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.

Right, and it ties in well with the comments from the developers that we've been seeing recently. They seem to have a solid plan to do something with the Sisters now, so they're drumming up interest again. That's my theory, anyway.

 pretre wrote:
BA had a real codex much sooner than we ever got a digital version (even if this rumor is true).

Ah, but the BA never had modelling issues holding them back.

 Troike wrote:
Right, and it ties in well with the comments from the developers that we've been seeing recently. They seem to have a solid plan to do something with the Sisters now, so they're drumming up interest again.

I guess we'll just meet back here in six months and compare notes on the new release.*

* Note: I've said this quite a bit in the last 10 years in reference to rumors about a new SOB codex or minis. It was right once.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Troike wrote:

 pretre wrote:
BA had a real codex much sooner than we ever got a digital version (even if this rumor is true).

Ah, but the BA never had modelling issues holding them back.

IF that is what was holding the SOB back. We have some anecdotal 'evidence' of a discussion at a games day or somesuch 5 years ago to go off for that.

What's meant to be happening in six months?

 pretre wrote:
IF that is what was holding the SOB back. We have some anecdotal 'evidence' of a discussion at a games day or somesuch 5 years ago to go off for that.

I thought the Jes also said so in an interview? Unless that was the interview.

 Troike wrote:
What's meant to be happening in six months?

I mean that in six months time another thread about a SOB release will come out and we'll all chuckle knowingly and debate the whole thing over again.

I thought the Jes also said so in an interview? Unless that was the interview.

Supposedly. Unless Lynata pops in and gives me a link though, I'll go ahead and list that as 'anecdotal'.

 pretre wrote:
Supposedly. Unless Lynata pops in and gives me a link though, I'll go ahead and list that as 'anecdotal'.

It does seem that the devs have been saying it consistently for a while.

He did stress that they really wanted to crack on with Sisters, but that they had been causing them technical difficulties for quite some time.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/328983.page

Oh yeah, one last thing about the Sisters of Battle. According to Phil Kelly, the reason why they never got plastic minis was because they couldn't be plastic moulded by the current process.

http://natfka.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/sisters-of-battle.html

A couple of these ones got some further points. It was mentioned that originally there had been a technical problem with developing Sisters plastics, but that Games Workshop would now have the technology to be able to do them.

http://the-responsible-one.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/enter-citadel-ask-audience-we-want-to.html

 Troike wrote:

 pretre wrote:
When's the last time they did something similar?

When's the last time an army had a White Dwarf codex?

When's the last time a White Dwarf had actual content?
Certainly not with the current editor.

 Troike wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Supposedly. Unless Lynata pops in and gives me a link though, I'll go ahead and list that as 'anecdotal'.

It does seem that the devs have been saying it consistently for a whie.

Fair enough, there is a bit of anecdotal evidence from games days, etc (as I mentioned previously) that they have been talking about that as a problem.

I still don't think that it would matter either way to releasing it as a digital file but withdraw my earlier comment about that not being a factor.

 pretre wrote:
Still don't think that it would matter either way to releasing it as a digital file.

Like I said before, my theory is that it's a result of them being able to make plastics and deciding to start work on an update. I view this as a move to take them "off of the backburner" as a result of those factors, and as an attempt to get people interested in the SoB in preperation for an actual update.

Just some speculation on my part, especially since it's still just a rumour, so we'll have to wait and see what happens. But hey, SoB fans are good at waiting, I guess.

I have a bad feeling that GW is going release a digital copy of the white dwarf rules then roll them into the GK codex with a supplement codex. This statement is just something I came up with myself, and has no rumors backing it so please don't take it as fact.

It should be crazy simple to add the WD rules to the digital content they already sell online. Although if they did, I would not consider it a harbinger of a future codex, or model wave.

 pretre wrote:

 Troike wrote:

 pretre wrote:
When's the last time they did something similar?

When's the last time they had a White Dwarf codex?

Compare the time between release of WD C:BA and the Free Digital version. Then compare the time between the release of WD C:SOB and the free digital version.

Heck, BA had a real codex much sooner than we ever got a digital version (even if this rumor is true).

If I recall the turn around time for between the BA WD and Codex was around 18 months.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

l0k1 wrote:I have a bad feeling that GW is going release a digital copy of the white dwarf rules then roll them into the GK codex with a supplement codex. This statement is just something I came up with myself, and has no rumors backing it so please don't take it as fact.

As it comes up often: Sisters were only part of the Inquisition for one codex, and then stopped.

