8th Edition 40k

I think it will be stuff regarding psychic powers and the problem with super friends. It will address the army building process.
Think about it: the Unbound idea is basically the age of crap bullshit and hopeful they've come to realise that it's not.... good.

They will incorporate death from the skies and give us several different modes to play with. Don't like death from the skies or super heavy units? The tournament play isn't including that for below 1500 points. Stuff like that.

I honestly can't think of anything I'd like them to do less than just release an insert sheet - there's enough books and paper and updates as it is, I do not want to have yet another element to add, at least with the state of FAQ's at present it's possible to know your own without too much effort.

If you're going to update the rules, have the decency to update the book as well (to be honest, I have faith in GW that this will be the case anyway)

Redefine battleforged, and add perks for taking no formation detachments so they can compete.

Latest info is that the new edition won't be coming till 2017, per SadPanda on dakka, as reported by Faeit212.

I'm so tired of the edition cycle.

My bookshelves are about to collapse from the weight of old 40k rulebooks, and I'm sick of having to buy the same game over and over and over again. 7th edition is deeply flawed. 8th edition will also be deeply flawed. 17th edition will probably be deeply flawed in new and different ways, but will still be deeply flawed.

As it stands, I'm already one good earthquake away from being crushed to death beneath my collection of discontinued GW game books.

Calyptra wrote:

As it stands, I'm already one good earthquake away from being crushed to death beneath my collection of discontinued GW game books.

Repurpose them. Based on your own idea, you could use them to make a makeshift anti-theft device to booby trap one of your doors, or you could always use them for kindling. OR you could use them to make paper mache with which to create terrain for 40k. Imagine it: You could tell people "You're playing upon the repurposed remains of 30 years of defunct 40k rules."

I gave them to the toddler, she likes going thru them and looking at the pictures.

Get some planks of wood.
Organize your redundant books into equal piles, and use them as blocks, with a plank over them.
What I'm basically saying, is use your redundant books and some planks of wood to make some new bookcases.

Squidmaster wrote:

Get some planks of wood.
Organize your redundant books into equal piles, and use them as blocks, with a plank over them.
What I'm basically saying, is use your redundant books and some planks of wood to make some new bookcases.

Haha!!

Squidmaster wrote:

Get some planks of wood.
Organize your redundant books into equal piles, and use them as blocks, with a plank over them.
What I'm basically saying, is use your redundant books and some planks of wood to make some new bookcases.

That's actually not a bad idea.

I find that I do go back and reference them periodically for a bit of flavor, or old art, or because I'm having a grognard moment and am arguing on the internet and need to check exactly how many regiments of Imperial Guard have been swept under the rug to leave us with Vostroyans, Catachans, and Cadians, but mostly just Cadians.

(Me: "Hey, remember when chapters other than the Black Templars, Flesh Tearers, and founding chapters got to do stuff too?"
Kids these days: "There was never such a time! We have always been at war with Eurasia!"
Me: *pulls book off shelf*
Kids these days: "Those chapters were stupid anyway."
Me: "Get off my lawn!")

My first army were Bad Moons. One of these days I'm going to dig those old models up and try to make them pretty again, at least just one mob and my old warboss ("Bignub"). I want to go nuts with green stuff and plasticard and make them even Bad Moonier, even though they come from the time when there were clan-specific sculpts. When I do this, I'll need to pull out my copies of Waaargh the Orks, 'Ere We Go, and Freebooterz to reference the old art, the glyph translations, and the Bad Moons army list.

These old books are the game that I fell in love with. I can't easily part with them for the same reason that I'm in the hobby at all.

Calyptra wrote:

These old books are the game that I fell in love with. I can't easily part with them for the same reason that I'm in the hobby at all.

Same - I have an entire bookshelf full of old books going back to rogue trader, many of which are redundant copies.  There is even an entire shelf for beloved specialist games including necromunda, gorkamorka, mordheim, and inquisitor.

As for the dwindling diversity:

My first real army developed out of a necromunda gang I couldn't stop buying pewter figures for (a blister containing 2-3 figures was like $2).  Eventually I learned that there was a necromundan imperial guard regiment, and went about building it, with each squad representing a different underhive gang and battlefield role.  I eventually used almost all the necromunda line in my army (and a good chunk of catachans who looked like one of the gangs) and it was about as awesome as that sounds.

Since third edition, the standing army of what was probably the most fluffed out planet in 40k (besides terra), which had something like 90 potential infantry models has been reduced to a slightly different color scheme for your cadians.

I've seen the 8th comming for a while now, from how few armies don't have a 7th ed. codex yet to the recent DFTS expansion and the FAQ. But there is still a few things to do for GW beforehand. Mostly, they need to see and evaluate what effects these yet experimental rules have on the player base.
If the new edition is really comming out this fall already, it might be rushed and not as good as it could be. Which would be a pretty stupid thing to do, since GW's customers are not exactly desperate for a new edition right now.
However, I'm not going to judge a book before it's even released.

