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.

"Howdy Guys and Girls

A white raven appeared today and brought me a message - winter is coming ...

Warhammer 40k turns 30 years old next year. The new edition is due. The clock will be taken from 5 minutes to midnight to 1 minute to midnight with the return of the Daemonprimarchs - or will they return alone? This is the theme of the new setting - think
along the lines of 13th Black Crusade - but this time, it's serious. They want to get the same excitement as the community had during the End Times - without actually going as far as Age of Sigmar did.

Chaos fans - this is your hour. Stop beeing grudgy, there will be lots of love for all of you - renegades, former legions, daemon lovers.

The lore already start to unfold, with the Shield of Baal and Warzone Fenris - so we are already within the action. As usual, this is a bit of an early talk, so stay cool and take it with a tiny bit of salt.

regards,
Lady Atia"

The rumor is chaos is first up for the new codex.

Why sorry you ask? Because since forever the first codex in a new edition is largely made irrelivent/uncompetative 3 or 4 months in, or 3 or 4 books in, as GW finally settles on a balance/path they like for the edition.

This while not being fact, is widely thought of as mostly true by long time 40k fans and players. Also they NEVER release marines first since 3rd, in fact most of the "cash cow" armies are kept in reserve till usually the 3rd book to lessen the chances
of them being a flop, the exceptions being the fringe marine books like blood and dark angels, and occasionally space wolves, just to keep up the xenos/imperial/xenos/imperial style releases.

I highly suspect that it will be a balanced book for the first few months, then quickly overshadowed for a period of years as chaos players continue to languish in obscurity and are rendered unable to compete at the highest competative levels.

No one wants for me to be more wrong than me, and obviously hardcore chaos fans, but past history does not bode well. The first bit of an edition cycle is always "lets throw some stuff at a wall and see what sticks" for GW.

Sorry again.

Necrons were relatively early in the 7th edition release cycle, no?

 Orock wrote:
This while not being fact, is widely thought of as mostly true by long time 40k fans and players. Also they NEVER release marines first since 3rd, in fact most of the "cash cow" armies are kept in reserve till usually the 3rd book to lessen the chances
of them being a flop, the exceptions being the fringe marine books like blood and dark angels, and occasionally space wolves, just to keep up the xenos/imperial/xenos/imperial style releases.

Oh yeah. You are going to be more convincing if you would keep to facts instead of make up stuff...

Let's see...First codex in 3rd ed: space marines. 4th ed: space marines. 5th ed: space marines.

So yeah. Somehow I have trouble taking you seriously.

orks first, necrons 3rd or 4th book, downhill after them really.

and we all know how good orks are right now.

 Traditio wrote:
Necrons were relatively early in the 7th edition release cycle, no?

6th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Orock wrote:
orks first, necrons 3rd or 4th book, downhill after them really.

and we all know how good orks are right now.

So you have what...2 editions datarange...

And of course in 6th ed Tau and Eldar came pretty early and we know how weak those armies were...Funny by your logic codexes after them should have been positively bonkers.

Selective memory+seeing trend on too small sample size.

tneva82 wrote:

 Orock wrote:
This while not being fact, is widely thought of as mostly true by long time 40k fans and players. Also they NEVER release marines first since 3rd, in fact most of the "cash cow" armies are kept in reserve till usually the 3rd book to lessen the chances
of them being a flop, the exceptions being the fringe marine books like blood and dark angels, and occasionally space wolves, just to keep up the xenos/imperial/xenos/imperial style releases.

Oh yeah. You are going to be more convincing if you would keep to facts instead of make up stuff...

Let's see...First codex in 3rd ed: space marines. 4th ed: space marines. 5th ed: space marines.

So yeah. Somehow I have trouble taking you seriously.

dominant in 3rd ed: blood angels, eldar, chaos.

4th ed: guard, eldar, orks to a degree, debateable for 4th place

5th ed: grey knights, probably the only time eldar does not make the top 3 in the games history, ork bikerstar, double lash demons, ect

in none of these editions were the top 3 armies one of the first 3 books released. Check the release cycle yourself.

