6th edition veracity

[UltramarineFan]

A GW manager I know said today that they received an email from GW HQ saying that it's a fake. So either GW are trying to cover up their mistake by lying to us to make us think it's fake or the official line from them is true. The latter seems more likely to me.

[gcsmith]

Seems likely its fake then
tho would be funny if real and now they have to say its fake to keep new line cinema happy and thus have to rewrite the edition.

[DrLove42]

I hope its real. I really do. It just seems like a great set of rules to play with.

If it is a fake then someone out there needs toget out and get laid. And i mean seriously badly. The amount of effort into writting a 100page plus document, plus the codex faq's and then leaving it for 9 months before it got out? Thats a seriously sad individual or group of individuals if its just for a troll.

[Defenestratus]

If its real and it got out then they'd be in deep trouble with New Line Cinema according whats been stated previously.

Which would give them every motivation possible to claim its a fake.

[gcsmith]

If they said it was fake and released it, NLC would know and could break the hobbit deal. Therefore its likey to be either fake or rewritten, or one guy will be sued for his entire future earnings for ruining this deal

[Lokken]

isn't there already a thread abouth 6th edition rumours?

[The Twilight Fade]

isn't there already a thread abouth 6th edition rumours?

There is but it was about a different "leak" and went on for many, many pages

This document has me intrigued, i'm still at work and reading about this makes me want to get home and find it.

Thank the lord BoLS works in my work place, may go insane otherwise!

[Entropic]

I'd be disappointed if this was fake, or if they rewrote because of the leak. It really is a great set of rules. Not perfect, but it's a big improvement over 5th, and there's enough time between last May and next July for them to fix up it's blemishes.

[wittdooley]

isn't there already a thread abouth 6th edition rumours?

Hey, thanks for the useful contribution to the discussion!

Agreed with Doc. If this is fake, then whomever is responsible for it really needs to get some ***. But then, GW should probably also look into contracting them as a consultant. I agree the rules appear to be pretty solid. Seems like it should make for a very different game with some really fun new tactical decisions to make.

[Bigred]

This story keeps on getting stickier by the hour...

Mercer at Imperius Dominatus (http://www.imperiusdominatus.com/2012/01/proof-that-leaked-6th-rules-are-fake.html) posted the following last night:


It was done on a home edition of the program that GW use the professional version of, this version was 1.5 vs the 1.6 that GW use for all their other (older) published files. The files origin is Glasgow not Lenton unlike all their published files and the file author is named Robert Smithe, not GWPLC like all their other published files.

Now that is a lot of insider information there, such as exactly what software and versions of it GW internally uses. The problem is that the metadata embedded in the leaked files doesn't support any of those assertions. Also the version numbers listed make no sense compared to current versions of Acrobat, Indesign, Pagemaker, or QuarkExpress (the professional layout software packages for document creation).

Another poster said that the "Robert Smithe" listed is a layout employee in Lenton. Finally, the original file download links that appeared all over the place have been taken down over the last 24 hours.

GW has never lifted a finger whatsoever in the past when hoaxes appeared online (such as the fake Blood Angel codex).

Something very fishy is going on.

[Wildeybeast]

Ok, I'll put my twopence in. If it was real, why would it be leaked? Could be a disgruntled employee, but they obviously risk litigation hell, plus they are very unlikely to ever work in games design again as what company will trust them? It could be an 'official leak' but as already pointed out, that goes against the terms of the new line deal which is a massive risk so there would need to be a big gain. Granted it's generated plenty of internet buzz, but is releasing such a massive leak really necessary to do that? There was already plenty of chatter, its not like the 6th ed piranha pool needed a whole cow chucking in to create some excitement. So that leads me to the idea that it might be fake. But I'd like to think that no one has that much time on their hands, so I'm really not sure. Interestingly though, whoever 'leaked' this has got exactly the reaction they are looking for.

[Wildeybeast]

This story keeps on getting stickier by the hour...

