. This by far makes this sound like a disappointment and not a treat, to me anyways.

frikandel speciaal
21-05-2014, 22:17
[QUOTE=frikandel speciaal;7167362]


I agree, it is sad. The more I hear, the less excited I get, as it feels like the exact same thing, with some big changes just for change sake. The psychic phase, addition of un bound, for instance. I haven't even heard much of actual USR changes. This by far makes this sound like a disappointment and not a treat, to me anyways.

Indeed, it starts to sound like the original rumours. Not much of a different game ruleswise, but the addition of Escalation etc.
That was boring.
But they decided to make it worse. Unbound...why? Just WHY? From a gaming perspective, there is no logic in that. Is it a money grab, i'm not sure. Maybe they are just as clueless and desperate as some of us are.
Sad times. I've commisioned someone to paint a couple of units for one of my army's. I had plans for even more expansions, but i just don't see that happen anytime soon.

GoodCarl
21-05-2014, 22:54
I wont be buying 7th edition because I feel the game has become more bloated than papa nurgle himself. GW has been playing at being oxymoronic for years now by lowering points and increasing average army sizes whilst introducing loads of minutae and dice rolling to the game system which slows down games. Its a shame really as the creative potential of unbound armies is quite special and the objective cards look like good fun.

My gaming group has gone back to 4E when 40k was straightforward, every race had a decent codex and the minute details were left to the creativity of the players.

Disposable Hero
21-05-2014, 23:18
Bugger all this. I get to buy a shiny new book, and cards too.

Commissar Merces
21-05-2014, 23:18
wow big words from a small mind.

no need to go over board.. You seem to be suffering some problems at the moment.. its best to not vent it out online. Especially if this is your haven?

Thanks for the new avatar!

Surgency
22-05-2014, 00:09
Personally I've been making a conscious effort to dial back the pointless internet cat fights with people who don't want to be convinced. If you like thinking that means a point has been scored, be my guest - the end result is that we're both happier anyway :).

This. Why try to discuss something with someone who doesn't want an actual discussion and insults those who disagree with their viewpoint. You'd be better off trying to convince an Eskimo that snow isn't cold.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

Ozendorph
22-05-2014, 00:11
This. Why try to discuss something with someone who doesn't want an actual discussion and insults those who disagree with their viewpoint. You'd be better off trying to convince an Eskimo that snow isn't cold.

Actually, considering the side of the argument I normally see you on, that's a very good analogy. ;)

Spell_of_Destruction
22-05-2014, 00:33
I don't think that's a fair statement. From the release of 4th edition through the pre-GK era of 5th was the most fun I've had playing 40K - a "career" going back to RT. IMO 5th was mechanically superior to 6th in nearly every sense (a whole different topic, which has been argued by myself and others in many different threads over 6th's mercifully short life). Not to put words in your mouth, but if you're talking about the overabundance of mech in 5th (a popular and deserved complaint) I don't blame that on the edition so much as a few poorly designed/costed units - primarily razorbacks and chimeras.

I think that, out of the box, 5th was a pretty good refinement of 3rd and 4th. There were three main issues - abundance of 4+ cover saves, the vehicle damage table and the wound allocation system.

IMO they needed to stick to the 'less is more' codex design principles of late 4th/early 5th ed. 7th ed WHFB (almost a perfect system in my view) was similarly ruined by poor army book design.

My experience of 5th ed is most likely coloured by the fact that it was a horrible edition for Eldar. Then again, I do remember a lot of people heralding 6th edition (before much was known about it) as the saviour of 40k. That may be due to the reasons you have already noted (abundance of mech in certain metas).

Bloodknight
22-05-2014, 01:01
Bonuses to psykers that choose powers from one discipline they get the primrus power on top of there mastery level powers.

I wonder if they'll errata CSM for that matter, their sorcerers really didn't need a kick in the nuts.


From the release of 4th edition through the pre-GK era of 5th was the most fun I've had playing 40K

I'd sort of agree. In my opinion, the two best editions so far were 2nd for its RPG aspect and the fact that movement actually meant something and was not random at all, and 5th because it was the best company level wargame 40K ever was. I wonder if the current trend of grafting elements of 2nd to elements of 5th will actually equal an interesting 7...or just another dull edition like 3, 4 and 6.