 Orock wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Orock wrote:
This while not being fact, is widely thought of as mostly true by long time 40k fans and players. Also they NEVER release marines first since 3rd, in fact most of the "cash cow" armies are kept in reserve till usually the 3rd book to lessen the chances
of them being a flop, the exceptions being the fringe marine books like blood and dark angels, and occasionally space wolves, just to keep up the xenos/imperial/xenos/imperial style releases.

Oh yeah. You are going to be more convincing if you would keep to facts instead of make up stuff...

Let's see...First codex in 3rd ed: space marines. 4th ed: space marines. 5th ed: space marines.

So yeah. Somehow I have trouble taking you seriously.

dominant in 3rd ed: blood angels, eldar, chaos.

4th ed: guard, eldar, orks to a degree, debateable for 4th place

5th ed: grey knights, probably the only time eldar does not make the top 3 in the games history, ork bikerstar, double lash demons, ect

in none of these editions were the top 3 armies one of the first 3 books released. Check the release cycle yourself.

You claimed space marines are never releases as first as they are money makers and put BA etc as fringe armies thrown there occasionally to keep xenos/Imperial release cycle. Make up your mind!

"lso they NEVER release marines first since 3rd, in fact most of the "cash cow" armies are kept in reserve till usually the 3rd book to lessen the chances
of them being a flop"

Phrase ring a bell? Should since you wrote it.

And top 3 armies not in first 3 books? BA, 3rd ed. MOT.

No I explained that vanilla marines are generally reserved, except for test scapegoats like the fringe marine armies occasionally. Go ask dark angels players what they thought about their previous codex and being first in a new edition, and how well that codex did.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:

 Orock wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Orock wrote:
This while not being fact, is widely thought of as mostly true by long time 40k fans and players. Also they NEVER release marines first since 3rd, in fact most of the "cash cow" armies are kept in reserve till usually the 3rd book to lessen the chances
of them being a flop, the exceptions being the fringe marine books like blood and dark angels, and occasionally space wolves, just to keep up the xenos/imperial/xenos/imperial style releases.

Oh yeah. You are going to be more convincing if you would keep to facts instead of make up stuff...

Let's see...First codex in 3rd ed: space marines. 4th ed: space marines. 5th ed: space marines.

So yeah. Somehow I have trouble taking you seriously.

dominant in 3rd ed: blood angels, eldar, chaos.

4th ed: guard, eldar, orks to a degree, debateable for 4th place

5th ed: grey knights, probably the only time eldar does not make the top 3 in the games history, ork bikerstar, double lash demons, ect

in none of these editions were the top 3 armies one of the first 3 books released. Check the release cycle yourself.

You claimed space marines are never releases as first as they are money makers and put BA etc as fringe armies thrown there occasionally to keep xenos/Imperial release cycle. Make up your mind!

"lso they NEVER release marines first since 3rd, in fact most of the "cash cow" armies are kept in reserve till usually the 3rd book to lessen the chances
of them being a flop"

Phrase ring a bell? Should since you wrote it.

And top 3 armies not in first 3 books? BA, 3rd ed. MOT.

I dont know if you are mad from seeing the writing on the wall or just at what you feel is release misrepresentation. Blood angels had 2 releases in 3rd much like chaos had chaos and chaos 3.5, the latter far more successful. Blood angels also had a white dwarf release.

Well, dont need to think on theories and such:

1º codex from last edition: chaos. Result-> chaos is odd and bad

1º codex of current edition: orks. Result-> orks sucks hard


1+1 = 2 xDDD

In 6th, Tau was in the first half of the edition. CWE was in the second half of the edition. So certainly not one of the early books.

 Orock wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Orock wrote:
This while not being fact, is widely thought of as mostly true by long time 40k fans and players. Also they NEVER release marines first since 3rd, in fact most of the "cash cow" armies are kept in reserve till usually the 3rd book to lessen the chances
of them being a flop, the exceptions being the fringe marine books like blood and dark angels, and occasionally space wolves, just to keep up the xenos/imperial/xenos/imperial style releases.

Oh yeah. You are going to be more convincing if you would keep to facts instead of make up stuff...

Let's see...First codex in 3rd ed: space marines. 4th ed: space marines. 5th ed: space marines.

