8e - Datasheets

Tounguekutter wrote:

Confirmed in their points article, points are separate so that codices can remain relevant and they can change points as new units or weapons are discovered to be under or overcosted.  I like this change, personally.

This is something I don't like actually. Not to be contrarian needlessly, but this was an enormous gripe about AoS when it first came out. Warscrolls were only available online and would be updated, along with the rules, randomly and without notice as originally planned. Now granted this will be probably a yearly update with FAQs and errata thrown in every now and then but a fluid ruleset is a hallmark of the competitive and eh-hem... "e-sports" scene. It is generally seen as a way of forcing people to constantly buy more stuff (like M:TG) or forcing out what game developers refer to as "emergent gameplay", or rather using gameplay mechanics in ways or combinations beyond what was originally intended. In some cases this is good, like stopping death stars from forming by keeping IC's out of units. And in some ways this is bad, like getting rid of formations because "a-bloo-hoo-hoo decurions seer councils riptide wings".

Bottom line is it's gonna suck if I shell out cash for models to use a strategy I've discovered only for it to be errata'd away in a year because the game developer thinks it's too powerful.

I'm actually in agreement with TA here. Fluid gameplay, when wielded by a corporation who's primary objective is to make money, generally tends to force players to constantly buy new stuff. With me being relatively slow to assemble/paint things, I could see this being a major thorn in my side. No sooner do I assemble a unit, does it become obsolete.

Given they have done none of the proposed living points changes for AoS in the last 2 years, I think its safe to say the chances of things changing on a dime are low!

@Massaen since Age of Sigmar's launch the last chance to buy section of Games Workshop's online store has seen more executions than North Korea in the same time period. It seems almost every week another classic Fantasy model is brought out back and shot, silently squatting it from the line. Sure, its rules are still presented in the warscrolls and it still has a points value in the General's Handbook, but good luck buying more of those models to incorporate into your army. Tomb Kings and Brittonia were just the first, my High AELFS have been suffering a similar fate as have the Dark AELFS, and what's worse there's no indication of plans to replace them. Sometimes they don't even bother printing unique rules but instead roll the model into an official "counts-as". I expect a similar thing to happen in 40k as time goes on, and would not be surprised to see an entire line end up being reduced to a mere footnote and warscroll before a year of the new edition has passed.

WOW.... you really are a glass is half empty kind of guy arnt you...

You are correct that the classic WHFB line is slowly being removed... because its not for AoS. They want to update the whole range and remove any ambiguity. It makes perfect business sense.

40k has a full and flourishing range. Which ones do you think they will remove from their flagship? Honestly? Anything they produce rules in a published book - read that as every current model from day 1 of 8th according to GW - will be almost certain to stick around for the duration. GW don't make a habit of printing books and including minis they discontinue.

The only thing that MIGHT disappear is sisters of battle - but given the new Celestine model, I am still expecting plastic sisters

Massaen wrote:

WOW.... you really are a glass is half empty kind of guy arnt you...

You are correct that the classic WHFB line is slowly being removed... because its not for AoS. They want to update the whole range and remove any ambiguity. It makes perfect business sense.

It also removes the entirety of the previous range on which Age of Sigmar has founded itself and alienates the last of the consumer base carrying over from the Fantasy game, as their armies are neither sold, recognized, nor encouraged by the parent company any longer. On that note I highly encourage anyone with a Tomb Kings army to play in any and all events, especially those sponsored or held by Games Workshop itself.

Quote :

40k has a full and flourishing range. Which ones do you think they will remove from their flagship? Honestly?

Every single potato sculpt from the Inquisition line. Numerous Eldar miniatures are old sculpts that predate even the venerable Rhino. Some of them already have been given the axe. Many Daemons units too require either a revamping or a scrapping.

Quote :

Anything they produce rules in a published book - read that as every current model from day 1 of 8th according to GW - will be almost certain to stick around for the duration. GW don't make a habit of printing books and including minis they discontinue.

The only thing that MIGHT disappear is sisters of battle - but given the new Celestine model, I am still expecting plastic sisters

You're missing the bottom line here. I'm right in that they are removing units for accessibility. Not in denying them rules, I can still technically play with my High AELFS, but they're locking the front door by not allowing me to purchase more of them. This is not modifying their points values but I would still argue it is taking advantage of the liquid ruleset by not publishing new material for the armies and preventing collectors from accessing them, thus dwindling their battlefield presence through attrition. Now, likely as you said the business aspect of homogeneity across the product line is the first and foremost reason for this but I can't help but feel this is also done to prevent them from having to worry about High AELFS and other armies from becoming prominent in the tournament circuits. The less they have to balance the better.

I'm not sure what you're arguing for TA, that is a completely separate issue unrelated to a living rule set.

The GHB2 which will be released this summer will give us our best indication yet of how they'll handle this, and the preview of the Fyreslayers points they showed off a couple months ago suggests they are taking a sensible approach to it.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

I'm actually in agreement with TA here. Fluid gameplay, when wielded by a corporation who's primary objective is to make money, generally tends to force players to constantly buy new stuff. With me being relatively slow to assemble/paint things, I could see this being a major thorn in my side. No sooner do I assemble a unit, does it become obsolete.

