New Edition, or Just Horus Hearsay?

[01RTB01]

20 minutes ago, Evil Eye said:

Saturnine Dreadnought sounds very interesting, but myself I'm still praying for plastic Mk. IV Castra Ferrum. Seriously, I could forgive a LOT of GW's nonsense if they gave us a modern boxnought on par with the plastic Contemptor (which to be fair I have yet to have the pleasure of building, but I understand is a very nice kit).

I've built and painted 3, they're a very nice kit as are the Leviathans.

[Marshal Rohr]

If they really are revisiting the templates I’m extremely optimistic for barrage, blast, torrent, etc to get upgraded rules like the Apocalyptic templates where we get our AP3 basilisks back in the three inch circle, AP4 in the traditional 5inch large blast template. I’d love an AP3 or Double Str Heavy Flamer if you’re right up on the enemy. (just spitballing how they could play with the templates, I’m not a game dev)

 

 

edit: ooooooh maybe a hinged template for torrent

Edited Sunday at 12:45 AM by Marshal Rohr

[MoriyaSchism]

1 hour ago, Evil Eye said:

Saturnine Dreadnought sounds very interesting, but myself I'm still praying for plastic Mk. IV Castra Ferrum. Seriously, I could forgive a LOT of GW's nonsense if they gave us a modern boxnought on par with the plastic Contemptor (which to be fair I have yet to have the pleasure of building, but I understand is a very nice kit).

I would love that. Especially if they included a Siege Dreadnought weapon and armour sprue.

 

Edited Sunday at 01:02 AM by MoriyaSchism

[Schrödingers Primarch]

Distenegrator weapon sprues are an interesting addition to the prior rumor. Given the prior precedent of multiple weapons being included, combi-weapons disappearing from the store may be related. They could release a 2nd version of the special weapon set from Heresy 2.0 and complete the plastification of weapon options for Tactical Support or Veteran Marines. Rest of the box looks great if true. 

[Marshal Rohr]

There’s no way they make a whole sprue of just disintegration weapons and sell that as a double sprue box. The current special weapon box has meltaguns, plasma guns, flamers,  volkite chargers, volkite calivers, and rotor cannons. 5 of each per sprue, 30 weapons total, and 60 per box. No one on earth needs 60 disintegrators. Even if it was pistols, rifles, and combi-weapons that’s still half the amount per sprue. It’s also a weapon that blows you up worse than plasma. 

Edited Sunday at 04:05 PM by Marshal Rohr

[TheArtilleryman]

If this is true then it also 100% means new edition, new rules and new Libers, because of all those new units. There’s no way they’ll just do a pdf or supplement for them; they will be in new army books. 

[Valkyrion]

3 minutes ago, TheArtilleryman said:

If this is true then it also 100% means new edition, new rules and new Libers, because of all those new units. There’s no way they’ll just do a pdf or supplement for them; they will be in new army books. 

 

I don't think that's necessarily the worst thing, although it is a pain.

The 'good' thing about 30k is that 18 factions are condensed into two £50 books. So sure, we have to pay another £100 tax on top of the new rulebook, but if that also means we don't have to be flicking through multiple editions worth of books to draw up army lists and reference rules for three years (which would only get worse as the edition aged), then I'm okay with it. 

 

It would have be ace though to just have this 'new edition' see the release of the remaining plastics (javelins, breachers, destroyers, sabres et al) and a new rulebook and save all the 'look what every legion also had access to during the Heresy but you never knew about' stuff for 4.0, but I'll remain hopeful for all those coming anyway. 

[Gorgoff]

3 hours ago, TheArtilleryman said:

If this is true then it also 100% means new edition, new rules and new Libers, because of all those new units. There’s no way they’ll just do a pdf or supplement for them; they will be in new army books. 

That'd give them the chance to rebalance units. 

We have to wait and see I guess.

[soviet1337]

3 hours ago, TheArtilleryman said:

If this is true then it also 100% means new edition, new rules and new Libers, because of all those new units. There’s no way they’ll just do a pdf or supplement for them; they will be in new army books. 

Or a new campaign book

[01RTB01]

I'd like to see new Libers if for no other reason that they can reorganise the special rules, put them in one place, and in alphabetical order. 

[Ripper.McGuirl]

1 hour ago, 01RTB01 said:

I'd like to see new Libers if for no other reason that they can reorganise the special rules, put them in one place, and in alphabetical order. 

