warhammer40k Updated 40k Codex Release schedule

[ZeroWolf]

23 minutes ago, irlLordy said:

 

I would think it would be quite achievable, assuming they hired enough staff to properly do it. Standardising wordings on strategems and properly mathemathically modelling weapon damages and how they could be increased in codex (there are only a finite amount of combinations) would also help avoid obviously broken interactions.

 

Whether or not GW has the desire to do this is another thing.

Not so much the desire more if they think putting in the increased resources will exponentially bring greater rewards versus the system now where they don't put in a lot but get a tonne out.

 

Basically nothing will change as long as GW is raking the cash in.

[Brother Carpenter]

Oh my, I have to get painting with admech as a first release..

[Ming the Merciless]

At this point I'd be happy with a 4 year cycle (40k, AoS, HH, OW) with codexes released over the first 3 years. Seems the most realistic  scenario we can hope for.

[Halandaar]

11 minutes ago, Ming the Merciless said:

At this point I'd be happy with a 4 year cycle (40k, AoS, HH, OW) with codexes released over the first 3 years. Seems the most realistic  scenario we can hope for.

 

Nothing realistic whatsoever about GW willingly choosing to take the massive new-edition sales boost every 4 years instead of every 3. Unfortunately.

[Dark Shepherd]

Id be happy if they admitted the odd number editions were .5 editions

 

9th was 8.5 so to speak

 

And they did new codex every 2nd edition/hard reset unless thered been lots of new releases

 

Minor updates could be digital only, new editions could be more often then

Edited November 27, 2023 by Dark Shepherd

[Halandaar]

3 hours ago, Dark Shepherd said:

Id be happy if they admitted the odd number editions were .5 editions

 

9th was 8.5 so to speak

 

And they did new codex every 2nd edition/hard reset unless thered been lots of new releases

 

Minor updates could be digital only, new editions could be more often then

 

If this was the case, and it was communicated up front, it would pretty much instantly revitalise my interest in the game. Knowing that 2026 was essentially going to be the 10E rules again but with the errata and balance dataslate changes from the intervening years baked in, and there would be no second Codex to buy in the 2026-2029 period would be a really positive change, and if nothing else would give every faction a minimum of 3 years playtime with their ruleset rather than the situation we have now where only the factions in the starter box get that privelege.

 

They could still deliver new army content in the .5 phase through campaign books as they used to, offering optional v2 Codexes if the number of new units warrants it (like they did with the 7th Edition Tau Codex which released alongside the Kauyon campaign book)

 

I know GW see edition churn as a way to shift products but for me personally it actively inhibits my willingness to engage with the game at all. If I knew that the 10th Edition Codexes were going to still be usable in the next edition I'd be prepared to buy one for every single faction I own models for (which to be honest is most of them). As it is, I'm not prepared to buy any.

 

 

Edited November 27, 2023 by Halandaar

[Special Officer Doofy]

My personal issue with the 3 year edition cycle is less to do with having to buy new books every 3 years and more about how drastically the game and some factions change in that time. From 8th to 10th edition, my main faction death guard went from being durable with 5+++ on everything and Morty being the most expensive primarch to losing all durability, having a melee faction ability on the slowest army, and becoming cheaper than basic Primaris marines (last I checked plague marines were the same cost as tacticals) and Mortarion is now the cheapest and weakest primarch. It's just odd.

 

I can roll with some changes like leaders joining units. Not a fan, but it's not a deal breaker for anyone I know. But other drastic changes kind of ruined it for me like set cost unit sizes and free wargear (power level). Having plague marines go from 5-20 man and being able to take 2 of each special with the 5 man with over priced wargear in 8th to 10th edition with 5-10 man squads, needing the 10th marine to get the second special of anything, and instead of having over costed wargear that one would pick and choose a few upgrades, is now all free wargear and people who built alot of bolter plague marines are now penalized for it (was not complaining about max unit size, I get doubling the wounds means halfing the max size). 