The best rumour monger has explicitly said in no uncertain terms that 8th edition will not be coming out before 2017. I firmly believe it will still be half baked but this Fall is out the window.

Calyptra wrote:

My first army were Bad Moons. One of these days I'm going to dig those old models up and try to make them pretty again, at least just one mob and my old warboss ("Bignub"). I want to go nuts with green stuff and plasticard and make them even Bad Moonier, even though they come from the time when there were clan-specific sculpts. When I do this, I'll need to pull out my copies of Waaargh the Orks, 'Ere We Go, and Freebooterz to reference the old art, the glyph translations, and the Bad Moons army list.

These old books are the game that I fell in love with. I can't easily part with them for the same reason that I'm in the hobby at all.

I still have Waaagh the Orks in a place of pride on my bookshelf. Fantastic book. Sadly my copy of 'Ere we Go! was left by an open window one day and ruined by the rain. Books like that you didn't really mind having the rules superceded, because you could keep going back to the well for more inspiration.

The obsolete 3ed - 7ed codicies... not so much.

I think it's going to be a complete do-over, maybe not quite as radical as Age of Sigmar was for Warhammer Fantasy, but not a thousand miles away from it either.

Barking Agatha wrote:

I think it's going to be a complete do-over, maybe not quite as radical as Age of Sigmar was for Warhammer Fantasy, but not a thousand miles away from it either.

Sure, who needs such things as force-orgs and point costs. Tournament players? Nah, GW can do without them. What 40k really needs is more little kids who want to buy and play with just any model they think looks cool.
Also, they totally need to write Slaanesh out of the fluff.

Kappa

I think they learned their lesson with age of crap and won't be doing that again.

Rokuro wrote:

Sure, who needs such things as force-orgs...

Not space meringues, craftworld eldar, tau, necrons, or indeed any army with rules published in the last year and a half. Haven't you noticed that by combining detachments, formations, allies, etc., they can take whatever they want, essentially playing 'unbound with points' and getting several formation bonuses into the bargain?

Rokuro wrote:

...and point costs. Tournament players? Nah, GW can do without them. What 40k really needs is more little kids who want to buy and play with just any model they think looks cool.

Actually, yes, that would be ideal, as little kids have been known to grow up and the next generation of GW customers has to come from somewhere. When I say 'grow up', clearly that does not necessarily involve turning into a typical tournament player, and may even be incompatible with such an existence. I'm old beyond mortal comprehension myself, and yet I prefer to play with models because they look cool, rather than because they're 'competitive'. That's what the hobby used to be about, before all the 'competitive' kiddies ruined it!

Rokuro wrote:

Also, they totally need to write Slaanesh out of the fluff.
Kappa

You're misinformed.

CptMetal wrote:

I think they learned their lesson with age of crap and won't be doing that again.

From what I hear, 'Age of Crap' is doing quite well, and much better than 8th edition was, so the lesson learned would be 'let's do it again'. It may seem hard to believe, but sometimes the people who shout loudest aren't representative of the majority.

Barking Agatha wrote:

From what I hear, 'Age of Crap' is doing quite well, and much better than 8th edition was, so the lesson learned would be 'let's do it again'.

That's pretty much the opposite of what I've heard. Every 'source' I've seen has AoS being a complete flop in terms of sales. If it is outperforming 8e then it's not by very much. This would seem to be the reason that GW is releasing alternative ways to play, including with points.

There's a lot of inconclusive evidence that it's doing poorly - limited edition books not selling, independent retailers dumping the product, GW's sales being down the same time period they released Betrayal at Calth and the Tau book, and so on. I'm not aware of any inconclusive evidence that it's doing well.

More anecdotally, every fantasy player I know including myself would like to see Age of Sigmar die in a fire and sink into the swamp.

It's easier to retain existing customers than it is to find new ones. It's possible that Age of Sigmar has managed to attract more players than it drove away, but that seems unlikely. Inconclusive metrics like opinion polls on forums like Dakka and Warseer, event attendance, and numbers of views of Youtube videos also seem to indicate Age of Sigmar not doing well.

Again, none of it's conclusive. I'm still grieving for Warhammer Fantasy and the Old World, so you should take my bias into account as well.

Barking Agatha wrote:

Haven't you noticed that by combining detachments, formations, allies, etc., they can take whatever they want, essentially playing 'unbound with points' and getting several formation bonuses into the bargain?

This really isn't true. It allows more possibilities, certainly, but many of them are far more restrictive than things you previously could have shoehorned into a normal force org. I'm all for things that allow people to get creative and give us more customization options for how to field our armies, and I think formations and detachments do just fine in that particular area.

Barking Agatha wrote:

Actually, yes, that would be ideal, as little kids have been known to grow up and the next generation of GW customers has to come from somewhere.

I'm a current GW customer. GW has to keep a majority of the "me's" happy in the meantime, or they won't be arround to see their next generation of customers.