My main issue with this edition really isn’t the rules, it’s how they’re organized and written. I would love some streamlining. There are a lot of places where there is totally needless flipping/referencing involved. For instance, a proteus land speeder has the wargear…proteus land speeder. But it has no weapon listed in the army list entry, you have to flip to the wargear section to find the Proteus land speeder, and the entry says “armed with a heavy bolter”.

I would buy new libers even if all they did was incorporate a FAQ and update the special rules section so it included any rules referenced in the liber, the way Necromunda does. The whole “is this special rule in the rule book or in the liber” dance makes me crazy.

[Cleon]

Honestly if it's a complete rules reset I'll pick up the edition box based on the models alone and I'll wait for the community to digest the rules before buying any further books, if it's not a massive upgrade on second edition we'll probably end up going back to first and house ruling things in. 

[Agramar_The_Luna_Wolf]

More than new rules, I prefer a better written and more compact rulebook and armies books(Libers), with a soft back versions,better to use in games and tournaments. Like in W40K 4th edition.

 

Edited yesterday at 03:37 PM by Agramar_The_Luna_Wolf

[No Foes Remain]

I'd like to hope GW will release some Libers at the start, probably the Legion ones let's be honest, though I would love for them to either release all of them or if they do just the Legions ones then have the others as basic PDF indexs until they can get them out in physical format.

 

  

1 hour ago, Agramar_The_Luna_Wolf said:

More than new rules, I prefer a better writer and more compact rulebook and armies books(Libers), with a soft back versions,better to use in games and tournaments 

 

In a ideal world they'd have two books, one fluff the other rules but that's too much common sense and wouldn't catch on.

Edited Sunday at 04:11 PM by No Foes Remain

[Joe]

If the fear of hardback books prevents a greater competitive scene forming for Heresy then I'm entirely in support of big, thick books that give you a workout everytime you go out for a game.

[SkimaskMohawk]

People played heresy 1st with skill and made intelligent, functional lists (things decried by the narrative community) using the first three hard back books no problem. Scars, angels, wolves, 1ksons, dangles, daemons, custodes; they all got lugged around too.

 

I'm not a fan on the sweatiness of modern competitive 40k, but the attitude of modern narrative players (heresy or otherwise) can be equally intolerable. Just derision for playing or discussing how rules actually work, and a  preference for RAI that's really just kneejerk rewriting. 

 

There was a middle ground back in the day where there were no trap units, or units so far ahead that they warped the game. You could just take stuff you wanted and good game play would take you far enough.

[No Foes Remain]

1 hour ago, Joe said:

If the fear of hardback books prevents a greater competitive scene forming for Heresy then I'm entirely in support of big, thick books that give you a workout everytime you go out for a game.

You say that, I did a shift around in my room a few months back and I couldn't decide where to put the old Black Books, ended up moving them about 5 or 6 times. My arms did ache a little after that, those things have some heft to them.

[01RTB01]

18 minutes ago, SkimaskMohawk said:

People played heresy 1st with skill and made intelligent, functional lists (things decried by the narrative community) using the first three hard back books no problem. Scars, angels, wolves, 1ksons, dangles, daemons, custodes; they all got lugged around too.

 

I'm not a fan on the sweatiness of modern competitive 40k, but the attitude of modern narrative players (heresy or otherwise) can be equally intolerable. Just derision for playing or discussing how rules actually work, and a  preference for RAI that's really just kneejerk rewriting. 

 

There was a middle ground back in the day where there were no trap units, or units so far ahead that they warped the game. You could just take stuff you wanted and good game play would take you far enough.

 

I'm not starting a discuss but middle ground in too many walks of life seems sadly lacking. The polarisation of everything and division seems order of the day.

 

For competitive/ narrative there's good and bad to be had. I just wish that more could refind that middle ground. Here's hoping that third edition brings people to it.

 

 

[TheVoidDragon]

That "shoulder pad" here doesn't quite seem like a shoulder pad to me. It's quite a slight curve and the overall piece seems pretty flat rather than something that's clearly shoulder armour. The rivets/bolts also seem to imply its something else as armour panels on Terminators and Dreadnoughts don't seem to usually have that many?

