Subscribe Us

header ads

Uniting The Community with a new BRB


A new edition coming in 2014 is quite literally a hard thing to swallow, and yet the rumor is here. The rumor comes from credible source, and is very logical if taken in certain context.

This article is written taking the new rumors of a new edition for 40k coming. If you missed this bombshell of rumors, they can be found by following the link.
http://natfka.blogspot.com/2013/12/40k-7th-edition-coming-2014-fantasy-9th.html
http://natfka.blogspot.com/2013/12/7th-edition-40k-not-65.html
http://natfka.blogspot.com/2013/12/7th-edition-as-it-stands.html

These are my thoughts, and not rumors. An editorial assuming a new 7th edition is coming.
As of right now, according to sources, new rules are in playtesting, and probably have been for about two months. Seeing how playtesting normally runs for around 6 months, this is very likely why our sources have said a summer release is unlikely and that September is looking better.

Before everyone goes into a rage that this may be happening, dont forget, that you demanded this. You demanded that rules in the new supplements be codified into the rulebook before being accepted. The community has looked for every opportunity to make escalation and stronghold assault to not be a part of standard or regular 40k when it clearly already is. In the same context we have declared that dataslates are not to be a part of it either. The community is extremely divided right now.

We also do not know what form these rules will take. They are being called 7th edition in development, simply as a means to identify updated rules. It could be that these rules will be released as an update, an updated rulebook, or literally called 7th edition. Regardless of what form these take upon release, no one is expecting or rumors saying, that we will be seeing an entirely new edition like we have seen in past editions.

The idea of a new and completely new edition, like we have seen in the past is an awful idea. I dont think that is what we will see, and I think its quite obvious what will occur. After all a new edition takes a lot of time and work to create, not something that can just be put together, and I believe previous rumors that the current edition of 40k is here to stay. 

A new rulebook for 6th edition is a much better use of terminology of what I think will occur. Updating the rules with all the new releases we have been seeing. Escalation and Stronghold Assault will be added in, as well as a "written in the rulebook" means for GW to add to the rulebook in the future if they so desire to. Making future additions much less dramatic and divisive on what is really in the standard 40k rulebook.

This would bring us the wording that we would need in the rulebook, and because it will not change any rules, just be adding, could be published at any given point in the year without disrupting other releases. 

I fully expect minimal change to the rulebook, with a few new sections added to bring Escalation, Stronghold Assault, Dataslates, and more into the game. They may update the battlefield terrain rules to bring those from stronghold assault into it, but I expect few changes. I do think we would see a new sentence or paragraph that would allow for GW to add new rules into the regular game as well for the future.

Would Forgeworld be included?
I think this is part of it as well. We have had rumors of a new GW website coming, and that Forgeworld is going to be a part of that. We have had rumors of GW taking over some production of Forgeworld models, and that finecast going away will open up some of that production capacity. Forgeworld 40k stamps are already re-worded to allow into regular games (as they have been for awhile, but we have been given new clarification).

I think Games Workshop has given in to the fact that we are all a little dense (I am part of this statement), and if the rule is not in the brb to allow new additions to the game, like forgeworld or escalation, then we as a community needs it to be in black and white. This is something we are asking for, and when we get it, there will be complaining that we are getting what we asked for. After all, an FAQ is not enough for too many of us, nor are the statements that this is for regular games. 

Tournaments. I fully expect that we will see something in the beginning of the new rulebook that will declare that you do not have to play with any codex, supplement, dataslate, or expansion that you do not want to. After all the game is between friends agreeing to play the game. I think tournaments will not be mentioned in the book, but the OK to pull out escalation or stronghold assault will be there, and if its not, some tournaments will do so anyways.

A living rulebook. There are those that are thinking we are seeing a living rulebook, Meaning that the rulebook can and will start to be updated with new additions and rules when they occur. This of course means that physical rulebooks will become obsolete rather quickly, and because of that, this idea does not make much sense.

Instead of a continuously updated book, every couple years we could see the rulebook being updated and compiled with new additions and updated rules. This is much more likely.

Do not think that rules are going to be changed much. Its possible for changes, but I expect very little of that if and when this happens.

Right now under so many changes I think our community is disarray on what even constitutes a game of 40k. This would unite the rules in our game under one Basic Rule Book, and hopefully our community as well.