Mercer at Imperius Dominatus (http://www.imperiusdominatus.com/2012/01/proof-that-leaked-6th-rules-are-fake.html) posted the following last night:



Now that is a lot of insider information there, such as exactly what software and versions of it GW internally uses. The problem is that the metadata embedded in the leaked files doesn't support any of those assertions.

Another poster said that the "Robert Smithe" listed is a layout employee in Lenton. Finally, the original file download links that appeared all over the place have been taken down over the last 24 hours.

GW has never lifted a finger whatsoever in the past when hoaxes appeared online (such as the fake Blood Angel codex).

Something very fishy is going on.

I'd be willing to place a hefty wager on there being no such person as Robert Smithe. Smithe is an extremely rare surname and there is no such person on the electoral roll anywhere in the UK, never mind Lenton. Could be they aren't registered, but this looks like total bull.

[skarzog]

The name Alan Smithe is used as a pseudonym by film directors who don't want their name attached to a dud. Just throwing that out there.

[LoreDraconis]

It amuses me that the supposed reason for their new lock-down policy is for a part of the GW line that hardly anyone gives a crap about, and for a story that's been around for decades. Are they seriously concerned about spoiling the Hobbit? :confused:

GW's policy decisions baffle me, but the way they are it wouldnt surprise me if they would deny it's veracity to save face. It could be old enough that it doesn't matter anyway, but I'd say that there are so many subtleties that make it seem feasible, that it's very likely a real GW doc from some phase of prototyping.

How much of it will survive the final draft is anyone's guess though, could be totally changed at this point.

Interesting point, wasnt there some rift about the redesign of 6th edition, with disagreement about how far the changes were pushing the product? Perhpas this was the draft that was deemed too excessively different, and the person responsible for writing it decided to let it free into the world to prove a point or see how the fan-base took it. Pure conjecture on my part though.

[UltramarineFan]

But I'd like to think that no one has that much time on their hands, so I'm really not sure.

Yeh I'm not that idealistic. I'm pretty sure some people have that much time on their hands.

[Lord Azaghul]

I'd be disappointed if this was fake, or if they rewrote because of the leak. It really is a great set of rules. Not perfect, but it's a big improvement over 5th, and there's enough time between last May and next July for them to fix up it's blemishes.

I agree - its probably the most interesting rule set for GW models I've seen in years...

May I should just print it out and play with it :P

[Lord Azaghul]

Ok, I'll put my twopence in. If it was real, why would it be leaked? .

A very simply reason.

Its not a 'leak' its an intentional slip.

W/O rumors interest would diminish.

At the very least this 'leak' or 'fake' has gotten people excited and interest in 6th ed.

[Wildcard]

Oh poor Alan, how much does a man have to f*** up to be left in the history as a "Name to be said when s**t hits the fan" :D

And now back to the point.. Lots of the rules in the leaked material correlates with the rumours we've been hearing for a long time now.. Lots of the rule changes (to my understanding) are similar, or try to achieve the same pace and feeling that the other games do, especially the biggest and toughest competitors GW has.. (And those parts of the rules thats being completely overhauled are the ones that the competitors have gotten greatest thanks)..

So, that could be a very elaborate 'wishlist', but for someone to pick out the rumors on the lenght of over a half a year plus to go through the trouble of putting them up into a games-workshop-like layout kinda makes me doubt.

[yrdetraxe]

So either GW are trying to cover up their mistake by lying to us to make us think it's fake
That's exactly what I would do in such a Situation. :D

Intentional slip or leak, I don't care. I just know that I like what I'm reading and that I think it is real.
Imo easily THE best ruleset for 40k in Ages.

If that is correct I'll be one happy-as-hell wargamer.

[Wildeybeast]

A very simply reason.

Its not a 'leak' its an intentional slip.

W/O rumors interest would diminish.

At the very least this 'leak' or 'fake' has gotten people excited and interest in 6th ed.

