New Warhammer 40,000 Edition announced!

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

On 5/13/2026 at 6:52 AM, Evil Eye said:

Kinda lame honestly, this is supposed to be a creative hobby, pre-painted models seems kinda counter to the point*. Not to mention it'll drive the prices up even further. Terrain looks decent sculptwise but if I get any I'll be stripping it and painting it myself.

 

*Yes I am aware of the old pre-painted foam terrain, but "basic drybrush over black on foam pieces" is a bit less egregious than "fully detailed and finished plastic terrain".

Stopped being a creative hobby a while ago imho.

when codexes no longer had hobby sections it stopped being a creative game  in GW’s eyes, at least imho

 

On 5/20/2026 at 9:25 AM, Kommisar_K said:

 

Very true. Ever since infantry started going through walls terrain has gotten a little less effective. The balance between 'meaningful unit' and 'meaningful terrain' has been hard to achieve. I personally appreciate flying units actually becoming relevant again, but definitely get your point. 

 

What do you think might work? Maybe a movement penalty for infantry units that do go through? Like - 2" to movement if a model passes through a wall/other terrain feature. Kinda like some of the old crater/woods rules. This way let's infantry maintain that tactical ability while hopefully keeping ruins relevant. Also the - 2" could be narratively explained as everyone lining up to go through a door, window, etc.

How about only being able to pass through doors/hatches, and gaps big enough to fit a model, not through random point in the a solid wall?

 

[gideon stargreave]

3 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Stopped being a creative hobby a while ago imho.

when codexes no longer had hobby sections it stopped being a creative game  in GW’s eyes, at least imho

Sorry but this is clearly untrue. They had an article on Wacom just last week about converting cogforts. GW is more supportive of non-creative hobbyists, but it’s clear they still value creativity. They could do more to help people be creative (conversion guides in codices like you point out) but I think you’re being hyperbolic 

[TheMawr]

4 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Stopped being a creative hobby a while ago imho.

when codexes no longer had hobby sections it stopped being a creative game  in GW’s eyes, at least imho

 

 

Thats like saying GW doesnt care about sales or money anymore since the 90s.. because they stopped including catalogue pages in codexes they used to do. There is a lot more than just codexes.

 

 

Hobby sections went the same places as those catalogue pages -> mostly online. ( and white dwarf like always.)  The community site has hobby related features with almost every mainstudio release, though these are more showcases ofcourse, painting guides are a regular feature on their youtube... a medium far more suited for it than a codex. ( same way in this era a webstore > a catalogue inside the codex.) and warhammer plus has a lot of hobby related focus, but I never subcribed so I dont know the details apart from that they announce the features on wednesdays.

Its not as many youtube painting guides as they used to a couple of years ago, but instead of that there is a lot more focus on presenting the personal projects of fans/staff. So the hobbyside is presented a bit less paint-by-numbers and more personalised and inspirational.

 

All of these things release far more regular content than codexes did back in the rosetinted glasses days. 

 

 

Its especially funny as this is regarding pre-painted terrain

 

Terrain GW offered in those nostalgic days ?

 

prepainted terrain was already a thing ( prepainted cardboard even..so even less hobbyworthy (but I liked them alot) )

 

But, that was a convenient thing for those who wanted to focus on the miniatures.. and it didnt mean that GW ignored the hobbyside of terrain making at all, only some of their studioshots featured the cardboard terrain.

So this whole prepainted terrain thing is just another back-to-the-old-days thing, just slightly more advanced and fitting with the modern time.

 

 

Opinionwise, I dont really like the new terrain or the layouts, but thats another story and not something I want or need to empower by trying to make it a "fact".
But the example layouts in those days, the ones they clearly balanced the game on, I didnt like either ( the flat green board with 2 hills and a building in the middle and a handful of trees ), so its nothing new.