Post a Comment

71 Comments

  1. Well put. If this comes to pass, I'll be much more inclined to go full on Bobby Digital .

    ReplyDelete
  2. Just fix the Russ, that is all I really care about in 40K anymore. WHFB is such the superior game.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I can only hope for minimal changes. I've really enjoyed 6th Edition quite a lot and would hate for community negativity to ruin that. And before people cry about close combat, I once played a game against imperial guard and won through a series of close combats. And I was running a Chaos Lord with Mutilators in a Land Raider.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Besides, for me 5th was "all about the close combat", and the game needed a boost to shooting. Maybe 6th went a bit to far to the other side. But I doubt any new edition will change close combat much.

      I would love to see the "Charge out of vehicle" rules return more though. Maybe make overwatch better (5+ or something) against targets that charged the turn they disembarked without an assault ramp?

      Delete
  4. If a new rulebook with minimal changes and escalation/SA added in is released, I won't buy it, and I won't play it.

    It is not a game I want to play.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. it is your right not to play something if you don't like it.

      In my opinion these changes to the game are great and I will play all of them!

      Delete
    2. You are exactly the type of player GW is being forced to make a compilation like this over. Players like you are what are causing everyone else to not be able to use the models they love in the games they want to play. I see a day in the future when the people who are against Escalation/FW/Stronghold/Dataslates/Anything that isnt in the BRB are the absolute extreme minority. I can also see those people being the only ones not getting pick-up games because no one will want to play against a player who brings so many restrictions to the table. Peace out in my opinion.

      Delete
    3. D weapons have no place in standard 40k Its becoming a game of who has big paychecks. There is no strategy with I win weapons.

      Delete
    4. Mortechai: So GW are being forced to print this book to cater to... the people who don't want to buy it? How novel.

      Maybe the problem that people are having with these rules is not 'they're written in a different book'? I dunno, I'm just throwing things out there.

      Delete
    5. @Eric Cook: Same can be said for flyers etc. At least when 6th came out and only a few armies had flyers (heck some still don't have ANY "official" anti air.)
      But if we continue to keep things out of the core game, we will never get proper counters to it either.
      I liked what they did in Apocalypse, where you get strategic assets to counter the super heavies.
      Maybe we will see things like that in the future?

      What if a Space Marine Chapter Masters Orbital Bombardment could be upgraded to a D-Weapon? The commander is a very very cheap model.

      In the en the person with the biggest wallet will always have the most options. He was the one that could buy the Necron Flying Circus etc, not the average Joe.

      Delete
  5. Just want to say the rule change rumors seemed very wish listy. They mentioned making the game competetive and balanced, which isn't something GW has been concerend with doing. I'm not disparraging GW for this, but rather taking their past into account.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well if its just a rule book with minimal changes and escalation/stronghold assault built it, then whats the intention of buying it? I mean I love 40k but I don't want to spend another $100 for the same BRB with some supplements built in.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Im along the same line of thinking here. As I said in the older post about 7th as it stands... I don't think there will be enough rule changes to warrant a whole new rule book but a digital update/FAQ/PDF would be great to tie it all together. I would also love it to see FW brought into the BRB just to quench the nay smiths.
    People keep harping on about time scale of releases, does it really matter how long the edition has been out? If it can be improved then let them crack on.
    Im all up for this, it won't stop the moaners as they will always find something to grump about. But it will make life a little easier for the rest of us. I just hope this turns out to be true and they don't change too much. Fix what needs fixing, clarify what needs putting in black and white and bring FW into 40k with a statement that even a simpleton can understand. Even though its already perfectly clear :).
    Finally,if its not broke, dont fix it!

    Cheers Nafka

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hah, wasn't it only in the past few days that people were saying "If you don't like Escalation then don't play it." That'll get a lot harder to do when the rules for Super Heavies are right in the rulebook.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Funnily enough, regardless of what is in a book, supplement, dataslate, or internetz, you still don't have to play with any rule or anyone you don't want to.

      Someone that shows up with the attitude 'You have to play the game I want to' without discussing it with their potential opponent first, is likely to be a very lonely gamer.

      Tournaments will no doubt decide what their rules will be. And then you can decide whether you will pay to play, or not, as you see fit.

