Rumors Some new 10th edition insight, take with a grain of salt.

[Chapter Master Valrak]

30 minutes ago, Captain Idaho said:

It's important to note Valrak said his sources indicated June 24th is the release date for 40K 10th and there'd be Indexes for the edition but it was his conjecture regarding the World Eaters Codex indicating what is to come.

Just clear this up again June 24th is the evidence I’ve been sent, but with the way GW move stuff around it anything can happen, I know a lot of training is being done in official GW stores, in the weeks leading up-to that date. 

[Lord Nord in Gravis Armour]

June 24th makes a lot sense. If GW goes with a three-week pre-order, which would not shock me at all, then June 24th is the earliest the release date could fall and have all of the revenue occur within GW's next fiscal year (as pre-orders would begin on June 3rd). Plus right on the back of the launch, they'd have boxes of the new shiny on shelves to ensnare any casuals checking in during the holiday in the US.

[ThePenitentOne]

Yep... Looking less and less likely that I'll buy in every day.

 

Oh well. My seven year return to the hobby was fun while it lasted.

 

Anytime they decide they want to stop edition churn and come up with a persistent edition, I'll join in for sure, but I don't think that's ever going to happen. Maybe I'll check GW out again sometime in the 2030's.

 

At least I know roughly how long I have to get the remaining 9th books I need so that I continue to play it with friends. Guard, Ksons and GK should do it.

Edited February 6, 2023 by ThePenitentOne

[RWJP]

I have to admit, I find this whole "WE is a taste of things to come in 10th Edition" and "10th Edition will be a rewrite and have Indexes" combination to not make any sense.

If the WE Codex is a taste of things to come in 10th, then why would GW immediately invalidate and release an Index? If it's been written with 10th in mind, it doesn't make sense for it to be replaced. If 10th is going to be a rewrite that requires Indexes, then the WE Codex would have just been written following the normal design principles for all other 9th Ed Codexes.

As far as I'm concerned, the two are effectively mutually exclusive. Either the WE Codex is a taster of 10th, or 10th will be a rewrite and have Indexes.

[WrathOfTheLion]

12 minutes ago, RWJP said:

I have to admit, I find this whole "WE is a taste of things to come in 10th Edition" and "10th Edition will be a rewrite and have Indexes" combination to not make any sense.

If the WE Codex is a taste of things to come in 10th, then why would GW immediately invalidate and release an Index? If it's been written with 10th in mind, it doesn't make sense for it to be replaced. If 10th is going to be a rewrite that requires Indexes, then the WE Codex would have just been written following the normal design principles for all other 9th Ed Codexes.

As far as I'm concerned, the two are effectively mutually exclusive. Either the WE Codex is a taster of 10th, or 10th will be a rewrite and have Indexes.

Your logic is sound if you take it literally, but even if incompatible with 10th, it could give us a view on how their design philosophy of how they write these books has changed.

[crimsondave]

I’m confused.  If the WE codex works, why wouldn’t every other codex work?

[Dark Shepherd]

1 hour ago, Lord Nord said:

June 24th makes a lot sense. If GW goes with a three-week pre-order, which would not shock me at all, then June 24th is the earliest the release date could fall and have all of the revenue occur within GW's next fiscal year (as pre-orders would begin on June 3rd). Plus right on the back of the launch, they'd have boxes of the new shiny on shelves to ensnare any casuals checking in during the holiday in the US.

Also, end of the month equals payday for most people paid monthty or fortnightly

[phandaal]

13 minutes ago, WrathOfTheLion said:

Your logic is sound if you take it literally, but even if incompatible with 10th, it could give us a view on how their design philosophy of how they write these books has changed.

 

Or it could be that WE did not get as much time and effort because GW has already moved on to index writing.

[Special Officer Doofy]

I hope valrak's rumor is true and they bomb the codexes and restart with indexes. The codexes this edition went bananas. Everything they add ontop of the datasheet (chapter/legion trait, mono bonuses, faction specific strats and secondaries) is more stuff they need to balance, and they can barely balance the datasheet and point costs as is. I'm not saying I want individual Sub-factions to lose their identities, but I personally care more about the game being playable and fun for both sides. 