 

I like full boards of terrain ( I think I also had this one from the cardboard era, but I thought it was for necromunda not 40k )

 

And if I make a board again ( Im really itching to combine Necromunda ashwaste terrain and the weird warcry trees into something strange and alien ), I will probably deviate from the adviced, as is usual, and if it doesnt work out with someone's army ( I only know infantry focused players right now so that shouldnt become issues.) .. houseruling things is part of the fun.

 

Im already thinking of for tanks or knights to have some crew jumping out of the vehicle mechanism to include to have those objectives inside or on top of buildings covered. ( ok for knights.. they dont have crew, but perhaps they drop some oddball servitors from orbit once they come across an objective they cannot control... a fun project for many bits I have that dont fit other projects.)

This too was par-for-the-course in those days by the way, at least in my experience.

 

 

 

 

[HeadlessCross]

3 hours ago, gideon stargreave said:

Sorry but this is clearly untrue. They had an article on Wacom just last week about converting cogforts. GW is more supportive of non-creative hobbyists, but it’s clear they still value creativity. They could do more to help people be creative (conversion guides in codices like you point out) but I think you’re being hyperbolic 

I saw the Cogfort not too long ago. It deserves a proper Ork treatment. 

[ZeroWolf]

6 hours ago, TheMawr said:

 

Thats like saying GW doesnt care about sales or money anymore since the 90s.. because they stopped including catalogue pages in codexes they used to do. There is a lot more than just codexes.

 

 

Hobby sections went the same places as those catalogue pages -> mostly online. ( and white dwarf like always.)  The community site has hobby related features with almost every mainstudio release, though these are more showcases ofcourse, painting guides are a regular feature on their youtube... a medium far more suited for it than a codex. ( same way in this era a webstore > a catalogue inside the codex.) and warhammer plus has a lot of hobby related focus, but I never subcribed so I dont know the details apart from that they announce the features on wednesdays.

Its not as many youtube painting guides as they used to a couple of years ago, but instead of that there is a lot more focus on presenting the personal projects of fans/staff. So the hobbyside is presented a bit less paint-by-numbers and more personalised and inspirational.

 

All of these things release far more regular content than codexes did back in the rosetinted glasses days. 

 

 

Its especially funny as this is regarding pre-painted terrain

 

Terrain GW offered in those nostalgic days ?

 

prepainted terrain was already a thing ( prepainted cardboard even..so even less hobbyworthy (but I liked them alot) )

 

But, that was a convenient thing for those who wanted to focus on the miniatures.. and it didnt mean that GW ignored the hobbyside of terrain making at all, only some of their studioshots featured the cardboard terrain.

So this whole prepainted terrain thing is just another back-to-the-old-days thing, just slightly more advanced and fitting with the modern time.

 

 

Opinionwise, I dont really like the new terrain or the layouts, but thats another story and not something I want or need to empower by trying to make it a "fact".
But the example layouts in those days, the ones they clearly balanced the game on, I didnt like either ( the flat green board with 2 hills and a building in the middle and a handful of trees ), so its nothing new.

 

I like full boards of terrain ( I think I also had this one from the cardboard era, but I thought it was for necromunda not 40k )

 

And if I make a board again ( Im really itching to combine Necromunda ashwaste terrain and the weird warcry trees into something strange and alien ), I will probably deviate from the adviced, as is usual, and if it doesnt work out with someone's army ( I only know infantry focused players right now so that shouldnt become issues.) .. houseruling things is part of the fun.

 

Im already thinking of for tanks or knights to have some crew jumping out of the vehicle mechanism to include to have those objectives inside or on top of buildings covered. ( ok for knights.. they dont have crew, but perhaps they drop some oddball servitors from orbit once they come across an objective they cannot control... a fun project for many bits I have that dont fit other projects.)

This too was par-for-the-course in those days by the way, at least in my experience.