Just Tony
22-05-2014, 01:02
Mixing and matching 2nd edition with editions 3+ is an awful idea.

2nd edition was complex, 3rd edition was super streamlined. Every edition after that has been an abomination mix of the two, and that's why we're in the fix that we are now.

You're right, with the exception that 2nd Ed was OVERcomplex.


Often it hears that a game is not worth playing if it is not the dominant game, and that the loss of the creatures' at games workshop share prices indicates that the other games are better because more creatures are playing those games now, which some creatures feel means that its game is failing and not worth its time any longer. That because its way of playing is not the way the design-creatures design so its friends and it leave the game is a global indicator that the masses are leaving the creatures' game since it is leaving the game.

It is not surprised that the creatures' game lost other creatures because it stopped being for their play style and went to the other creatures' playstyle instead. So it does what it does when it doesnt get what it is after, it finds something that gives it what it wants, and then it speculates that other things are like it as well.

It probably got told somewhere along the line that its bizarre way of referring to itself was "witty", "charming", or something along those lines. It was lied to...


I think that, out of the box, 5th was a pretty good refinement of 3rd and 4th. There were three main issues - abundance of 4+ cover saves, the vehicle damage table and the wound allocation system.

IMO they needed to stick to the 'less is more' codex design principles of late 4th/early 5th ed. 7th ed WHFB (almost a perfect system in my view) was similarly ruined by poor army book design.

My experience of 5th ed is most likely coloured by the fact that it was a horrible edition for Eldar. Then again, I do remember a lot of people heralding 6th edition (before much was known about it) as the saviour of 40k. That may be due to the reasons you have already noted (abundance of mech in certain metas).

What I'm learning and hating about GW the more it progresses is that rather than redo an army book to whack balance of a good system back into order, they would rather sink top dollar into redoing the ruleset and EVERY OTHER ARMY BOOK while they are at it. This is the most miserable business plan ever. Get it dialed in, work on advertising and growing the customer base, implement master molds so you don't have to retool a new sprue plate every three years (Hasn't the Marine bike been in service since Clinton was President? I call shenanigans on mold degradation...,), and proceed to make nothing but profit. Hell, take Space Hulk and a WFB equivalent and package them for the game aisles in major retail stores. DOW sold bafflingly well to tons of people, some of which had no idea that miniature games even existed, and they weren't able to pull off the cross-media blitz? My hopes aren't high, I'll give you that.

Wolf Lord Balrog
22-05-2014, 01:17
It probably got told somewhere along the line that its bizarre way of referring to itself was "witty", "charming", or something along those lines. It was lied to...

Don't be too harsh on Kitty, there are legitimate reasons for that speech pattern. And in any event its no worse than some of the people on here that always post with different-colored text just to be special.

Bloodknight
22-05-2014, 01:21
It probably got told somewhere along the line that its bizarre way of referring to itself was "witty", "charming", or something along those lines. It was lied to...

It's probably out of lotion.



ou're right, with the exception that 2nd Ed was OVERcomplex.

Was it really? Look at the stack of special rules that comes with practically anything now. They just basically used to formulate these in a paragraph in each book apart from the psychology rules. 2nd suffered from two time-stealers, the close combat phase and crap that stayed on the board and changed sizes or moved about randomly (plasma and smoke grenades and such). But ruleswise? No. The rulebook was comparably thin for what kind of game it was, you had stuff on cards and apart from remembering a few more stats for guns than today (to-hit mod for short/long range and the damage die, if applicable), it was relatively easy to play. People just remember it as complicated because the games took long, cf. close combat and maybe the psychic phase minigame which is just returning.
I'd say it's more complicated now, but the gameplay is less complex and has been since 3rd edition.

AngryAngel
22-05-2014, 01:28
Don't be too harsh on Kitty, there are legitimate reasons for that speech pattern. And in any event its no worse than some of the people on here that always post with different-colored text just to be special.

