40K RUMORS: 8th Edition Big Shakeups!

Today’s latest set of 8th Edition rumors covers obsolete rulebooks, updated stats, assault & lots more!

via The Age of Darkness Podcast (facebook) 4-5-2017

 

Thoughts

Let’s break these down into groups.

Like this, but more grimdark?

Items #1,3,4,5,6 have all been previously reported by numerous rumormongers over the last few months.  This set of rumors is yet another corroborating report pointing us into the 40K-Age of Sigmar hybrid model for 8th Edition. I think at this point you should pencil in 40K warscrolls. Note that most of these also fit in with the rules teases from GW’s Adepticon seminar. The biggest jolt in these is yet another report of codexes becoming obsolete – that’s gonna hurt.

I hardly knew you…

#2 Is interesting, but would also follow the Age of Sigmar model, with simple rolls for numbers of hits replacing the fiddling with templates. It would be sad to see templates go after decades of use, but you get the same effect with X hits and its faster.  What 40K really needs right now is speed of play.

We’re back!

#7 Is unexpected, but not a giant surprise. Over the years, you can argue that GW has slowly but steadily nailed down how the basic phases of the game should function – with each getting more streamlined each edition. With the glaring exceptions of Assault, Psychic and Vehicle rules where GW has swung wildly from too strong to too weak from edition to edition.  Assaults are overall weak in the current edition, so I fully expect the pendulum to swing back in it’s direction in 8th. Time to dust off those Rhinos!

 

~What do you think of these? Better for the game, or worse?

  • 40000feet

    None of this is unwelcome. The rules have been quite bad for a long time and at this point a complete reboot or something close will be beneficial. Will they get it right? Who knows. But with a total shakeup there is always the chance they can FAQ it into something good.

    Will it be a gigantic pile of nurgle as some will automatically assume? We’ll have to wait and see.

    But let’s face it, the game is dying, and there needs to be something streamlined and balanced in order to get people interested again.

    I’m cautiously optimistic.

    • ZeeLobby

      100% agree. Im probably more cautiously pessimistic, but I’ll always welcome a surprise.

    • Jason C

      Yes the game is dying. Except in sales. And tournament attendance. And traffic on 40k websites. And increasing rules, new models, rules support, community outreach, internet presence… 40 years of slow slow slow slow death.

      • Mr.psyker

        mankind devided by 1000

        • Sporkel

          1000?!
          Your surely meant 40.000, Sir!

          • Severius_Tolluck

            More like zero….

          • Severius_Tolluck

            More like zero….

      • ZeeLobby

        Eh, There’s no real stats out there. Our local tournament scene is gone, and the two GT sized events I go to have shrunk over the past couple years. The two store managers I know have also told me of lagging sales of 40K (AoS is actually selling OK). Of course that’s all anecdotal. The fact that AoS was considered to sell higher last year than fantasy, but overall profits were down would also indicate that 40K sales must have dropped during that financial year.

        Regardless, they wouldn’t be making drastic changes like this unless something was up. If 40K was doing stellar, why change it at all. I mean that right there is a clear logical indicator that not all is well.

        • Kami

          the big tournaments are like doubling in size

          • ZeeLobby

            You got numbers? Genuinely curious. I also wouldn’t hold 2/3 major events in a year as total indicators for growth of the player base as a whole (I mean normally it’s hundreds of players compared to thousands of customers). On Independent Characters, a very pro-40K podcast out of CA they’ve even talked about drops in event attendance. And that’s on the other side of the country than me.

          • Kami

            doubling is an exaggeration of course

          • zeno666

            Yes it is

          • Kami

            increasing is not though

          • Sergio Celi

            It depends on the country. I can tell you, in Hungary and Spain the sales of 40k outnumber AoS and the tournaments of AoS are almost non existent (while you have many 40k local ones). In fact, in Hungary old Fantasy boxes and books are sold better than AoS.

          • Kami

            anecdotally warmachine is popular in my area. but aos tournaments are popping up now

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah, WMH is still super popular locally since MK3 dropped. Occasionally I see AoS. I never see 40K anymore, in all 3 local stores. One that actually focused primarily on GW products actually shut down, though that could be due to a slew of bad management issues it was supposedly having. Right now the big 3 are X-Wing, WMH, Infinity, but there’s a ton of Flames of War/Bolt Action players as well.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah. So going by yearly sales figures is the best we can probably do. So considering GW was on a 5 year bender up until this year, the 40K player base and sales must have been dropping, if fantasy was really doing nothing as they claimed it was.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            However anecdotally AoS was 4 times larger at adpeticon then the last 5 years of WHFB, and was at least two to three times as large as any KoW or 9th Age events…

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah, I mean I never expected 9th Age or KoW to truly replace Fantasy. And honestly anything GW did to fantasy would increase sales, they’d basically ignored it and focused on 40K since about a year after 8th edition WHFB dropped. I do have to say I’m excited for FFG’s RuneWars. My main store has already seen a bunch of pre-orders.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Hype was huge for that one, and they gave tons of starters away. I just look at it and I can’t feel for it. Not a fan of the dials, not a fan of the card system, which will make me buy many things and out of faction . That was ok for xwing, but not for a game I have no love for, nor how it mechanically requires many more figs. Plus the art style and figs I care not for. I hope it does well for FFG as I like them, but I am not liking that every mini game they do now has this card and dial crap. Works for dog fighting, not so much lines of battle.
            Sorry to rant, but I just do not get the same urge that I do from other systems. I want to like it but just can’t 🙁 I will stick to old hammer and all my historicals to scratch the line system for now. As 9th wasn’t my scene, nor KoW, and I tried to love KoW but it is so bland and has many of the same problems people whine about AoS.

          • ZeeLobby

            Actually they’ve stated no out of faction purchases necessary multiple times. So really the only thing to prevent you having the cards you need (our local store doesn’t care if you even print those off) are if you don’t want to buy a model in faction.

            And no, I got you. If there was any hope for oldhammer where I lived, or any care for historicals with ranked combat, I’d take those as options as well over this.

            But it’s hard not for me to get excited with clean competitive rules, built on top of already extremely solid mechanics, and the community that thrives around those things. THat’s what has me going.

            And yeah, AoS is just not my thing along with KoW. I mean I MAY take a look at shadespire, but if it’s anything like GW’s recent releases, it’ll just be a way to shovel people towards overpriced blisters if you don’t want to play Sigmarines or Bloodbourne.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Yep, God speed to you, and may you lay your foes down on my behalf.

          • ZeeLobby

            To you likewise good sir!

          • Matt Razincka

            Thank you and Severius for keeping this civil and constructive. We can disagree on what we enjoy without being uncivil and insulting! You both are an example for everyone.

          • ZeeLobby

            Haha. Your welcome! I think you can find a lot of good conversation here on BoLS. People who claim the comment section is a disaster here are usually just upset because people aren’t agreeing with them so they attack, get wounded and limp away. Way too many people bring their feelings to the conversation, waiting for them to be bruised and retaliate. The core commentators here are pretty good at ignoring or chasing them away though, haha.

          • Carlos Eduardo

            In Lisboa, Portugal, 40K is a game played by 3 or 4 fanboys that don’t even want to try a different game. And when I mean “played” is on a once-a-week basis with no tournament support at all.
            AoS is also in the same array, maybe 6-to-8 on “Game Days” -> not tournament support also. AoS is only sponsored by one store that the owner refuses pretty much any different game from AoS being played in his store.
            WarmacHordes had for 2 consecutive years 2 teams in WTC and a constant monthly tournament presence, leagues and big events. But it has decreased a lot since MK3.
            Flames of War has a basis of 18~20 players in monthly events with a team presence in ETC being a constant from several years now. It has a loyal fanbase, always present and very active. But no growth has seen in the past 2 years.
            X-Wing is off the charts… the number is growing every month and the LGS I go was once sold-out of event slots to play X-Wing.

            So, yes. In Lisbon, PT, GW lost its presence. We had 20ish+ attendance in monthly tournaments for WH:FB and a 14ish 40K scene. But now, crickets… if this isn’t being dead please do me some CPR!

          • Kami

            aos happened mostly do to bad sales. i didnt see anything wrong with the rules of fantasy itself. I even liked magic compared to warpcharges

          • ZeeLobby

            Right. Which is why we’re getting a heavily revamped 8th edition. Prior to this year, which looks to be heavily propped by positive AoS sales compared to fantasy, after the release of the Generals Handbook, GW had experienced 5+ years in falling sales. Clearly those losses had to come from somewhere. It’s not like 40K has been increasing continuously. It might have never stopped falling frankly.

          • Damistar

            Adepticon 2017 was bigger from what I heard.

          • ZeeLobby

            Oh no doubt. I have 2 friends who went because the normally closer events were canceled due to lack of interest. Again, it’s all just anecdotal as like I said previously, tournament attendees form a small percentage of GW consumers. I was just curious as 10 large events doubling in attendance is pretty huge. 3 major events having 20 more people than last year probably falls within a normal fluctuation for attending events.

          • Kami

            Lets not forget GW hyping, livestreaming, and overall attending these events. They have moved out of the past and engaged the new social media age. It came fast and not every company has been quick to embrace it.

          • ZeeLobby

            All true. Not sure that necessarily indicates massive growing sales though. It seems more like a change in tact was deemed necessary because things weren’t going as planned. I definitely have hope for a better GW of the future, but hype, livestreaming, etc. do little to make people want to play a broken game. Hopefully 8th will fix that.

          • Kami

            I mean people are having fun and the game isnt broken. Its just bloated and outdated. The faq helped a little. But i know change is slow. Gw has veen around for a long time. They would downsize long before they die. They arent doing that. Most of the raving ive heard is about how awesome aos is and how people enjoy playing it. And heck i enjoy playing it. Its so much easier. And i dont have to look up what happens when my barrage template scatters into melee with an invisible unit.

          • ZeeLobby

            I mean I don’t know if i can take that seriously. I mean the mechanics might not be broken, but if you play in a 1 friend meta and your Orks and they’re Eldar, regardless of all the house rules you add, one of you isn’t going to have a very fun time…

            I do agree that it’s also bloated.

          • Kami

            You can say that but its also a competetive copout. You see it in magic all the time balme luck cards etc. Yet you see tge same players. Some guy has won adepticon like 3 times. There is a bit of skill involved. The problem i see is eldar can be more unique in how they win. Tyranids have to use coeex flyrant and mawloc. But at this point tyranids are so old that its almost understandable. I see aos is more viable because with wounds and damage and such things can be balanced easily. Everything can die. Its more fun then 2++ rerollable saves that are only hit on 6s…

          • ZeeLobby

            lolwut? I have a non-competitive friend who moved and was literally in that position. There’s definitely still skill to be in the top 10, ofcourse. But when 50% of the top 30 is Eldar, that’s jsut called imbalance. I think your completely missing what constitutes a good game. What you’re describing is called “power creep”. There’s no reason an old codex should automatically be underpowered for some reason. All codexes should all be viable at any one time in a game’s life. Hell, they even fixed this with AoS!!! Clearly they know it’s an issue! Why don’t you agree with GW?

          • Kami

            Except that wasnt my argument. Outdated doesnt mean its less powerful in the strict sense. The game changed on them. It happened to newer codexes too. Like BA was outdated a month after its release thanks to the format changing. And nids can still be played. Jutls not how people necessarily want them too. And not everything is competetive. There are 3 ways to play.
            And chaos and marines make up the other 50% that leaves out most factions. Game balance is hard and meta forms. Its worse w thanks to the internet you cant escape that easily. My friend is always like “i dont really want to get this unit cause it is kind of bad.”

            Everything can die is a reference to low armor saves and rends in age of sigmar. You can actually hurt archaon. In 40k everything has low wounds so are more likely to take no famage or sometimes just be killed outright. If they stretch the numbers out like in aos it gives more room for nuance.

            The dark angels old codex was gobad. The 7th ed space wolves codex remianed powerful. Its not really about age. (But tyranids are last edition old) which in of itself shows how good living rules are. Its super easy to adjust rules more frequently. Most competetive games lnce monthly. Not every 3 years.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Huge, outside of Xwing and 40k it was probably in the top 3 of the largest events.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah, I had 2 friends go, mostly because other events locally had died down and they wanted to do something with 40K this year, haha.

          • kevinharoun

            Because the smaller tournaments are gone.

        • Red_Five_Standing_By

          Eh, GW also did not release a ton of new or updated factions in 2016.

          For proper codexes, we got Deathwatch and Genestealer Cults, both at the end of the year. The only other non-campaign books released of any note were Angels of Death (which basically re-printed rules from other books and added a little bit), Imperial Agents (reprint of the Inquisitor’s codex) and Traitor’s Legion (which genuinely had new rules).

          Compare that to 2015, where we got Necrons, Harlequins, Khorne Daemonkin, Skitarri, Eldar, Imperial Knights, Cult Mechanicus, Space Marines, Dark Angels and Tau.

          You can’t even compare the two years. 2015 was stellar.

          To me, this says that GW has been planning for a complete revamp of 40k since 2016 and minimized the edition’s impact by curtailing the release schedule.

          • More like figuring out what to do with 8th as soon as they finished 7th. At least from what I know, 5th was in the works only a few months afte 4th was released. That was “old” GW though so who knows.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah. I mean I never expected 7th to come so soon after 6th. During their period of declining performance I think a lot of old GW went out the window.