 

 

 

 

Regarding the 2nd cardboard terrain you mentioned, it was originally a Necromunda release (started off as pack in terrain iIRC before getting a stand alone release before being reboxed under the guise of 40k 3rd edition.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

17 hours ago, gideon stargreave said:

Sorry but this is clearly untrue. They had an article on Wacom just last week about converting cogforts. GW is more supportive of non-creative hobbyists, but it’s clear they still value creativity. They could do more to help people be creative (conversion guides in codices like you point out) but I think you’re being hyperbolic 

I’m sorry, but converting cogforts with GW kits doesn’t show they’re supporting creativity, it shows they’re trying to convince you to buy a $200 model or something, AND other kits to glue on to.

 

when was the last time they showed a scratch built anything like the terrain in some of the codexes? 

 

15 hours ago, TheMawr said:

 

Thats like saying GW doesnt care about sales or money anymore since the 90s.. because they stopped including catalogue pages in codexes they used to do. There is a lot more than just codexes.

 

 

Hobby sections went the same places as those catalogue pages -> mostly online. ( and white dwarf like always.)  The community site has hobby related features with almost every mainstudio release, though these are more showcases ofcourse, painting guides are a regular feature on their youtube... a medium far more suited for it than a codex. ( same way in this era a webstore > a catalogue inside the codex.) and warhammer plus has a lot of hobby related focus, but I never subcribed so I dont know the details apart from that they announce the features on wednesdays.

Its not as many youtube painting guides as they used to a couple of years ago, but instead of that there is a lot more focus on presenting the personal projects of fans/staff. So the hobbyside is presented a bit less paint-by-numbers and more personalised and inspirational.

 

All of these things release far more regular content than codexes did back in the rosetinted glasses days. 

 

 

Its especially funny as this is regarding pre-painted terrain

 

Terrain GW offered in those nostalgic days ?

 

prepainted terrain was already a thing ( prepainted cardboard even..so even less hobbyworthy (but I liked them alot) )

 

But, that was a convenient thing for those who wanted to focus on the miniatures.. and it didnt mean that GW ignored the hobbyside of terrain making at all, only some of their studioshots featured the cardboard terrain.

So this whole prepainted terrain thing is just another back-to-the-old-days thing, just slightly more advanced and fitting with the modern time.

 

 

Opinionwise, I dont really like the new terrain or the layouts, but thats another story and not something I want or need to empower by trying to make it a "fact".
But the example layouts in those days, the ones they clearly balanced the game on, I didnt like either ( the flat green board with 2 hills and a building in the middle and a handful of trees ), so its nothing new.

 

I like full boards of terrain ( I think I also had this one from the cardboard era, but I thought it was for necromunda not 40k )

 

And if I make a board again ( Im really itching to combine Necromunda ashwaste terrain and the weird warcry trees into something strange and alien ), I will probably deviate from the adviced, as is usual, and if it doesnt work out with someone's army ( I only know infantry focused players right now so that shouldnt become issues.) .. houseruling things is part of the fun.

 

Im already thinking of for tanks or knights to have some crew jumping out of the vehicle mechanism to include to have those objectives inside or on top of buildings covered. ( ok for knights.. they dont have crew, but perhaps they drop some oddball servitors from orbit once they come across an objective they cannot control... a fun project for many bits I have that dont fit other projects.)

This too was par-for-the-course in those days by the way, at least in my experience.

 

 

 

 

So new people to the hobby are supposed to see that because they’re automatically invested enough to buy white dwarf or check warcom all the time to see a once a year article meant to sell $280+ of kits?

 

when was the last time they had an article showing people how to scratch build terrain? 

I guess they technically brought back vehicle creation rules for a niche side game which is cool, but not particularly useful to the mainline game.

 

3rd edition they literally had a ‘how to make terrain’ book that taught people how to make scratch made terrain, that was advertised in the 3rd edition marine codex, showing premade terrain as an option, and just below that examples of scratch built terrain.

[irlLordy]

Mentioned in the preview article this week is that there should be a battle report going up on Warhammer Plus featuring the contents of the Armageddon box. This is a free battle report, so no subscription required. Not sure if it will also be up on youtube at some stage.

[Vassakov]

5 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

I’m sorry, but converting cogforts with GW kits doesn’t show they’re supporting creativity, it shows they’re trying to convince you to buy a $200 model or something, AND other kits to glue on to.