Fantasy Flight Games and Privateer Press both operate with frequent rules amendments based primarily on gameplay issues. PP recently rewrote an entire faction's rules on the grounds that they completely screwed that faction with the change from 2e to 3e. FFG frequently release 'balancing' changes to reflect the dominance/underperformance of a given ship or upgrade. Both systems seem to be doing pretty well!

Both of those systems' games have a fishbowl of a playerbase compared to 40k's ocean though.

Quote :

I'm not sure what you're arguing for TA, that is a completely separate issue unrelated to a living rule set.

It's different but related. If they want something to sell they buff the snot out of it. If they want something to disappear they stop updating their rules and cut the model line. That way they have a smaller pool of armies to balance around and/or have room for newer armies that supplant the strategy the previous army took up.

TeenageAngst wrote:

Both of those systems' games have a fishbowl of a playerbase compared to 40k's ocean though.

Quote :

I'm not sure what you're arguing for TA, that is a completely separate issue unrelated to a living rule set.

It's different but related. If they want something to sell they buff the snot out of it. If they want something to disappear they stop updating their rules and cut the model line. That way they have a smaller pool of armies to balance around and/or have room for newer armies that supplant the strategy the previous army took up.

Sure, none of which has anything to do with a living rule set as they were doing it just as well under the previous codex/edition churn.

I have always expected new editions and new Codexes to change around which units are good, perhaps in part to make sure you always need to buy new models. Living ruleset or otherwise, the game evolves and what's the best way to win changes with it.

Count Adhemar wrote:

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

I'm actually in agreement with TA here. Fluid gameplay, when wielded by a corporation who's primary objective is to make money, generally tends to force players to constantly buy new stuff. With me being relatively slow to assemble/paint things, I could see this being a major thorn in my side. No sooner do I assemble a unit, does it become obsolete.

Fantasy Flight Games and Privateer Press both operate with frequent rules amendments based primarily on gameplay issues. PP recently rewrote an entire faction's rules on the grounds that they completely screwed that faction with the change from 2e to 3e. FFG frequently release 'balancing' changes to reflect the dominance/underperformance of a given ship or upgrade. Both systems seem to be doing pretty well!

Those are both companies with a reputation and history of treating their customers with dignity and respect. We're not talking about those companies. We're talking about GW.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

Count Adhemar wrote:

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

I'm actually in agreement with TA here. Fluid gameplay, when wielded by a corporation who's primary objective is to make money, generally tends to force players to constantly buy new stuff. With me being relatively slow to assemble/paint things, I could see this being a major thorn in my side. No sooner do I assemble a unit, does it become obsolete.

Fantasy Flight Games and Privateer Press both operate with frequent rules amendments based primarily on gameplay issues. PP recently rewrote an entire faction's rules on the grounds that they completely screwed that faction with the change from 2e to 3e. FFG frequently release 'balancing' changes to reflect the dominance/underperformance of a given ship or upgrade. Both systems seem to be doing pretty well!

Those are both companies with a reputation and history of treating their customers with dignity and respect. We're not talking about those companies. We're talking about GW.

If you'd said that a year or two ago I'd have agreed but there seems to have been an absolute sea change at GW since that idiot Kirby stepped down so I'm at least optimistic that they may use a living ruleset to balance the game, even whilst trying to make money.

These are the same clowns who think the abominations that are the Age of Sigmar models are a good idea, giving us AutoCAD pictures and tiny arrows to follow with no words and only a token nod towards the word "instructions" to assemble these unholy abominations of plastic. And you trust THEM to design things.

Pretty sure LEGO has been doing that for 40+ years. Didn't realize that made a bad company.

BetrayTheWorld wrote:

Those are both companies with a reputation and history of treating their customers with dignity and respect. We're not talking about those companies. We're talking about GW.

Count Adhemar wrote:

If you'd said that a year or two ago I'd have agreed but there seems to have been an absolute sea change at GW since that idiot Kirby stepped down so I'm at least optimistic that they may use a living ruleset to balance the game, even whilst trying to make money.

Well yes and no. For one thing, Kirby may have stepped down as ceo but as far as I know he's still the majority stockholder, so his spectre yet falls upon Nottingham, a chill whisper barely heard in the corridors or a sudden shiver down your spine as you enter the toilets in Bugman's Bar, waiting only for the stars to align once again that he may reclaim his power to shrivel away the joy in the hearts of gamers everywhere, to the delight of his black-hearted acolytes currently chafing under the sickening, customer-loving ways of Rountree, just waiting for the day... oh! the day...

For another, while this 'new' Games Workshop is certainly working hard to improve their public image, and while the designers may well feel as if a boot has been slightly lifted off their necks (for now), administratively they haven't really changed at all. They may even be worse, now that they're clever. They still look down on the people who buy their own products and think of them as anorak-wearing weirdos to be manipulated and exploited, but certainly not to be taken seriously.

I'm all for enjoying it while it lasts, but don't trust them!