All I do think of reading it is " It puts the lotion on the skin. " Perhaps that was it's intention ? I'm not sure.

ehlijen
22-05-2014, 01:29
Don't be too harsh on Kitty, there are legitimate reasons for that speech pattern. And in any event its no worse than some of the people on here that always post with different-colored text just to be special.

What reasons are those? First and second person pronouns were invented for a reason and unlike this, different colour text (as long as it contrasts right) doesn't make reading the text require any more effort.

On topic, yes, GW should be going to less is more rules approaches as with late 4th edition, and a bit in early 5th. But those books didn't sell and those who did buy them didn't like them. We, the players are not blameless in what 40k has become.
That said, 40k as it is now can be saved. I just don't think GW is trying hard enough :(

Heafstaag
22-05-2014, 01:33
My enthusiasm for 40k has been waning as my enthusiasm for flames of war has been waxing.

hobojebus
22-05-2014, 01:35
If they'd taken 5th reworked the cover system and added hull points then 6th would of been alot more fun, with 6th the game went backwards and with 7th it's even worse.

Now we know 7th is 6th with a new magic phase and unbound I can say definitively this new edition isn't worth buying.

Konovalev
22-05-2014, 02:51
What reasons are those? First and second person pronouns were invented for a reason and unlike this, different colour text (as long as it contrasts right) doesn't make reading the text require any more effort.

That user is probably underage and in this day and age it's generally inadvisable to bandy words with anyone that young.

Are you referring to the Skies of Death and Crusade of fire books? I agree that the players should be more supportive of such things if we hope to see more of the kind, but those books in particular felt very rushed and lazy. Wasn't the skies book even a limited english release only that stopped being stocked shortly after release?

HelloKitty
22-05-2014, 02:56
It probably got told somewhere along the line that its bizarre way of referring to itself was "witty", "charming", or something along those lines. It was lied to...

Its really just not that smart to try to talk in any other way. Witty it is not, and charming well, charming is what its cousin is, but this creature is not charming.

It is old and young.

It heard that this forum was the best place to discuss its hobby and that its people were kind and gentle to it. So it came here.

Amnar
22-05-2014, 03:03
Um...1998-2014....it's 16 years later, buddy. Did you know that 80% of 40k players are in and out of the hobby in four years or less, and only 10% last past ten years? "But way back in rogue trader" is about as useful as tits on a fish when less than one player in ten remembers fourth edition, let alone before.




It escalated quickly because this is whineseer, and whiners get under my skin :D 7th edition came out when it did to fix the tournament scene. GW was getting feedback that virtually no TOs were allowing escalation, stronghold assault, Knights, or sometimes even allies. To fix that, they have to put that stuff in the main book. It's not because they want $85 a player two years sooner, and it's not as if you'd complain any less about the $85 two years from now. If you can't use the expensive new kits, you're less likely to buy them, and if you do buy them, you're going to be really pissy about not being able to use them. This had nothing to do with selling rulebooks! As for GW not offering the cheap version to early adopters, show me a business that does. Can you buy the paperback of the latest novel the same day that the 3x-as-expensive hardcover is released? Of course not! Do video card manufacturers offer slightly nerfed versions of their next generation of flagship cards the same day as the $1000 version? Natrually, you're not going to get 95% of the benefit for 40% of the price the same day, or nobody would buy the big one. That's simple economics, not evil greed. If you had a choice between the slim rulebook and the big version from day one, they'd have to charge the same for both, and it wouldn't be $30, it'd be more like $75, or they'd make less money and have to raise prices on something else to offset that.



What's mind-boggling is that you think it's reasonable to demand something that you admit is unrealistic. I'm sure you'd be happy to deal with a 20 page FAQ in lieu of spending $85. Who wouldn't? Of course, GW would be equally happy to just update the rulebook on the fly (printed on demand, it's not hard), and then you're stuck with a BRB containing out of date rules, and you have to find someone who just bought his copy yesterday and scribble notes in your copy...I think a reasonably-sized FAQ and a new rule book whenever there are significant changes is a decent enough compromise...As for continuing to play 6th, go for it, I support that. Play 3rd if you want, it's my favorite edition, I love the idea that only DA can have plasma cannons in their tactical squads, and stubborn sergeants for a few points, making them essentially fearless till the sergeant, who can neither be challenged nor precision shotted, goes down. I'm totally cool with older rules, as long as you can find a willing opponent.