          • I DID work for them at one time and I remember during training they were talking about beginning work as soon as one edition was done. WD was finished 3 month in advance. As short as these rules are for AoS, I’m not sure how much time went into it, but starting from scratch and then having the GH in stores about a year later (plus a year of end times leading up to it) I’m thinking that there was at Least a 3 year window. Probably the same with 40k 8th. Now, I am curious about the “amount” of rules for he new 40k. It appears that they have taken parts from Vedros and Overkill (like the data sheets/warscrolls, 4 simple phases and removal of templates) so I wonder if we will see flyer rules from that aircraft game they released (don’t remember the name) and possibly rules from that Imperial Knight based game and that will be it. 10-15 pages tops. My thoughts on it anyway

          • ZeeLobby

            I don’t know. I know people who are pretty tight nit with some higher ups still at GW, and they left me with the impression that GH was nowhere in the works when AoS launched. They knew they’d release something like it at that point, but it was quite the scramble to basically integrate a community driven comp into an official book and that part I know started that winter.

            That said, I think 8th edition has been in the works for a while. I mean they’ve had declining sales for almost a decade, with no improvement with the drop of 7th, so clearly they knew they had to change something.

          • ZeeLobby

            But in 2015 sales were slouching as well. After all, according to them fantasy was a stagnant 0, and they were still losing sales. It’s honestly more shocking that 2015 produced a loss in sales (for I think the 5th year in a row). I think the continuous drop in 6th and 7th edition player base and sales is why we’re getting a revamped 8th.

          • Kami

            I mean im just an anecdote but now im willing to put money into aos. While fantasy was cool it wasnt enough to bring in new players. AoS did change up the game to court new players and it worked in that sense.

          • ZeeLobby

            Well 8th created most of the issues with the game. Requiring people to buy 8 boxes to build an 80 strong unit for horde unit sizes was just ridiculous. Add to that spells that removed half of your army (purple sun), and it was just heading down all the wrong paths. Then they had nowhere near the campaign support 40K had (where were the 3 book with boxed game campaigns littered throughout 6th/7th 40K for fantasy?).

            They killed it themselves. AoS is working because they’re paying attention to it. It’s funny cause 40K is failing for almost the same exact reasons: Formations urging you to buy multiples of units and vehicles you get for “free” in game, game breaking psychic powers like invisibility, etc.

      • Marco Marantz

        Pretty sure sales dropped or were stable last year. No one I know bothers with 40K tourneys because of the crap ruleset. The game is actually really crap; there are alot better games out there but people have invested in the hobby and/or like the lore. Personally i prefer to play a game that works so i play 40K very little these days. GW themselves said they are in business for the collectors not the gamers. Alot of gamers play very infrequently.

        • Kami

          That was the old CEO that was basically in charge during 7th. This is new GW.

          • bobrunnicles

            I’m hoping it will promote more interest in the game. 40K is DOA at my local store right now and we used to hold Apocalypse events! Ironically Fantasy 8th has been pretty solid this last year though so we’re probably an anomaly lol.

          • Geronimo32509

            New CEO, same game. At least for now.

          • Kami

            Well yeah. Its like in the US. We elect a new president but for the first year all the policies are still written up by the old president. It takes a while for the new agenda to kick in.

      • stinkoman

        yeah, i hear that the game is dying all the time as well. ive been playing since 2nd edition. i think it will endure. i did think the same for WHFB and that got killed. i’ve been in and out. recently back in. (actually like the options in 7th – but whatever)

        • ZeeLobby

          def not dying. Not performing well and dying are two completely different things financially though.

          • stinkoman

            i think with all the talk about 8th edition a lot of people are on a buying freeze. and who can blame them as GW is known to invalidate things you just bought rather easily.

            save for getting the codexes i needed for 7th (and a couple of campaign books), i have not spent anything, nor will i till 8th comes out. Granted what i did buyi got what i needed to play my six factions now, and will upgrade when 8th comes out.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah, agreed. That’s definitely part of it. Sales continued falling through 6th and 7th though, so it wasn’t just a sales freeze pending new editions. GW also just recently posted their best performance in a LONG time, which I think had a lot to do with the return of Custodees, GSC, 1K Sons, etc. But yeah, I dont’ even know if 8th would really cause me to buy more. I already have factions I want to play now but they’re stupidly underpowered. I’ll have enough to just explore the rules for the next 2 years.

      • stinkoman

        I think another thing to consider is that people arent putting much effort in 40k right now with the onset of a new and vastly different rule set coming out.

        • Kami

          Thats me basically. Though once i see the new game im sure i will invest again.

          • ZeeLobby

            And GW has this loyal fanbase to keep it going, which is why the claims that it will “die” are always ridiculous. Heck, people would line up to pre-order the new iPhone before it’s even announced, or buy it even when it’s a backword step (MBP only having 4 USB-C ports).

      • EndreFodstad

        In Norway, 40k has been slowly bleeding players these last five to ten years. AoS has not been a big success, instead WHFB players have about equally migrated to WMH/AOS/KOW/T9A. Few seem to have gone to 40k. The attendance numbers at the major national event took a more serious dive with the last edition, but 40k is still the second biggest game after WMH.

      • Jakub Jánošík

        So basically the game is dying, but it is not …

      • Carlos Eduardo

        That’s why there is almost zero to none X-Wing Miniatures players and events…

        • ZeeLobby

          can’t tell if sarcasm or not… haha

          • Carlos Eduardo

            ICv2 numbers may enlighten your doubts 😉

          • ZeeLobby

            Haha, no, I know X-Wing sales are through the roof, it’s really popular locally. I’m just confused as to what you were implying by responding to Jason C. Like do people claim that X-Wing is dead?

          • Carlos Eduardo

            No, X-Wing is popular *globally*.
            And no, it’s not dying. But 40K is, as AoS is, as Warmachordes also is.

          • ZeeLobby

            Eh. AoS and WMH are both growing most likely (AoS primarily in the UK, WMH primarily in the US). 40K is in a slow decline, but it’ll bounce back with 8th, maybe only temporarily if the rules are bad.

          • Carlos Eduardo

            No, X-Wing is popular *globally*.
            And no, it’s not dying. But 40K is, as AoS is, as Warmachordes also is.

    • TenDM

      The problem is almost any serious shake up will result in cries of Sigmar and running off before they read the rules. It doesn’t matter what the chances actually are. It has to happen but it’s going to be painful.
      They almost need to do an extremely conservative 8th edition just to wash the taste of Age of Sigmar’s launch out.

      • Kami

        sigmarization started as a bad word. then the generals handbook came out and sigmarization became a cry of happiness.

        they learned their lesson. anyone who thinks it will be bad is dumb.

        • Karru

          Actually, sigmarization is a bad word and will continue to be one until the end of time. Sigmarization refers to the start of AoS when it replaced Fantasy with a game that was completely unplayable outside super friendly casual crowd.

          The release of General’s Handbook didn’t fix that event at all. The launch of AoS remains as a reminder that GW is extremely incompetent and are willing to release half-finished lunch break rules and try to pass them as actual rules.

          If it wasn’t for the outside sources and help, General’s Handbook would have been a disaster, presuming it would have ever been released. GW has shown it’s lack of professionalism many times in the past to leave many extremely pessimistic about anything that even remotely looks like “major shake up”.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah. There’s a difference between adding things from AoS, and the End Times of fantasy, haha.

          • Kami

            you are entitled to your opinion i guess.

          • zeno666

            Most of the world eh? lol you poor thing.

          • Discoqing

            I guess he is, yeah! Haha.

            Even the heartiest GW ball sniffer must know that AoS was very poorly received on initial drop.
            And it very publicly took a book release a year later to mop things Up. Oh, and with help from UK podcasters.

            So this is why there are justified tentative undertones about any big shake up GW initiate.
            Regardless of lessons learned.

          • Kami

            ignoring precedent for older precedent. Yeah sure

          • Discoqing

            “I guess you’re entitled to your own opinion” 😉

          • Kami

            actually thats just a sort of legal thing. not my opinion.

          • Discoqing

            Sort of Yeah. But also it’d be stupid not to take note of the original precedent / situation.
            And still doesn’t acknowledge the fact that GW needed handholding to get it right.

          • DJ860

            You say “needed handholding”, other people might say it was responding to feedback and inviting their consumers to provide feedback and guidance on what’s working and what isn’t but sure, whatever turn of phrase fits your narrative.

          • Discoqing

            They never needed help or reached out before.
            It was ‘like it or lump it’ for years.

            Their reaching out was a part of a re-brand / restructure after the AoS change had happened.

            No amount of feedback was asked for before the change to AoS, or even pre end-times.

            So yes, the handholding may feel harsh to your ears, but it’s definitely appropriate in this context / “narrative”.

          • Xodis

            “They never needed help or reached out before.
            It was ‘like it or lump it’ for years.”
            You mean like with 6th or 7th edition 40K where people are supposedly claiming the game to be on a decline? Or all the versions before that which were completely revamped/replaced every few years to try and stop certain armies from dominating?

            At this point you are arguing semantics, but honestly its GW evolving to the player base and giving them what they actually want (balanced rules, and a game not decided before the dice are even tossed).

          • Discoqing

            I would agree with your last paragraph, apart from the last 2 points.

          • Xodis

            So you dont agree that GW is giving players what they want, or you dont think those 2 points are what players actually want?

          • Discoqing

            If you read what I said you could probably work it out.
            But I’ll iterate.
            I agree that GW is evolving and giving people what they want.
            I don’t think the rules are balanced, and I still think games of AoS can be decided before they begin.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Oh sure, and you think deployment phase for 4 editions of 40k didn’t do that either? Because I can tell you it pretty much did as well. Be it AoS, or 4oK both games sucked in many balance issues and they need to change, be it with feedback or internally..

          • Discoqing

            Ok

          • Xodis

            I did read what you wrote, and it was very worded incorrectly for the meaning you elaborated on.
            Regardless, I disagree with you completely unless you are looking for that near perfect Chess type balance or the “perfect balance” which I believe is impossible. AoS is a much more balanced game than 40K or WHFB has been since I started with GW. There are a few tweaks needed still, but its far from the convoluted mess of those already mentioned. I would be curious as to which games you consider better balanced.
            As for AoS being won before the dice roll…..maybe if someone is playing “Narrative” play with some Elf Spearmen against Archaon maybe, but a balanced Pitched battle I have yet to see that broken.

          • Nostok

            I would add that the phrase would be in context if we go back to the old CEO. However, the context has changed, the new CEO actually plays apparently and from what we have seen since his arrival in the about face that GW have performed I am more optimistic.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            An 8th edition release like the release of AoS would likely kill GW…

          • Discoqing

            There are always those who are absolutely glamorised by what ever GW do. So I wouldn’t be so sure. I’m sure any book releases from now won’t do so well lol.

          • Kami

            yes like their fantastic Dark Eldar codex. or how about that wonderful Blood angels codex.

          • Discoqing

            More examples as to how GW are not a very good games company. Models though, they’re good.

          • Kami

            It was also sarcasm. That was still under old GW.

          • Discoqing

            Old GW or not, they still are a terrible game company.
            They started to engage with the gaming community in 2016.

            TWENTY SIXTEEN.

          • Hussein Alobaidi

            But….that’s what he just said, the “new GW”. You are going round in circles now

          • Discoqing

            Incorrect sir. I’m going round bases.

            And he didn’t say GW were a bad game company.

          • Kami

            Thats because i dont think they are.

          • Nostok

            What metric are you basing your GW are a terrible game company? GW are diversifying their product types and ranges again, licencing etc. so extraction of money from gamers pockets and business growth will come from different places.

            Even OLD GW previously engaged via the forum, their telesales “trolls” people, written letters to WD, they previously attended a lot of events and spoke to a lot of people. Then it stopped… it stopped for reasons we were not privy to. Then it flirted with facebook and that stopped as well. Now it is back, they are listening and it is more evident than before.

            I play a number of game systems and they all have their issues, things I love, things I hate, things I just don’t get. No one game system or player choice is “right” and after all these are games and hobbies, so we allocate our time accordingly to what brings us most joy or time spent with mates etc.

            They may not give a hoot about paper book sales beyond the limited edition fan boy releases.

          • Discoqing

            I like the fact they’re engaging more, wish it happened 10 years ago though.

          • Kami

            I know that at one point a game store wqs essentially stealing/scammint prize support and they pulled out od the tournament scene altogether

          • Kami

            They were also founded in the 70s so they are an old company. And its not easy to change ceos.

          • Discoqing

            Hmm, shouldn’t have taken the highest ranked person in the company to change, in order to become more customer focused.
            I used to work in their web team department, deffo missed opportunities left + right.

          • Kami

            Actually thats how companies work.

          • Discoqing

            This one

          • Kami

            Say what you will but changing a companies focus is pretty much a job for the ceo. As someone intimately familiar with microsoft you can see the change to customer focus when they swapped from balmer to nadella.

          • Discoqing

            Indeed.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            Aos was dead on arrival. People were panic selling their fantasy armies and the reviews were awful. If this happened with 40k shares would crash and GW would be bought out.

          • Mr.Gold

            if it does maybe you could buy the shares and create 40k as you would like to…

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            Sadly I am not a wealthy venture capitalist! I am available for paid consultancy work however…

          • stinkoman

            GW definately needs to tread carefully with this release. 40k branding is arguably bigger than Fantasy and if they mess this up, there are so many more games out now for people to jump ship to. it if takes them a year to release a “generals handbook” to fix things, they might only get the people back who couldn’t dump their armies off on other poor souls.