Barking Agatha wrote:

From what I hear, 'Age of Crap' is doing quite well

Pretty sure you're misinformed. When GW released their latest numbers, it seemed to indicate that AoS wasn't doing well, which is what prompted them to create new, more competitive rulesets for it. Because let's be honest... the age of sigmar line has some of GW's best models ever. If they're suffering after putting out a model line that looked that good, that sort of flips the idea that "most GW customers are model collectors, not gamers" on it's head, doesn't it? Also, there was a poll of like 2000 GW customers done that actually showed that somewhere close to 90% of GW customers were primarily gamers. People have known this for a long time, with the exception of Tom Kirby and all the GW fanboys who drank his kool-aid.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

Pretty sure you're misinformed. When GW released their latest numbers, it seemed to indicate that AoS wasn't doing well, which is what prompted them to create new, more competitive rulesets for it.

Age of Sigmar now accounts for 30% of all sales, compared to 12% during 8th edition. Overall sales are down, but that's what you'd expect during a particularly bad economic year when disposable income is scarce. To put it another way, AoS isn't doing exactly well, but it's doing better than 8th edition was.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

...that sort of flips the idea that "most GW customers are model collectors, not gamers" on it's head, doesn't it? Also, there was a poll of like 2000 GW customers done that actually showed that somewhere close to 90% of GW customers were primarily gamers. People have known this for a long time, with the exception of Tom Kirby and all the GW fanboys who drank his kool-aid.

It's a new GW now, and they no longer believe that. That's partly why I believe that 40K is due for a major makeover. The current rules were made under the directive that 'rules don't matter'. Now that they believe that 'rules do matter', they'll be taking a good, serious look at the rules and drag 40K kicking and screaming into the Century of the Fruitbat, as it were.

That being said, the opposite idea is equally silly, that gamers buy models primarily for the rules. If that were true, then why are we here? The rules for Dark Eldar are abysmal. Surely we'd be better off just buying Craftcheese Eldar or Meringues, if all we cared about were their rules. That's not to say that Kirby was right, because if he had been then we would be happy with the way things are, and it should be clear to anyone but the thickest that we are not, but it's not all rules either. It's a combination of good rules, cool models, and exciting lore.

I'm wondering how they will manage to further nerf our already heavily nerfed codex.

Barking Agatha wrote:

Age of Sigmar now accounts for 30% of all sales, compared to 12% during 8th edition.

Where did you get that information from? I didn't think GW released breakdowns of their sales figures.

Quote :

The current rules were made under the directive that 'rules don't matter'. Now that they believe that 'rules do matter', they'll be taking a good, serious look at the rules and drag 40K kicking and screaming into the Century of the Fruitbat, as it were.

I hope that's true but they need to do it properly. Actually write rules that do what they want them to rather than write any old rule and say "Well this is kind of what we mean but you just roll off for it if you disagree".

Quote :

That being said, the opposite idea is equally silly, that gamers buy models primarily for the rules. If that were true, then why are we here? The rules for Dark Eldar are abysmal. Surely we'd be better off just buying Craftcheese Eldar or Meringues, if all we cared about were their rules. That's not to say that Kirby was right, because if he had been then we would be happy with the way things are, and it should be clear to anyone but the thickest that we are not, but it's not all rules either. It's a combination of good rules, cool models, and exciting lore.

Speaking personally, I bought into Dark Eldar when the 5e codex was released. It was a combination of a semi-decent, or at least vaguely playable, codex together with the most beautiful models GW had ever made (IMO). If they had released the model range at the same time as the 7e codex I wouldn't even be on this site now!

Basically, I will buy a cool model if it has acceptable rules. I won't buy one if it has crap rules. I might buy a crap model with decent rules but I'm more likely to convert one instead (Hello Grots!).

As far as I understand it, GW only breaks their business down in to core (games, models), and non-core (licensing, digital media, and apps) sales.  From what I've read their core sales have been down over the last year, despite a frenetic development of new models, new rules, and entire new games.  Non-core sales (and specifically licenses) have grown to just about cover the downturn.

This sort of sums it up, as of late last year.

Anecdotally, I bought up a half dozen or so age of sigmar boxes when they dropped from $120 to about $60.  I figured I could resell them when the price stabilized above $80 (the normal low-end of dark vengeance) - but for the most part it hasn't.  If the market demonstrates demand, demand seems to be pretty low.

On the plus side, I now have a ton of big/mean looking khorne cultists and true scale dark angels veterans...

As for people buying models for their rules - it's more common than not.  It's pretty easy to track the ups and downs of units just based on their ebay prices.  Grav guns/cannons are a pretty simple example, but recent changes in rules/demand for things like windriders, scatter lasers, and swooping hawks hit a little closer to home.  This trend can be bucked in many situations like raven/deathwing models from the dark vengeance set, which are not only so common it's painful, but far inferior to similar units in the same book.  

It's a big hobby though, and there are certainly people who go in entirely on aesthetic.

That said - I know a few players that use dark eldar models in craftworld armies - I use mine as predominantly as corsairs.