LGS is hosting demos and discussions on Saturday. Rules are only an "outline" of rules for the basic skirmish version and not the "expansion" version. Initial rules do not have points costs or limits but should be agreed to as to units and max unit sizes. GW will be essentially forcing TOs to come up with points/comp system and victory conditions it appears. Much more objective-based rules system for victory, so TOs that rely on VPs and VP and comp differentials (like ETC and Swedish comp do) will have to adapt to new game. GW has basically given the finger to the tournament gaming community based on initial rules. Units don't necessarily break and flee and get run down anymore; instead a certain number of models in each unit in combat "flee" (units on both sides in a combat) based on casualties and bonuses and bravery statistic (not LD anymore). The new battleshock concept had been rumoured (as all models and units have instability) and is sort of like the unstable rules for DoC units in 8th edition. You get +1 for each ten models in unit or unit size, except it looks like you roll a D6, instead of 2D6 random number roll for the old break test or daemonic instability test, and test on bravery minus wounds plus bonuses to determine how many models/units are lost at the end of the combat.

GW is reportedly shifting to selling warscrolls (smaller and more focused army factions) to avoid selling army books/factions at least initially and to roll out new units and factions more frequently. You will be able, once the ravening hordes-style rules are out, to play your old models and units and play mass battles, but the fancy special rules and new units will be more tailored to the new game, i.e. force you to buy the new warscrolls and models to play the game competitively and keep up with the game. Sort of more like a PP business model. The focus of the new game is basically like 40K more in units and models but with more of an infantry-based fantasy/combat focus (fewer models and units, quicker games to encourage new players) but then scalable up to play larger unit sizes and battles. Pretty much along the lines of thoughts I had heard rumored a year ago (not surprising given development time for new system). ET was a diversion while GW developed and completed AoS alternative. Of course, given GW's propensity for writing poorly written rules and not play-testing or simulating the game enough, expect a lot of bugs and imbalances in the game initially. In this business model, players will have to keep buying stuff to keep up with the game and not be able, at least GW hopes, to play older models and alternative company models as much to stay current such that one will have to buy regularly in smaller amounts but more often. That's what I pulled together from a number of sources consistent with the past.