Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Rather than multi cult multi-kits, I reckon GW will probably go for single cult multi-kits instead. The rumours for Legions seems to suggest that cult MEQ will access to different types of cult units. Therefore I reckon the current Khorne Berserker/Plague Marine/Emperor’s Children/Thousand Sons boxes will probably be replaced with newer versions that contain additional bits to represent variant units (just like the PAGK box). For example, the new Khorne Berserker box probably could be used to assemble Standard Berserkers, Gladiators and Assault Berserkers.

Assuming the 3 legion codices rumour is true, this leaves us with 1 new multi-kit for each legion codex (which doesn’t seem to out of the ordinary). Additionally Assuming GW won’t be doing new kits for the non cult legions/units (as the current stuff on offer is adequate), this probably leaves us with the following new kits:

• 1 new cult multi kit for each Legions codex
• 2-4 new Special Character blisters for each legions codex
• 1 new plastic Dreadnaught kit

Doesn’t seem to too out of the ordinary IMO.

Nurgle units can’t perform Sweeping Advances and are what he refers to as “stoic” (possibly meaning slow and purposeful)

What exactly is a Sweeping Advance? I don't know how every rule is called in English.

It's when you can (potentially) wipe out an enemy unit when they fail their Leadership test after losing combat.

That's the same thing Terminators can't do, right? With the Iniative roll?

bhsman wrote:It's when you can (potentially) wipe out an enemy unit when they fail their Leadership test after losing combat.

People actually see this rule used in the "all space marines, all the time" meta game?

lol

Can't see the point of those three codices myself. A codex for the Black Legion and the four cult legions would make more sense, with either one codex with the IW, WB and NL and another for the AL, or one codex for each of those four.

Durza wrote:Can't see the point of those three codices myself.

Personally I can't see this happening or being likely at all.

I think it far more likely we'll see 1 Chaos Space Marines Codex, perhaps indeed with a few non astartes elements in it, which would then ( once again) leave them free to do Codex : Ultimate evil badness and the like at a later date.

I'm going to wager a standard Legions codex, a White Dwarf 'Renegades' list and maybe a Renegades codex in the following year.

DarkStarSabre wrote:I'm going to wager a standard Legions codex, a White Dwarf 'Renegades' list and maybe a Renegades codex in the following year.

Something just occurred to me. What if we get nothing but a WD update? What if we get Sistered?

The rumor of it being an actual codex has been pretty consistent. The only mention of a WD 'dex has been for the "Renegades" as something distinct from the Legions.


I agree. Even IF, and that's a big if, GW were to do 3 legion books... talk about a waste of resources. I love playing chaos, but 3 codices with what is effectively a single facet of Chaos, when they already have two other concepts that are just as interesting... its a waste. If GW seriously tried to do 3 legion codices, it would end up like they did the Inquisition codices... where they get through 2/3rd and then decide it wasn't the best idea and the resources could be better used elsewhere. I've seen enough proposed Chaos Legion codices to know it can be done in a single book and be worthwhile.

^

The thing is though, as long as the codex is good, I don't mind being sistered, it's cheaper than buying a £20+ codex that aint worth half the price

Durza wrote:

DarkStarSabre wrote:I'm going to wager a standard Legions codex, a White Dwarf 'Renegades' list and maybe a Renegades codex in the following year.

Something just occurred to me. What if we get nothing but a WD update? What if we get Sistered?

It will depend on how good it is.

The only people that think the Sisters WD Codex is "bad" also happen to be "bad" at Warhammer 40K and they'll be declaring that Necrons are also "bad" within the next month or so as the herd stampedes back to being bad with Space Wolves and Grey Knights.

Brother-Captain Scotti wrote:^

The thing is though, as long as the codex is good, I don't mind being sistered, it's cheaper than buying a £20+ codex that aint worth half the price

Why is it "sistered" same thing happened with Blood Angels first?-And they eventually got fixed. As it is Chaos has been living with the equivalent of a WD codex for the past edition, so it should only go up from here... if it doesn't I quit.

Seems to me a larger codex could have everything'
Legionaries,Renagades,LatD

Just hope Cruddace is being kept very far away from it then.

I had a horrible realisation...

The Squadroned Heavy Support deal is his trademark gimmick - look at IG and Tyranids....

Cruddace, Thorpe, Ward (?)- Bad.

Kelly (?), Ward (?)- Good.

Hmm...

I'm not sure what's the reasoning for giving Plague Marines a plastic kit. Of all the cult troops they seem like the best fit for finecast, while more mechanical shaped armors of Thousand Sons or Emperor's Children would suit plastic better. Not that I'd mind having finecast Noise Marines...

Cruddace - All his work has turned out horribly generic with no-brainer choices in over crowded slots. The Tyranids were a prime example of this.

Thorpe - Don't blame him. No longer a rules developer. Moved to Black Library now. Was going on an older design principle akin to Dark Angels and Eldar - all armies were going to be scaled down to this extent. Daemon and SMs threw this out the window.