 

The 3 year edition churn with constant resets is a bit much for me. I'll admit, I was one of the ones who wanted a reset for 10th because I saw the power creep and too many faction bonuses of 9th ed, and thought there was little to no way to roll it back with a slow codex churn in 10th. No one is excited to buy a codex where they lose AP on everything and get less rules. I am a huge fan of the idea of the 2 page rules and swapping detatchment bonuses. Just the execution was very poor and for some stupid reason they forced power level masked as points on everyone. There was less balance at the start of 10th than the end of 9th. I could tell from the faction previews that some armies like Eldar were going to soar and poor death guard got hosed. I was accused of being negative about them in the preview, and they came out to be in dead last to second to dead last in the first tournament results and the first GW meta watch. As a casual player with only a few factions, it's not a good sign that from a preview alone I could see the best and worst factions (there was almost a 40% win rate difference). How those two factions made it out of play testing to the edition launch is beyond me.

 

Cherry on top is this edition has codexes coming out at a rate of less than one a month so far. Pretty embarrassing for a billion dollar company in their flagship game. Could you imagine playing a MMO or another table top like D&D and with the edition change / expansions they only updated one class at a time? Every 4-8 weeks they would do another class. The game would fail poorly. I know it's not a one for one comparison, but it's like come on. Spend a few hundred thousand more a year and hire a few more game designers, rules writers and play testers and get the codexes out a little faster and a little more balanced.

Edited November 29, 2023 by Special Officer Doofy

[irlLordy]

12 hours ago, Mogger351 said:

What would those staff be doing the other 2 years of the edition?

 

If they spend one of 3 years writing the books, we must assume they spend a year or so also working on the core rules or index releases if needed, so in reality, you release an edition, spend a year rapid firing books, get 1 year of patches/supplemental content, then nothing for 12 months as they go and work on the next edition. The doesn't also then consider both other game systems nor the fact the teams would need to be a lot bigger to get any form of playtesting done in time.

 

Well the question was more could they release all codexes in a year, and yes, like anything, it _could_ be done if enough resources were pumped into it. As for what they work on the rest of the time, GW do have other games they could be shifted to, along with campaign/crusade/balancing the current edition tasks. Same with playtesters, its just a matter of hiring enough people. 

 

But I don't think GW would ever actually release all the codexes within a year, they're too married to the constant content train, and spreading codexes out has been a proven money maker for them.

[Scribe]

34 minutes ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

My personal issue with the 3 year edition cycle is less to do with having to buy new books every 3 years and more about how drastically the game and some factions change in that time.

 

The 3 year cycle is absurd at this point with the number of factions in the game that have their own books, lump in the Marines that are Base + Dedicated book? Madness.

 

How long was the Guard and WE Codex legal? Oh and the new books are $70 a pop CAD. Nice.

Edited November 27, 2023 by Scribe

[MegaVolt87]

Each of the games work better on alternative cycles, they don't work on the same timeframe. The optimal timing I believe is-

 

AoS- 3 years. The game is very strong and flowing design wise, the faster churn is actually good for this system. I rate this as GW's top system design wise, everything about it just works, clicks for some reason.

 

40k- 4 years. The edition is really two years because it's a minimum of one year to catch everyone up to the new rules. The game is more set/ structured than AoS.

 

HH- 5 years. People hate the churn. It's a refuge for 40k players sick of the 40k treadmill, firstborn 40k erasure and old 40k players. New content is easily delivered via expansion campaign books, OOP re-releases, resin to plastic remakes. 

 

GW should move to a strategy of keeping people in their walled wargaming garden, move away from the cross sell, buy everything/ consume product be excited for next product strategy they are at now. The warhammer community/ customers are not a monolith. Right now, it's pretty easy to pull away because they are fumbling hard on easy layups. 

[DemonGSides]

21 hours ago, MegaVolt87 said:

 

 

GW should move to a strategy of keeping people in their walled wargaming garden, move away from the cross sell, buy everything/ consume product be excited for next product strategy they are at now. The warhammer community/ customers are not a monolith. Right now, it's pretty easy to pull away because they are fumbling hard on easy layups. 

 

Good God, this forum would explode. It was bad enough when the HH plastic got sent to legends, this place was flooded with tears.

 

Segregate then entirely and there'd be blood in the streets!

[Kastor Krieg]

20 minutes ago, DemonGSides said:

 

Good God, this forum would explode. It was bad enough when the HH plastic got sent to legends, this place was flooded with tears.