 

when was the last time they showed a scratch built anything like the terrain in some of the codexes? 

 

So new people to the hobby are supposed to see that because they’re automatically invested enough to buy white dwarf or check warcom all the time to see a once a year article meant to sell $280+ of kits?

 

when was the last time they had an article showing people how to scratch build terrain? 

I guess they technically brought back vehicle creation rules for a niche side game which is cool, but not particularly useful to the mainline game.

 

3rd edition they literally had a ‘how to make terrain’ book that taught people how to make scratch made terrain, that was advertised in the 3rd edition marine codex, showing premade terrain as an option, and just below that examples of scratch built terrain.

 

Yes, the company based around selling you model kits wants to show you their model kits. Next on the 10pm news, water is wet and the Pope is Catholic. 

 

Being slightly less facetious... back in 3rd Ed the internet was in its infancy and they didn't really sell their own hard plastic terrain. It certainly predated something like "Cities of Death" in... god, was that 20 years ago? And subsequent to that, a lot of their "build a board" has focused on what they sell - there might be the occasional "this is how we made this cool thing" but mostly it was just "here's how to combine Cities of Death X with new release Y." 

And then obviously they've added and changed the types and ranges of terrain they sell, but since then its mostly been their stuff front and centre. The existence of that book wasn't (entirely) out of a deep seated love of building terrain, but instead a recognition of a gap in their product line - and something to sell you.

 

And why not do it now? Well, because the internet exists and why on earth would GW (or any company) spend time, effort and resources replicating what the hobby community has already done a thousand times over, in such a way that would detract from sales of their own product? Like, I'm sorry that GW is a business... but it always has been. 

[01RTB01]

I'm assuming we'll see Armageddon a week today on the preview.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

1 hour ago, Vassakov said:

 

Yes, the company based around selling you model kits wants to show you their model kits. Next on the 10pm news, water is wet and the Pope is Catholic. 

 

Being slightly less facetious... back in 3rd Ed the internet was in its infancy and they didn't really sell their own hard plastic terrain. It certainly predated something like "Cities of Death" in... god, was that 20 years ago? And subsequent to that, a lot of their "build a board" has focused on what they sell - there might be the occasional "this is how we made this cool thing" but mostly it was just "here's how to combine Cities of Death X with new release Y." 

And then obviously they've added and changed the types and ranges of terrain they sell, but since then its mostly been their stuff front and centre. The existence of that book wasn't (entirely) out of a deep seated love of building terrain, but instead a recognition of a gap in their product line - and something to sell you.

 

And why not do it now? Well, because the internet exists and why on earth would GW (or any company) spend time, effort and resources replicating what the hobby community has already done a thousand times over, in such a way that would detract from sales of their own product? Like, I'm sorry that GW is a business... but it always has been. 

What does the internet have to do with any of this?

[Cactus]

So much similar / equally useful content is available online. It's not in GW's interest to compete in the space of 'how to build ruins from cereal boxes' guides. Their offering is unlikely to be the best and it only drives sales in a very indirect way.

 

How to make your own terrain was a valuable product for GW to provide when there weren't many other sources and there wasn't an enormous range of card/MDF/resin/plastic terrain on the market. It's simply a different landscape now.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

5 hours ago, Cactus said:

So much similar / equally useful content is available online. It's not in GW's interest to compete in the space of 'how to build ruins from cereal boxes' guides. Their offering is unlikely to be the best and it only drives sales in a very indirect way.

 

How to make your own terrain was a valuable product for GW to provide when there weren't many other sources and there wasn't an enormous range of card/MDF/resin/plastic terrain on the market. It's simply a different landscape now.

They don’t promote it at all. Haven’t seen any reference even to “you can build your own terrain!”

 

However they still have videos on how to paint models, despite countless videos on how to paint those same models, so why can’t they also compete in custom built terrain?

[Antarius]

At the risk of sounding slightly wishy-washy, I think both points of view can be true to a degree.
 