[StratoKhan]

That’s a good point. Rivets aside, I was thinking that one explanation to the curve is that the shoulder pad is like the MkVI marine pads, and comes in multiple pieces. But it’s just an off the cuff theory and I’m not even sure I’m fully convinced myself.

[TheVoidDragon]

19 minutes ago, StratoKhan said:

That’s a good point. Rivets aside, I was thinking that one explanation to the curve is that the shoulder pad is like the MkVI marine pads, and comes in multiple pieces. But it’s just an off the cuff theory and I’m not even sure I’m fully convinced myself.

 

Even if it is multiple pieces though, it's a part without any obvious actual convex shape to go around some sort of shoulder. It seems more like it's just a flat pannel with a slight curve towards the right.

[Mandragola]

4 hours ago, SkimaskMohawk said:

People played heresy 1st with skill and made intelligent, functional lists (things decried by the narrative community) using the first three hard back books no problem. Scars, angels, wolves, 1ksons, dangles, daemons, custodes; they all got lugged around too.

 

I'm not a fan on the sweatiness of modern competitive 40k, but the attitude of modern narrative players (heresy or otherwise) can be equally intolerable. Just derision for playing or discussing how rules actually work, and a  preference for RAI that's really just kneejerk rewriting. 

 

There was a middle ground back in the day where there were no trap units, or units so far ahead that they warped the game. You could just take stuff you wanted and good game play would take you far enough.

To be honest I think there have always been trap units in pretty much all GW games, as well as ones that are too good. I think they're bad for all players, but probably affect "narrative" players more than "competitive" ones, who are less likely to end up owning those units.

 

On the issue of the weight of the books, in my experience they are just as heavy when I take them to narrative events as they would be at tournaments. Actually I'm not sure there's such a thing as a 30k tournament and I've never been to one. I'm not sure why heavy books would discourage competitive play. I can say that I stopped bothering to put Inductii in my Raven Guard army because I couldn't be bothered carrying a whole book just for a single paragraph describing something that made almost no difference anyway.

 

I'd be interested to hear what kind of content people would like to get for 3.0. We could easily write about which units are best (unless GW shocks us all and all the units are balanced perfectly) but I always feel that's kind of obvious, and the community doesn't seem to want content that might be seen as competitive. Would that be useful?

[Ripper.McGuirl]

20 minutes ago, Mandragola said:

 

I'd be interested to hear what kind of content people would like to get for 3.0. We could easily write about which units are best (unless GW shocks us all and all the units are balanced perfectly) but I always feel that's kind of obvious, and the community doesn't seem to want content that might be seen as competitive. Would that be useful?

I want an updated and fun “Tactical Strike” ruleset, the return of things like the Shadow War and Raid missions, more complete City Fight rules that build on the ones from WD, and, most importantly, I want a absolutely gigantic Zone Mortalis supplement that is the size of the Boarding Actions book.

[Unknown Legionnaire]

32 minutes ago, Mandragola said:

 

I'd be interested to hear what kind of content people would like to get for 3.0. We could easily write about which units are best (unless GW shocks us all and all the units are balanced perfectly) but I always feel that's kind of obvious, and the community doesn't seem to want content that might be seen as competitive. Would that be useful?

 

 

What I'd like to see from this potential 'third edition' ? 

Easy.

 

- If they decide to keep the rules and systems from 2.0, I'd love for them to fix the more glaring rules hiccups and smooth things out.  -  Most likely not going to happen. It'll likely be a 'new' ruleset.

 

- More support for non-astartes factions.  -  Yep, not gonna happen either after how 'legacy' units and factions were handled in 2.0

 

- Plastic kits that are aesthetically more in line with the releases from 1.0 than the ugly ones from 2.0

 

So, I rather not get too excited for this new edition, if it comes at all, since we haven't seen a single adequate picture yet. 

Or let me specify that, probably not too excited for the rules, but I'll let myself be suprised in a pleasant way, even if I don't expect it to happen.

The models, from their descriptions, could be gorgeous, but could also be horrible, since we just don't know (yet).

 

 

[Nephaston]

5 hours ago, StratoKhan said:

That’s a good point. Rivets aside, I was thinking that one explanation to the curve is that the shoulder pad is like the MkVI marine pads, and comes in multiple pieces. But it’s just an off the cuff theory and I’m not even sure I’m fully convinced myself.

Maybe a front-facing plate on a more complicated shoulder pad assembly, projecting the void shield in front.