Segregate then entirely and there'd be blood in the streets!

And rightly so.

 

[Scribe]

37 minutes ago, DemonGSides said:

 

Good God, this forum would explode. It was bad enough when the HH plastic got sent to legends, this place was flooded with tears.

 

Segregate then entirely and there'd be blood in the streets!

 

Thats because it was a bait and switch.

[Indy Techwisp]

Speaking of the New Codex Release Schedule, anyone seen or heard anything about the [REDACTED] block on the roadmap?

Any rumours or anything?

[ZeroWolf]

29 minutes ago, Indy Techwisp said:

Speaking of the New Codex Release Schedule, anyone seen or heard anything about the [REDACTED] block on the roadmap?

Any rumours or anything?

I said before that I thought it could be Emperor's Children based on rumours but it has been pointed out that the army may be an oldie but the cover art spoils something that GW want secret.

[Karhedron]

I think Redacted is just GW's way of trying to be funny when saying TBC. I don't think it implies anything about the content of the codex.

[DemonGSides]

Yeah, the last two REDACTED's we got on a Roadmap way back in 2021 were Genestealers and Adeptus Custodes.

I wouldn't AUTOMATICALLY assume "New army", but I also don't think it's necessarily wrong.  We really just don't know at this point.

[MegaVolt87]

5 hours ago, DemonGSides said:

 

Good God, this forum would explode. It was bad enough when the HH plastic got sent to legends, this place was flooded with tears.

 

Segregate then entirely and there'd be blood in the streets!

 

We have primaris, firstborn erasure marches on, no IA, clear action and intent of range separation (30k and 40k). Its happening already, we have already reached peak malding. Its time to adept or move on, is GW's message. 

Edited November 29, 2023 by MegaVolt87

[Interrogator Stobz]

Yep. Adapt by Moving on. 

Bye bye 40k.

[Bouargh]

4 hours ago, Interrogator Stobz said:

Yep. Adapt by Moving on. 

Bye bye 40k.

 

 Nah... I would not be so extreme.

I would only give up on armies most likely to be concerned or threatened by the great shift:

- SM of all flavours (too many models and potencial big rotation)

- oldies with ranges that have been low on refresh since more than (let´s say) 2 editions (Aeldarii, Drukhari...) - until the circle is broken

- newbies that might see their ranges grow and their playing archetypes evolve (votann)

 

OK. It looks like I removed most of the range. It leaves niche forces ( Knights, WE...), Necrons or Tyranids. Enough to be attractive and deserve investing my dimes? 

 

...

 

Let me think it once or twice

...

 

So, OK, you may be right: bye bye 40k*. And welcome KT**...

 

* I am too addicted I cannot quit even if I´d like to. but I will invest diferently, sure***.

** Time is scarce ressource and KT allows getting a good game in a limited amount time, which fits better to my agenda.

*** and anyway I will probably make poor decisions with low RoI. 

 

Now, back on the codex release under current roadmap: I guess we can stand for almost firm that what we saw in the indexes will remain for the next 4 to 6 quarters. The release rhythm speaks for itself: there is no room for changing yet.

Then the wheel of time and new product introduction will slowly but surely imprint their mark: 1 or 2 new or not so new armies, campaigns books, alt gaming conditions (I pray for Cityfight or Apoc to come back...) and attrition of rules from long living indexes/late scheduled codex release due to balance dataslates... All of this may change the shape and dynamics of future codices, their contents and the amount of phase in / phase out. So Roadmap from Q4 2024 and beyond might be full of surprises.

 

To me, the marlketting plan is clear. Unwritten but obvious and launched for 2 Eds at least. We should not be surprised (vets). Yet, it is still a dirty stuff for new players though. They could legitimatly complain if they choose an army from the current indexes with no known codex release date. They will invest based on a set of rules that may change without any warning.

 

What is "redacted"? Rumours stand for Emperors Childrens, but I dunno: we have a frechly released Primarch in resin for HH and I cannot see an alt version for 40K so soon. Merging the 2 ranges may make sense for this character but what about the other chaos primarchs? as HH is more or less in standby, hard to predict. My feeling would rather beon an utilitarin codex - Imperial agents for example. Someting that may maximize the cross investment between KT and 40K (Inquisitors, assassins, special units with no plan for full codex ever...)