Plus that would just be a mess, or basically be two books turned into one with massive restrictions and the like all over the place. I can't imagine it as anything but a bloated mess. I'm not saying it's impossible, just really unlikely.

Insurgency Walker wrote:It should be crazy simple to add the WD rules to the digital content they already sell online. Although if they did, I would not consider it a harbinger of a future codex, or model wave.

I wouldn't say it's "crazy simple" as they have to unscrew the layout from the the WD stuff (like the mixed up unit order that was used to keep us from guessing which units went in which slots (as if we couldn't figure most of them out anyways)), but it wouldn't be really hard either.

I still hold out hope that it gets tweaked, just to justify them taking so long to release it.

I could see an =I= dex happening you know. Considering the new SM dex has restrictions on chapter rules and characters etc. Itnwould be a bit messier thsn the sm dex but not beyound the realms of possibility.

The last schedule of release rumours pegged Nov 2014 as either Blood Angels OR Sisters of Battle...something that far ahead certainly makes me wonder if it holds water but TBH I don't see anything happening before then (in terms of new content/dex/minis) but I suppose they could release the WD dex digitally before then, but would there be much point?

D

Seeing the history of the SoB, it certainly seems like it's GW 's intent to have them as their own army, that one WH Codex aside. And now that they can apparently make plastic Sisters, they can finally make them a proper, new model range.

Apart from that, more or less what ClockworkZion said. Bloated mess, wouldn't make sense fluff-wise, ect.

@evildrcheese
The point would be to get people interested in and hopefully the Sisters, thus getting them ready for a proper update. And hey, releasing it as a PDF would certainly get people talking.

Bah, GW needs to get over its '80s misogyny and retool the fluff to allow for full-on female space marines if they're not going to support Sisters of Battle.

If nothing else, have them be one of the odd survivors of the failed "Cursed Founding" - have them put in cryo or something and now they've been thawed out to help save the Imperium from its impending twilight.

Stormonu wrote:
Bah, GW needs to get over its '80s misogyny and retool the fluff to allow for full-on female space marines if they're not going to support Sisters of Battle.

If nothing else, have them be one of the odd survivors of the failed "Cursed Founding" - have them put in cryo or something and now they've been thawed out to help save the Imperium from its impending twilight.

No, but female guard is another topic...

Sisters in a guard codex don't really work because both they and GK have large enough infantry ranges that they overlap quite a bit as far as roles go. And some of the remaining holes in the GK book would be better suited by more thematic units.
Sisters would do better to get their own book, and expand in their own direction with new vehicles and units.

Stormonu wrote:
Bah, GW needs to get over its '80s misogyny and retool the fluff to allow for full-on female space marines if they're not going to support Sisters of Battle.

So female heads for the Marine models then?

In all seriousness, I don't think GW is being malicious about their support of the Sisters. There are at least 3 people mentioned to be working in the Studio who have Sisters armies (no, I don't know if Cruddace is honestly being counted in this group) so it's not like there aren't people who won't go to bat there to get the army updated. It's just a matter of time, money, and GW having the right equipment.

My money is still on the back half of 2014 for a proper codex, so if they finally get the digital one online it can start drumming up that interest nicely.

ClockworkZion wrote:

Heck, BA had a real codex much sooner than we ever got a digital version (even if this rumor is true).

If I recall the turn around time for between the BA WD and Codex was around 18 months.

According to wikipedia the BA WD dex got released in WD (329/300 USA) in June/July 2007. BA codex proper came out in April 2010 so a period of just under 3 years.
The Sisters WD (379/380 USA) codex came out in August/September 2011.
If Sisters have their WD codex the same length of time as BA we should expect a Codex mid next year ... sometime ... hopefully.

I do not see a combined Inquisition codex or one with Sisters and GK's together, as GW have already had that opportunity and did not take it.

As already said previously, the current mentions of SoB by GW seems to be them starting to build up interest in SoB ready for a later release. No point in building up interest if you don't have anything to sell.

 Desteele wrote:

ClockworkZion wrote:

Heck, BA had a real codex much sooner than we ever got a digital version (even if this rumor is true).

If I recall the turn around time for between the BA WD and Codex was around 18 months.

According to wikipedia the BA WD dex got released in WD (329/300 USA) in June/July 2007. BA codex proper came out in April 2010 so a period of just under 3 years.
The Sisters WD (379/380 USA) codex came out in August/September 2011.
If Sisters have their WD codex the same length of time as BA we should expect a Codex mid next year ... sometime ... hopefully.

Better than I thought AND matches my guesstimated timeline!