Kirkby was never been a majority share holder - a significant one yes (around 8%) but majority? No

TeenageAngst wrote:

These are the same clowns who think the abominations that are the Age of Sigmar models are a good idea, giving us AutoCAD pictures and tiny arrows to follow with no words and only a token nod towards the word "instructions" to assemble these unholy abominations of plastic. And you trust THEM to design things.

Seriously dude - just walk away. Clearly you don't have any interest in the new edition, you hate the company and are so disillusioned with it all that you do nothing but spout hate and vitriol every chance you get.

We get it.

We all agree GW has not been great in its practices in recent years but we all recognise they have changed and are getting better and are excited mostly because of it.

We don't need white knight antics of people claiming GW can do no wrong but we equally don't need black knight always negative hatred in every thread.

I don't hate GW, I hate some of the things they do. I don't trust Frontline Gaming and their bizarre west coast 40k nonsense to create a balanced ruleset. I also don't trust Mike Grant since he didn't consult with any of the NOVA judging staff (specifically Phil) in any of the decisions. I also hate the directions for most models produced nowadays, a few words would be nice to go along with pictures. The Yncarne was beyond frustrating >_<

And I am interested in the new edition. Dark Eldar and Harlequins are going to be insane in it, and I plan to run roughshod over the competition whenever I get the chance. If you actually paid attention to my posts instead of only selecting the ones you don't like you'd see I've been saying we're going to be bonkers this edition since we've started getting leaks.

Just ignore Teenage Angst until the full rules come out and we play a game. Some people are just negative.

IMO this edition for sure is going to make DE more fun to play than 6th and 7th, at least now we wont be Codex "Eldar's Ally"

TeenageAngst wrote:

Both of those systems' games have a fishbowl of a playerbase compared to 40k's ocean though.

Pretty sure X-Wing has been outselling 40K for a few years now.

TeenageAngst wrote:

Dark Eldar and Harlequins are going to be insane in it, and I plan to run roughshod over the competition whenever I get the chance

Genuinely wondering what makes you think that. There's literally nothing in the previews provided so far by GW that even hints that DE and/or Harlequins are going to rock. Is this just wishful thinking cos there doesn't seem to be any basis in fact, or even in rumour!

@teenageangst That the style of the miniatures is changing I agree, and in a lot of cases might also not be the biggest fan, still this is what they are doing and has not much to do with a new ruleset, except that there is more chance that they bring more new miniatures in. This is both necesary for them as a bussines and a good thing for the people who like the new miniatures.

AoS has been a major thorn in my side (I used to play and love warhammer a lot before they booted it. But the major difference was they booted warhammer because it was not profitable enough, hence model lines were getting scrapped, brettonia is a great example.
A major part of the Brettonian playerbase was old school old gamers. They bought something once in a while but not as much as the people who just started. Most miniatures were older and I think that a lot of the moulds would either need replacement or a new set of miniatures.
I hate GW for discontinuing them and not either giving them new minies (which i think would have sold better then they expected) or just recasting the moulds.
I do not think it is an issue of making balance easier but I think they just want to make the most money at the lowest cost. If they can convince everyone to buy the same miniatures (by having fewer races) then they have an easier time in making money and can spend more effort in adding things for those few races, thus letting the same people buy more stuff even if they are not new to the game. This way they make more money for less costs. Of course they like it.

Now with 40k yes there is the risk that some lines will be discontinued. Yes a ton of special characters will get counts as basic leader as their rules. But I doubt it will be as drastic as with AoS. First I agree that while the new GW might not be perfect it seems to at least make an effort to be slightly nicer than the previous boss. So I hope we will not get shafted as hard as we were when AoS came. And in the case of AoS the major idea was to kick it completely so they made a bear and pretzels lolzors game instead of a wargame. I think they might sort of have realised that was not very well recieved.

Quote :

Genuinely wondering what makes you think that. There's literally nothing in the previews provided so far by GW that even hints that DE and/or Harlequins are going to rock. Is this just wishful thinking cos there doesn't seem to be any basis in fact, or even in rumour!

"TA you're too negative."

*posts optimism*

"TA your claims are unfounded!"

Geez look what I have to work with here.

Also if you can't see how we are gonna be good in 8th I can't show you. I just know when I look at the big picture, the pieces fall into place. The 4D wizard chess is working it's magic.

TeenageAngst wrote:

Quote :

Genuinely wondering what makes you think that. There's literally nothing in the previews provided so far by GW that even hints that DE and/or Harlequins are going to rock. Is this just wishful thinking cos there doesn't seem to be any basis in fact, or even in rumour!

"TA you're too negative."

*posts optimism*

"TA your claims are unfounded!"

Geez look what I have to work with here.

Also if you can't see how we are gonna be good in 8th I can't show you. I just know when I look at the big picture, the pieces fall into place. The 4D wizard chess is working it's magic.

Meh, whatever. I've always thought you're full of... something and now it's been confirmed.

I can see dark eldar have the POTENTIAL to kick ass in the 8th edition. But, for now, there are far too many unknown factors to state it as a fact.