Out of all the rumors that try and tackle 2012, I would have to say we have a bad mix on our hands. Chaos Legions, Eldar, Tau, Black Templar, Dark Angels, and 6th edition is just too much for one year to handle. So when I see rumors starting to break this down, it just might start becoming a little more logical.


This rumor set starts off with a codex release schedule and then goes into 6th edition rumors. Marik puts a little bit too much into whether or not this source can be trusted, when the information can often speak for itself. "This is a new source take with salt" is all that is needed. Anything longer makes me start to think whether or not the rumor is completely made up, which was my first thought on this one. Instead I am going to attribute this to just lack of confidence and getting to the point. (not meant as an insult Marik if you read this).

via Marik Law
Can't name my source, but this person is a fairly new source to me so please take this with a large helping of salt. I can't even be sure that I can trust this person 100% yet. We'll see if I can trust him if what he said actually comes to pass.

Codex: Necrons (Late October & all November)
Codex: Tau Empire (Early 2012)
6th Edition AND Codex: Legions of Chaos (Mid 2012)
Codex: Eldar (Late 2012)

The following are supposedly to be released in 2013, but I was not given a specific release order. With that said, the following is NOT in order of release.
Codex: Dark Angels (2013)
Codex: Sisters of Battle (2013)

He/She mentioned that there would be a third Codex in 2013, but couldn't give me specifics as to what it was (or was unwilling to at this point in time). He/She mentioned quite a lot of other things as well (6th Edition, narratives, etc), but I don't want to push too much out there when I don't know if I can trust this person yet or not. So again, please take this with a grain (or a spoonful) of salt.
 
 
6th Edition via Marik Law
He/She wouldn't go into specifics, but said that a lot of what had been said online was true, some of it wasn't entirely correct, and some of it was correct but just worded extremely poorly to a point where it made the rule seem more complex than it actually was or made the rule seem somehow different. He/She said he/she had played games using the new rulebook and said that the games didn't take much longer to complete than they already are, if anything they were making a point that some of the more convoluted rules have been streamlined and some of the rules that were "too basic" got changed as well. He/She said that, if anything, the game feels much more strategic with the new rulebook, though he/she did say that some of the rules take "a bit of getting used to."

EDIT: Codex books won't be invalidated by the new rules apparently, but the new rulebook will come with an FAQ section for each already existing army to clarify any confusion or mix-ups in concern to the new rules.

Also, to those worried about the lack of Imperial releases, my source did say that new models and finecast were coming out over the next year for a few Imperial loyalist armies, including Imperial Guard, and that after Eldar we'd be, and I quote, "sick of Imperial releases."

As for why they chose certain armies over armies that needed it more (Dark Angels, Black Templars, etc), it was apparently due to lore/fluff reasons. Chaos is going to be a major threat come 6th Edition to everyone, not just the Imperium, and apparently they (Chaos) will have a front against the Tau Empire, hence why Tau are getting a release before-hand. The perspective/narrative is also changing apparently and it won't be only or heavily Imperial, he/she said that GW wanted to make some of the other "good" races (Tau Empire, Eldar) feel just as important as the Imperium when it comes to lore/fluff and the fate of the galaxy. This was apparently some of the reasoning behind why Tau Empire and Eldar are getting books before armies like Dark Angels and Black Templars.

As for the actual Tau Empire rules, all my source was willing to say was that a good deal of the rumours currently on the internet about Tau are true, but that some were false or just poorly worded, and that he/she couldn't give out or confirm/deny specifics as he/she "might get in trouble." Apparently, some GW staff are allowed to leak certain details to the public via the internet, but are very specific as to what is allowed to be said by who.

23 Comments:

  1. I'm not sure what to make of a new edition with a Space Marines codex over a year and a half away and not on the upcoming rumors. You have to go back to 2nd edition for find a rules update without a near-simultaneous (or at least within a year) Space Marines update. Considering the cash-cow that is Space Marines, I'm wary of any schedule rumors about upcoming codexes that do not include them.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 2013 for Sisters of Battle? 2013? 2-3 more years of using the White Dwarf crapfest?

    FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFine. I can live with that. I guess.

    Either way, looking forward with anxious anticipation towards Tau and Chaos Legions.

    ReplyDelete
  3. pbagosy, shish what a nick, is right, unless the Dark Eldar were such a success as to make the other Xenos races more financially viable. I guess it depends on how well the Necrons sell. The Space Marine cash-cow (love that word) is still being thoroughly milked by the Grey Knights and Blood Angels.

    2012 will be a great year, well, as long as the world doesn't end.

    ReplyDelete
  4. if i have to wait till 2013 for DAs (after the world ended) GW can f.. off

    rumors are not much diffrent from what has been said before by others... but the SoB dex is a dream IMO :D i don´t think they will get any love for the next 4+ years

    since the named dexes are the only not redone dexes it seams logic that they will be next at some point but of the order i am not so conviced.
    We had enough xenon dexes and its time for some SMs now

    But maybe they want to get all the boaring gay-xenon races out of the way before SMs hit with ubber rules in the next ED of 40k :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This makes sense to me somewhat on a financial level. GW needs their sales to go up sooner and later, and what better way than to force bandwagon players to buy all new models! Your Chaos-counts-as-spacewolves-counts-as-greyknights could easily count as Dark Angels or Black Templar, but it's not so easy to pass them off as a counts as Tau army. If they went right into updating Marine Codex's, players would only have to buy a few new models here and there, rather than whole new armies.

    ReplyDelete
  7. @ anon 12:14: Ask any tau player how they hold objectives, and then ask if they need a new codex. Just because space marines (and their 4.2 trillion variants) get all the love and thunderhammers, doesn't mean that other races should get ignored. No matter how much money the space marines bring in, GW will start losing money if they ignore tau, eldar, or 'nids. Though the 'nids have a good codex. I'm not sure how much chaos legions will help me and my Daemons, though at a minimum, they will have to get rid of the "roll to see which half of your army comes in". May my warp-spawned brethren savor the souls of those foolish writers. But yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if SM's get the first codex, though current rumors aren't really indicating dex. And personally, I find Xeno races much more unique and flavorful than the appropriately titled "vanilla" marines.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I would like to throw a couple points out there though in relation to the codex release schedule:

    1/ In 40k there sixteen codices of which there are eight that are Non-Imperium; CSM, Tau, Nids, Daemons, Ork, Eldar, Dark Eldar and Necrons. Five out of these eight comprised of the seven codices that were released in 4th edition. GW cemented their release schedule years ago and forced these past couple of years to be nothing but Imperium Based codices.

    2/ The Sisters of Battle is in no way a codex but rather a quick fix to updating a codex that was released in 2003 two edition ago. This updating eliminates the old Ally system that was basis and unfair to half the armies in the game. It also prevents Imperium Based armies from exploiting their old codex. The White Dwarf update brings them into 5th edition by cleaning up their faith system and balancing out the various units points cost with other 5th edition units (Yes they 12pts which balances them between IG Vets and Space Marines quite nicely). The internet community does an excellent job at smear campaigns and should be hired by various political parties around the world. Have a look around the blog-o-sphere and you will find some very well written and unbiassed reviews on their update.

    GW pumps out six to seven codices a year and they have not had all their codices up to date since 3rd edition. It just takes time to update especially when we have to wait our turn for GW to update their Fantasy line at the same time. Objectively looking at the state of the 40k GW is updating the proper codices in the proper order. If you or any is in doubt have a look through this link:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_(Warhammer_40,000)#5th_Edition

    Here you can find the various codices, their release dates and what edition they were released in. Food for thought.

    ReplyDelete
  9. @ HOTPANDA
    SoBs was purely a WD and old metal-stock off selling attempt and in no way a real dex or done for tournament balance... GW doesn´t care about competativ play.
    Its no wonder SoB players are pissed... they didn´t get ubber rules & they didn´t even get fineREcast of the 90tys models... they were only forced into buying 2 WD full of adds.

    You got to understand GW isn´t putting out new EDs or dexes to balance the game, but to SELL new models & to sell models due to rules.
    The goal is to keep you buying if you want a "good" army.