Pretty sure I addressed that when I said:
"It could be an 'official leak' but as already pointed out, that goes against the terms of the new line deal which is a massive risk so there would need to be a big gain. Granted it's generated plenty of internet buzz, but is releasing such a massive leak really necessary to do that? There was already plenty of chatter, its not like the 6th ed piranha pool needed a whole cow chucking in to create some excitement........Interestingly though, whoever 'leaked' this has got exactly the reaction they are looking for. "

[Lord Azaghul]

Pretty sure I addressed that when I said:r. "

I reiterate: I did say 'A very simple reason'

You rambled ;)

Just clarifying the point for you - no need to over think it! :p

[Chris Copeland]

My two cents: this is an intentional leak by GW. GW gets a few things out of it: they generate buzz ahead of the release, getting the faithful jazzed up. Also, they get the community at large to playtest the rules... the community at large is probably better at "breaking" the system than their small community of playtesters is... thousands of us might spot deficiencies that the 40 or so of them might miss. They get both benefits behind the full cover of deniability. One more thing: this month's White Dwarf editorial by Jervis touches on the fact that game designers aren't as good at pushing the rules to the limit; ultra-competitive gamers do that... heck, the editorial more than touches on that point... that is the point of the editorial! It seems nicely timed to coincide with this possible leak. A quick skim of the rules look pretty good to me (though I'd still like to see True Line of Sight go away).

Cheers! Cope

PS One last thing: GW could do this leak with New Line's knowledge... they could have worked this out with NLC... I don't see that as an issue...

[wittdooley]

That's exactly what I would do in such a Situation. :D

Intentional slip or leak, I don't care. I just know that I like what I'm reading and that I think it is real.
Imo easily THE best ruleset for 40k in Ages.

If that is correct I'll be one happy-as-hell wargamer.

No no no, the Situation would definitely fist pump:

http://larrybrownsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/thesituation-fist-pump.jpg

[Wildeybeast]

I reiterate: I did say 'A very simple reason'

You rambled ;)

Just clarifying the point for you - no need to over think it! :p

Ah I see, you took what I said and made it so stupid people could understand it. That's where I've been going wrong with this whole forum posting malarkey- assuming internet users had brains. Glad you were on hand to clarify to my otherwise incomprehensible post. Perhaps I should keep you on a retainer, I could tell you what I want to say and then you could just post for me. :rolleyes:

[Wildeybeast]

Also, they get the community at large to playtest the rules... the community at large is probably better at "breaking" the system than their small community of playtesters is... thousands of us might spot deficiencies that the 40 or so of them might miss.

One problem with this idea. The game is due out in around 6 months, give or take and that doesn't give them a lot of room to fix any major errors, given that it needs writing up into a proper book, printing and such like. They will also now be writing codexes on the basis of that and so won't be expecting to make major changes. Also if they wanted public playtesters, it would be far more efficient to actually hire some, rather than leak half finished rules and trawl internet forums for the odd grain of useful feedback amongst the opinionated rubbish most of us post. If it has been deliberately leaked, its to generate hype, nothing more. I wouldn't put it past GW to leak rules they had no intention of ever including in a game, just to generate chatter.

[harveydent]

there's no way that thing could have been A) an old version or B) a final version. it was too complicated and horribly designed. i've worked as a designer, and that book was the type of convoluted junk that playtesters would come up with and try and get me to work with.

[Schnitzel]

Has any one thought that possibly the "keeping a lid on things" deal with New Line might actually be a big fabrication on GW's part to pave the way for an intentional leak like this? Has New Line made any official statements about this deal with GW?

[eldargal]

New Line wouldn't give a damn about a 40k or WFB leak so long as their Hobbit stuff remains under lock and key.

I'm still inclined to assume it is a hoax as I can't see GW making such huge changes to their flagship system.

[daboarder]

not much to go on. But a mate of mine who is also mates with the regular reliable rumour guys (oh god what a mouthful) reckons that this is likely the real deal.

personally....I don't care, me and a couple of mates are already planning a few games using the rules set and if it plays well enough who cares if its "fake", its still vastly superior to ANOTHER game of parking lot at this point.

[Big Jim]

I don't get why someone would write such a good set of rules and not take the credit for them, only to troll the 40k community. Seriously the thought of that is insane to me.

[DrLove42]

Conspiracy Theory time!