So yeah. Somehow I have trouble taking you seriously.

dominant in 3rd ed: blood angels, eldar, chaos.

4th ed: guard, eldar, orks to a degree, debateable for 4th place

5th ed: grey knights, probably the only time eldar does not make the top 3 in the games history, ork bikerstar, double lash demons, ect

in none of these editions were the top 3 armies one of the first 3 books released. Check the release cycle yourself.

As someone who followed the tourney & competitive scene quite closely in 3rd & 4th, I have to laugh at your supposed "top tiers" claims...

Pre-Kraftworld Codex 3rd edition:
- Eldar, BA's, DE/Orks were tops

Post-Kraftworld Codex 3rd edition:
- Craftworld Eldar (more specifically, Ulthwe 'Seer Congress' & occasionally min/maxed Alatioc or Swordwind Host Biel-tan)
- 3.5ed Chaos (Iron Warriors or Siren Daemonbombs)
- Space Wolves
- Necrons

Early 4th edition:
- Craftworld Eldar
- Vanilla Marines
- Tyranids
- 3.5ed Chaos/Necrons/Pups still moderately hang around

Mid-late 4th edition:
- 'Flying Circus' Eldar
- Tau 'Fish of Fury'
- 'Nidzilla
- Orks/Necrons/Puppies/double Lash Prince CSM's still do decently


Guard were never a factor, except when games could only be played on Planet Bowling Ball... While easily still the 'best' codex in terms of its character & fluffiness, the 4ed 'Doctrine' IG codex wasn't a strong contender, as you paid way too much to give them all those cool abilities.

Eldar, Space Wolves, and from 4th ed on, Vanilla Marines have routinely been the long standing, "competitive" books.
Everyone else gets a turn here and there for 4-12 months or so.



As for Chaos being the first likely book of 8th and thus automatically continuing to suck? Honestly I don't care if we remain a bottom tier army forever, just so long as we get some actual character added back into our army...
Give us back our Legion rules, some nifty new wargear, (Heavy + Hand flamers, Kai gun, a couple new infantry-based heavy weapons), and a model line that's not full of woefully incomplete kits & nearly 3 decades of differing styles, and I would be one insanely happy Chaos player!

If it at least feels like a Legion-based warband, and I can finally fluffily represent what say an actual Thousand Sons or Word Bearers or Alpha Legion or whatever host should look & play like, I'll be happy to lose every single game I play.

The only way I'd feel "cheated" or gakked-on yet again by GW, is if our new book is 100% copy-paste of our current soulless dumpster fire, and our 'new' model kit releases amount to 2 new Khornate/Nurgle units a piece + a token Havoc kit that doesn't give us a single new option. (and still only comes with 1 of each weapon option!)

First half, but not one of the first 3.

Look the point is the first book is and has been garbage later in the cycle. And it looks like chaos drew the short straw....again.

It can't really get much worse. At least Daemons and FW are strong enough to prop up the trash we keep getting shovelled.

I think being first isnt bad as long as the design philosophy remains consistent.

GW keeps shooting themselves in the foot by trying to change strategies for what is considered fun and they end up breaking the game.

Formations are great, but they need a points cost to use tbh, vehicle and monsterous creature rules need a refresher, some point changes here and there and 8th edition will already be a winner imo.

I don't anticipate anything spectacular for chaos here, in fact I expect anything good we jad being given to imperials with less restrictions, and we gain new test abilities again.

If I took any more salt with this I'd die of hypertension.

 Wulfmar wrote:
If I took any more salt with this I'd die of hypertension.

I am thinking you are talking about the rumor? If so sorry, it is coming from a source that has a 90+ precent correct rumor track.

Source: dakka rumor tracking thread, and multiple confirmations in the past.

 Orock wrote:

 Wulfmar wrote:
If I took any more salt with this I'd die of hypertension.

I am thinking you are talking about the rumor? If so sorry, it is coming from a source that has a 90+ precent correct rumor track.

Source: dakka rumor tracking thread, and multiple confirmations in the past.