Sure, the primary thing affecting the share price, however, is the investor's perception of what return he's likely to get, as compared to all considered alternatives. So is GW's price likely to appreciate significantly? Does the stock pay an attractive dividend? If the answer to both is "no," then why buy the stock? And profits go to one of three places, eventually. R&D (in GW's case new rules and new models), debt repayment, or dividends. So profits are a direct and large influence on the quality of GW stock as an investment. And GW doesn't make any sort of obscene profits that would translate into a healthy dividend. "Sales," by which you must mean gross income don't really influence stock price so much, although relative sales growth or declines certainly do have a huge impact, but net income is a really big deal, and so is investor perception of whether GW is reinvesting enough profits in R&D.



...the point being that GW isn't making the obscene profits that most whiners claim?

The point being the GWs obscene prices and strategy of only caring about new blood is backfiring. Volume of sales is down.

The entire franchise needs a reboot, the game in it's current state isn't fun and barely deserves to be called a game.

Horus38
22-05-2014, 03:11
I am crazy excited about it.

Quoted for truth, same here!

itcamefromthedeep
22-05-2014, 03:56
Disassociated mechanics. The background looks like an excuse for the mechanics, rather than mechanics that describe what goes on in the background.

Too often it looks like there's a random table, and then some nonsense to justify it. Things like the 7e Perils table and Mysterious Terrain before it feel as if the writers needed to come up with an idea to put on the chart (as if it were paint-by-numbers), rather than coming up with good objectives and then organizing them in chart format. No warrior can ever tell the difference between a Skyfire Nexus and a Repulsor Generator (or whatever it's called, it's been so long since I used the chart) until they're right on top of it? Why are those rare-sounding things suddenly *pervasive* in the 41st millenium, despite never having shown up in the background before? None of the troops know what they came to fight over until they arrive? The troops have no idea what their commander is like, and their psyker was brought to the battle and even chose their equipment without knowing the role that their psychic power would dictate? For God's sake *how* would this add to my entertainment?

Some of these mechanics make it hard to understand what's going on. When a Necron army successfully Denies the Witch on Tigger's Prescience, what's going on there? Is a Necron Overlord orchestrating the attempts to dispel the buff? How? More importantly, when does this sort of thing happen in the novels, or the short stories? I've never read about how "The Imperial Guard Lieutenant then waived his arms at the daemon, thus harnessing the will of his troops to undo the creature's foul transformation". I think the design team would be better served by looking at a battle in one of the novels, and then told to make a set of rules and scenarios to describe what went on there.

Random charts can be fun, like the chart for Perils of the Warp in Fantasy Flight's RPG systems. Having huge charts can be a good idea, so long as they're used sparingly. However, charts for dozens of different, relatively minor interactions in a game? That just feels like a waste of my time.

A D666 chart for Perils? Great. That could use a lot of unpredictable and wild effects to highlight the danger of it all.
A D66 chart for the mission? Glorious, a lot of uncertainty in mission objectives can lead players to build cautious lists.
A 3D6 chart for the kind of planet the armies are fighting on, with board-wide effects on play? That could be really interesting, and add a lot to replayability by messing with very specialized lists.
A pair of D6 charts to see what a Destroyer weapon does? Don't waste my time. For that, give me a simple mechanic I don't need to roll dice for.

AngryAngel
22-05-2014, 04:01
My only real hope, if you can call it that, is that there will be some fun Guard formations or the like to try out. That's about all I have left. Though it seems like they don't get much in the way of that.

ehlijen
22-05-2014, 04:06
That user is probably underage and in this day and age it's generally inadvisable to bandy words with anyone that young.

Are you referring to the Skies of Death and Crusade of fire books? I agree that the players should be more supportive of such things if we hope to see more of the kind, but those books in particular felt very rushed and lazy. Wasn't the skies book even a limited english release only that stopped being stocked shortly after release?

If the person is underage that's all the more reason to educate them in the way people usually communicate. No disrespect should be shown, of course, but at some point pointing out if they're being weird and it's annoying people may be necessary.