- GW has put a lot less emphasis on the more free-form creativity aspects of the hobby for the last X years (I couldn't say exactly how many, but I'd guess we're talking close to 20 - it's not exactly a new development), because they want to sell their own stuff instead. Whether or not you think that's a problem for the overall creativity of the hobby, or that they should be doing more to promote creativity is subjective.

 

- GW still does put emphasis on a lot of the creative aspects of the hobby, such as painting, converting and yes, building terrain. They clearly devote resources to produce articles, videos etc. and it's way more than once a year, so they do in fact still promote this as a creative hobby.
Now, they obviously do so to sell you a product, but they always wanted to do that, of course.

As for the internet, I think it's highly relevant. If you started out in the early-mid nineties like I did, you simply didn't have access to all this knowledge about both the creative aspects of the hobby and the rules/game side of things. You learned things in persone or from printed media (hell, I remember being blown away when I was introduced to drybrushing  ). So articles in White Dwarf or a book like "How To Make Wargames Terrain" were both a lot more essential and something you would actually buy (as indeed I did). Today, even if you don't go outside the GW bubble, I'd guess a lot of people are more likely to turn to their painting videos etc. for these tips and tricks.
tl;dr: the media landscape has changed, so that obviously changes how a company communicates, what they do to drive sales and what products make sense for them to produce and sell.

Edited May 25 by Antarius

[Evil Eye]

How to Make Wargames Terrain is one of my favourite books GW has ever published. I won't lie, a more "advanced" version aimed at more skilled/ambitious hobbyists who want to take their tables to the next level would be more than welcome; even if it still focused predominantly on using existing GW kits, it'd be nice to see them show how to completely transform the parts into something new, along with detailing tips and tricks.

 

I do agree the advent of the internet and GW's increase in terrain kits is a limiting factor, but I also think there's still room for such a book.

[Domhnall]

1 hour ago, Evil Eye said:

How to Make Wargames Terrain is one of my favourite books GW has ever published. I won't lie, a more "advanced" version aimed at more skilled/ambitious hobbyists who want to take their tables to the next level would be more than welcome; even if it still focused predominantly on using existing GW kits, it'd be nice to see them show how to completely transform the parts into something new, along with detailing tips and tricks.

 

I do agree the advent of the internet and GW's increase in terrain kits is a limiting factor, but I also think there's still room for such a book.

 

That was a very good book. As you say though, the internet has pretty much done a kibosh on that kind of thing for them. 
If they did release a nice book about advanced terrain building, you can bet there will be a queue out the door of people lining up to say "I can just get that off the internet for free" 

They're not entirely wrong, but it does kind of put a dampener of ever having something like that released by GW. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I used the book as an example.

it doesn’t have to be a literal book.

 

it could be a video series on their YT channel, it could be part of warhammer+, it could be a dedicated hobby tab/section on warcom, or even just a small tiny section in a codex highlighting how you could make awesome custom terrain using their kits AND other household items etc.

 

someone please show me the last time GW produced any thing about terrain that wasn’t just a sales pitch for the newest terrain kit.

Edited May 25 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Matcap86]

2 hours ago, Evil Eye said:

How to Make Wargames Terrain is one of my favourite books GW has ever published. I won't lie, a more "advanced" version aimed at more skilled/ambitious hobbyists who want to take their tables to the next level would be more than welcome; even if it still focused predominantly on using existing GW kits, it'd be nice to see them show how to completely transform the parts into something new, along with detailing tips and tricks.

 

I do agree the advent of the internet and GW's increase in terrain kits is a limiting factor, but I also think there's still room for such a book.

 

See if you can't pick up the Imperial armour model masterclass books by Forgeworld. Those are exactly that. And not toooo long ago.

[Evil Eye]

3 hours ago, Matcap86 said:

 

See if you can't pick up the Imperial armour model masterclass books by Forgeworld. Those are exactly that. And not toooo long ago.