[Interrogator Stobz]

Yeah, it's not a rage quit. It's a slow adaption to reality.

I just only play KT, AT and soon LI.

To me the main game has lost all credibility. 

[ZeroWolf]

5 hours ago, Bouargh said:

 

 Nah... I would not be so extreme.

I would only give up on armies most likely to be concerned or threatened by the great shift:

- SM of all flavours (too many models and potencial big rotation)

- oldies with ranges that have been low on refresh since more than (let´s say) 2 editions (Aeldarii, Drukhari...) - until the circle is broken

- newbies that might see their ranges grow and their playing archetypes evolve (votann)

 

OK. It looks like I removed most of the range. It leaves niche forces ( Knights, WE...), Necrons or Tyranids. Enough to be attractive and deserve investing my dimes? 

 

...

 

Let me think it once or twice

...

 

So, OK, you may be right: bye bye 40k*. And welcome KT**...

 

* I am too addicted I cannot quit even if I´d like to. but I will invest diferently, sure***.

** Time is scarce ressource and KT allows getting a good game in a limited amount time, which fits better to my agenda.

*** and anyway I will probably make poor decisions with low RoI. 

 

Now, back on the codex release under current roadmap: I guess we can stand for almost firm that what we saw in the indexes will remain for the next 4 to 6 quarters. The release rhythm speaks for itself: there is no room for changing yet.

Then the wheel of time and new product introduction will slowly but surely imprint their mark: 1 or 2 new or not so new armies, campaigns books, alt gaming conditions (I pray for Cityfight or Apoc to come back...) and attrition of rules from long living indexes/late scheduled codex release due to balance dataslates... All of this may change the shape and dynamics of future codices, their contents and the amount of phase in / phase out. So Roadmap from Q4 2024 and beyond might be full of surprises.

 

To me, the marlketting plan is clear. Unwritten but obvious and launched for 2 Eds at least. We should not be surprised (vets). Yet, it is still a dirty stuff for new players though. They could legitimatly complain if they choose an army from the current indexes with no known codex release date. They will invest based on a set of rules that may change without any warning.

 

What is "redacted"? Rumours stand for Emperors Childrens, but I dunno: we have a frechly released Primarch in resin for HH and I cannot see an alt version for 40K so soon. Merging the 2 ranges may make sense for this character but what about the other chaos primarchs? as HH is more or less in standby, hard to predict. My feeling would rather beon an utilitarin codex - Imperial agents for example. Someting that may maximize the cross investment between KT and 40K (Inquisitors, assassins, special units with no plan for full codex ever...)

While EC is rumoured either way, I wouldn't put any weight on FW Fulgrim release as the left hand does not talk to the right. I suspect that GW already made their money from FW Fulgrim so would eagerly release plastic Fulgrim to mop up those who held out...and those that want all the Fulgrims (except Clone Fulgrim...you'll never get an official model that I reckon*)

 

So yeah, EC may or may not come next year but Forge Worlds Fulgrim release will have had no bearing whatsoever.

 

*- Watch this age well...

[marspeople]

Also the people who would buy 30k resin Fulgrim are not the same people who would buy plastic 40k Fulrim to go with an Emperor's Children army.

I would bet the overlap would be very low.

[Orion]

17 minutes ago, marspeople said:

Also the people who would buy 30k resin Fulgrim are not the same people who would buy plastic 40k Fulrim to go with an Emperor's Children army.

I would bet the overlap would be very low.

Agreed.
Fulgrim Ascended is more of a collectors piece than a standard unit.

 

Meanwhile has anyone seen a 40k World Eaters army without Angron?
The army has basically become Angron ft backup dancers.

[Bouargh]

6 minutes ago, marspeople said:

Also the people who would buy 30k resin Fulgrim are not the same people who would buy plastic 40k Fulrim to go with an Emperor's Children army.

I would bet the overlap would be very low.

 

Indeed, but mainly because Fulrim in resin is twice the price of a plastic Daemon Primarch... It is filtering a lot through adquisitive power. Yet I can´t help thinking that getting a resin exalted proimarch and potencialy a plastic daemon one is... an "interesting" strategy I do not necesarilly suscribe to.