And the books I'm referring to were the 4th ed DA, Chaos and Ork codices. A few issues, yes, but overall they were straightforward and eschewed flashy nonsense instead of trying to offer clear choices. That kind of return to basics is what 40k needs, I think, to get rid of a lot of excess its accumulated. But it won't sell flashy new kits (it didn't at the time anyway) so GW can't do it.

AngryAngel
22-05-2014, 04:13
I do remember when the 4th ed DA codex came out. All the talk of wait and all will come into line with it. We saw how that turned out. Yet again more words to have faith in GW, when none is warranted. I even got a chance to talk to Jervis about it at a games day, and he was very polite but generally lied in saying that it was setting a trend of where the codeci were going.

It didn't sell kits as all the books would need to end up around the same otherwise the ones that were more focused would seem boring, as is what happened at that time. If GW were more concerned about game stability and goodness, I'd only have to imagine it would mean more consistent sales as opposed to flash in the pan buys, added with some other changes of course to their standard policy.

Spell_of_Destruction
22-05-2014, 06:35
I've never fully understood the argument that lack of game balance is a way for GW to make a quick buck by releasing new kits with OP rules.

Just as many new kits come out with underwhelming rules. I can cite examples from every codex. The Wraithfighter is arguably the worst unit in the Eldar codex. Are IG players lining up to buy overpowered Stormtroopers and Ogryns?

Surely if rules were designed purely to sell a miniature it would be better to have greater balance - why invest in kits with underpowered rules just so you can sell kits that are more powerful in comparison? I don't follow the logic behind this argument.

I think the true explanation is much simpler - GW simply doesn't invest as much time and resources into playtesting as it could.

The release cycle is also a problem because codeces will generally be aged across 5-6 years so its difficult to get a consistent approach over that period of time. The minimalist approach of mid to late 4th was abandoned in 5th but equally I think the current codeces are less cluttered than the mid 5th ones such as GK. From a balance perspective it would be better to release all the codeces at one but obviously that will never happen.

frikandel speciaal
22-05-2014, 07:13
All I do think of reading it is " It puts the lotion on the skin. " Perhaps that was it's intention ? I'm not sure.

Buffalo Bill? Hehehe

AngryAngel
22-05-2014, 07:18
I'd buy that, if anyone who has played the game for awhile couldn't just see that some of these units under perform. It is more then play testing, it is game system understanding seemingly. Some of these choices are easily seen to be bad. As well, in the citing of poor choices in model release. Usually they release a kit with one good unit, or arguably good unit. The ogryns for instance, the ogryns are meh, the Bullgryn are good or at least much better. The another the Mortar tank is good, the Hydra is less good.

The only odd out one is the Scions, but they did release a codex just for them so I guess they hoped that would drum up sales, as well as the fact you could take Scion command squads now.

Though yes they do questionably with anything new, usually its the under performing units they give the most love in their heavy swing from useless to useful.

Excessus
22-05-2014, 07:28
My enthusiasm for 40k has been waning as my enthusiasm for flames of war has been waxing.
Then go play your Axis & Allies wargame then, nobody is forcing you to stay in 40k!


It heard that this forum was the best place to discuss its hobby and that its people were kind and gentle to it. So it came here.
"It", came to the wrong place! This forum is and has never been as long as I have been here at least, a kind and gentle place for hobbyists. It's a pit of resentment and rage that darkens my mood just to think about...


...perhaps it's the black background that does it, perhaps it's the people...if I cared enough I would try to find out, haha :)

malisteen
22-05-2014, 07:31
I've never fully understood the argument that lack of game balance is a way for GW to make a quick buck by releasing new kits with OP rules.

Just as many new kits come out with underwhelming rules. I can cite examples from every codex. The Wraithfighter is arguably the worst unit in the Eldar codex. Are IG players lining up to buy overpowered Stormtroopers and Ogryns?

Agreed. This sentiment is nothing but cynicism and confirmation bias. Yeah, sometimes new units with new models are strong in the rules, but just as often they're garbage, and the same old unit with out of date models stay on top.