 

The Second marine codex in 8th is where it all started with doctrines (mono bonus) and giving a basic troop -2ap on everyone's gun. Ironically enough, every codex got that treatment and marines ended up sucking and needed AoC (or now free wargear) to be playable. It would not have been hard instead of giving mono bonuses to just say in the core rules of matched play it has to be a mono army. Narrative and open can do whatever they want.

 

In either case (rumor is right or wrong), I'm excited for 10th. My 9th edition codex was a huge let down for my main faction.

[WrathOfTheLion]

3 minutes ago, phandaal said:

 

Or it could be that WE did not get as much time and effort because GW has already moved on to index writing.

That is the other possibility that makes sense, although there is some wishful thinking on my end that they've decided to prune things down a bit.

[Nephaston]

Maybe this time they'll manage to have their codex releases be relatively rapid-fire, because during the start of 9th it really seemed like they wanted to sling out ~2 books per month before they got hamstrung by covid/shipping bottlenecks/material shortages/lockdown.

 

Or maybe just maybe they finally have some working IT-solutions. Lol, Lmao.

[OldWherewolf]

Be careful what you wish for...

 

I was just thinking, if Firstborn and Primaris will be merged into the same model/statline, does that mean there's now going to be a "Secundus" marine (firstborn -> primaris -> secundus)?

 

A way of GW selling new models, and giving this forum what they asked for...

 

God I hope I'm wrong...

 

 

[Slave to Darkness]

2 hours ago, RWJP said:

If the WE Codex is a taste of things to come in 10th, then why would GW immediately invalidate and release an Index?

Wouldnt be the first time they have released a book and canned it a few months later though.

[Mike8404]

On 1/25/2023 at 4:08 PM, Dark Shepherd said:

Hasnt thst been suspected/rumoured based on some of the ranges for newer weapons or weapons in newer codexes?

 

Removing the Primaris keyword would be awesome. Would seem to link up with new Terminator models. Twould be especially great if they fixed transport flyers like how theyre fixing tanks eg tougher flyers and or added negative to hit but they have to hover to disgorge their troops

Don't get your hopes up, they won't get rid of Primaris ever.  If anything, this confirms FB are going away.  As many of us have said about the Terminator rumor back when Valrak started talking about it, they're going to be for AoD era Marines, there will be zero new FB models in 40k ever again. By making all Marines "Space Marines" GW will just pump out Primaris models from now on.  FB will be relegated to 30k, where they belong, and Primaris will be what's used in AoD 40k, just like how The Old World and AoS are similar, but different.

 

TL;DR Don't need keywords to separate Marines if there's no First Born to separate from Primaris.

Edited February 7, 2023 by Mike8404
Spelling and grammar

[Noserenda]

They have been pretty open about not taking the "divide" between marine types as seriously as the fans do, we have even had a few ambiguous minis come out that could be either like the Black templar chap. It really wouldnt surprise me to see the keyword disappear and just have Marines going forwards and let people decide for themselves if they want regular or hobbit varieties in their army. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

7 hours ago, RWJP said:

I have to admit, I find this whole "WE is a taste of things to come in 10th Edition" and "10th Edition will be a rewrite and have Indexes" combination to not make any sense.

If the WE Codex is a taste of things to come in 10th, then why would GW immediately invalidate and release an Index? If it's been written with 10th in mind, it doesn't make sense for it to be replaced. If 10th is going to be a rewrite that requires Indexes, then the WE Codex would have just been written following the normal design principles for all other 9th Ed Codexes.

As far as I'm concerned, the two are effectively mutually exclusive. Either the WE Codex is a taster of 10th, or 10th will be a rewrite and have Indexes.

I get where you’re coming from, but a soft reset to bring things like lethality back under control by nerfing AP on nearly all weapons would require indexes, meanwhile the WE codex could have already had AP adjustments made, therefore being a peak at things to come.

i also think they have fewer strats as well than most everyone else? Cutting the fat on strats could be another example.

 

this is just an example, I’m not saying this is what’s happening or what I think will happen.

 

5 hours ago, Mike8404 said:

Don't get your hopes up, they won't get rid of Primaris ever.  If anything, this confirms FB are going away.  As many of us have said about the Terminator rumor back when Valrak started talking about it, they're going to be for AoD era Marines, there will be zero new FB models in 40k ever again. By making all Marines "Space Marines" GW will just pump out Primaris models from now on.  FB will be relegated to 30k, where they belong, and Primaris will be what's used in AoD 40k, just like how The Old World and AoS are similar, but different.