Ward - Has this habit of power scaling to a ridiculous amount. AWFUL habit of 'punny' names. Horrid background writing...have you read the Grey Knight codex? On the other hand his work seems on par compared to itself...you know, apart from Blood Angels compared to normal SMs where they got a crapload of freebie rules and buffs and then had some units become mysteriously cheaper than their counterparts.

Kelly - I like him. He writes decent fluff. He puts his effort into the armies he enjoys. He does Xenos proud.

And there lies the problem.

Ward is a SM player through and through.
Kelly has Wolves and DE - lo and behold his shining examples.
Cruddace is an IG player (doesn't forgive him though) abd clearly didn't give a hoot about 'nids.

Does the Studio actually have any Chaos players...?

I actually find all this talk about codex writers rather interesting, as I don't know anything about them besides Matt Ward. So far it seems like you guys to prefer having Kelly to write the Chaos Legions codex?

aka_mythos wrote:That'd be a very minimalist approach and one that continues to ignore the distinctive details GW has added to the artwork depiction of the cult marines. I liken that approach to the minimal differences in 2nd edition between blood angel minis and generic marine minis... but as the depiction of blood angels has evolved so has the cult marines. To ignore those distinctions in sculpting new minis is to continue the trend of selling short the effort to really update the chaos miniature line. The Chaos marine's minis have been stuck largely in 3rd edition, so the last thing we need is something less than a 3rd edition approach. I'm not saying it won't happen your way... just that'd I be disappointed and see it as another lost opportunity for GW.

Yeah, exactly. A kit can last a good number of years if it's good (Avatar, dire avengers are getting there, greater daemons to an extent, plague bearers), and GW would be tossing itself down a mineshaft by not giving the chaos marines good, solid kits. Ideally:

-They would keep the standard CSM box. I don't really like it, but I don't see it changing much, unless they totally switch to mixed armor types like a lot of people are doing with FW stuff. OR if they add something to the standard CSM unit in game that can't be covered by a simple upgrade sprue.
- Berserkers would get a new kit, hopefully with more detail and skulls, spikes, etc. I don't think KBs are as simple as an upgrade sprue.
- Noise marines would get a kit, probably with all sonic blasters and a blastmaster. I see big changes in Noise Marines, so I can't say for sure. But a new kit is definitely necessary.
- Thousand sons would get some sort of kit..... I could see a FW kit that was basically a Aspiring Sorcerer and some head pieces, much like the current kit, but the armor would have to be Heresy-Era, or else a lot of players would cry foul. There's lots of modelling opportunities with them for runes, tabards, gems, scrolls, books, etc. I'd be sad if they didn't get something cool.

I can't help but feel in the pit of my stomach that GW will probably screw this release up. We'll be expecting a total revamp of the line, and we'll get a new raptor box and a dreadnought and they'll tell us to go feth ourselves and be happy that we got anything at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

aka_mythos wrote:The rumor of it being an actual codex has been pretty consistent. The only mention of a WD 'dex has been for the "Renegades" as something distinct from the Legions.


I agree. Even IF, and that's a big if, GW were to do 3 legion books... talk about a waste of resources. I love playing chaos, but 3 codices with what is effectively a single facet of Chaos, when they already have two other concepts that are just as interesting... its a waste. If GW seriously tried to do 3 legion codices, it would end up like they did the Inquisition codices... where they get through 2/3rd and then decide it wasn't the best idea and the resources could be better used elsewhere. I've seen enough proposed Chaos Legion codices to know it can be done in a single book and be worthwhile.

You could say the exact same thing about BA. DA, BT, SW and SM The inquisition codexes worked for a while, and I don't believe anyone really wanted them to be combined until late fourth or early fifth when codex creep started.

Even going by the recent marine codex releases i'd say chaos is in for a good few kits. Hopefully we'll get something rather nice.

Hoping the greater daemons finally get a revamp... possibly not for this codex though... next daemons, if that ever happens.

aka_mythos wrote:That'd be a very minimalist approach and one that continues to ignore the distinctive details GW has added to the artwork depiction of the cult marines. I liken that approach to the minimal differences in 2nd edition between blood angel minis and generic marine minis... but as the depiction of blood angels has evolved so has the cult marines. To ignore those distinctions in sculpting new minis is to continue the trend of selling short the effort to really update the chaos miniature line. The Chaos marine's minis have been stuck largely in 3rd edition, so the last thing we need is something less than a 3rd edition approach. I'm not saying it won't happen your way... just that'd I be disappointed and see it as another lost opportunity for GW.

How? The level of detail they can put into plastic minis these days makes this kind've thing entirely possible. Look over the new Necron plastics. There are two plastic boxes that contain two completely different units, and to start with we weren't sure if some of them were the same kit or separate boxes (I was certain Deathmarks were single-pose Failcost models). I think they could do a Thousand Son/Noise Marine box very easily.

ph34r wrote:I dread the concept of a 5 book release. That would mean large portions of chaos players not getting their rules for years from now yet.