      And I am not knocking Stronghold or Escalation. I like them. But nothing is a substitute to discussing the game before you play it, or checking the tournaments rules being used.

      Delete
    2. Still people will give in to the peerpresure of apoc.

      Its been clear 40k would turn into 2.5k 3k Games with Titan. It can only get bigger.
      But the way they are rushing to it now is intressting.
      TO are going to dissallow titans and dataslates never the less.
      Happend before!
      Its just not fair with super IC formations ect!

      GW SHOULD maybe give all armys titans in plastic before doing 7th!
      Whats the point without them?

      Delete
    3. Funnily enough MJames70...the people not wanting to play against things, will end up being in the minority. THEY will be the ones no one will want to play against. No one likes a player who brings a load of restrictions to the table. I know I will definately avoid players like that in my games.

      Delete
    4. In my area at least, and on the forums I regularly read, oddly it always seems to be the hyper comparative players that are now saying "I don't have to play anything I don't want to" like the GK player who was happy to abuse the end of 5th ed power weapons and complained when they changed in 6th, and has everything magnetised but Unpainted, who was happy to smash my out of date DA army, and the Cron/GK/SM/flavor of the month player who's list is always built after he has seen what you are bringing because he "forgot" yet has exactly the tools he needs, but suddenly neither of them want to play my out dated Ork tide now I have added a stompa. Both complained about flyers to when they had no AA available...

      Delete
    5. Funny because around here, it's the casual gamers that refuse to play Escalation ou against Screamers star and other broken units. WAAC players are all drooling over the Revenant on a Landing Pad.

      Delete
    6. In reply to seb12, different editions have different points for standard armies. Back in earlier editions, 2500-3000pt was often standard, although heroes, heavy weapons and especially vehicles wre more expensive points-wise.

      Delete
  9. Unless it fixes the significant problems with 6th it will be worse than if there were no new edition. Without changes to melee, vehicles, flyers, and cover saves, I don't think that it will be worth while.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. From a 40k novice, whats not right about mêlée? Or the other stuff for that matter.

      Delete
    2. Yeah, I mean the part about those rules functioning clearly and concisely is such a significant problem...

      /sarcasm

      There's nothing wrong or imbalanced with those rules. Close combat will be defined by the Tyranids, Orks, and Blood Angels codices, not the BRB. Then we will see the viability of CC in 6th.

      Delete
    3. I can't see any problem in melee rules, just different list needs to be used. Problem everyone has is that you can't deepstrike and assault in one turn(or outflank, etc.), but that is not the only way to get into assault. for example a full unit of chaos spawn and two lords in terminator armour seem to be pretty happy with the assault so far. as well as other good builds.

      Delete
    4. My Daemons have no trouble in cc or getting into cc.

      Delete
    5. Sorry McDoogle, but the BRB does define close combat, and the change to power weapons is proof of that.

      Danniil, I think that with the introduction of overwatch, assaulting straight from reserves should be permitted, simply to even out the balance between melee and ranged combat.

      Delete
    6. Or, go back to the way over watch was back in earlier editions: instead of shooting in your turn, place an over watch token on that unit. Then they can over watch in the opposing players next turn instead, for example if an enemy unit charges or breaks cover. Of course, if they don't, then you have given up a turn of shooting. But then, thems the breaks for being fire tactically flexible. And being on over watch may affect how your opponent will act knowing that there is an over watched squad ready to act

      Delete
  10. Or maybe forceing people into apoc play / buying?

    We dont have enough rumors to even be talking about rule changes and the like. Its still only 1-2 people even claiming there will be a 7th 40k ED. When we had more than that on wfb 9th.
    Its to far out and to uncertain what GW Plans are for the game.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I am excited for 7th edition. I love 40k and will adapt to changes. I may not have the meta approved WAAC list, but I will try and field lists that are fun for me. There is too much b****Ing about things that the MAJORITY of 40k players have been asking for. The game is about fun...why? Because that is what the creator of the game says. If you want it to be something else, make your own niche. There is room for all in the Imperium!