    They could have just keept it at 2nd ED and just put new stat-cards in WD for new units every once in a while (like they had). And the game would have been intressting and balanced.

    The only reason a 6th is comeing so quik is to drive sales. Old lists wont work and they hype up the hobby again, driveing sales.

    ps. youre link suggest BTs next :)

    ReplyDelete
  10. @snailking
    no offence but tau and demones have never been the best supportet armys just like crons, DE, SoB & Nids
    from a finaciall POV its best to play Chamelion Marines... or at least one of these armys SM, CSM, ELDAR or Orks. And stick to mainlly plastik kits.

    Yes other armys are being played too and people have a right to a somewhat comp dex... but havein played for 15 years i can tell you its not going to happen so frequentlly for these dexes.
    With 6th a lot of dexes will be bad.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "some of it wasn't entirely correct, and some of it was correct but just worded extremely poorly to a point where it made the rule seem more complex than it actually was or made the rule seem somehow different. He/She said he/she had played games using the new rulebook and said that the games didn't take much longer to complete than they already are, if anything they were making a point that some of the more convoluted rules have been streamlined and some of the rules that were "too basic" got changed as well. He/She said that, if anything, the game feels much more strategic with the new rulebook, though he/she did say that some of the rules take "a bit of getting used to."

    Le sigh. While I personally enjoy more depth/detail...I can see how this will negatively affect the tourney scene, particularly the bit about "taking a little longer than now". I lol'd at that. When a 2K game takes 2-2:15hrs to complete (and that's going fast) adding more to it to make a standard 2K game take upwards of 3hrs is...annoying.

    But hey, as long as they add flyers in the main rules and return Valkyries/Vendettas to flyer status, I'll be happy! 4X Valkyries, 3X Vendettas, and 2X Vultures in my IA:8 Elysian list means tons of flyer love :)

    ReplyDelete
  12. I, for one, hope that 6th edition is exactly as the original rumors supposed. I really want to have more tactical options for my units besides "move, shoot, assault". The game is supposed to be much more tactical and I hope that these new rumors will simply make more sense as well.

    PLEASE GW, let's make this edition ROCK!

    ReplyDelete
  13. @ roland
    i agree games are long enough as is... you hardly have time to play if youre working, wich you have to caus this is turning into money hammer.
    I hope they make the rules less and simpler and also easier to lern

    i think flyers as in the Apoc rules are to strong for normal sized games with the low amount of longrange weapons most armys have... 24" movment is enough 36" or more is just for apoc... were you have units everywere to still shoot at those flyers
    besides do you realy want to play with the MUST start in reserv rules?
    for valkuries those rules might be good for stormraven out of wich you want to assault they are bad caus they limit youre options IMO

    ReplyDelete
  14. @ whitestar333
    you want to play 2nd ED?
    you won´t have more options you will just have more BS... caus youre oponent has more options too.
    You will need tons of markers and the game will take twice the amount to play or you play with less points in wich case one bad roll or 1 op IC makes the game.

    i really don´t want to have 10 pages of rules for every unit-typ again
    and i don´t want to argue about rules for ages during a game, just to play 4 houres of tactical coldwar

    ReplyDelete
  15. @HOTPanda: Shill around often? The WD SoB crapdex was just that. Crap. Simplified the way to roll to trigger faith? Cool. Turned faith points into a turn by turn pool? Kinda cool, kinda not, so about even. Made AoF only useful during the SoB turn? Definitely not cool. Gave unit specific AoF? Not only uncool, but stupid. Stuck with selling overpriced metal that cost 3x plastic armies do despite having the SoB sprue on hand? Serious beardy garbage.

    Big battle report? A rigged playing field with a half arse 'Nid list and the SoB only barely won. Real good for a new codex.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Did anyone notice that in the WDs leading up to the SoB Battle Report, they kept saying it will be SoB vs Orks, then in the WD with the first rules they said SoB vs Orks in the middle of the magazine and then SoB vs Tyranids on the last page. Not to mention the mistakes made in the BR, saying Dominions had heavy flamers and then showing them with four flamers, whilst they can only take two for a five man squad.