          • Nostok

            From the rumours we are seeing it will start effectively as a Generals Handbook, and if they release a new one each year tweaking the game it moves them to a far better model to my mind.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            I think its far bigger than fantasy. GW could afford to risk WHFB sales, but a big drop in 40K sales will kill the company. I think they are taking a huge risk here. They have painted themselves into a corner with their current strategy.

          • Kami

            You mean risking WHFB lack of sales XD

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            exactly!

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Yep.. Locally all I hear are people whining, and selling off their armies and saying “not my 40k” but that’s anecdotal. Working in the shop, it’s all I hear is nerd rage about things that are yet to even be certain. Crying about how their armies will no longer work the way the net intended….

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            I think we are all too invested in 40K to give it up, but I hear people at my club saying they will carry on with 7th or only play 30K (which presumably will continue to use the rules for 7th).

            I wonder if some folk will come along and ‘9th Age’ 40K for us?

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Sure there will be, and I always say there is no one with a gun to your head telling you new edition or death! I mean I still have my books and occasionally play old hammer games for both systems with people willing to give her a try. I can still get people into silent death and that game has been dead for twenty plus years.

          • Kami

            Aos is really picking up via word of mouth. People play it enjoy it tell their friends community they try it. Etc

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            its funny but games die quite quickly when not supported by a manufacturer, or become the preserve of a few enthusiasts. I find 9th Age quite amazing considering, I can’t think of a game that has done so well after its manufacturer disowned it.

          • Kami

            Unless that game is bloodbowl

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            I think that counts as the “few enthusiasts”. Quite a few in the case of Blood Bowl, but in comparison I saw people playing Mantics Deadball or whatever its called whereas I haven’t seen anyone playing BB for years, until the rerelease.

          • Kami

            I only ever played it on steam myself

          • Kami

            People selling there models makes for a better secondary marekt for me! Xd

          • Turil

            Which UK podcasters?

            Are there any good podcasts regarding tabletop?

          • Discoqing

            I personally don’t listen to their podcasts, as the people who run the pro gw ones are essentially bought by GW. They would never say anything against them for fear of losing their mounds of free stuff sent to them, or would not be invited back to sit in Jerry’s Johnsons holy presence.

            Dan Heelan, Ben Curry, Russ Veal to name a few.

          • Nostok

            Heelan Hammer for AoS is worth a listen if you want to get a feel for that game and what the UK scene is like.

          • Am I the ONLY one that remembers GW stated that they had a points system coming right after they released the game? Most everyone on here seems to think that the Generals Handbook was a reaction to poor reception. It was planned the whole time. Granted, releasing it a year later was a bad move and should have released no more than a month later (in my opinion), but it was planned none the less

          • Discoqing

            Don’t think it was. There was a statement released that said there would never be points, and that AoS was a new way to play tabletop games.
            Which is obviously a Ludicrous move, hence the 3 ways to play.
            I’m pretty sure it may as well be 2 ways, who the smeg plays unbound lol.

          • I’m sure of it, because I remember posting (on here) when the first book came out that maybe the promised points would be in it with “time of war” rules.

          • rhoadesd20

            You are actually right. Kirby came out in an interview about a week after Sigmar’s release and said there would not be points. It was until at least a few months later (after tons of harsh feedback) that they said they would consider points, then a few months after that where they said they were actively working on points. That’s why it took a year for the Generals Compendium to come out, as it was not the initial plan.

            I had thousands of dollars invested in warhammer fantasy miniatures, I wanted to play with my toys. So I followed all the news very closely while trying to get people to play with me (I had zero success until points were officially released).

          • Xodis

            No you are not, people forget that though. Even with the initial release of AoS the reps stated they wanted to listen to the player base and the rules would be a living rule set…..but that interferes with the narrative being painted.

        • TenDM

          I agree that it’s a good thing and their recent attitude shift shows GW learned from it, but there are soooo many people who will have a knee jerk reaction to it.

          • Kami

            they are listening and interacting again. and the game is better for it

        • vlad78

          Sigmarization is when I start playing with other brands than GW. Cry of joy indeed.

          • Kami

            If you dont want to play no one is forcing you.

          • vlad78

            But I’m not playing AOS because it’s inferior in every ways (except speed and GW commitment) to what WFB was before 8th edition.

          • DJ860

            If only you’d Sigmarize yourself onto another brands comments section

          • Kami

            Nice

        • Charon

          Even with the generals handbook, the game is pretty bland.
          There is not half as much actual tactics involved as people try to convince you.
          The thing I love in 40k is “every unit is unique”. I really dont want to see the name as the only difference between Rough rider, Eldar Jetbike and CSM Bike.
          Also the talk about “finding and using synergies” is cringeworthy. That is exactly what people in 40k are called WAAC for. The only real difference here is: Deathstars in AoS are not “unstoppable” but the concept of piling on buffs is exactly the same.

          • Kami

            Not from what ive seen and researched about AoS.

      • sethmo

        We still have old fantasy guys that refuse to play AoS, they tried one game, gave it zero chance, and crap on every chance they get.

        • Zethnar

          If they played a game it sounds like they did give it a chance and didn’t like it.

    • vlad78

      Save modifiers, if they return to the old system with at least -1 modifier to almost everything, is not a step in the right direction. It’s slower and makes all armors almost useless. Change for the sake of change .

      • Kami

        the point is to kill things faster. and lasguns as an example wouldnt have any rend.

        • vlad78

          what do you know?

          • Kami

            what do i know is a tad to vague. Its an example. Do i know if boltguns will have rend -1 or rend – no. but ap – seems like it would equate to rend –

          • vlad78

            I’m sorry I’m not following you when you say ‘ap – seems like it would equate to rend -‘

            I liked the fact AP system allowed power armor to have a 3+ save against most weapons save for antitank and plasma melta before 7th edition.That was fluffy. If they implement the save modifier system, I see them return to the old save modifiers of old (given their utter lack of imagination nowadays) which will make power armor save 4+ or worse most of the time which does not really match the lore.

            I’m not sure having rules which make both players remove models faster is a better system, it will give an edge to horde armies or vehicles over everything else.

          • Red_Five_Standing_By

            No, it matches the lore, since Guardsmen are likely at a 6+ or worse.

          • vlad78

            lol
            mmmmhh which is worse at reflecting the lore, guardsmen having no save (which they don’t have with both systems) or space marines without a reliable power armour?

            ap wins here imho unless they make all weapons which are not plasma melta dedicated antitank or grav AP- .

            anyway they decided to change, we’ll see what happens.

          • Shinnentai

            I just meant that GW had to add on special rules to still give certain armies a chance against hordes of power armoured marines.

            Looking forward to my shurikens being -1 (as with most 2nd ed save mods, -2 was one too much XD).

          • euansmith

            Shuriken Catapults (shooting monofilament projectiles) should be pretty good at penetrating armour; but maybe having each dude cause D3 hits would better reflect the hail of whirling discs?

          • Shinnentai

            Well 2nd ed Shurikens were sustained fire weapons. Shadow War gives these D3 hits. However I don’t think they’ll slow down the new 40k by adding a new die-roll. I expect they’ll keep the existing system re number of attack dice for ranged weapons.

          • stinkoman

            if shadow war is any indication, they are probably falling back on 2nd edition modifiers. Power Armor was useless in that game (or more so than it is now).

          • deris87

            Lasguns and Shootas don’t have any armor modifier in Shadow War, which to my understanding is already different from 2E/Necromunda. Even some heavy weapons like the Scatter Laser don’t have an armor mod. There are plenty of things that do have a -1 or -2 mod, but I personally prefer that to the all or nothing values we currently have. Plus, if in 8th ed cover returns to being a to-hit modifier then there’s actual benefits to having good armor and being in cover.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Several sources claim GW at adepticon straight up said that was the way 8th would be, cover purely modifies your to hit roll, and then after than armor is modified.

      • Shinnentai

        I agree that 2nd ed went overboard with the save mods.

        I am however, cautiously optimistic since I saw that the lasgun in Shadow War Armageddon no longer has any save mod.

        I also found it interesting that the Marine scout had 5in movement.

        • orionburn

          Surprised that didn’t get mentioned in the article since they said movement was going to making a return. That’s another thing I’ll be glad to see change. It’s never made sense to me that an Eldar troop has the same standard movement as a Terminator. Yes, you can get rules like fleet and so forth but get rid of those and just change the base stat.

          The other thing I hope to hell goes away is difficult/dangerous terrain. I loathe those rules.

          • 40K Today

            I think Terrain needs to count for something, running over a wall should slow someone down.

    • Ian Plumpton

      I’m not sure it’s dying but I agree with your points made. I play Blood Angels and it would be nice to be feared once more haha

      • Kami

        our DoA codex was great. first and last codex i payed for

    • stinkoman

      that’s funny because i got back in because of 7th edition. my buddy and i are quite enjoying it and all the different options we have. though we don’t power game, so i guess there’s really nothing upsetting we cant get past.

      the only thing that makes me upset about this is the fact that i spent a couple hundred on books. (i have 6 armies and picked up some campaign books). sad to see that money wasted. but then again, i don’t really ever need to buy more miniatures.

      Change will be tough, but if my tzeentch army has taught me anything…

    • Orangecoke

      I agree. The game is a bloated, slow playing mess and people are flocking to other games (even AoS).

      I think if they do this right (and if they learned from AoS, they will), this could massively reinvigorate interest and player base of the game.

  • ZeeLobby

    Sad to see templates go, but at the same time it’s gotta be the number one cause of arguments in game. Assaulting from vehicles sounds amazing though. It’ll be nice to run wyches again, or non-free rhinos, which will again have a purpose.

    • Shawn

      I’m not a super-thrilled to see that much of a shake up. Templates, while tedious at times, I kind of understood. Each one represents an explosion and each flamer represented a gout of flame for visuals. It will be a shame to see those go. I hope the rumor mongers are wrong about that.

      Now as far as codices go and the advent of a warscroll type approach, I’ll be able to survive the change I think, so long as it closely resembles my current space marine codex (i.e. attack equals WS4, and shooting equates to BS4, and Iron Hands get some bonus to repair vehicles and FNP. However, I hate to think that all the money I spent on space marines that last few months, and years a total waste.

      • Red_Five_Standing_By

        There’s not a huge difference between a Flamer Template hitting 7 guys and you rolling a 2d6 for the number of hits. You are just trading the randomness of model placement for the randomness of a die roll.

        Most likely it will be like AoS, where each individual weapon has a different number of attacks, a different to hit, a different to wound and a different number of damage.

        • Shawn

          Yeah, I know. But the template for me, at least gave me that imaginative visual aspect. Crazy I know, but I’m creative like that. Every time I lay that flamer template down I’d imagine a gout of flame shooting out to cover the enemy. I can still do that with a different system, but it’s just not the same.

        • Karru

          My biggest issue with it comes from something like a unit of burnas throwing 10d6 hits on a single dude like a Carnifex. A true AoE weapon right there when it can take down any single target with much greater efficiency than a regular weapon.

          • AX_472

            they could go down a 1 hit per model in the unit rather than D6, that would work.

          • Karru

            Like they do in AoS? Oh wait…

            The problem is two-fold on this one. First of all, this is GW we are dealing with, which leads to the second problem which is copy/paste. They will just take their AoS rules on that and just use it. It’s not like they will properly test them out or put any real effort behind it.

        • ZeeLobby

          My only issue with removing templates is that there’s less tactical concern with spacing and placement. Most people probably won’t care, but when I could place a unit to take minimal template casualties, I always felt pretty proud. 😀

          • rtheom

            Yeah, but your opponent probably never enjoyed that. Even if it only takes a few seconds to do for experienced players, it still always feels tedious watching the other guy do it. :p

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Right, which we saw in Bolt action where people caused some issues with assaults and bunching, which minimized certain weapons impact. So they brought back templates in 2E

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah. I mean I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with templates. I think they add a pretty awesome factor to the games, an additional dimension. In the end it’s just easier to write rule without them though.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            True that, I kinda enjoy AoS now and I did enjoy BA without them, it is smoother, but I guess some personality was lost. Thing is, WAAC players will abuse both systems regardless. However it does allow some abstract diversity with imagination based on roll types. long as it avoids RT days of d6-d20 damage types XD

          • ZeeLobby

            Haha. Too true. Let’s hope we avoid those 😀

          • 40K Today

            I agree with that, I do think placement will still matter in regards to how the CC bubble works. Also Templates like a flamer might be limited to a certain range and not hit the entire unit

        • Charon

          I would call “your single DP takes as much hits from the flamer as your unit of 20 Bloodletters” a big difference.

          • Brian Griffith

            If it’s accompanied with a “your DP considers fire to be the equivalent of a soothing bubble bath” rule, I could dig it.

          • Brian Griffith

            Heck, that could make marking Daemon Princes worthwhile. Make each flavor immune to something:

            Khorne: fire
            Nurgle: poison
            Tzeench: wedgies
            Slaanesh: cocaine withdrawal

          • rtheom

            Why would a follower of Slaanesh not be using cocaine? Thanks for giving Slaanesh the most useless ability, yet again. ;p

          • euansmith

            “withdrawal”? This is Slaanesh we’re talking about. The party never ends.

        • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

          Model placement isnt random. Likewise bigger units take more hits. This means people bring flamers to kill hordes. All part of the game balance. Huge tarpit units will dominate 8th if there are no templates.

          • Red_Five_Standing_By

            It is something you as a player have very little control over from the perspective of your opponent moving his models. There just is not that much skill in making sure your models aren’t bunched up. It’s something a kindergartner could do. Yes you may sometimes catch a unit by surprise but in my experience it rarely happens.

            Still flame templates were never the problem. It was the scattering blast templates that are ruining it for everyone.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            Choosing whether to spread out or shoot your deep strikers, whether or not to squash a unit up to get weapons into short range, how many guys to put close to that objective, whether or not to protect against overwatch by getting as many troops close to their target unit, whether to squeeze a unit into a terrain piece…. These are all tactical decisions, and there are as many on the attackers side too. They will all vanish if templates go.

          • euansmith

            In AoS the big monsters have as many wounds as some entire units.

        • euansmith

          Dumping templates will certainly speed up moving horde armies; and I can see a sales advantage to GW for making such armies easier to play.

      • Maitre Lord Ironfist

        Flamer Templat, ok if it is gone. Artillery Templates. I do not know how this could work without. While staying Cinematic too a certain point

        • Shawn

          Agreed. The imagination can do quite a bit, but it does help to have some visuals, yeah?

    • J Mad

      Wychs can charge from them now. They are bad b.c they are 10pt S3/T3 models with over costed weapons that doesnt have any good AP and they are in vehicles that bolters can kill.

      • ZeeLobby

        Yeah. I was hoping it meant a return to before when they could move farther than 6″ and still charge. I seem to remember being able to move 12, disembark 6 and charge 6. It’s all hazy after 2 editions of firey death to be honest, but the threat range usually meant they could be delivered as an alpha strike, avoiding exploding vehicles.

        • Severius_Tolluck

          3E was the ultimate time of Rhino rushes. However rhinos were much higher in points back then. Easy bake oven strategy may make a come back for sisters….
          Rhino, full unit of flamer dominion, or worse, back in the day with 4 repressors with hvy flames. Rush up, fire all flamers and then assault….

          • ZeeLobby

            And our groups sisters player would cry with joy. The one thing I’m glad they’re doing is removing the vehicle unit type, and going to wounds/saves/etc. I mean I know it makes the game seem less diverse, but armor’s restrictive values, and a single dmg chart, made differentiating vehicles and finding their balance extremely difficult. GW has always struggled between them being OP and cardboard boxes. Now they can just adjust wounds to rebalance (I mean technically they always had points adjustments as an option, but I’m not sure they ever really had the points concept down).

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Yep.. felt the same way for many editions now. I was so happy when artillery weapons got reduced from devastating vehicles. Because unless it took it right to the top from a heavy AP shell, it would brush off the dirt and keep going but not in 40k where the marines inside have better armor then the stuff they ride in. I always say, make rhinos much more surviveable with option to bolt a second squad onto the outside.
            But in all honesty I like what AoS did with large monsters. Those rules I see working well with vehicles with some minor modifications for things like weapons to do more like melta etc. Would streamline and make vehicles operate better and reduce extra rolling and charts.

          • ZeeLobby

            Definitely. Will be interesting to see where certain vehicles fall, especially in regards to vehicles that should have been monstrous creatures or the other way around.

    • DJ860

      Yeh, I think as everyone has kind of learnt by now, anything that’s open to a humans interpretation probably isn’t the right move. Clear binary rules that don’t rely on the human eye might be the way forward.

    • Severius_Tolluck

      Strange when they brought back artillery die and template in shadow war.

      • ZeeLobby

        Yeah, I just kind of liken that to Total War releasing games set in the old world, haha. It was probably planned out from the start (it also made copy and pasting the Necromunda ruleset 5x easier, haha).

  • UnLachy

    Interested to see how this will effect 30k, or if they will be staying with 7th edition

    • Bligh said 30k will always use the current rules for Warhammer 40k

      • Red_Five_Standing_By

        Unless New 40k proves massively popular, then they will switch. It is still GW after all.

        For now, stay the course. In fact, I would prefer it if Bligh created a new rulebook just for 30k. Fix the problems with 7th and make a better version of it (so… 5th edition with 7th edition concepts thrown in).

        • No, no, current edition as in whatever edition is current, e.g. They will release faqs to update 30k to 8th when 8th comes out

  • Dax

    So they just released a bunch of Chaos codex-related stuff, and they’re intending to make this all entirely pointless? Yeah that would basically confirm me giving the fingers up to GW after two instances of being convinced to buy a codex and then shortly after either another is released or in this case they’re all made to be meaningless anyway. Really winds me up – It’s not as if they aren’t already absolutely milking every person that decides to partake in their hobby…

    • Shawn

      I understand your pain. Even though I play space marines, I’m not too thrilled about everything suddenly becoming meaningless.

    • Stealthbadger

      Maybe there will be some overlap in stats to try and minimise the impact. It really depends on how much of the above actually changes though.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      I am sorry you did not see the writing on the wall. This has been coming for a while. There’s no way to fundamentally change the game and not eliminate codexes.

      To me, the Chaos book had “filler” written all over it. Same with the Inquisition book and everything in the Gathering Storm books.

      I bought the books I wanted to read and haven’t bought a codex proper since late summer of last year.

      • ZeeLobby

        It’s one of the reasons I haven’t bought anything new for 6+ months. Get ready for a table flip, haha.

        • Karru

          I bought many of the latest releases solely so I can use them in 5th edition games or similar. It’s not that difficult for our group to implement some of the new rules into those days. Legion rules for CSM for example were a big change and had some interesting effects which made the game more interesting.

    • This is a hella unreliable rumor, GW said on the record at adelticon that they aren’t invalidating codexes

      • rtheom

        While it is likely unreliable, they also said they weren’t moving Fantasy to round bases and then did a week later. They also said the same about the rules and how they would be changing…

        • Kami

          they didnt move fantasy to round bases. They blew up fantasy and made a new game. 😛

          • stinkoman

            yeah it’s not like AOS is 9th edition WHFB (or is it actually – i dont know). it’s a new game that happens to use the same minis from my point of view.

        • orionburn

          Honestly the rumors rarely get things right (looking at you “new” Tyranid codex & monstrous creature from 1 1/2 years ago). There’s some grains of truth mixed in with a bunch o’ salt. For what it’s worth I hope most of these rumors are true as they are things I’ve wanted to see change. The only thing left out that I’d like to see is reigning in the out of control psychic phase with some armies.

          • Geronimo32509

            Well sure, if you pay attention to every single person spouting off rumors, most of them are very likely to be false. There are a small handful of people in the community that are incredibly reliable though.

    • Koonitz

      The Chaos Traitor Legions supplement isn’t useless. If it sparked a renewed interest in a favoured faction, allowing you to rekindle your joy in the hobby, then it’s done a good job.

      If you played a few games with it (as most Chaos players should have, by now), and you actually enjoyed yourself, then it’s done a good job.

      I’m sorry you don’t have a rule set that lasts so long it becomes the worst codex in the game….. Oh wait, you did. They could have left you with that….

      Even if the current codex and supplement is invalidated, rumour is, everything new is free, so you got your money AND you don’t have to buy a new codex.

      • Jennifer Burdoo

        I like the idea of free rules. On the other hand, I play classic historicals because the rules DON’T change. The Sword and the Flame has been essentially the same for thirty years, and is still popular.

      • grumzimus

        Yeah I’ve been loving playing my Night Lords (Finally). Yes fear is useless practically & they’re not that effective. But I’ve had fun for the first time in a long time. AND I’ve even managed to kill some Tau for the first time in 10 years.

        But the replacement of Codexes is GREAT, since the rule spread is larger than many libraries. But most importantly, assaulting out of a rhino is BACK baby!!

        Boom! Best redaction ever!

    • David Leimbach

      The new changes will probably all end up on the scrolls. The scrolls will be translated from the current codexes. You can still play 7th.

    • Kami

      id rather invalidate the codex then continue to have to buy them in the future. The aos warscroll phone ap is delicious

    • stinkoman

      im there with you man, i just got back in a few months back. i spent a couple hundred on new books. WOM was 70$ alone! the only saving grace is that i have 6 armies and dont care to buy more miniatures. at least with this release, all my rules will be updated for free and my book shelf will have another useless row of books (save for the sub-par codex fluff). I guess it will go with all my outdated IT books, like “Securing Windows XP” and “Photoshop 3.5 for Dummies”.

    • Xodis

      The bright side is that your new Chaos models will get a free upgrade available online.

  • Red_Five_Standing_By

    1. Campaign books with free unit rules are the way to go

    2. The real problem with templates is the scatter die. I am fine with killing them.
    3. Tanks become Monsters as in AoS. Called it. Solid change. I imagine Rhinos will have like 5 wounds but a crap save.

    4. Rending is nice. My question is how deep are they going to make Rend. In AoS the deepest usually seen is a -2. Depending on what they do with armor saves, we could see deep rends come into play (-3, -4, maybe even -5). My gut is that Terminators will be like Retributors in AoS, so they will have a 4+ save but have 3 wounds a piece.

    5. Late June, early July is fine.

    6. Charging from vehicles needed to happen. It is silly that it was disallowed.

    • EvilCheesypoof

      I don’t think Rhinos will be that flimsy, the consequence of removing armor values is that now any weapon can attack it. But you don’t want a squad of lasguns to just annihilate a tank. So the way to balance is wounds, saves, rending, and damage.

      So like the article says, probably expect even a rhino to have wounds in the double digits, lets say 10. 3+ save. Lasguns and stuff like it probably wounding on 5+ and have no rending. But a Meltagun probably wounds on a 2+ or 3+, has -2 rend and does 5-ish damage per wound or something like that to simulate its anti-tank ability. Close range possibly increasing its damage like it does now.

      • Red_Five_Standing_By

        This is true. There is way more shooting in 40k than AoS.

      • euansmith

        They could give vehicles 1+ or better saves, so they could only be hurt be weapons with a high rend; so a Landraider might have a -1 save (immune to anything with less than 3 rend).

        • orionburn

          That would make sense. I don’t care if three squads of marines are dumping rapid fire weapons into the side of a Raider. It shouldn’t hurt it. A Rhino perhaps, but not a Raider.

        • EvilCheesypoof

          I like that idea a lot.

    • orionburn

      I’m pretty stoked if these rumors are true. I was hoping for the wounds system for vehicles. It makes more sense to see a tank lose weapons and/or move at a slower speed as it takes damage.

      The assault change will be oh so welcome. I’d even be fine with not allowing shooting the turn they come out. As long as they get to charge I’ll be happy.

      As someone else commented in another article I do wonder how they are going to make the warscrolls work with the amount of gear that troops can take. For those units that can take a wide mix of weapons (Devastators for example) that’s a lot of info to cram onto a single page. My guess would be a standard data sheet with the weapons to use as a reference. This might be easily solved with their own 40k army builder app which they said would be coming as well.

      Likely we’ll see them follow the same steps as AoS where the codex as we know it goes away but there will still be individual books (like Battletomes) available.

    • Xodis

      1) I completely agree. Campaign books could even tie in some Shadow War content in order to expand that game as well.
      2) I wont miss anything but the flamer template but I understand the reasoning behind getting rid of it.
      3) I imagine at least 10 HP, with a 5+ or 4+ save. Eldar Wave Serpants being 10 HP with a 5+/6+ unless they pay for the upgrade. I just want to see vehicle upgrades matter in this edition.
      4) I dont think Terminators will lose their 2+/5++ but I can see them having 3 wounds. 40K, unlike AoS, has a lot of anti tank firepower available so they wouldn’t be OP with those stats.
      5) Agreed. They can take longer if it helps them proof read lol
      6) Again I agree. Now Khorne armies can be effective.

  • Keith Wilson

    i gotta be honest and hope that templates dont go away …… a flat roll based on each weapon is lackluster

  • This doesn’t match with GW’s on the record statement that codexes aren’t being invalidated. Entire rumor is suspect.

    Plus 2 weeks ago GW said nothing for 8th is finalized

    • rhoadesd20

      They also said a year before end times that no armies would be squatted, because they learned their lesson from 40k (it came about after a discussion around Sisters of Battle). Two years later Bretonnia and Tomb Kings were squatted.

      • I mean, both are still armies with rules, so not squatted

  • Nuking the books overnight isn’t going to fix the bloat. AoS is already up to 13 tomes (14 with overlords), 4 alliances and 4 campaign books. Not to mention all the original release PDF scrolls. Not to mention they now have 82 factions according to their app (81 if you remove terrain). On top of that, I have bought more books than ever before in 7th, and have $s in IA books. If overnight ALL of that is just shelf fillers, I will be ticked off.

    • This rumor is salty as hell

      • Yeah, and thinking on it, Death Guard is coming out. If they get a faction book, like 1k sons, there is no way the two months later that book would get nuked. I could see it for a campaign book, but not a faction book.

        But yeah, the more I think of these “rumours” the more garbage like they seem

        • It has all the hallmarks of a wishlist, I definitely got the impression that 8th wasn’t finalized at all from their statements at Adepticon

        • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

          It has happened before. Wood Elves right at end of WHFB for instance. Stronghold Assault and Escalation immediately before the next edition.

          • rhoadesd20

            Yup, I bought the wood elves book, magic cards, at least one of each of all the new units. Then End Times happened, then Age of Sigmar. Granted, Age of Sigmar was probably a year after Wood Elves came out.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            you have my sympathies.