 

TL;DR Don't need keywords to separate Marines if there's no First Born to separate from Primaris.

I doubt they’re nuking FB, at least not this edition.

 

they’ll just remove the key word and maybe mash similar datasheets together like tactical squad/intercessor sheet

assualt squad/assault intercessor sheet etc.

[spessmarine]

7 hours ago, Lord Nord said:

June 24th makes a lot sense. If GW goes with a three-week pre-order, which would not shock me at all, then June 24th is the earliest the release date could fall and have all of the revenue occur within GW's next fiscal year (as pre-orders would begin on June 3rd). Plus right on the back of the launch, they'd have boxes of the new shiny on shelves to ensnare any casuals checking in during the holiday in the US.

I don't think they'll push it to three weeks.
Preorders up June 10th, announcement on the 4th. So roughly a month after WHfest. Feels like that all makes sense.

[Mogger351]

7 hours ago, Chapter Master Valrak said:

Just clear this up again June 24th is the evidence I’ve been sent, but with the way GW move stuff around it anything can happen, I know a lot of training is being done in official GW stores, in the weeks leading up-to that date. 

 

Sorry my dude, it goes to show when writing up a quick summary in few words nuance is post which then can be misinterpreted.

 

6 hours ago, RWJP said:

I have to admit, I find this whole "WE is a taste of things to come in 10th Edition" and "10th Edition will be a rewrite and have Indexes" combination to not make any sense.

If the WE Codex is a taste of things to come in 10th, then why would GW immediately invalidate and release an Index? If it's been written with 10th in mind, it doesn't make sense for it to be replaced. If 10th is going to be a rewrite that requires Indexes, then the WE Codex would have just been written following the normal design principles for all other 9th Ed Codexes.

As far as I'm concerned, the two are effectively mutually exclusive. Either the WE Codex is a taster of 10th, or 10th will be a rewrite and have Indexes.

 

Think of it as they were in the head space of designing books with few strats, reduced options and no subfactions etc. And that's what they were used to having to do and were practising when it was written. It's not to say "it's a 10th ed codex they'll bin" it's more "it's different enough it shows the writers are thinking of something else"

[Orange Knight]

Valrak has repeated that apparently we'll be returning to an index format for the launch of 10th, but has also said that this isn't an indication of a full teardown of the existing rules.

 

I supposed this could be true, and would function as a way to reset the meta and purge the bloat. 

[AenarIT]

The issue with that is simple: extra rules for other armies are bloat, extra rules for my armies are flavour. 
Good luck with trimming rules by the right amount without angering players.

[Brother Captain Alberic]

23 minutes ago, AenarIT said:

The issue with that is simple: extra rules for other armies are bloat, extra rules for my armies are flavour. 
Good luck with trimming rules by the right amount without angering players.

Very true. I’m already worried about what they’ll do to Black Templars. As to cut back bloat we might lose a lot of our character. 

[Captain Idaho]

Back in the days of 6th and below, players were happy their chosen faction had a unique Chapter Trait. I don't think we need lots and lots of additional rules to make something thematic.

 

GW needs to trim down.

[Brother Captain Alberic]

Oh I agree it needs to trimmed down.  As long as they keep enough that Templars don’t just become black painted Space Marines I’ll be happy. Thankfully we have a good range of unique models so that shouldn’t happen.

[Mandragola]

1 hour ago, Captain Idaho said:

Back in the days of 6th and below, players were happy their chosen faction had a unique Chapter Trait. I don't think we need lots and lots of additional rules to make something thematic.

 

GW needs to trim down.

Agreed (for those chapters who did get this, and some like BT and SW got far more of course). 
 

But anyway, for me there are two key problems with 40K: lethality and IGOUGO. They combine at the moment to create one-turn games, or at least games that can be decided in a single turn. Turning down the lethality is essential but they do also need to get rid of IGOUGO. Basically every other game system, including their own (AoS and blood bowl are the exceptions I think) use some version of alternating activations. 

Edited February 7, 2023 by Mandragola

[Emperor Ming]

Indexs, has that been confirmed?

 

While I'm not against that at the current state of 9th

 

Cant see index style reset happening now, esp with khorne dex not even out yet