8th Edition

Does anyone else have the feeling that 8th edition will completely remove the Standard and allied FoC and replace it entirely with formations?

If we get enough and cool formations I'm okay with that.

Yesterday in a dream a GW executive confirmed to me personally that the next edition of 40K is actually going to be an Age of Sigmar-style reboot, with completely new rules. He didn't give his name, but he looked a bit like Leonardo DiCaprio, except that he was very upset about voting Leave on Brexit and kept hitting himself with spiked chains, and there was blood everywhere. I asked him if I could get him anything and he said, a gin and tonic. At first I couldn't find the gin, because someone had hidden it behind the bin bags. Then every glass in the house was full of chili peppers. Then there was no ice and I had to wait for the ice cubes to freeze. By the time I had the gin and tonic, it was too late, the poor fella was dead. We had him picked up by UPS and shipped him to New Zealand.

You may take this with a grain of salt, if you like, but I consider it incontrovertible proof!

No, I'd actually expect it to go in a similar rout to Age of Sigmar's General's Handbook, allowing for multiple styles of play and within the structured set up having both Force Org's and Formations, hopefully including the "you pay points for the formation benefit" that the GH uses as well.

GH? What's the?

Generals Handbook. And I agree, if anything, 8th Edition will linclude Decurion style FOC and a multitude of fornations for each Army just like AoS has now. We may also see choosable warlord traits (like in AoS) and a linking between troops and how many artefacts an Army may contain. In AoS you have to take two core choices and may take one artefact per Army. For each additional core unit you may take another artefact.

Barking Agatha wrote:

Yesterday in a dream a GW executive confirmed to me personally that the next edition of 40K is actually going to be an Age of Sigmar-style reboot, with completely new rules. He didn't give his name, but he looked a bit like Leonardo DiCaprio, except that he was very upset about voting Leave on Brexit and kept hitting himself with spiked chains, and there was blood everywhere. I asked him if I could get him anything and he said, a gin and tonic. At first I couldn't find the gin, because someone had hidden it behind the bin bags. Then every glass in the house was full of chili peppers. Then there was no ice and I had to wait for the ice cubes to freeze. By the time I had the gin and tonic, it was too late, the poor fella was dead. We had him picked up by UPS and shipped him to New Zealand.

You may take this with a grain of salt, if you like, but I consider it incontrovertible proof!

Warhammer 40k 8th Ed: Age of Sigmarines confirmed.

Age of Ultramarines vs World Eaters.

Quote :

Warhammer 40k 8th Ed: Age of Sigmarines confirmed.

Haha!!

With the release of the FAQs and Death from the Skies, it's hard to think a TOTAL reboot like Age of Sigmar. The long work of the FAQ would be useless, and the flyers supplement obsolete in a few months.

I've red that the story/background is going to be continued (maybe with the return of the primarchs) and the rules are going to be more soft (which is a total no sense compared with Death from the Skies that have difficult rules).

I only hope Dark Eldar won't be delete as my Tomb Kings of Fantasy or join eldar as a "supplement".
If things will go bad, I think we should move to some well done fun-rulebook like Fantasy 9th edition.

Im more than 100% sure 8th will be 70-80% the same as it is now, just ALOT of clean up on rules, some rules combined and streamlined with a different CAD and CAD restrictions.

amishprn86 wrote:

Im more than 100% sure 8th will be 70-80% the same as it is now, just ALOT of clean up on rules, some rules combined and streamlined with a different CAD and CAD restrictions.

I'm with you on this one, we may see some substantial changes and quite a bit of simplification but fundamentally I'm expecting to see the same game, the CAD won't disappear until we've seen all factions get their own specific detachments, and even then I wouldn't be surprised to see it stay as a sort of 'intro' level option.

The_Burning_Eye wrote:

amishprn86 wrote:

Im more than 100% sure 8th will be 70-80% the same as it is now, just ALOT of clean up on rules, some rules combined and streamlined with a different CAD and CAD restrictions.

I'm with you on this one, we may see some substantial changes and quite a bit of simplification but fundamentally I'm expecting to see the same game, the CAD won't disappear until we've seen all factions get their own specific detachments, and even then I wouldn't be surprised to see it stay as a sort of 'intro' level option.

Not saying the CAD will disappear at all, saying It might have some added things.

I think it might be more simpulary too, but not to the extreme everyone is talking about, witht he FAQs, DftS and other releases (All most likely set up for 8th ed) it to me seems that its mostly the same game with some problems being addressed (other than power creep from 4-5 armies)

amishprn86 wrote:

The_Burning_Eye wrote:

amishprn86 wrote:

Im more than 100% sure 8th will be 70-80% the same as it is now, just ALOT of clean up on rules, some rules combined and streamlined with a different CAD and CAD restrictions.

I'm with you on this one, we may see some substantial changes and quite a bit of simplification but fundamentally I'm expecting to see the same game, the CAD won't disappear until we've seen all factions get their own specific detachments, and even then I wouldn't be surprised to see it stay as a sort of 'intro' level option.

Not saying the CAD will disappear at all, saying It might have some added things.

I think it might be more simpulary too, but not to the extreme everyone is talking about, witht he FAQs, DftS and other releases (All most likely set up for 8th ed) it to me seems that its mostly the same game with some problems being addressed (other than power creep from 4-5 armies)

The thing is, according to Sad Panda over on Dakka Dakka (who is proven to be very reliable, which is why I think it's worth mentioning here) the higher ups at GW since the change over from Kirby to Roundtree recognise that 7th is a bit of a lame duck. It's why we haven't seen a codex release in nearly a year, and the Tau codex only came about because the printers were pre booked. Things like Warzone Fenris and Death from the Skies are there to tide 7th over until 8th comes out, which would be well into next year at the earliest.