        • stinkoman

          im looking forward to DG coming. but i am waiting till 8th to purchase anything else. pretty much on a buying freeze (which will give me time to catch up on the stuff i havent painted).

    • Simon Chatterley

      40k players will then understand why I was less than happy with AoS to begin with. My shelf of 8th books including the expensive End times became pointless overnight

  • A: While we don’t want to invalidate all books immediately, we do recognize the effects on the game by having so many books and supplements. In the new edition we will reduce the physical books needed. Look forward to the future.

    https://spikeybits.com/2017/03/end-of-codex-books-gws-private-adepticon-qa-reveals-more-on-8th.html

    • stinkoman

      but hasnt AOS gone back up to having a bunch of physical books again?

      • Is…that meant to be a response to me?

      • Severius_Tolluck

        Yes they have, however, they are optional as all the scrolls go on the app, and are relisted in the GH with point values.

        • rhoadesd20

          The only thing you miss out on is the fluff and batallion lists.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Correct, forgot to mention that point. Thanks.

  • Hakon

    Maybe assault vehicles will prevent the charged unit overwatch firing at the Chargers.
    Meaning a land raider would still be a better choice then a rhino.

    • euansmith

      That would be a neat idea.

    • No-one Special

      Or maybe it will grant the unit ‘Strikes first’ in combat? Could take it further and say units assaulting out of a non-assault vehicle count as making a disordered charge.

  • ruleslawyer

    It seems to me that apart from rumor 1 none of the above rumors invalidate a unit entry in a codex until it is replaced with a warscroll?

  • Mr.psyker

    The rules are not being simplified in my opinion. I think the matrix has been destroyed by smart people on the internet and it doesn’t feel like a historical battles in space anymore. Its yahtzee with variables. This is why movement is being reduced and assault is coming into play more. Ironic that it seems like 40k will become more like old world Warhammer

  • Ravingbantha

    Nice to see all these expensive codexs I’ve spent so much money on, will all go to waist at once. It’s one thing to get a new codex from time to time, it’s another to watch almost $1000 worth of books become useless all at once.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      Why did you buy every codex in the first place?

      • Cristhian Mario Landa Rivera

        Maybe he has at least one small skirmish force for every army available.

        Which would be funny, since if he is able to fund that many armies, then the codexes should be just a minor inversion.

        Or maybe he is owner of a retail store and has a copy of everything to run demos, which would be even funnier because he would already be getting the codexes with discounts on the first place.

        • Brian Griffith

          And seriously, “getting all my books invalidated in one fell swoop” is pretty well mitigated by “getting updated unit entries for free.”

          • Kami

            I know its just bitterness not actual careful thought. I hate having to buy so many books to play.

    • Mr.psyker

      I still have all the fluff and if I walk into any half price books I go and look at the old codices from editions past and buy a few now and then. I Feel like they have value when I read them. Now if they don’t update the digital editions for free I will feel ripped off

      • Ravingbantha

        Having them for the fluff is just as pointless. Either the new books will reprint the old info, or change it. Either way, the old codex becomes worthless. As for the digital editions, I doubt they will be updated. They are doing away with all the codexs and going to a warscroll format. So we can expect an AoS type release, we’ll see a him of free downloads, and later battletomes. But I wouldn’t count on your digital books getting an update.

    • BaronSnakPak

      Yeah, because it’s not like a game currently in it’s 7th edition has ever invalidated previous edition codices when a new rule set arrives.

      Oh wait…

      • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

        Codexes have only been invalidated by a new version of the same codex, or a successor codex, not by edition changes.

        • Red_Five_Standing_By

          3rd edition would like a word with you.

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            That was a LOOOOONG time ago.

          • Red_Five_Standing_By

            That was the last time the rules were fundamentally altered. 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th are the same base system (just with tons of stuff layered on top of one another).

          • Knight_of_Infinite_Resignation

            they had the good grace at least to include some Ravening Horde type army lists with the release.

    • Sleeplessknight

      Keep your books in pristine condition and keep the receipt. When rumor has it that that particular book is going obsolete, take it down to your local GW store and exchange it for something worthwhile. And do it before GW officially announces it’s replacement. You can claim it’s still current and you had no idea a new version was coming out!

      • Strategery.

        hhhhahahahaha

    • matty199

      Sux for me too but you have to break a few eggs to make an omlette. Im enjoying sigmar atm so dont mind, however any talk of open play and my warhound is coming out

      • Ravingbantha

        Breaking eggs to make an omelette, isn’t a valid saying here. There’s hundreds of ways they could change the game without completely invalidating the current codexs. They’ve done it for the past 4 editions.

        As for AoS, I’m glad you like it. But not everyone does. All the gamers that I know that used to play it, don’t like it. And so now my armies just sit there, collecting dust.

  • silashand

    I’m good with pretty much all of this actually, though I do think they should just keep the templates. Games like Bolt Action started out with random wounds, but the new edition added them back in because it was more cinematic. JMO though…

    • Inian

      It gets tedious when your opponent has to place, and scatter (with re-rolls) 12 templates and count up the wounds. Then repeat this 3 times a turn for 7 turns…

      • orionburn

        Yep. Just did this last weekend with a guy that ran 3 thunderfire cannons. The shooting from that alone took near as long as shooting with everything else.

      • euansmith

        … and then rolls to wound, and then you roll your saves, and re-roll them, and roll your FNP, and then remove one mini as a causality. 😉

        • orionburn

          Exactly. You end up taking 5 minutes to wind up killing one guy. Drives me absolutely insane.

        • silashand

          That isn’t exactly an issue with templates per se, but with GW allowing individual models to generate more than one. Honestly that’s a pretty easy fix all things considered.

      • EvilCheesypoof

        Yeah as somebody who loves my thunder fire cannons, I think I’m cool with just rolling a bunch of dice instead of scattering 12 templates and keeping a tally…

    • euansmith

      Do Bolt Action templates scatter?

      • silashand

        No.

        • euansmith

          Neato! If only those guys were still writing for GW 😀

          • silashand

            IKR. There’s a reason some of their most popular games are their older ones back from when they actually did new game design. Their recent attempts such as Gorechosen, while mildly entertaining, are nowhere near their previous offerings. Ah well…

  • Strategery.

    BACK IN YOUR RHINOS, BERZERKERS

    the time of ending (for shooty armies) is at hand.

  • SacTownBrian

    Who has dusty rhinos? 10 free with every Gladius!

  • georgelabour

    As a player or Orks, Guard, Knights, and MOAR GUARD I will be sad to see our Template overlords go….

  • Karru

    I’m still holding on to a sliver of hope that these rumours aren’t completely true. Especially considering that these “fixes” won’t do any good for the game and instead will do the opposite, outside the assault change that is.

    Codices being done is nice, but I highly doubt that it will be a “real” codex release. Dataslate online for each unit, with luck they will also have points attached to them, and we wait a few months for them to release some “Grand Alliance” book for each faction after which we watch as they release nothing but Space Marine and Imperials for a year.

    Templates going is a bad thing, all they really had to do was remove the scatter die. RNG amount of wounds makes templates a mixture of absolute uselessness in their primary role while making them extremely powerful in a scenario where they aren’t supposed to be powerful. With RNG wounds, a units of Ork Boys for example won’t be affected as badly. 5-6 under the template on average, now they might lose 2 or 3. Meanwhile, a unit of Terminators will be taking a lot of template hits in comparison.

    Vehicle armour gone is the biggest thing I wish isn’t true. AV is extremely simple and simulates vehicles very, very well making them unique and fun. Bringing in double digit wounds for vehicles doesn’t bode well for their existence. Tau, SM and Imperials might enjoy it somewhat but armies like CSM or Orks will lose this one badly. Lacking massed high strength, low AP weaponry, they are forced to just cry as the enemy closes in.

    Looking at AoS, my hopes aren’t high at all for the “multiple wounds caused by heavier weapons” thing. It’s most likely just D3 or with the most powerful weapons a D6. This means that Autocannons and other spammable AT will rule the game. I don’t even want to know what Grav does in this edition. Looking how GW has done it in the past, I’d guess it works just the same as it does now, except it works normally against vehicles.

    Armour save modifiers is a nice thing, in theory. The problem was partially explained in the vehicle comment. Good bye expensive special weapons, hello cheap, spammable and high strength weaponry like Autocannons! Why on earth would I take 1 long range or 2 short range Plasma Gun shots when I can take 6 Autocannon shots instead with double the range? Plasma Gun has better damage output? When things had one wound, maybe. Now when things will start to have more wounds attached to them, the Autocannon is the superior choice here.

    Overall, if these rumours are even partially true, my 40k journey has come to an end. I will continue to play 5th edition with my friends and still buy new models for the armies I collect, but I won’t be actively promoting the game any more. Vast majority of these changes are very bad for the game and won’t fix anything. Instead they will just make the game that much worse and more reliant on Alpha Strike.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      In AoS you don’t pay for upgrades and I imagine the same will be true for 40k as well. The cost is built into the unit.

      Each weapon will probably have its own profile for how many attacks it gets, its to hit, its to wound, its rend and how much damage it does. Lots of knobs to fiddle with.

      Your complaint about weapons comes down to, “A handful of weapons will rise to the top and will be spammed”, well, yeah, that’s the nature of every game. Even 40k right now has that.

      AV is the worst mechanic in the game, bar none. It is archaic and a terribly designed system. It needs to be gutted and Tanks need to join the rest of the game’s mechanics.

      • Karru

        The key here regarding weapon spam was to fix the current problem and not replace it with another. They are just making things like Plasma Guns even more useless than they are now. This is not good at all.

        Especially with Rending coming over to 40k, something that I don’t exactly mind per say, it will make many of the cheaper weapons superior. Autocannons will most likely have a Rending of -2 at least. that 3+ save turns into a 5+, why bother with a Plasma Gun at that point? That Autocannon can also melt vehicles like they are not there.

        Also, have you taken more than 2 seconds to think about AV vs Wounds regarding vehicles? In an average game of 40k, you have around 5-10 vehicles running around. How in the world will you track those wounds in a reasonable manner? Also, AV is both extremely simple and at least more realistic than wounds. A vehicle hit with a weapon strong enough to penetrate can hit a vital system and blow the damn thing up in one shot. Now, only realistic way to kill a tank will be to spam it to death with massed fire. There will be no point in taking expensive Lascannons or Meltas. Just bring things like Autocannons or Heavy Bolters that bring more shots, that should melt the thing.

        The real issue will be the random wound generation that they will, with 99% certainty, implement regarding heavy weapons against vehicles. They will cause something like D3 or D6 wounds. First you need to hit once and then you need to wound the thing, then the damn thing has to fail a save possibly and THEN you get to roll your damage. It will boil down to AoS levels of spam here. No need to take actual anti-tank when you can just wither the enemy down with massed fire.

        • Holger Wurst

          Some “what if”s to this comment…
          What, if weapons like plasma do 2 wounds damage with one hit?
          What, if AT-weapons gain a special AT-ability that reduces more wounds on vehicles than on normal infantry?
          What, if all these rumours don’t cover the full range of new rules? And that your quite definitive sounding conclusions are based on insufficient informations thus making these worries you express rather pointless?

          So many “what if”s…

          And by the way, you already have to keep track of damage (hull points) and destroyed equipment of each vehicle. Just changing from a d6 to a d10 or d20 is hardly bringing the world down…

          • Karru

            What if my predictions and arguments are based on Age of Sigmar? How many “special weapons” in that game do fixed amount of wounds if they do extra? It’s always “this weapon does extra D3/6 wounds/mortal wounds”. GW is big on recycling, which means that the chances are that the plasma for example does D3 extra wounds.

            Once again, going back to AoS, there are no such weapons in AoS that are “anti-monster”. It’s just extra wounds one way or another. Same thing will most likely happen to heavy weapons in 40k. They have slightly higher chance to wounds something, but in return they shoot a lot less and cost more. Since GW doesn’t know a thing about averages, quantity will win over quality.

            I always take all rumours with at least a handful of salt. Anything regarding something major like a rule release I usually order a truckload of salt, just in case.

            My opinions on the matter are just ways to maybe convey people to understand the massive downsides things like this will have and the damage it will cause should it be implemented.

        • Red_Five_Standing_By

          Plasma guns will likely have a strong rend or they may even deal “mortal wounds”, so they would be highly effective at taking out characters, tanks and elite units.

          How do you track wounds? With dice? With tokens? I feel like it would not be difficult.

          A weapon that could nuke a tank, would do the same to a Monstrous Creature and a Character. It is silly to have two different systems to govern what are effectively the same thing (monstrous entities).

          • Karru

            Okay, this one is going to be a long one, so I don’t mind if you ignore it. Here we go.

            There is two very good reasons why I am against removing AV and bringing in Wounds and Toughness for vehicles.

            First reason is fear of vehicles becoming absolutely broken. The other is the fear of the opposite, they become absolutely useless.

            Both of these share the same base, so I will start with that. All of my predictions and assumptions are based on AoS and these rumours. AV 10 vehicles would have 10 wounds, AV11 would have 12, AV12 would have 14, AV13 would have 16, AV14 would have 18 and Super Heavies would have 20. That sounds “reasonable”, considering the rumour. On average I would say at least 16 would be the highest a non-super heavy would have.