A few posts ago people mentioned that it seem possible that the rules were "leaked" to see how people reacted and what people could do with them.

In this months WD, Jervis' Standard Bearer article is all about how game developers suck at playing games, and that real people are much better at testing rules and coming up with combinations the developers don't think of.

Coincidence? :P

[eldargal]

Probably.:p

[UltramarineFan]

Probably.:p

Yeh, Jervis' ramblings have never meant anything before haha

[Xenith]

I'm still inclined to assume it is a hoax as I can't see GW making such huge changes to their flagship system.

2nd to 3rd ed 40k? 7th-8th edition fantasy?

5th edition codexes have been getting special rules thrown in all over the place, this special rule laden edition would seem the natural evolution of this.

[eldargal]

7th-8th ed WFB occurred because WFB was dying under 7th, 40k is not dying now, it is very strong. 2nd to 3rd occurred to turn what was in many ways a hyrbid RPG/wargame into a pure wargame.

Nothing like that is warranted for the 5th edition ruleset. Hell you could fix most problems like IG parking lots and certain GK builds with an errata upping a few prices, I really don't see it warranting a complete overhaul. Which isn't to say GW won't do it, but I'm highly sceptical until we see something official from GW.

[Denzark]

Since when did GW get 'the little people' to do their play testing en masse? Since when didtheymake quick changes to found flaws?

This being the case how much do you think this 'leak' was so they could change what is wrong?

[daboarder]

If thats the case.... PLEASE give us some standard missions and drop the stratagems, they're fun in supplamental play but they DO NOT belong in pick up games.

[L192837465]

If thats the case.... PLEASE give us some standard missions and drop the stratagems, they're fun in supplamental play but they DO NOT belong in pick up games.

I definitely disagree with this. Right now, the benefit you have of going second is... deploying second. Wow. Good, but whatever. Then, to top it all off, you can screw the other player by stealing the initiative. With the bidding and stratagems idea, you can make sure you get first... for a price. Or you can bait and switch to give the opposing player first turn and yourself stratagems. The ways this influences the first turn are astonishing.

[Beamo]

7th-8th ed WFB occurred because WFB was dying under 7th, 40k is not dying now, it is very strong. 2nd to 3rd occurred to turn what was in many ways a hyrbid RPG/wargame into a pure wargame.

Nothing like that is warranted for the 5th edition ruleset. Hell you could fix most problems like IG parking lots and certain GK builds with an errata upping a few prices, I really don't see it warranting a complete overhaul. Which isn't to say GW won't do it, but I'm highly sceptical until we see something official from GW.

5th isn't dying, but it's somewhat stagnant; I hear all the time (and am guilty of making comments myself) from people that are basically just going through the motions with 5th. A lot of people are tired of the same things over and over, the same army builds, the same one-trick ponies, the same battles. GW is on the verge of releasing a new edition, and if they don't spice it up, they may see a decline in players. In that sense, I do think a more drastic overhaul is necessary, rather than the "cleaning up and adding a few new things" that has been the 3rd-4th-5th progression.

[Defenestratus]

5th isn't dying, but it's somewhat stagnant; I hear all the time (and am guilty of making comments myself) from people that are basically just going through the motions with 5th. A lot of people are tired of the same things over and over, the same army builds, the same one-trick ponies, the same battles. GW is on the verge of releasing a new edition, and if they don't spice it up, they may see a decline in players. In that sense, I do think a more drastic overhaul is necessary, rather than the "cleaning up and adding a few new things" that has been the 3rd-4th-5th progression.

This.

And to say that GW hasn't made drastic changes between editions of the game simply isn't true. They have done it before, and will do it again.

The fact that we are looking at potential set of rules that drastically change the game - but at the same time fits 90% of the existing codex material into the mechanics is something that GW has very recently demonstrated that they're comfortable in doing.

[DrLove42]

See other than the change in the turn order, with shooting and assault its not THAT big a change. A lot of its just rewording and changing the way some things are listed.