At this point I could easily see an End Times style re launch, though no where near as sever, being on the cards whilst at the same time I wouldn't be overly surprised if your suggestion of minor changes with DftS rolled in happens either.

I'd like better, more logical melee rules.

I can see 40k getting sigmarized. GW learned their lesson with the lack of structure in sigmar, but the power for AoS comes from the whole anymodel in the shop can slot into your army.

40k is restrictive like that, and the unbalanced units will shoe in sales. How many actual pyrovore models do you see? After killing fantasy after the amazing end times nothing will surprise me with GW. Theyre clearly ok with alienating a fan base in the hope they ll buy something else from them. I hope its not the case as i love 7th. But I get the feeling the freedom of age of sigmar put dollar signs in their eyes.

I suspect the whole FAQ thing is an attempt to see where and how rules are causing confusion, which is an excellent idea and should have been done years ago. I'm hoping that this will lead to an 8e with clear and concise rules. My problem is that I don't think GW is actually capable of doing this, even if they want to. The FAQ answers are, in many ways, as unclear as the original rules that caused the question to be frequently asked in the first place!

Imateria wrote:

amishprn86 wrote:

The_Burning_Eye wrote:

amishprn86 wrote:

Im more than 100% sure 8th will be 70-80% the same as it is now, just ALOT of clean up on rules, some rules combined and streamlined with a different CAD and CAD restrictions.

I'm with you on this one, we may see some substantial changes and quite a bit of simplification but fundamentally I'm expecting to see the same game, the CAD won't disappear until we've seen all factions get their own specific detachments, and even then I wouldn't be surprised to see it stay as a sort of 'intro' level option.

Not saying the CAD will disappear at all, saying It might have some added things.

I think it might be more simpulary too, but not to the extreme everyone is talking about, witht he FAQs, DftS and other releases (All most likely set up for 8th ed) it to me seems that its mostly the same game with some problems being addressed (other than power creep from 4-5 armies)

The thing is, according to Sad Panda over on Dakka Dakka (who is proven to be very reliable, which is why I think it's worth mentioning here) the higher ups at GW since the change over from Kirby to Roundtree recognise that 7th is a bit of a lame duck. It's why we haven't seen a codex release in nearly a year, and the Tau codex only came about because the printers were pre booked. Things like Warzone Fenris and Death from the Skies are there to tide 7th over until 8th comes out, which would be well into next year at the earliest.

At this point I could easily see an End Times style re launch, though no where near as sever, being on the cards whilst at the same time I wouldn't be overly surprised if your suggestion of minor changes with DftS rolled in happens either.

And 100's of times before "reliable" sources have been wrong. I take my rumors with lots of salt till there are some type of tangible proof.

I remember one of the BIG Reliable 6th ed rumors was, you can use pistols in melee (shooting profile) and that not even close as we see now. I can name 20 others but its pointless.

As a business PoV, 40k is selling and doing well with formations, they are not going to change that, and if you remember 5th ed sales dropped, so I dont see them steam lining it as much as people are saying, BUT Im also not saying it wont be streamline more so than now, Im saying they are cutting off some of the fat and making some of the rules better/simpler.

I can see, Building and fortification rules changes, many Walker rules, many rules combined into one, rules like Calv and Beasts combined somewhat, Flier rules changed, FMC rules, D chart, Super Heavies, Missions and cards changes and a few more .

This is my opinion from years of warhammer fantasy and 40k also from running businesses.

Also with no codex thing, as a company fixing core rules and change the meta to fit what they feel is best will take a lot of work and man power to go through, play test etc... its more work than one would think, adding a codex to that is huge, codex require more than just rules, its writing, legal, models, art, the list goes on and on.

CptMetal wrote:

Age of Ultramarines vs World Eaters Word Bearers.

Fixed that for you, with regards to Chaos Gate and Betrayal at Calth.

Trying to predict GW behavior is sort of like trying to predict the next thing the crazy homeless guy on 8th avenue is going to say: It could be a moment of perfect clarity, where everything comes together and seems to make sense, or it could be a jumble of words that are barely recognizable as language as he spills his beer on you, or pretty much anywhere in between.

Trying to guess which is like playing roulette.

On a scale of 1 - 10, where '1' is the level of change between, say, 6ed and 7ed without the superheavies, and '10' is Warhammer to Age of Sigmar level change, what level of change are you hoping for?

Personally I'm hoping for about 7.

Creeping Darkness wrote:

On a scale of 1 - 10, where '1' is the level of change between, say, 6ed and 7ed without the superheavies, and '10' is Warhammer to Age of Sigmar level change, what level of change are you hoping for?

Personally I'm hoping for about 7.

PRobably a 3-4. I think the basic rules are fine. We just need the ruleset cleaned up and clarified. We don't really need an overhaul.

They DO, however, need to put more thought into it than they seem to be putting into their FAQ answers. Some of their answers on the FAQ are fundamentally altering the way the game has been played for a decade. Like being able to move through cover being taken away by the FAQ.

Changes in the base rules?

2. No more than 3.

I would say somewhere around 3, maybe 4.

7ed th was a very well clean up of 6th ed.

I'd sat 3