            Scenario 1: Vehicles become overpowered

            In order to make sure vehicles remain in play, they would have to make sure a rock couldn’t kill them. This means that the lowest AV vehicles should have a Toughness of 7 at least. This means that Lasguns cannot hurt it, as it should be. The standard should be 8 for most vehicles, 9 for mediums and 10 for heavies/super heavies.

            So how does one bring down many high toughness, high wound model in a single game? On average, I would say, a standard game of 40k has 5+ vehicles in it at once on one side. Considering that many struggle with a Toughness 8, 6 wounded Wraithknight, I would love to see how one deals with 10 wounded Rhinos that have the same defensive abilities.

            Considering that AoS doesn’t do “fixed amount of wounds” rules, one can expect the same from the new “extra wounds” for heavier weapons. Meaning things like Lascannons and Meltas will cause D3/D6 wounds. They will most likely reserve the fixed extra wounds to D-weapons. That means your average Lascannon would have to hit and wound 3 times so on average they can kill a Trukk. Yep, that sounds reasonable, considering you are shooting 75pts worth of weapons into a 35pts vehicle, it sounds completely balanced.

            “But what if they made the toughness more ‘reasonable’?”

            Scenario 2: Vehicles become obsolete

            Making the standard Toughness of a vehicle becoming 6-8 would be a suicide for vehicles. Massed Lasgun/Bolter/Shoota/*insert standard weapon here* would be able to kill any vehicle there is outside the most heavy. Even with a save, which they won’t increase beyond 2+ for sure, those things won’t last long.

            Even increasing the effectiveness of shooting would be disastrous. We already have problems with shooting being too powerful, that would just add to it.

            Basically, I don’t see anything positive coming out of the system. The reason why AV is such a good system is because it balances vehicles out nicely. A lucky shot from a Lascannon can take down a Tank so you no longer have to worry about it. Now you have to spent tons of shots to take down a transport that is worth 1/10 of the amount you spent on bringing it down and on top of that, there is 5 more of them coming towards you.

            The issue with GW is the fact that they do the exact opposite of what should be done. They keep scaling everything up. They give people better guns, then they give people better survivability, then they bring better guns and the cycle continues. Instead, they should dial back. Reduce the effectiveness of many units while making sure things aren’t too difficult to kill.

  • David Leimbach

    Removing templates is a huge change in flamers. For example: a single model attacking a single flamer model. It used to result in 1 hit. Now it will be 4 hits? “template” weapons just got awesome.

    • Karru

      Burna boys will be happy once more. 10 Burnas in a Battle Wagon = happy BBQ times for the lads.

    • Reven

      Yeah, but fire warrior squad that got all grouped to take advantage of terrain that is taking 12 heavy flamer hits that kill on a 2+ could just be 1 wound.

  • WhyNot13

    The loss of templates means a decrease in tactics. Whether or not I can spread my troops around enough to avoid the template. Will it scatter onto a friendly unit? That is a loss I am not looking forward to. And those arguments mean my opponent is invested in the game. If you can’t bear to lose an argument, then why are you playing a war game. War is how you solve arguments, and sometimes you lose.

    Swapping out the codexes is another way of saying that GW is a huge money sink. (Duh)

    Vehicle armor values always served the function of target priority. Why waste bolters if it can’t hurt it? Well, now they can. Even with a ton of wounds, that makes my bolters, and new 10d6 flamer hits, worth shooting at it.

    Armor save modifiers I can live with. I’d like to try saving terminators with a 3+ on 2d6 like back in 2nd edition.

    Open, Narrative, and Matched is a good idea. But I dont want to play AoS with guns. If I did, I would go play AoS.

    As for assaulting out of all my vehicles, yes please. Make all my mounted troops carry flame weapons. Lots of hits, assault out of the vehicles, and victory to the player going first.

    In conclusion, I dont really trust GW to get these many changes right the first time.

    • Simon Chatterley

      I have played a games where my opponent had a little bit of plastic that was the required size to make sure that models were as spaced out as can and not outside unit coherence. This would be done setting up and then every single movement phase there after. The only tactic I could tell that was in play was to bore me to death.

      So I’m great with blasts and templates doing one. One less thing to remember to bring and one less thing to argue about as the inevitable “you think I’ve hit 3 but it looks like 5 to me” situation repeatedly comes up and we have to have a negotiation. Every. Single. Time.

      • WhyNot13

        ‘High, low’? Split the difference, maybe? It sounds less like the system is broken and more like you were playing against people who take themselves, and the game by extension, way too seriously.

        But dont take my word for it. See if they can play a game of slapjack without arguing. 😉

      • Shinnentai

        I think the take-home message there is to stop playing with terrible people!

    • Omnia Incendent

      also with no templates and (presumably) no scatter you can jump out of your rhinos with many flamers 1″ away from your desired target(and your flamers can be at the back of the squad too), fire 3 thunder fire cannons, 2 units of 2 Whirlwinds and 3 vindicators at them knowing your guys will never be scattered onto, then charge to mop up.

      • euansmith

        Maybe just removing scattering from blasts would be enough. Scattering is very much a skirmish level game mechanic.

        • Omnia Incendent

          I thought scattering for small blasts (introduced in 5th or 6th?) was definitely not needed.

  • rtheom

    While I have always loved templates from a thematic point of view, I’ve had waaaaaay too many otherwise fun games marred by the “millimeter shift that goes from hitting 10 models to 3” shenanigans. I’ll be happy not to deal with that any more.

  • Antoine Henry

    Rules will never be good with GW and this time will be the same. They will release something unfinished and not tested, try to convince peeps that “No points is all fun and take whatever you want”. Good point, they had Age of Sigmar worst release ever to check that they do not do that again, but we know for sure that they like to make the same mistakes over and over again. Only solution i had: do not buy anything from GW anymore, just buy it from someone or find it for nothing on a little market.

    I am surprised that people forgive so quickly and forget that fast…

    • Shinnentai

      Consensus is that Generals Handbook fixed the worst problems in AoS. I heard recently that the Generals Handbook has now sold more copies than any other book in GW history. Pretty amazing though I guess skewed by main rulebooks also being found in starter sets (which I assume don’t count).

      • generalchaos34

        and its cheap, go figure, its almost like they listened to all our complaints and jumped on it. Heck, I just got into AoS last month and I bought GHB knowing there will be another one soon simply because of the utility it presented and the low price point.

  • Ryan C

    I like all except the removal of templates. Not only do I like the narrative of template weapons but even more importantly I HATE HATE HATE when a “tactical” mechanic is removed and replaced with a purely random one. Also this will now limit all weapons to only hitting one unit? No more feel of an explosion.

    Using and protecting yourself from templates is skill that is based on positioning. Random hits completely eliminates that tactical aspect. (I felt the same way about adding random charge distances to the game, I feel like it takes a tactical skill away from the player and replaces it with a dice roll)

    Also, idk about most people but I don’t find templates to be the things slowing my games down. Especially not flamer templates which don’t scatter.

    What really slows games down are all the re-rolls this game has now. When determining the result of a squads shooting involves 5 or 6 layers of rolling (hit, reroll hit, wound, reroll wound, save, reroll save, feel no pain), then multiply across an entire army, that is where games get bogged down.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      Blast Templates were random…

      • Ryan C

        They have a random element in the scatter but still are influenced by positioning, and placement. (tactical decisions)

        Replacing that with say a D6 hits roll, completely eliminates the tactical aspect and makes it all about how well you roll.

        • Red_Five_Standing_By

          A Kindergartner could measure out his movement so his men are not clumped. That doesn’t take skill. It is just tedium.

          • Karru

            Actually, it does take some skill to properly space out AND place your models. Spacing out your models can be hazardous since taking casualties will mean you have actually advanced less if you space out too much in different directions. Then you run the risk of getting flanked and thus losing your valuable models like special weapons to enemy fire.

            New system just means I take all my models, place them as close as possible to each other and surround my important models with meat shields from all sides. Gunlines will weep with joy since they can now really jam themselves into one corner of the table without any worries of actual damage being done to them.

          • Red_Five_Standing_By

            Most likely in the new edition, you can pull whoever you want when a model is killed. So you don’t even need to worry about placement until Assault comes (ensuring your good weapons are front and center).

          • Shinnentai

            As with all tactical considerations, it should be about weighing risk and reward. Terrain often funnels your advance, so templates provide a risk that you will have to weigh against the potential reward of pushing your men to wherever they’re going faster and not piecemeal (eg rather than stringing out several units).

            I can see why GW are doing this, but it does remove another genuine (albeit small) tactical element from the game.

          • Ryan C

            Of course its not the mechanical aspect of spreading troops out. Are you being intentionally stupid?

            Its the decision TO spread out (or not) and how it situationally impacts the battle as a whole.

            Spreading out comes with a myriad of downsides. Once spread you now have a much bigger footprint and it is easier for more enemy units to draw line of site to you in order to shoot. It is harder to take advantage of cover. Part of your unit now may be out of range or out of LoS to shoot. You are easier to assault because of that larger footprint. You may now be interfering with the movement of other units in the army because you are taking up too much space. etc etc.

            Furthermore decisions come into play such as when to go through a choke points or how to spread out. (is it better to expand as a blob, to spread out in a line, etc)

            Positioning is such a complex decision that requires a strong read on the situation or you are likely to be punished for it. By eliminating the risk of blast we eliminate a major variable in that decision making process.

          • generalchaos34

            and this speeds up game play immensely. Theres a reason we don’t see horde armies in play at the tournament level even though they are capable of holding their own. Time is a factor and this can cut out a lot of time spent moving

          • Ryan C

            I disagree, moving a model is moving a model. I guess if you move every model to be exactly 2″ away from the other that may take some time. But for everyone I play with no one bother ever being that precise.

            The biggest factor that slows my games down is rolling. There is TOO much of it in the game now.

            Warhammer is becoming less and less a tactical game with random variation added with dice to an incredibly random game with some tactical variation added.

            Think about it this way:

            – Remove random charge ranges. The assault phase just got faster

            – Remove random run ranges. The shooting phase just got faster.

            – Return to a philosophy where re-rolls are rare and special (aka master crafted). Every phase just got faster.

            – Move to an AoS style psychic phase. The Psychic phase just got faster.

            All things that improve the speed of the game WITHOUT compromising tactical decision making.

            In my opinion the perfect design of Warhammer would be a situation where it feels like a super complex game of chess with some random variation in the effects of decisions. Rolling dice to determine every step at every time is a huge burden on the game.

  • Marco Marantz

    None of the above ideas are bad and some are actually really good (make melee great again! tee hee). Removing templates should prevent shinanegans like multiple Thunderfires do a bazillion wounds type thing. Ill wait for the release but it looks like 8th will be an improvement….(heck, it has to be an improvement over the current mess).

  • Sean Fisher

    What i dont get is why continue to release stuff if ya just gonna change it all anyway eg magnus, gulliman and what not

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      Because models will be ported over?

      Because GW still needs to earn money? They can’t survive not selling anything for 6 months. And to be honest, they have been pretty fair with their releases. 2016 saw 2 main codexes released and 2 big supplements (with a third lame one no one really bought (Imperial Agents)). That;s super tame compared to 2015’s release schedule.

  • Arthfael

    I’m glad I moved to an area where I cannot play 40k at the moment because I don’t know anyone. I will wait for things to stabilize, the community to learn how to play 8th, GW to fix it, then can start learning it once the dust has settled ^^

    • Karru

      Wait… Do you actually think GW will fix 40k? All these rumours indicate the exact opposite.

      • Arthfael

        Oh, I have no doubt they will break it in style, like they did when WHFB became AoS. Then 1 year down the road they will fix it with a Generals’ Handbook or something similar. I will be waiting.

  • Ian Chisholm

    2: Will make anything from a mortar to a basalisk more reliable vs small groups/ spread out targets.
    3: We’ll have to just see how this goes.
    4: Take that, terminators!
    5: Looking forward to it.
    7: *Stuffs Ogryns into chimeras*

    • Anderan

      That’s kind of the point of spreading out units, to make them less suseptible to blasts.

  • Omnia Incendent

    Will certainly miss flamer templates but on the plus side, I probably won’t have to put my flamers near as possible to enemy, or worry about the placement of multiple flamer models within a squad to achieve max hits.

    • generalchaos34

      if it works like warpflamers its just D6 auto hits (or in this case mortal wounds) which makes flamers desirable to use against single models as well as hordes

  • Emprah

    I approve of all except the removal of Templates.

    Maybe vehicles should have a different thoughness value for their facings.

    • thereturnofsuppuppers

      Really miss the templates in AoS, but I can understand they do slow down the game needlessly.

      They had a sort of interesting physicality that rolling the dice can’t replicate.

    • Sz

      I hope so re: vehicles. A team should get rewarded by getting thinner armor by making their way behind it. Having different values doesn’t slow the game down, and keeps a strategic element.

  • Shinnentai

    Bit of a mixed bag here. I thought the problem with transport-bourne assaults was that they were so strong as an early first-strike that they dominated the metagame?

    I prefer vehicle damage rules as is. Not sure I like the idea of having to keep track of double digit ‘wounds’ on them.

    Template removal makes sense given how GW are constantly pushing larger and larger battles. A Real shame to lose such a basic tactical concern as not bunching your troops up though.

    • orionburn

      From the business standpoint it makes sense. You’d rather see people playing 2500+ point games on a regular basis simply because it means more models on the table. I prefer big games and honestly cannot recall the last time I played anything under 1850 pts.