    How is that not sheer negligence? Coming from the guy that got paid to write the new "codex", I mean what were they doing when they wrote it? Is this what we pay for?

    A badly written monthly catalog that has little to nothing to do with the hobby?

    ReplyDelete
  17. @Anon 6:39 - While the flyer rules were always intended for IA only games, the trend in 5th ED (and this is part of an article I'm debating writing for 3++) has been to "apocalypsize" normal 40K...to the detriment of the game overall.

    Honestly though, the mandatory 36" flyer move a turn isn't that OP. It's either that or go back into reserve and wait a whole other turn to arrive again. And given the limited amount of space on a board...36" will end up putting you in range of some weapon system.

    As for the mandatory starting in reserve...I did it in 4th ED with Elysians and had no issues. Storm Ravens wouldn't really be nerfed, as you can still arrive, move, and so long as it's not flat out, disembark. Remember, flyers always had the dual mode option - remain a flyer (bonuses: 6's to hit w/o an AA mount, add 12" to weapons targeting you, move flat out get the skimmer cover save; disadvantages: immobilized = death, no disembarking units) or become a skimmer with the relevant bonuses and disadvantages.

    At the end of the day, most of the new hybrid flyer/skimmers we see would not be negatively impacted, made OP, or nerfed. If they do bring flyers into regular 40K, I'd support it. As I said, with my specific army, having 9 flyers is more of a bane than a boon...there's not much space on a board to move them all 36" every turn so some will have to fly off back into reserve and wait to come on again...which, trust me, sucks.

    ReplyDelete
  18. You can argue about GW not doing this right or that right all day long, at the end of the day 40K has to share its time with Fantasy releases and there is only so much time in a year to produce. I can agree that the SoB release if you can call it that was lame to say the least, But ive been playing this game for 15 years+ some years more competative then the others but always steady. The one constant i've seen throughout is that no matter what they do its never good enough for the player base. I've seen people up in arms about no SM release coming in the next few quarters... Really? take a look at how many SM and there brothers in arms(inc Grey Knights) have come out since lets say begining of 2nd ed to today. Now look at how many have come out for everyone else... again really? I love playing this game. I don't care how long it takes to play a match. I don't care about what rules they put in or take out. My CSM have seen ups and downs throughout the years. Rules come and they go. If we all spent less time complaining and more time in the books and on the table learning it all works itself out. Adapt and overcome. Any commander that cant will find himself washed up and on the losing end of the table.

    ReplyDelete
  19. sorry for 2 in a row but i just looked at the link from above about the releases... Really?
    I might be feeding a troll here. To the guy that wants a new SM book out i count over half in 5th ed as SM somthing, lol Facepalm good one.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Space Marines may be GW's cash cow but maybe GW have realised that they could also be the goose that lays the golden eggs. There have been so many SM releases in the last couple of years. The Xenos need a little love.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I hope they start putting out less SM books TBH It starts to look like SM hammer 40k with some dudes in tanks that didn't make the power armor cut(Guard). One none Imperial book a year is not good enough. In the last few years ive spent a lot more time at the WHFB table. There might be armies that are better then others but at least they give them all love and try to keep them in a cycle.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Really wanting more SM codexes right off the get go? Come on go choke on a chode. There are other races out there That don't pay homage to a dead emperor. Other races that are unique and have their own story and playstyle. Smurfs in Power Armor are lame and dime a dozen. It's the Xenos and Chaos time to shine.

    ReplyDelete
  23. GW last quote from a local shop was that a full codex is normally no more than 12 months after a WD issue (ie total nerf). The faith point system was the one thing that made the sisters semi competitive and it got annhilated.

    SOB certainly need it as the WD relegated them to the worst army in 40K :( It surprises me that people still defend that WD issue saying its good! The majority of sisters players I know say otherwise.

    Several rumours sites quote 2012... 2013..... for a new codex. Typically GW - probably still haven't made their mind up yet.

    ReplyDelete

 
Top
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...