I'll keep my eye out! Need a few old IA books, notably volumes 1 and 2 (I have a PDF of 2 but I want my tomes!).

 

I do agree that the internet has somewhat reduced the demand for such a book, however I do feel there is still a market for it. Speaking purely for myself I very much enjoy having books, both for the permanent/physical element (can't lose them to a hard drive failure or hosting service going bankrupt) and just for the joy of leafing through a tangible volume.

[Malakithe]

Watching the new edition game on twitch. Is Ceramite Sentinals worth all 3 detachment points? Orks are using More Dakka and Dread Mob combo.

[HeadlessCross]

11 minutes ago, Malakithe said:

Watching the new edition game on twitch. Is Ceramite Sentinals worth all 3 detachment points? Orks are using More Dakka and Dread Mob combo.

Yeah. Because of the way the detachment rule is worded and with cover being prevalent, the detachment rule might as well just read "You reroll all 1's to hit and wound". While it may not be just straight up better than Gladius and the Ultramarine version, it's a degenerate rule that shouldn't exist. The Strats and Enhancements are just fine, but you almost don't need those when you reroll half your misses anyway. 

[Petitioner's City]

20 hours ago, Evil Eye said:

How to Make Wargames Terrain is one of my favourite books GW has ever published. I won't lie, a more "advanced" version aimed at more skilled/ambitious hobbyists who want to take their tables to the next level would be more than welcome; even if it still focused predominantly on using existing GW kits, it'd be nice to see them show how to completely transform the parts into something new, along with detailing tips and tricks.

 

I do agree the advent of the internet and GW's increase in terrain kits is a limiting factor, but I also think there's still room for such a book.

 

Mel the terrain tutor's book was very good - and exactly that itch!

[Focslain]

23 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

someone please show me the last time GW produced any thing about terrain that wasn’t just a sales pitch for the newest terrain kit.

 

Back in January of this year they did a showcase of what you could do with the Necromunda terrian. Not exactly new kits, but still mostly their own.

 

At lesast that was a quick search on warcom. Not sure on the WH+ eps yet. 

[StraightSilver]

I watched the live stream of the first 11th Edition game on the official Warhammer YouTube.

I have to admit, the pre-painted scenery looked really good, especially on the card bases. It will make getting a table ready quickly really easy (but maybe not cheaply).

 

However, using the same terrain in slightly different positions on a perfectly flat board left me feeling sad. It looks awful, and it just looks like everything I (personally) hate about ITC type games (that's my opinion though).

It looks like the days of beautiful, narrative tables, are over if you want to play the official GW Missions. I know some people like that style of game, but I do not.

I will still be getting the new terrain, but I don't think I will be playing the core missions.

[DemonGSides]

3 hours ago, StraightSilver said:

I watched the live stream of the first 11th Edition game on the official Warhammer YouTube.

I have to admit, the pre-painted scenery looked really good, especially on the card bases. It will make getting a table ready quickly really easy (but maybe not cheaply).

 

However, using the same terrain in slightly different positions on a perfectly flat board left me feeling sad. It looks awful, and it just looks like everything I (personally) hate about ITC type games (that's my opinion though).

It looks like the days of beautiful, narrative tables, are over if you want to play the official GW Missions. I know some people like that style of game, but I do not.

I will still be getting the new terrain, but I don't think I will be playing the core missions.

 

It's only over if you want it to be. Both 10th and 11th will work fine with more dense boards.

 

GW will not come to your house and jail your models if you don't play the exact way they show you in intro videos. Most of my 10th games were on non standard tables and it's my most played  editions (army building being my biggest gripe) and I've been around since end of 6th early 7th.

 

Not requiring daddy GW to tell you how to play your game will free you. Let go of the need for someone to tell you what to do and be adventurous. Adapt the crusade stuff to a one off game and have fun. These are toys and games, afterall. Having fun is the point, not slavishly following optional rules. 

[happyslugger]

Do people really only play the way GW says they can, outside of tournament scenes?

 

I am not a comp player so I play with my little group as we see fit.