      I’m torn on the templates. Great when they work, but a couple of bad scatter rolls can render a vehicle/weapon completely useless for the entire game. It’s great to have a strength 10 blast template, but in games where the scatter takes out all of 2 guys it really, really sucks. My issue has always been a) the people that have zero sense of direction as to where the arrow points and b) the multi-blast templates that bog things down.

      • Shinnentai

        Yeah – exactly where the arrow is pointing has always made templates a little too open to interpretation!

        • generalchaos34

          I had to custom build a template with 2 small blasts glued side by side on a stick to speed up my Wyvern shots. So this is welcome, esp if its something like “if the unit has 10 or more models it takes D6 extra wounds” like in Sigmar so I can quickly roll and move on

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      My bet is that guys inside cannot get out if a vehicle “runs”

    • generalchaos34

      not bunching your troops is still a thing in AoS given the lack of templates. This is usually to ensure the enemy can’t charge another unit, ensuring you have the maximum amount of guys to pile in, or denying the enemy movement toward an objective, etc. Tactical movement is very much alive without templates. The only time you bunch up is to maximize the amount of guys in close combat

  • Sounds kinda like the Vedros stuff and some box games like Overkill were pretty good indicators after all.

  • thereturnofsuppuppers

    Game fixed. Everyone go home.

  • MarcoT

    I hope and prey the armies do keep their gameplay. The Genestealer Cult ambush table for example would be a loss :s

    • orionburn

      Oh I don’t see things like that going away. Same with Nids having to take synapse tests. I think all those core things will remain. It’ll just be better IMO if you see Cults and Nids get better movement stats. A scuttling mass of cultists or gaunts should be able to move across the board quicker than what it would take a marine to do.

      • phobosftw

        speaking of things going away ; what happened to the genestealer cult codex? – gw stopped selling the thing, screw everyone thinking of starting an army I guess?

        • orionburn

          Huh? It shows it’s still available here in the states. Is it out of stock in other countries?

          • phobosftw

            It is out of stock in the GW/EU webstore and has been for some months at this point, I figure it`s to make way for 8th edition, or something along those lines..

        • orionburn

          I checked the UK store. The hard back version is no longer available, but the soft back is. Here in the states you only have the choice of the hard back. I’m sure that will change once it sells out.

  • No-one Special

    GW are swinging the pendulum too far the other way again. If they wanted to give assault armies a boost, then fine, but they don’t seem to have factored in the proposed changes with each other in altering the balance.
    The switch from AP to Save modifiers (which is a good thing) already weakens shooting as many units that would have had no save now get one – and this weakens overwatch too. But to then allow assualting out of cheap transports as well pushes it too far the other way. Cheap chaff units will have no problem getting into assault very quickly to tie up the weakened shooting units – and as everyone likes to forget in the shooting vs assault argument, assault units can deal their full damage in both player turns. Each change causes an exponential effect, as every extra model that isn’t killed by shooting or overwatch and makes it in to combat then deals double the damage over a game turn.

    Vehicles get a much needed boost to their durability – I can remember raising concerns over how easy they would be to destroy when the HP system was first introduced, glad to see them finally fix the mistake.

    Would be sad to see templates go, a dice roll is so sterile and detracts from the feel of the game. And I still don’t understand how people get into so much bother with them (you both have a tape measure, put one over the arrow and the other over the template/location – it becomes pretty obvious when they’re not parralel).

    • Hawt Dawg

      Based on a rumour?

      • No-one Special

        This is obviously assuming these rumours are correct.

        • Hawt Dawg

          No, rage quit while you have the chance.

          • No-one Special

            There’s no rage here, this is just my opinion of what the rumoured changes will bring. GW has a long running habit of overcompensating for things when making changes – swinging wildly back and forth on certain issues over multiple editions. Currently assult armies needing help is the current groan amongst a number of players, and it seems GW have listened. But rather than tweak a few things to gently bring things back towards centre balance, they will make multiple changes and go too far the other way – this has been going on for years, if not decades.

  • euansmith

    Hive Fleet Charybdis has got a pile of AoS Warscrolls for 40k.

    http://hivefleetcharybdis.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/age-of-sigmar-40k-space-marine.html

  • Maitre Lord Ironfist

    I like Tamplates, but well, i can deal with that.

    I got the feeling i will still play, it the core stays the same, wich looks like it will be. (T vs S; generall Game Mechanics) the rest ist more like and icing on the Core. So yeah, i am positivly curious about this.

    The curent system is Stagnant. i want changes.

  • Angus MacKenzie

    Streamlining 40k can only help and AoS is an excellent example of how to streamline a game while still retaining enjoyment, depth and strategy in the game.

    However that is not what I’m really looking forward to with this new edition of 40k. What I really want to see is a rules change so “profound” that meta-chasing, whiney, selfish manbabies will throw a completely, utterly, radiantly glorious tempter tantrum. And when that happens I truly hope that you (the manbabies) will burn your armies and post it on Youtube again.

    That video was the most entertaining thing I had seen all year. Watching an “adult” destroy his own property in a self-entitled rage over a distant company changing the optional rules for playing with his toys was…just breathtaking!

    So please…burn them! BURN THEM!!

  • Heinz Fiction

    Sounds good. Although I’d miss the template weapons.

    • euansmith

      In the grim dark Universe of the future; it is template weapons that be missing you.

  • ChubToad

    I call No. 1 bull. AoS has not eliminated Cdexes, they are called Battletomes now. Of course there have to be an update of the stats of every single unit in the game, but that does not mean that the codexs are gone. They will never be.

    Anyway, let us get ready for the pile of comments where: GW will fail, AoS is crap, they never learn the lesson, 40k is dying, I like “insert game name” better that 40k because of the rules, GW can’t do rules for games, I told you so, you are a GW ball sniffer for defending GW, and an infinite list of hate.

    Welcome to 8th ed rumors!

  • Defenestratus

    No templates is sad.

    I love using templates.

  • frankelee

    Nothing about the scale of armies tripling, seems fake.

  • Svenone

    Seems like GW being kind of tone deaf on what their issue is. To me the game has weakened not because of CORE rules, but because of the endless amount of formations/detachments that GW decided to flood their game with. It put a major strain on the social contract between two random people trying to get a game in (because let’s face it, all your friends stopped playing, so you get a game where you can). “You’re detachment does WHAT again?”

    The biggest though is that there’s still a major cost issue. This might be an unfavorable comment to some people, but I see a majority of players who in my opinion shouldn’t be spending money on this game because they don’t really have jobs to support it. I waited on the sidelines for YEARS until I finally got into this game when I was comfortable enough to buy sprues. Even then, for every 1 box of an actual GW-store product, I probably bought 4-5 boxes off of ebay. My ebay account literally exists to flag me for 40K deals.

    Maybe this new warscroll format will allow them to balance their rules more frequently.

  • Hendrik Booraem VI

    Color me skeptical. This sounds like just another repeat of the last set of rumors. Some of these are terrible ideas (getting rid of codexes? How does that help GW make money?), while others are just bad (getting rid of templates in favor of just a random number of hits? That INCREASES the randomness of the game and diminishes the benefit tactical skill accrues).

    Only two of these allegations are neutral or okay. Weapons having an armor save modifier is a good idea – chainswords should have SOME benefit over beating your opponent with a stick. Also, GW codifying 3 playstyles is a good idea. I’ve no objection to having Vedros-style Kill Team, regular WH40K, and SuperHeavy 40K, but the idea that “everything needs to be simplified” is garbage. The game is meant to represent indirect fire, ranged fire, and close combat in a high-tech magic-riddled universe. If you think that’s something that can be done “simply,” then you have an unreasonably high opinion of your own ability to write rules. Wait 5 more years and your precious Age Of Sigmar is going to have the same “flavor of the year”-dominated gameplay as any other game system.

    Anyway, I think this is bogosity on stilts. We’ll see what really happens.

    • DJ860

      Why would you care if things help GW make money? Are you a shareholder?

      • Commissar Molotov

        He’s just pointing out that GW giving up a revenue stream is pretty damned unlikely.

    • When it was rumored AOS was getting rid of templates, people said the same thing.

      And AOS indeed got rid of templates.

    • Sz

      Secondly (riding piggyback on what DJ said– you are likely a consumer after all,) speaking for myself, I know for a fact where my non-codex buying money is going: It’s going to GW to buy things I actually WANT to buy– more dudes, more paint, maybe I’ll finally even pony up a bit and buy some of their terrain. It will be refreshing to buy what I want to buy, rather than spending $50 on something I grudgingly have to buy. GW still gets my money, and maintains a happier consumer in my case.

      All editions start cracking under their own weight over time. Predicting that will happen to AoS doesn’t tell me much. I practically worship at the fanboy altar of WHFB 6th, and even I recognize it was getting a bit bloated and power-creepy at the end. That is when it is time to refresh things with a new edition. Now, we won’t have hundreds of dollars in codices that are just a graveyard of pretty pictures after the fact. That is a good thing for us consumers too.

    • generalchaos34

      AoS still has codexes. You just don’t need them to play a regular game. You need to them get access to formations and they still have tons of fun fluff and artwork. I buy the AoS codexes because I like having a book in my hand over the digital product. Also with some new books you need to buy them to get access to the newer spells, artefacts, and command abilities. Unit rules are free, formations and command are not. Plus you can buy the basic versions of these codexes in their App for a few dollars

  • kevinharoun

    Really hope all of this is true.

  • Walter Vining

    100% disagree with assault being weak. There are many ways that assault is still strong in this current edition, just not every army is good at it.

    • Sz

      Sure there are some nasty assault armies (space wolves come to mind,) but I think GW had to really amp up the assault capabilities of some squads (e.g. wolfen) to make up for the inherent weakness of the assault phase. I hope GW can walk and chew gum at the same time to a. pump the core capabilities of the game’s assault phase, and b. tone down the really kill-crazy assault troops to fit better in the new normal, or the 8th will devolve into a melee skirmish game.

      • Walter Vining

        The assault phase has functioned pretty much the same across all editions that I have played (since 3rd). the only thing in recent years that has “weakened” the phase is the change to power weapons. otherwise its still the same. Assault based units/armies will cut through their enemies with relative ease no matter what. if anything the current way of doing it is more balanced that it ever has been (im looking at me having 4 power weapons in a unit of grey hunters and BA libbys and chaplains getting tons of attacks killing units before everything else goes).
        the assault phase is fine.

        • Sz

          I disagree; and imo the problem isn’t about the hitting part you cited. The problem is the charge/overwatch mechanics as they stand. That is the part that needs work.

          • Walter Vining

            What if I told you that random charge distances are actually better? Way back when everything was only 6 inch charge. Now you can actually reach out to 12 inches. Overwatch often has little to no effect on charges. Sometimes it does. Just like sometimes you can fail a charge roll. Heck even before you could “fail” because you couldn’t premeasure so you had to keep track of how far they moved as compared to how far you have moved. Trust me, assault is fine. 10 years of “the assault phase is broken” is really old.

          • Sz

            “What if I told you that random charge distances are actually better?”

            I would respectfully disagree with you. You are talking to a guy who has had strong opinions on rolling dice on charge distances in both Fantasy and 40k. I don’t like being ‘that guy,’ but I can look up at my original copy of RT on my shelf in my office (not that we played 40k much back then– we were broke 13 year olds.) But I mention this to say, I’ve lived through both sides, and I prefer non-randomized distances, and overwatch actually being a choice with a cost rather than the derp it is now. Even jinking requires more thought than overwatch. This is all my personal preference though. I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

  • MechBattler

    Free rules with optional fluff books? YES!!!

  • Xodis

    Im excited, but hope leads to disappointment…..

  • Baldrick

    Mmmm, war scroll system…..no points……this concerns me greatly. Still trying to remain positive……but the dropping of a points based system (IF this is the case) really concerns me.

    • Xodis

      All the rumors point to a Generals Handbook being a part of the initial launch (which is what brought Points into AoS), added to the fact that the confirmed Pitched battles game format requires points, I think you are safe in assuming that Points WILL be a part of the game, probably not printed on the warscrolls though.

  • Grand_Master_Raziel

    I’m guardedly optimistic about the upcoming release of 8th edition. It remains to be seen how the changes are implemented.
    .
    I’m most concerned about armor save modifiers. If they’re not too extreme, then I won’t mind. If most basic infantry weapons have an ASM of 0 or -1, then I think we’ll be okay. If we have basic infantry weapons with ASM of -2 or more and other weapons going from there, then that’ll make armor pointless. Hopefully, GW has learned from the mistakes of 2nd ed.

    I’m more optimistic about being able to charge from vehicles again. I have a modest concern GW will return to the 3rd ed rules when Rhino Rush was king, but if they return to the 5th ed rules in this regard, then I think that will be fine.

    • generalchaos34

      if its anything like sigmar only elite and/or powerful units get to have anything better than a -1, with -3 being extremely rare or limited. So I would expect -2 on plasma, -3 for melta/lascannons and powerfists. Of course theres always mortal wounds to contend with….

  • Deathwing

    I really hope these “40k Warscrolls” still preserve all the options units have in the current 40k system at the squad/unit level. Generic tactical squads with 8 bolters, a flamer, a missile launcher, and a sergeant with bolt pistol and chainsword across every meq army would suck so bad.