The only other big change is the wound allocation and cover system. And the jump back to 4th ed is oviously no bigger jump that 4th ws to 5th

[daboarder]

I definitely disagree with this. Right now, the benefit you have of going second is... deploying second. Wow. Good, but whatever. Then, to top it all off, you can screw the other player by stealing the initiative. With the bidding and stratagems idea, you can make sure you get first... for a price. Or you can bait and switch to give the opposing player first turn and yourself stratagems. The ways this influences the first turn are astonishing.

stratagems are bunk for the sole reason that only ONE player ever gets them and they can be very very powerful.

[Necron_Lord]

stratagems are bunk for the sole reason that only ONE player ever gets them and they can be very very powerful.

The way I read it is that 'Seizing the Initiative' is for the person who won the tactical gambit to go first and he/she can get 25% of his/her bet in Strategem points as well on a '6' or a '4+' for Vect and Imotekh. That 1SP Strategem to make a unit stubborn is huge for Necrons! Having the 20 Warrior blob with Stubborn wouldn't be a problem then, especially if there were Ghost Arks nearby. :D

It is also cool because one can get penalized for being greedy which can add to the fun of the game. If you keep raising the bet one at a time to try to get more points and your opponent bails out leaving you with starting first and conceding the strategem points would be great fun! If you then 'seized the initiative' and got some back, it could also be great fun. Sounds cool to me!

[daboarder]

first turn isn't worth givingour opponent that strong an advantage. it will just devolve into the 1 or to strateagems and then those stratagems determining the game's outcome.

[Necron_Lord]

We'll see what happens this Summer. The mechanics and pricing of strategems might change, but I think that it is fun starting off the game playing chicken and the longer it goes on the higher the stakes. It's a random element but with no dice involved which makes it even better imho.

Another thing I noticed is the 'patch up' compulsory move in the consolidation phase. It basically closes the Wound Allocation loophole. Good riddance!

[Wrath]

stratagems are bunk for the sole reason that only ONE player ever gets them and they can be very very powerful.

Untrue in every way. You can Seize Initiative, some give both sides a bonus, and the standard mission is only one type of mission. Others allow both sides to spend SP.

[daboarder]

seize is on a 6 as always....not even close to being reliable. No one will take the stratagems that help the other guys too. and the "other" mission types are a group free for all and 3000+ point apoc games....yeah AWESOME!! (sarcasm)

edit: to clarrify I think the core rules presented in the document are GREAT, however the mission structure itself needs a serious overhual before in goes into publication.

[Wrath]

seize is on a 6 as always....not even close to being reliable. No one will take the stratagems that help the other guys too. and the "other" mission types are a group free for all and 3000+ point apoc games....yeah AWESOME!! (sarcasm)

edit: to clarrify I think the core rules presented in the document are GREAT, however the mission structure itself needs a serious overhual before in goes into publication.

but it is still possible.

Really? I intend to take fire at will every chance I get. <Tau>

As for the other missions, I see them as samplers. 3 <or is it 4?> very different missions so that the play testers could try very different experiences. I expect more will be in the final product.

There is a build your own mission section also.

[Entropic]

stratagems are bunk for the sole reason that only ONE player ever gets them and they can be very very powerful.

I think the stratagems are one of the weaker points of this rule set. The rumors we got a few months ago mentioned them and said that both players started with 15, and bid out of that. I think that's a better way to do this, and since that rumor batch came after the edit date on this document, it doesn't seem unlikely that that's what'll happen (or similar) in the final rules.

[s_harrington]

***Retracted because it's not worth wasting time on.***

[DrLove42]

I just noticed something else that is wierd

on page 101 (pg 122) (transports) it lists a few examples of transports. It says;


the staunch Rhinos of the Imperium of Man, the lightning fast Raiders of the Dark Eldar, or the caterpillar-like Cerebores of the Tyranid swarm fleets

I'm no expert on Nidz....but when did they have transports? Is GW hiding something from us? What exactly is the contents of that Nid wave in February? Cos if one of them is a Cerebore (added in a WD manner similar to the Night Spinner)....it might be a proving point

[gcsmith]

Yeh Nids seem to basically be zerg now. with the cerabore, Then again zerg are actually tyranids anyway