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.

Looking back through the old editions of Codex Space Marines (£0.42 for 4th edition from amazon) it seems like options have become more limited to the point that the slightest change is presented as a major innovation.

In 3rd, all marines were vanilla (except DA, BA, SW) until Codex Armageddon and so on. Then, in 4th, these non vanilla chapters were watered down, but all chapters could have their own combination of rules which was an improvement overall (ignoring broken combinations etc.). Then 5th, the vanilla is back and the only way to change this is to take a special character which made it all generic and made special characters a lot less 'special.'

And now we have chapter tactics which may be a good thing or not; given the option of selecting forgeworld chapter tactics, there are a lot more options. Whatever they are, it isn't progression in the long term. I'm not saying they should be getting more powerful with each codex, but if it must be changed each time, then removing options and calling it innovation is a massive cop out. I remember IG were given a load of similar options in 4th as well, but now everyone is a Cadian.

I think the hardest thing to achieve is balance with a lot of options, and it would take a writer who is invested in the game, not just the army. It would also help if they are not a talentless hack.

I might be wrong. I am jaded by the loss of Salamanders rules in Codex Armageddon and Iron Hands no longer having Terminators leading Tac squads.

What is the general concensus on this subject? Are the changes between editions seen as a good thing or not?

Personally, as of the start of 7th/end of 6th, I see there to be no need for updates whatsoever.

At that point, every codex was 100% compatible with the rules, as the older ones that had rules that were outdated (and by that I mean didn't work without an FAQ clarification) had been replaced. There was nothing content-wise that any codex had/didn't have over another. Everything, basically, worked.

Now, 7th hits, and a new breed of codices fine with our. Codexes with formations and optional detachments. All of a sudden, there's now books that have what others don't, which 'neccessitates' (and I use the word in the loosest possible sense) updating the rest.

Which is why I have basically elected to consider anything after 7th as superfluous and irrelevant, and have bought neither the SW or GK codex despite using both armies. The two books I had for them before worked perfectly well, they aren't going to suddenly stop working when new one comes out.