    ReplyDelete
  12. An updated 6th seems very unlikely. If there would be little to no change in the rules, playtesting would be unnecessary. Releasing a compendium of all the expansions and brb into one book seems more likely, but it would be a digital only, with perhaps a limited 100 hard copy run for the collectors out there. The idea of a 7th ed being released also seems unlikely, as it would run counter to how everything has been released thus far for this edition. I believe whoever is spreading this rumor is probably going on misinformation or inaccurate info. Hopefully GW will adress this rumor soon, as I imagine it is affecting sales for some of the more recent releases. Just my humble opinion. On another note, I would like to see GW release a free beta digital rulebook for the purpose of letting the community properly playtest new rule sets. This would allow them to get feedback and test far more variables before releasing a "finished" product.

    ReplyDelete
  13. All of this resistance to a new rulebook confuses me. I will be first in line to buy an updated rulebook the day it comes out. Trying to merge all of these releases over the past year and a half has created balance issues. Some units are better than they should be, others are worse. Some of this could be corrected by an updated rules set (I.e. Monstrous creatures being much better than walkers). They will have released nearly a full 5 year cycle of codices by the end of next year. Problems have arisen in the past deep into the rules cycle that have lead to chapter approved rules changes and supplements. Release years are like dog years now. One year of releases now is equal to the problems developed over two years in the past. Why do we have to wait 5 years to correct or clarify problems that exist now? Why should we want that? People already buy Madden updates every year only for a few tweaks, how is this different? We spend thousands on our models, why would we be hesitant to pay a hundred every two years for (hopefully) improving rules that make the ability to use those models more balanced and (hopefully) in more diverse and fun ways? Such a small fraction of the overall investment in the hobby, yet arguably so crucial. What happens when GW starts to rerelease codices in a year because there is nothing left to release? Same complaints will arise again. "My codex is only 2 years old, why should I have to pay for a new one already!" How about so they can make some of the useless unit choices viable, tone down some of the overpowered stuff, and thus create more list diversity based on thousands of players experiences and playtesting? I find this preferable to the alternative of having to wait 5 years to take some models off of my shelf to use regularly because they just aren't good enough versus other choices?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The funny thing is, no one ever wants their overpowered units to be toned down. In fact, the first thing people often complain about the moment rumors start is a "nerf" to their super OP unit that will no longer require thoughtless play to be effective.

      Having OP units is fun, when they are rare, and so long as every army gets one.

      Delete
    2. Balance Problems are Part of the game. GW porpusly created new Problems from 5 to 6th. Random charge, overwatch and hull points are self made Problems. Changes were fine. Overwatch unneeded, rapidfire weapon and blast weapon buff was enough. Hullpoint were unneeded. Changeing the DMG table to +1 would habe been more than enough. Also makeing cc vs vehicles so Onesided was over the Top.
      Firstblood and the other new objectives were unneeded to be in every Mission. In some ok. But in all? Just stupid!

      GW created those new things to fix. Its just better for biss if you cant play youre old Army. And its good if there is a new OP thing to buy.
      Flyers defensive structures were 6th and now its titans.
      Dont expect a total balance. There will be unplayable stuff.

      Delete
    3. I don't really agree with McDoogle, for example, the tzeentch flamers were very OP before the new dex came out (it was not even fun to play, pretty much like the heldrake is now), now I have to actually think how do I use them, especially with the warpflame rule. They are still quite a viable unit but need to be used with caution.

      Delete
  14. Some people are under the delusion that is Escalation is codified in the basic rulebook, then that will settle things. No it won't. I don't care if GW does this as FW, Super Heavys and D- Wepons will only EVER appear on the tables I own with my permission ahead of time even if they are in the BRB. If GW thinks jamming Escalation into the BRB will bring acceptance, forget about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Than the people who want to play with those thing, like me for example, will find like-minded and play against each other, and you will ind the ones that want to play only codex and supplement(if you'd allow that) and play against them. That is quite a simple solution isn't it? =)

      Delete
    2. Well, then the way I see things ending up, not many people are going to be showing up to your tables. If a new rulebook comes out unifying content, the players limiting things will be the ones left high and dry when it comes to getting games.

      Delete
    3. I don't see this happening. People want fun games and it's not fun to fight D Weapons. Overpowered things will be banned in friendly pick up games at FLGS just like they already are. For example, no one plays Aircrons, Screamers Star or Jetseer Council at my store because no one would play against them.

      Delete
    4. An LGS that bans things that are legitimate builds or units, in "friendly pickup games", is not going to stay in business for very long. This is more than my opinion; I've seen it happen. If an LGS runs a tournament in their store they can set whatever rules or restrictions they like. But to say "You can't play that in my store because I think it's OP" is tyrannical and just plain bad business...

      Delete
    5. This sound a lot like the pre 6th Flyer talks. Sure you can disallow it. But if this is the direction the game is going, then more and more people will add things like this to their game, and it will even it self out quite a lot.

      Just like flyers Super Heavies etc is over powered NOW, but in two years? not so much.

      Delete
  15. I initially disliked the idea, but now that it sounds like it could be a final polishing of 6th, I rather like it.

    What really won me over were some of the supposed changes from those sources that Naftka calls solid. Interceptor definitely needs some sort of revision, allies rules could use some changes, and Apocalypse-style D weapons in regular 40K should be reconsidered. Some have called this "wishlisting" but when much of the community recognizes that something should be fixed, is it unreasonable to believe that GW just might listen?

    I don't know how far GW thinks ahead, but maybe this was part of their grand scheme: release a new edition with a huge number of additions and changes to the game, release new codexes for every (or nearly every) army in rapid succession, introduce new aspects to the game like fortifications and Super-Heavies, determine where the imbalances are, release updated rulebook that summarizes all aspects of the game and addresses the imbalances.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 6th revised rule book, sounds better. All current books remain viable but this one gas all rule sets in it... They can't make all current shelf stock worthless, like big rule book, little rule book, and tourney The Rules book, this will be the book to rule them all. Maybe they'll throw kill point and apoth rules into it

      Delete
  16. i am fine with one big book to rule them all.

    what i am not fine however is that they will most likely charge us with another big money investment.

    i feel like they treat us like paying beta testers. and that is definetly not okay.

    ReplyDelete
  17. All you people eager to wait in line to pick up a new $75 rulebook after getting a new one online a year ago... GW has trained you well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Still cheaper than college textbooks.

      Delete
    2. Or concert tickets, or sports tickets, or going out to dinner with the family (or date night), or even a few rounds at the bar. Don't even go there with costs for car payments, mortgage payments, college loans etc....
      Relatively speaking, not a hugely expensive hobby.

      Delete
  18. Kind of a ramble, but stick with me =)

    I also agree that this "Special Edition" is going to bring the game back to its roots. Who remembers playing with the Card Ork Dreadnought from the 2nd Edition boxed set? This guy!

    40k had degenerated like the rest of America (I can't speak for England). As the Video Game era smashed through in the 90's, children's attention spans had decreased and we ended up with something heinous and rude, namely Warhammer 40000 3rd Edition. Sorry, but that was a terrible edition in my opinion.

    Turd Edition was a complete departure from 2nd Edition. 2nd Edition allowed wargear cards to enhance your army and had colorful datafax for vehicles. You could shoot at a vehicle, explode its ordnance, have the blast enter the engine compartment, and have the vehicle actually scatter into the air and land on enemies. A single game of 3k vs 3k could literally last all day long.

    4th and 5th tried to bring back more to the game, but 6th is the closest to the 2nd Edition style of playing. This is where, once again, I bring back short attention span players. Keep in mind all the children from the 90's are adults now.

    Skirmish games, like War Machine, became popular because players could spend relatively little amounts of money and play fun and exciting games that ended quickly. However, Warhammer persevered through that turbulent time and now we have an edition that takes even longer to play, that has even more rules, and now has almost an infinite number of playing options.

    I love it. 3rd, 4th, and 5th were all very narrow-minded, with only a set number of armies and options, leading to only a few choices if you wanted to win. A new army came out (codex creep) and it was the Army to have. If you did not have that army, you had to play better and be more strategic then usual to win. Now, any time a Codex, Supplement, or Dataslate comes up, there are so many more options, you can make a army that has not been updated in a while stand out again with new shinies. Allies take limited rosters from other armies and make them near-limitless. I spend more time than ever working through roster after roster (thank God for Army Builder).

    Maybe its the Nurgle in me, but I love the chaos (no pun intended) this edition has drawn. People don't know what to do anymore, they are having problems getting that Win-Win tourney army. Natkfa has posted about the Revenent Taudar recently as an option to win. However, there is no definite build. You might go more Tau then Eldar, or vise-versa.

    If your a store owner, and not on board with Escalation and Stronghold assault, you need to rethink things - because you are punishing your own sales.

    I embrace this edition wholeheartedly, as it reminds me of my days back in 2nd edition. I do hope that 7th basically says, 'use whatever you want'. And goes back to % force organization. Those things make sense to me. I also hope that modifiers (to hit, armour save mods) come back but that is the slimmest of chances.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. you sir are awesome! this is EXACTLY the point of view I think more people should have! and I think ur absolutely right.

      Delete
    2. 2nd just became impossible to play, since I had a life... 3rd let you play, have fun and still had time to bang your girl...

      Delete
    3. 2nd just became impossible to play, since I had a life... 3rd let you play, have fun and still had time to bang your girl...

      Delete
    4. 2nd and 6th edition: RPG

      3rd, 4th and 5th: TBS (turn based strategy game)

      Quite different styles. The return to the RPG style in 6th has either been great or awful, depending on what the individual likes to play. It's not waac vs casual at all.



      Delete
    5. @Cruzcontrol39 - you are the case study for the Attention span I speak of. People who I meet who you remind me of usually don't play 40k very long. Maybe a few years then the disenchantment begins. You can play on Saturday once or twice a week/month, and still have plenty of booty.

      Delete
    6. I liked 1st and 2nd editions, although they were very much the scifi version of warhammer. 3rd was when it started being its own game a bit more. 4tg was pretty good, as it started opening up what 3rd had shut down in terms of variety, 3rd was a little too brutal for my tastes. 5th jnfortunately went back to short, sharp and brutal again, now 6th is back (as

      Delete
    7. @EpicWarGamer: I kind of agree with you. I don't mind streamlining, 2nd edition was a very very complicated game (I tried learning it as a non-engish speaking person at the age of 14, and had a hard time understanding much, but I tossed some dice and had fun with my Dark Angles and Eldar models)
      I love 6th, I see issues with it too, but all in all I love playing it. I wouldn't mind 7th... just not yet. FAQ the rules that are not working, and let us keep this book another 2 years or so.

      I mean consider all the crying kids on here when "GW JUST WANT MORE MONEY" kicks inn (Death from the Skies anyone?)

      Delete
  19. So far all the rumors I've read are FAQ worthy at most. But a new edition...?

    Salty.

    ReplyDelete
  20. So Natfka, what you're telling me is to *not* pull the trigger on Stronghold Assault and Escalation? Got it.

    ReplyDelete
  21. As far as I'm concerned if something is released by Games Workshop (inc Forge World, Data Slates ect) then it's official.

    I'd welcome a new Rulebook that contains Escalation & Stronghold Assault.

    It's a shame that GW feel the need to do this, as the time spent doing this could have been spent on getting out another codex in 2014 or something

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Summer time rarely have new codices though. But I thought 9th edition fantasy would be the thing this year.

      Delete
  22. Thank you for a well written article on the subject, Natfka. This is a bit clearer. I'm not thrilled with the idea of having to buy an updated 6th Ed (or whatever ) rule book after buying the big BRB, DV to get the little BRB, and then the digital version of the BRB when it came out (so I didn't have to churn thru FAQs to pinpoint the most recent wording), all the Dataslates I want for my armies, Escalation & Stronghold Assault, etc, just to have them all available in one convenient compilation that I have to also buy. That does burn me a little, but I understand what you're saying about the stubbornness of a vocal minority who are trying to draw lines in the sand when it's clear that everything is "40K Legal".

    Hopefully for those of us who have loyally bought all the digital versions there will be some sort of discount to "upgrade" the digital version of "Warhammer 40,000: The Rules", but come what may, I'm nearly certain that whatever comes out, I will end up buying. We will have to see what how they end up implementing this if it comes to fruition...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'll make the switch if there is a free/discounted by half at least upgrade for digital. It would be worth it to buy every codex that's digitally available to save on future updates if something like this is the case.. Doubt it. Seems like they will be making us purchase escalation and stronghold assault twice within a years time lol

      Delete
    2. I will buy it no matter as I have for years, but my local store only one around has stopped stocking and is going warmachine because to many players can't afford to keep up their 40k armies. I haven't played fantasy since moving six years ago and now 40k is following. GW is losing newer players and GW doesn't seem to have focus, when I got into game 3rd was brand new and well liked it was streamlined to speed up game and make smaller faster games this lead to tourneys 1000/1500 pts about hour game. Game use to be about terrain and movement, felt more strategic ruler mattered now everything deep strikes all guns cover table and CC happens once a game. What is the focus of game is my question who is GW trying to sell to that is what matters because this current plan doesn't make anybody happy, I want to get back to homemade terrain in WD, painting your own chapters every army runs a special now, remember when specials were only for conversions. Game will stablize I just hope they don't turn off to many players finding out what kind of game they are creating

      Delete
  23. I would like to see CC rules rehashed and more armies making it to CC so everyone is familiar with a less confusing explanation required for a lot of people. Alot of new tau players a year in still have no idea what CC consists of

    ReplyDelete
  24. I have my doubts whether GW sees divisions between players on the internet as a reason to update an edition. My experience is that the company is run by sales figures, not emotions. The main target audience is 12 to 15 year old children, not vocal grown men who occasionally update their old armies.

    I think there is an alternative possibility. WFB is relegated to the second tier due to disappointing sales, and 40k as the flagship product, is put on a permanently faster release schedule, including editions, to increase revenue.

    Given earlier rumors on this site, HH will become the main (and more expensive/exclusive) product line for adult gamers who have outgrown the basics.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I think the overlooked rumor may actually be the related to this. "Horus Heresy will be the third System after Fantasy & 40k and become the "Mature" Game for 40k." It occurs to me that simply adding all the expansions may qualify as "Mature" 40K to GW.
    However, I am still expecting 1 or 2 more expansions. I keep thinking an expansion for Psykers and one on Close Combat and Assault would at some point be conceived.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I don't like the idea of shelling out the $$$ for a new BRB already, but I guess I grudgingly would should it come to that. I have too much $$$ invested in my armies not too. On the flip side though, enough people have left 40K recently that it is becoming harder to get a game on a consistent basis. As such I have invested in Warmachine/Hordes, Malifaux, and Dystopian Legions (though finding a player for the last one is difficult). These new systems are great fun and a nice change of pace. None of them require this constant rules purchasing to be able to play the game with the models I have spent so much money and time on to be able to field. Just sayin' GW, don't look now but there are a lot of other new kids on the block that are looking for a chance to knock you off the top shelf. Mess with the formula too much and the $$$ moves away.

    ReplyDelete
  27. If that rumor is true, that would explain why a few recent books were not released in any other language than english. Escalation, for example, being one of them and the entire range of digital products being another one.

    We know GW has aimed for a younger audience and the english language only has dramatically narrowed the possibilities for younger people in many countries where 40k is being played by a lot of people.

    So a book with all the latest rules in the usual different languages seems to me very likely.

    I really like how the game is evolving even though I feel overwhelmed by the rapidity of it.
    I used to collect every book they released. I don't buy them all anymore. First, it's expensive to buy so many books and models but the main reason is the lack of time to actually read or build and paint it all.

    So while I like this ever evolving 40K, I loose track of it cause it's been too fast for me lately.

    Someone in the comments above was talking about being lost and hell yes, I do feel lost cause for the first tile in a long time, I can't say I've read everything and know every option at my disposal.



    ReplyDelete
  28. Nice to hear a voice of reason, thanks, Natfka!

    ReplyDelete
  29. I'm not especially happy about having to shell out more money for a new BRB either, but I am glad they are taking the time to do it. Properly designed and play tested rules for the various random bobs, bits and expansions are exactly what is needed to make the game playable. With so many people pushing for the inclusion of everything GW is putting out, I am glad to see GW is taking a measure of responsibility for making the game playable, fun an cohesive.

    I hope to see a few significant rules updates, especially within the less thought out expansion elements added to the game recently. If they just shove everything we already have into a new book, I'm going to be a lot less happy about this than I am currently.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I'm personally wondering if this might not be a new rulebook, but rather a collection of rules book. Throwing a lot of things together in one big book, with some changes to it. Much like Death from the Skies.
    Peel away all the fluff pages and scale back the show case and the rulebook is no thicker than Codex Space Marines, so you have a lot of pages for added fun.

    I won't judge till we have more info, but I personally feel it's too soon for 7th edition.

    ReplyDelete