  • Benjamin Race

    I’m curious as to how invulnerable saves will function (I cannot remember how the wards got changed for AoS) and also if instead of AoS warscolls, the rules format is more like the shadow war armageddon

    • Geronimo32509

      Some (very few) units have a save specifically against mortal saves. I’m thinking of Chaos Runeshields which grant a 5+ against mortal wounds. Pretty much the same thing as an invuln.

    • Shinnentai

      I would have thought they’ll just be a saving throw that isn’t worsened by the saving modifier. As they were in 2nd ed (though you got your armour *and* invulnerable save back then XD).

      • Sz

        Yeah– I am sure some armies had additional access to invulnerable-save wargear I don’t remember, but what I do remember is one refractor field (5+) and one power field (4+) pretty much in every army. Also, I think there was a cc penalty of some sort when your character lugged around the power field. Yes, you got to roll both your armor and your invuln. Space Marine Captains with power fields were the reason I always fielded 14 dark reapers.

        • Shinnentai

          Well you got wargear cards to give your characters – the invulnerable save cards were available to any army’s characters (cept tyranids who had biomorphs instead).

          Power field was 2+ save in fact! (and yeah, -1 in CC as with heavy weapon). Most common was displacer field – 3+ save but it moved your character.

          • Sz

            Yeah! You’re right. Power fields were horribly hard to crack. Did they work at all in cc? I completely forgot the displacer field. Oh wait! There was a ‘conversion field’ too. Don’t ask me what its save was. I wonder if it was the 4+ and that is why we saw the 4+/5+ gear the most often because they didn’t come with a tradeoff. This was too damn long ago now.

          • Shinnentai

            I don’t think power fields did work in CC, no. Conversion field was 4+ I think? (and had a chance of blinding people?) and I think the 5+ was the Refractor field with no side-effects.

    • generalchaos34

      more like a feel no pain really, and extremely limited and usually not subject to bonuses. Usually its a special rule that if you take a wound or mortal wound roll a dice and on a x+ ignore that wound. People have taken to calling them ward saves but there is no official name for them. The death faction basically gets this on a 6+ for their whole army within X inches of their leader.

  • Luc Voyer

    perfect time to sell my models, with all this half AoSing of 40k, Im really not on the hype train.

    • stinkoman

      depending on the lot, good luck. most people serious about the game and have the resourced to drop money on the game will be holding off unless the deal is really sweet. I scour ebay daily and things dont sell unless they are a rip off to the seller.

      neat little story, my buddy got back in and the fastest way was to offer a seller 1500$ for 2500$ worth (or 8500pts) of beautifully painted eldar. i mean this was a steal and a half (kind of jealous), because he has everything e could need for eldar as of now with zero work and less than half of what he would have spent retail (factoring in hobby supplies – not to mention time). the seller was really upset to sell it for so little, but realized he wouldnt be able to get much more. (he even relisted for the offer price and told him to bid, thinking he might get more – tons of watchers but no bidders).

      we now enjoy apoc sized games and i enjoy having a table with two completely painted armies.

      • Luc Voyer

        I don’t have the time or passion anymore to sell my complete legion off ebay is the right move, I still can do some kill team skirmish games but I wont go anymore for the big stuff, after more than 20 years seeing GDub doing stupid decisions I’m really fed up. The fact that they killed off fantasy was also a big factor as I was about to jump in. Kill Team, necromunda or Mordheim will be a better rule set for me and I wont have to buy from GDub.

        • stinkoman

          im just getting back in, and depending on this new system will determine my future purchases. i’ve been in for over 20 years so i have amassed quite a collection myself. but a new army calls once in a while and ive been fighting that urge till 8th drops. but for now, i have 6 really full armies to enjoy 7th with.

    • Geronimo32509

      I’m actually kind of hoping for this. I was part of the crowd that was vocally against AOS when it first came out and I missed the buying/selling spree. Then I actually played AOS (after the GH) and now prefer it to 40k.

      Hopefully people sell off their 40k stuff in a rage and I’m able to pick up some 40k armies for pennies on the dollar.

      • Luc Voyer

        if you like the black legion, you might find my stuff. I`m out of GDub and their silly decisions.

      • generalchaos34

        I agree 100%. After being punished for playing guard and not abusing the psychic phase and summoning daemons for all these years I can finally PLAY my army and not feel like I have to do something stupid and broken in order to have a chance to win. Hopefully this will help a great deal. AoS isn’t perfect on balance but they are trying really really hard to make that possible and its getting there as the game develops.

        • Geronimo32509

          Yup, I really appreciate being able to finally use my Beastmen.

    • Matthew Pomeroy

      already dropped most of my fantasy due to AoS, 40k is next if its anything like that awful mess.

  • Commissar Molotov

    Got no problem with armor save modifiers, but turning vehicles into creatures is a real no-go for me.

  • Sz

    I’m only mildly surprised (despite the multiple rumors) about templates going away because SW: Armageddon chose to continue with the templates. I know, different game, shorter game, etc., but I thought if GW was making the break, they would make it a full and clean one.

    • Shinnentai

      It would be difficult to exchange templates for multiple hits in Armageddon because models operate as individuals rather than units (not that you’d want to streamline the rules in a skirmish game to that extent anyway).

  • Ronin

    If I had to guess, Shadow War is probably the beta test for the new rules.

    • Shinnentai

      Shadow War’s rules are fundamentally just Necromunda with a few small changes. Necromunda is just 2nd Edition 40k with the addition of pinning/out of action and ammo rolls.

      You’re right in that rumours indicate some 2nd Ed 40k concepts are returning (movement values & save mods). I don’t believe we’ll see hiding & 2nd ed overwatch though.

      Also there’s no way in heck they’d go back to the 2nd Ed 40k assault rules we see in Armageddon – these are *way* too slow for the size of 40k games we’ve become familiar with.

    • PanzerDan

      AOS is the Beta Test, Shadow War may be the E3 playable demo

  • I have too much invested to quit now. I’m in for the long haul and I’m excited how power levels may change.

    • generalchaos34

      besides, 40k is way more fun to make jokes about!

    • Same here.

  • SilentPony

    That all sounds terrible. Random wounds for flamers? Wow, way to destroy Salamanders, Sisters, 30k Death Guard, and any army that brings rockets.
    Vehicle AV gone? Well so long lascannons and meltas. Hello having to buy autocannons. *sigh*
    Jeez and someone needs to tell GW that AoS is NOT simplified. Its extremely complicated with 30x the number of rules Fantasy had. You replaced all the USR with hundreds of little ones, making it impossible to plan for another army ’cause guess what? You don’t know all their special rules! ’cause there are no USR you idiot! What do you think this is, some sort of balanced rules based game system?!

    • Shinnentai

      I should think that Lascannons and meltas will still be better tank hunters than autocannons due to causing more wounds.

      Agree on the rules. Having everything you need to know about a unit on one sheet is great, but that doesn’t mean you need so many individual special rules.

  • Warboss_Stalin

    So does this mean don’t buy the Plague Book coming out soon, because it will be worthless in two months?

  • CthulhuDawg

    If templates go I’ll riot!…Not really, I’ll just adapt the game to use them, forge the narrative or w/e /sigh. I’m usually really positive about changes in editions. I’m fine with everything, but really man…muh templatez…

  • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

    Waiting for FW to publish Datasheets for IA 1 and IA 13 vehicles, as I’ve got vehicles from them that I’ll want to be able to use. Slightly concerned that ABC and the Dominus are going to be Nerfed hard by 8th, though.

  • Gilissen Kim

    The community dying is nothing more than just a lack of initiative takers in your community. I take initiative in mine and we’re a blooming community with over 16 active players and dozens still in mild slumber. 7th E main rulebook is amazingly well balanced (besides psychic phase) when you look back on 5th and 6th, however, it’s the codexes and silly supplements that make it unbalanced. With Angels of Death (psychic powers), Fracture of Biel Tan (Soul Burst) as a few examples of OP crap as opposed to the crappy codexes of Niddies, DE and Orks.

    • ZeeLobby

      Eh, it just requires a circle of players telling you the rules aren’t bad. But it’s hard for a community to spring up in places where one wasn’t, or games with better rulesets are popular. Good on you for keeping your community alive. We tried for 3/4 years here, but people just moved on to other systems.

    • Nyyppä

      So, how did you solve the balance issues between fluffy vanilla CSM and tournament cheese?

  • OleTimer56

    It will be interesting to see how the battle cannon of the Leman Russ tank will be handled.

    • generalchaos34

      It will probably cause D6 wounds at -3, possibly add something like if the unit has more than 10 add X more wounds.

      • SprinkKnoT

        Idk, I’m weary of -3 or greater weapons being
        that common. If all they do is a direct switch of AP2-> -4, AP3>-3 we will still be in bad state of high armor models not getting a save. I hope they really take a hint from AoS and make -0 common, -1 on the damage dealers, -2 on glass cannons, -3 on the best of the best (like a leader’s sword).

        Seeing as how shooting is often in a much greater volume than CC attacks, I hope shooting never gets a -3.

        • generalchaos34

          I can agree with that sentiment, I was thinking more of its traditional role of killing marines, but I forget about the design paradigm of having multiple wounds being a balance facter, so a -2 would be more likely far a battle cannon

          • SprinkKnoT

            Also remember that even a -1 weapon will kill 16% more marines than it did previously. Any rend makes weapon useful against high armor targets. It’s one of the best things about this change; weapons can still be effective but there will (hopefully) be less moments where you don’t get a save. Hopefully the only players that don’t regularly get saves are Ork and Tyranid players.

  • Anggul

    This all sounds great.

    I’m sceptical as to whether they’ll do it, but it would be brilliant if they did.

  • Drpx

    Black Templars go!

  • Francois Sanchez

    I really hope some of these rumours are wrong, the one about templates in particular. Assaulting from any vehicle doesn’t seem good either, it removes the only advantage light open topped vehicles like ork truks and dark eldar vehicules had over “classic” vehicles and will reinforce even more top tier armies.
    Giving wounds to a vehicle and removing armour completely… I don’t know, it can be nice if they do it right but it can also be absolutely awful.

    • deris87

      Just being able to assault from a vehicle doesn’t mean it wouldn’t have limitations. I’d love to see a return to the 5th ed rules, where you could disembark and assault as long as the vehicle had remained stationary beforehand. Assault vehicles still had clear advantages, it just meant it wasn’t entirely pointless to say throw Assault Marines or Howling Banshees into a transport.

      • Reven

        Would be nice if my Repentia 😀

    • chuck_lapine

      Tracking wounds on all your vehicles would be a pain. Maybe GW will come out with a fancy wound tracker for $29.99

  • Crablezworth

    This all sounds pretty terrible, if I asked the GW rules team to fix my sink all they’d do is steal my furniture

  • My soul is ready.

  • Tim Finton

    All this sounds okay minus a few things I dont agree with (i luv ma flamerz!) however I have a hard time seeing GW update all the FW line as well as there own at the same time to make this drop. They will literally have to write tons of new IA’s as well as their current catalouge by July… I dont see that happening.

    • Deeple101

      I would doubt that GW would even consider FW when making this change, let the staff over at FW fix the FW stuffs. This will take a while, but this has been the status quo when regarding a rule change from GW regarding FW items.

      FW might put out a quick FAQ but they won’t reprint everything/anything for the new ruleset. They’ll handle that when they release the next book (probably another HH book).

      • Tim Finton

        What about the players using renegades or corsairs? the people with all their expensive resin toys they want to use in 40k? FW would almost have to release everything in the same time frame.

        • Deeple101

          Well, FW and GW are, for purposes like this, separate companies. GW owns FW, but FW doesn’t HAVE to release updates to their stuff just because GW release a new rule set.

          —-

          As for the players, well they are kinda screwed. Like I said before I wouldn’t expect to see FW release a quick FAQ/update PDF of their rules (like what they did when the edition changed from 5th to 6th – aka the introduction of “Flyers” in the main rules) which was a 2-3 page PDF that looked like a excel spreadsheet that was just unit profiles that were adjusted and those where in 2013. And you can find those easily on their website if you want a reference.

          —-

          There was no reprinting of books with the newer rules…maybe a few years later like what we saw with the IA books from 4th or 3rd ed (Siege of Vraks, Anphilion, Kastoral-Novum – forgive spelling) and that was just a limited release a couple of years ago.

  • Adrien Fowl

    I know for a fact that I’m not the only one who has given up playing W40k due to its lame current state. I am totally looking forward to a new iteration of the ruleset to dust my models off and come back to the game.

    Codexes going aways wouldn’t surprise me at all, although this rumour has been marked as fake, so I guess we will have to wait and see. In any case, Warscrolls and cards are something that I see as a “Must” for a new edition.

    There are a lot of positive things in AoS that could really be introduced into W40k, and taking all rumours into account, it wouldn’t be weird to suppose that a big chunk of those rules or concepts are going to be included in the long await 8th edition of our favourite Sci-Fi game.

    I just can’t wait to know more about it!

    • Matthew Pomeroy

      I would love to see a better version of 40k, but AoS is IMHO the worst way to go, that game is a soup sandwich. If they make 40K like AoS that would be the end of our group doing 40K.

      • Adrien Fowl

        We still have to wait to see what GW has in store for us. We do not know much “AoSness”

        • Matthew Pomeroy

          cautiously optimistic.

  • Nyyppä

    Now all they need is the will to make it well balanced.

  • Bobby La Plante

    not sure I like the idea of ditching templates. For the tanks, no armor value? I hope that lasgun will not start to score damages onn land raiders…