Aye indeed

If this was on any other faction I'd be less cynical - I've seen my beloved Chaos neglected for so long I don't expect any update, and if one crops up I'm inclined to believe it won't be worth the cheer suggested by our rumouring friend


If I'm wrong, I'll be happily wrong

Cant wait for GW to take a big dump on CSM. Might aswell rename CSM to Crappy Space Marines.

Grief wrote:
Cant wait for GW to take a big dump on CSM. Might aswell rename CSM to Crappy Space Marines.

This. I have no faith in GW. Adding daemon primarchs is just another overpriced over-detailed giant model to help sell a gakky irrelevant army.

As a long time CSM player and and now also Renegade Milita player I appreciate the sentiment.

I can already feel the sorrow coming, part of me is excited to get a rule revamp cause latletly it has been hard and debatably impossible to play CSM and win in competitive scenarios lately because the rules are outdated by 2 editions and dont compair to newer armies even with supplements; however I am also worried they will mess Chaos Space Marines up in remaking it like they did to Imperial Guard.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Especially being someone who loves and prefers Nurgle

It's the curse of first. The first codex is always the trial and error codex, built with caution in mind which generally translates to underpowered rather than risk the opposite. Then 4 codex later they say "f it" and go crazy, usually flushing any design philosophy in favor of the chance that they may be able to milk more money out of good books and units, unless you are a designated npc race like tyranids and orks.

its a good theory but based on the last 2/3 editions only. We know there has been a change in the top down thinking at GW. We know that there has been a shift towards campaign books and supplements adding rules and formations that may replace codices.

There is a hell of a lot of speculation. While it is plausible to draw the conclusion you have, I think its equally plausible that the recent trend is likely to be thrown on its head.

I don't think that anyone in GW intentionally nerfed earlier releases.

Its far more likely that we should be saying sorry CSM players, no more whinging and bottom of the pile for you because you're toys gonna get real awesome now!

As an owner of a 4k ork horde that makes me both happy and orkish angry!

After so many years we all know the crushing inevitability that the Chaos codex, regardless of edition, will be a terrible cacophony of dumb rules, over costed units and spiky bits with a mind numbing lack of variety in comparison to the loyalists... but for the love of the Gods don't snuff out the hope these players have clung onto for over a decade just for a chance of a good codex.

It's not fair on them.

Not only is the point all the first codexs in each edition wrong but NOTHiNG in this rumour is anywhere near stating this is a new codex in a new edition.

This is a campaign update with new formations, hopefully a decorian, hopefully a few new and updated units and maybe some new stuff like psychic powers warlord traits and relic lists.

This does not appear to be a new chaos codex. All rumours point to a new 8th edition mid 2017 and no new codexs till then.

I'd already heard, and I had much the same reaction. We'll be overpowered for 6 months to a year, while only the SMs are gonna be on par with us... then there's a new Eldar codex. Or Tau. Or Necrons. Imperial Guard maybe? And within 18 months, we're at the back of the bus with the Sisters of Battle and da Boyz.

Thing is, Chaos is a cashcow army even when it sucks ingame. It's one of the most popular factions in general in all its forms.

Experiment 626 wrote:
If it at least feels like a Legion-based warband, and I can finally fluffily represent what say an actual Thousand Sons or Word Bearers or Alpha Legion or whatever host should look & play like, I'll be happy to lose every single game I play.

What if instead they just changed the fluff so there are no more Legion-based warbands? Would that make it better?

Wait how can 40k be 30 years old when they just celebrated the 30th anniversary of the space marines unless they just created them and did gak all for a year with it.

gungo wrote:
Not only is the point all the first codexs in each edition wrong but NOTHiNG in this rumour is anywhere near stating this is a new codex in a new edition.

This is a campaign update with new formations, hopefully a decorian, hopefully a few new and updated units and maybe some new stuff like psychic powers warlord traits and relic lists.

This does not appear to be a new chaos codex. All rumours point to a new 8th edition mid 2017 and no new codexs till then.

yes

that is what I was talking about, 2017


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Wait how can 40k be 30 years old when they just celebrated the 30th anniversary of the space marines unless they just created them and did gak all for a year with it.

correct. fantasy existed first, then 40k. that teaser model was a year in advance.