On the other hand it would be balanced against the half dozen loyalist books we have

I suspect you're looking at this the wrong way - rather than expecting an equal number of CSM and SM books (which is the way madness lies), you need to look at the Imperium vs non-Imperium balance. By my count it is 7 codexes and 1 WD list (SoB) for the Imperium vs. an array of eight codexes against them - which would seem to be balanced, once SoB grow up into a proper Codex again.

After all, the Imperium of Man is meant to be our viewpoint upon this universe...

It’s not about viewpoints and Codex ‘balance’ between the Imperium and non-Imperium. It’s about the actual release schedule.

Ph34r’s concern, and this is something I expressed quite a while ago, is the idea of having multiple Codices to cover the various Legions. Imagine for a moment that it’s just one Codex for each of the Cult armies (forget the unaligned Chaos Legions for a moment). With GW’s frantic pace of 2-3 books a year it would take anywhere up to 4 years to get all four of those books. Imagine if you were a Thousand Sons player and your Codex was 4 years away?

I think having a ‘Renegade’ and a ‘Legion’ Codex is a good idea. I don’t think that having multiple Legion Codices is a sensible idea. It will just drag things out far too long.

DarkStarSabre wrote:Kelly - I like him. He writes decent fluff. He puts his effort into the armies he enjoys. He does Xenos proud.

Kelly has Wolves and DE - lo and behold his shining examples.

Does the Studio actually have any Chaos players...?

Castiel wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:If Phil's writing the book, expect it to be nowhere near as good as Wolves or Dark Eldar.

Kelly has no vested interest in Chaos. He only does well on the armies he plays/collects, and if he's working on Chaos he'd likely halfarse it so he can get to working on Sisters faster.

NO!

I can't let this comment pass. You do realise that Kelly is a member of the crew that wrote the 3.5 Chaos codex, which is regarded by almost everyone as the best Chaos codex ever.

To quote myself from earlier in this thread.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bonde wrote:I actually find all this talk about codex writers rather interesting, as I don't know anything about them besides Matt Ward. So far it seems like you guys to prefer having Kelly to write the Chaos Legions codex?

Yes, for the reason above.

You quoted yourself.

Well done. I was querying whether or not Kelly actually was a Chaos player - taking part in the 3.5 codex is one thing...until you realise that Andy Chambers AND Pete Haines were also involved and they were known Chaos players.

Kelly is however the best bet around at the moment from the pool of what they seem to be producing - the SW and DE do shine compared to Cruddace's attempts to tack every army into the same structure and Ward's attempts to ramp Space Marines even higher.

Don't forget Kelly wrote the Ork codex, and it still stands the test of time. It's playable, and even competitive. I'm happy with whoever writes it...though I may have reservations on Cruddace Nidding it in the bud.

I don't suppose GW still employs Chambers or Haines by any chance?

DarkStarSabre wrote:You quoted yourself.

Well done. I was querying whether or not Kelly actually was a Chaos player - taking part in the 3.5 codex is one thing...until you realise that Andy Chambers AND Pete Haines were also involved and they were known Chaos players.

Kelly is however the best bet around at the moment from the pool of what they seem to be producing - the SW and DE do shine compared to Cruddace's attempts to tack every army into the same structure and Ward's attempts to ramp Space Marines even higher.

Well done, you were sarcastic.

And yes I do realise that, henece I said he was a member of the team. I do however find it objectionable that people suggest that he would do a worse job on CSM than on SW or DE just because they don't think he collects them. It is insulting to his proffesional manner, and from the examples of his other works quite an unfair accusation.

Also, I think he is probably the best writer out there atm. He writes good fluff, and his rules are good, but not ott. Definately the man I hope to see on the job, and I hope the rumors I shared from the B&C prove to be correct.

Durza wrote:I don't suppose GW still employs Chambers or Haines by any chance?

No.

When it comes to rules?
That is a good thing.

Haines wasn't even really that good for background material. Chambers, however, was.

Castiel wrote:And yes I do realise that, henece I said he was a member of the team. I do however find it objectionable that people suggest that he would do a worse job on CSM than on SW or DE just because they don't think he collects them. It is insulting to his professional manner, and from the examples of his other works quite an unfair accusation.

I say it because it's known he doesn't collect them. It's also a perfectly fair accusation, considering. Four armies he's known to be quite fond of(and his armies of which have been displayed before in White Dwarf or even the army books proper over the years) become powerhouses with very strange, particular builds. It's also worth noting that he was a big fan of Wolf Guard and Haemonculi Covens...two of the most "broken" potential lists.

Also, I think he is probably the best writer out there atm. He writes good fluff, and his rules are good, but not ott. Definately the man I hope to see on the job, and I hope the rumors I shared from the B&C prove to be correct.

When we talk about Dark Eldar, you're absolutely right. He makes good fluff, but the rules point is questionable. However it is, again, worth noting that the man has been a well-known Dark Eldar (and even regular Eldar) player. Codex: Eldar, which had quite a few units which one could very well refer to as "broken" was his handiwork.

However when you compare Eldar, Dark Eldar, and Space Wolves you can definitely see a trend which is quite worrying and based upon what he was working on at that time.