Take chaos - our possessed unit was garbage when their new models came out, and they're garbage now. Yeah, heldrakes were ott, but what about the other new stuff? Mutilators? bad. Apostles? bad. Fiends and warpsmiths? At best lackluster. Warp talons? Bad. Raptors? completely overshadowed by chaos bikes in the new book - a unit that hasn't had new models in ages. In the troops category, plagues, with their ancient hybrid kit, are still arguably tops. In heavy? The same old oblits.

Same with any faction - for the most part new stuff isn't on average any better than older units.

Wolf Lord Balrog
22-05-2014, 07:34
I've never fully understood the argument that lack of game balance is a way for GW to make a quick buck by releasing new kits with OP rules.

Just as many new kits come out with underwhelming rules. I can cite examples from every codex. The Wraithfighter is arguably the worst unit in the Eldar codex. Are IG players lining up to buy overpowered Stormtroopers and Ogryns?

And it really doesn't explain things like the Pyrovore. Crappy rules two codex editions in a row. Like they didn't even think about trying to do anything with it.


Then go play your Axis & Allies wargame then, nobody is forcing you to stay in 40k!


"It", came to the wrong place! This forum is and has never been as long as I have been here at least, a kind and gentle place for hobbyists. It's a pit of resentment and rage that darkens my mood just to think about...


...perhaps it's the black background that does it, perhaps it's the people...if I cared enough I would try to find out, haha :)

Also a pit of rude people that contribute nothing of substance to the subject at hand while whining about other peoples' whining.

Excessus
22-05-2014, 07:35
Also a pit of rude people that contribute nothing of substance to the subject at hand while whining about other peoples' whining.
Sounds like everybody posting here except a select few, yes! :D

Spell_of_Destruction
22-05-2014, 07:59
Don't be too harsh on Kitty, there are legitimate reasons for that speech pattern. And in any event its no worse than some of the people on here that always post with different-colored text just to be special.

Hey, black text is awesome!

duffybear1988
22-05-2014, 08:42
"It", came to the wrong place! This forum is and has never been as long as I have been here at least, a kind and gentle place for hobbyists. It's a pit of resentment and rage that darkens my mood just to think about...

I prefer to think of it more like Mos Eisley - a wretched hive of scum and villainy. :)

Mr_Foulscumm
22-05-2014, 08:55
Um...1998-2014....it's 16 years later, buddy. Did you know that 80% of 40k players are in and out of the hobby in four years or less, and only 10% last past ten years? "But way back in rogue trader" is about as useful as tits on a fish when less than one player in ten remembers fourth edition, let alone before.


80% eh? Where did you get this number from? I get the feeling someone just made this up on the go to win an argument. Was it you? :p

squeekenator
22-05-2014, 09:44
I really liked 6th edition. It had its flaws, but it was fun and the codexes were good. Tau and Eldar were certainly too strong if you made a competitive list, but for more casual games without silly spam armies they were cool and fun, both to use and to play against. Then escalation came out and then everything, well, escalated from there. Planes in regular games were very inconsistently balanced, but they were manageable. Titans in regular games, though? Then all these silly pdfs full of pointless rules, and adding in formations from all over the place, entire armies consisting of knights and the imperial guard aren't the imperial guard any more. I just stopped caring. If I look away for more than two seconds a whole new poorly balanced and rushed set of rules will have sprung forth out of nowhere. I'm blah about 7th edition because it's not a reset button. It's just more of this rushed out, totally unnecessary cash grab crap, and after years of staunch GW apologism I just can't maintain any interest in the game any more.

Bloodknight
22-05-2014, 10:32
Don't be too harsh on Kitty, there are legitimate reasons for that speech pattern.

A dissociative disorder?


A pair of D6 charts to see what a Destroyer weapon does? Don't waste my time. For that, give me a simple mechanic I don't need to roll dice for.

What I really hate about their random charts is that they always put terrible and crappy results, some mediocre results and an awesome result on the table at the same probability, there is no average result. Vehicle damage as well, which leads to odd decisions like boni because you need a 7 to blow it up and such. 1d6 tables suck, 2d6 are much better to get an average performance out of a unit most of the time with rarely some junk or awesomeness due to the bell curve. But there seems to be a general lack of understanding of A level maths in the team, which is quite odd for game designers. Or they're doing it on purpose or somebody makes them...

underscore
22-05-2014, 10:48
Well, looks like all the stuff I was hoping to get changed isn't. Meh. That's the last of my optimism gone...

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2014/05/40k-rumor-tidal-wave.html

frikandel speciaal
22-05-2014, 10:54
I really liked 6th edition. It had its flaws, but it was fun and the codexes were good. Tau and Eldar were certainly too strong if you made a competitive list, but for more casual games without silly spam armies they were cool and fun, both to use and to play against. Then escalation came out and then everything, well, escalated from there. Planes in regular games were very inconsistently balanced, but they were manageable. Titans in regular games, though? Then all these silly pdfs full of pointless rules, and adding in formations from all over the place, entire armies consisting of knights and the imperial guard aren't the imperial guard any more. I just stopped caring. If I look away for more than two seconds a whole new poorly balanced and rushed set of rules will have sprung forth out of nowhere. I'm blah about 7th edition because it's not a reset button. It's just more of this rushed out, totally unnecessary cash grab crap, and after years of staunch GW apologism I just can't maintain any interest in the game any more.


Squeekenator, i feel exactly the same. All those suplements, it makes me feel numb. I long for those times again when there was a reason to get excited about a new release. But i'm at a point i just don't care anymore. Everytime i get some new hope, another dissapointment arrives. It's like politics.

hobojebus
22-05-2014, 12:34
I prefer to think of it more like Mos Eisley - a wretched hive of scum and villainy. :)

But at least they have that one song...jizz music...yeah that's what Lucas called it, I'm not making it up go check a starwars wiki.

Zingraff
22-05-2014, 13:08
I'm thinking of buying the big expensive Warhammer 40,000 Munitorum Edition Box. I mean I bought the limited edition Astra Miliaturm Codex, but then that only cost me 200 NOK or so more than the standard Codex. This boxed set costs 4 times as much as the standard version. And all you'd really get is the rule book in a practical format and those brushed steel coins.

What do you think? Yes or no? I can afford it, I'm just not sure I should. I'm not a fanboy.

itcamefromthedeep
22-05-2014, 13:25
I'm thinking of buying the big expensive Warhammer 40,000 Munitorum Edition Box. I mean I bought the limited edition Astra Miliaturm Codex, but then that only cost me 200 NOK or so more than the standard Codex. This boxed set costs 4 times as much as the standard version. And all you'd really get is the rule book in a practical format and those brushed steel coins.

What do you think? Yes or no? I can afford it, I'm just not sure I should. I'm not a fanboy.Which decision will you be happy with in 10 years' time?

Commissar Merces
22-05-2014, 13:29
Well, looks like all the stuff I was hoping to get changed isn't. Meh. That's the last of my optimism gone...

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2014/05/40k-rumor-tidal-wave.html

All I see here is GW taking a gigantic, first **** of the day on Tyranids. No access to biomancy, flyers have to wait a turn to charge, no allies, no consolidating into combat and vehicle killing got worse with smash attacks getting nerved.

Lovely.

duffybear1988
22-05-2014, 13:44
I'm thinking of buying the big expensive Warhammer 40,000 Munitorum Edition Box. I mean I bought the limited edition Astra Miliaturm Codex, but then that only cost me 200 NOK or so more than the standard Codex. This boxed set costs 4 times as much as the standard version. And all you'd really get is the rule book in a practical format and those brushed steel coins.

What do you think? Yes or no? I can afford it, I'm just not sure I should. I'm not a fanboy.

I'ts far too expensive unless you really want a handful of shiny tokens, a cardboard box and some different book covers. I was going to buy it as well but the new rules details have put me right off.

Vipoid
22-05-2014, 13:48
Honestly, having found out that the -2BS rumour was incorrect, I now cannot find a single thing about 7th to be enthusiastic about.

Probably doesn't help that they seem to be charging full price for very few changes - which, impressively, have managed to not tackle any of my issues with 6th. I'd have thought one or two would have been fixed... if only through the law of averages. :skull: