# Phil Kelly writing the Tau 'dex?



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

This seems to be the most speculative of the 3 upcoming codices' authors. AFAIK, Ward is on Necrons, Cruddace is on Sisters, and that leaves Kelly and Hoare - of which the latter is better at WHFB.

It seems to be the going assumption that the Tau codex is done by either Phil Kelly or Phil Kelly and Andy Hoare. What does everyone think?


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)

Wait.... Matt Ward is doing Necrons??????
Oh god, don't let him write(rewrite) the rules/fluff for Ctans. 

Honestly, i highly doubt that 3 non-marine codices would be released in a row.
I would expect to see Dark Angels and/or Black Templars released in between Necrons and Tau.
(Remember, GW have an obsession for Marines)


----------



## Chaosftw (Oct 20, 2008)

KingOfCheese said:


> Honestly, i highly doubt that 3 non-marine codices would be released in a row.
> I would expect to see Dark Angels and/or Black Templars released in between Necrons and Tau.
> (Remember, GW have an obsession for Marines)


Ya I have to agree, no way they would bring three codices with out some marines in the mix (Hopefully CSM). Unless the SoB are somehow connected to marines they could possibly justify that as the Marine Dex P


----------



## Azezel (May 23, 2010)

Andy Hoar left GW a few years ago. He's freelance and writing for Fantasy Flight Games these days.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

Sisters is Imperial. Their release algorithm is always xeno, imps, xeno, imps etc. ad nauseam. Sisters are comfortably sandwiched between Tau and Necs.

And Black Templars will be in the starter set for 6th along with Eldar to tie in with Dark Millennium Online.

Dark Angels? Just wishlisting. Nothing credible has been said one way or other that there would be a DA release. It's just DA players having a bit of a panic that they'll get the 4th. ed BA treatment (White Dwarf + free .pdf)

Which, to be fair, I wouldn't mind.


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> Their release algorithm is always xeno, imps, xeno, imps etc.


5th ed started off with SM, then IG, then SW.....

Kinda throws that theory out the window now doesn't it. :laugh:


Basically, GW love loyalist marines.
Not just any loyalists, and not just any marines, but loyallist marines.
They would even have to sandwich the CSM codex between 2 loyalist marine codices to be able to release it.


----------



## TheSpore (Oct 15, 2009)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> Sisters is Imperial. Their release algorithm is always xeno, imps, xeno, imps etc. ad nauseam. Sisters are comfortably sandwiched between Tau and Necs.
> 
> .


Thank you so much finally some one sees this flippin pattern i have been preaching about forever.



KingOfCheese said:


> 5th ed started off with SM, then IG, then SW.....
> 
> Kinda throws that theory out the window now doesn't it. :laugh:
> 
> ...


That may be how GW started 5th yes but when you analyze data and search for a pattern you have to go with the most current and accurate data which shows that GW puts out an imp. dex then a xenos dex. The pattern resembles this quite accurately. Now I am not saying this can't change because it can. if you look at 4th ed. there were times where two xenos/chaos books put out but as of late the pattern shows the above

There is no need for you to post back to back within a minute of each post. Next time use the edit button - The Wraithlord


----------



## gally912 (Jan 31, 2009)

KingOfCheese said:


> 5th ed started off with SM, then IG, then SW.....
> 
> Kinda throws that theory out the window now doesn't it. :laugh:
> 
> ...


Have the Tyranids been forgotten so soon?


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)

gally912 said:


> Have the Tyranids been forgotten so soon?


Tyranids were released AFTER the Space Wolves, not before.


----------



## yanlou (Aug 17, 2008)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> And Black Templars will be in the starter set for 6th along with Eldar to tie in with Dark Millennium Online.


Again with the assumption that BT will be the featured chapter in Dark Millennium, this had not even been confirmed yet, so the release for BT can not even be based on the release of Dark Millennium.


----------



## aboytervigon (Jul 6, 2010)

Don't worry cheese Necrons are going to get powerful and there fluff ruined good thing I can always look at the original dex.


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)

TheSpore said:


> if you look at 4th ed. there were times where two xenos/chaos books put out but as of late the pattern shows the above


It was actually CSM, then Orks, the Daemons.
So 3 non-Imperial codices in a row, with Orks splitting the 2 Chaos books.



If its any easier guys, the Wikipedia page has the release dates in a table in order of date.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_(Warhammer_40,000)




> 5th Edition
> Codex	ISBN	Release Date
> Grey Knights April 2nd 2011
> Dark Eldar	ISBN 978-1-84154-978-1	November 2010
> ...


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

Well the Orks were supposed to come out between SM and IG but were released end of 4th instead.


----------



## Chaosftw (Oct 20, 2008)

TheSpore said:


> That may be how GW started 5th yes but when you analyze data and search for a pattern you have to go with the most current and accurate data which shows that GW puts out an imp. dex then a xenos dex. The pattern resembles this quite accurately. Now I am not saying this can't change because it can. if you look at 4th ed. there were times where two xenos/chaos books put out but as of late the pattern shows the above


This is completely wrong. To get accurate readings on data you must take a significant chunk not just start picking and choosing where to start recording. This will make your readings more inaccurate and heavily skewed.

Chaosftw


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

Damn it. Personly Tau, Necs, and SoB all need to be release next, but then 6th comes out for Eldar and BT? Fuck that. Eldar and Orks are well made 4th dexes. Chaos and DAs need updates bad. Considering that I see more Chaos (CSM/Daemon) players than I do any other non SM player I dont understand how they are neglecting them a early Update in 6th so they can rake in more profits? Or are Eldar a super seller. Now I think about it does any one kno a link or way to find out what sells the most. Or we can only guess work?


----------



## Chaosftw (Oct 20, 2008)

Warlock in Training said:


> Damn it. Personly Tau, Necs, and SoB all need to be release next, but then 6th comes out for Eldar and BT? Fuck that. Eldar and Orks are well made 4th dexes. Chaos and DAs need updates bad. Considering that I see more Chaos (CSM/Daemon) players than I do any other non SM player I dont understand how they are neglecting them a early Update in 6th so they can rake in more profits? Or are Eldar a super seller. Now I think about it does any one kno a link or way to find out what sells the most. Or we can only guess work?


That would be a very interesting study to see done. I am sure they have the numbers but for them to release them I think would be very cool.


----------



## Marneus Calgar (Dec 5, 2007)

KingOfCheese said:


> Wait.... Matt Ward is doing Necrons??????
> Oh god, don't let him write(rewrite) the rules/fluff for Ctans.
> 
> Honestly, i highly doubt that 3 non-marine codices would be released in a row.
> ...


Also, don't forget how the codex cycle has been recently. Imperial, Non imperial, Imperial, Non imperial. The next codex has got to be Necrons going by that logic, however the one after that will be imperial (by the same logic), meaning we won't see Tau or any xenos until 2 codexes time (provided Necs are next).


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)

Marneus Calgar said:


> Also, don't forget how the codex cycle has been recently. Imperial, Non imperial, Imperial, Non imperial. The next codex has got to be Necrons going by that logic, however the one after that will be imperial (by the same logic), meaning we won't see Tau or any xenos until 2 codexes time (provided Necs are next).


See previous post....



KingOfCheese said:


> 5th ed started off with SM, then IG, then SW.....
> 
> Kinda throws that theory out the window now doesn't it. :laugh:
> 
> ...


----------



## TheSpore (Oct 15, 2009)

Chaosftw said:


> This is completely wrong. To get accurate readings on data you must take a significant chunk not just start picking and choosing where to start recording. This will make your readings more inaccurate and heavily skewed.
> 
> Chaosftw


excuse me for being a lil wrong and frogetting to leave a lil out. When I research and analyze data to predict or asses future occurances I have to check both sources history and try to find commonalities that form a pattern.
If my research shows more data to support the most likely scenario then that is what I must go with , vut at the same time I cannot rule out the least likely. I may be still quite new to the analyst game but I do know quite a bit. So for that I am sorry if I got things a lil wrong but you must agree when looking at the current stat of GW a Pattern does form.


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

Chaosftw said:


> This is completely wrong. To get accurate readings on data you must take a significant chunk not just start picking and choosing where to start recording. This will make your readings more inaccurate and heavily skewed.
> 
> Chaosftw


Ok lets try it from 2nd editiion (ignoring things like codex assassins and multi codex):

2nd
Eldar
Orks
Wolves
Guard
Nids
Marines
Chaos
Sisters

3rd
marines
d eldar
b angels
chaos
orks
eldar
guard
catchans
wolves
eldar
nids
tau
necrons
chaos
daemon hunters
guard
witch hunters

4th
marines
catchans
nids
templars
tau
eldar
d angels
chaos
orks
daemons

5th
marines
guard
wolves
nids
b angels
d eldar
grey knights


So - basically appart from 5th edition (which goes marines, something else, marines etc)there is no pattern.

However, dissmissing the current release pattern as inaccurate is misleading at best. Just because they used to put 4 armies in a mini dex does not mean they ever will again. So, although they have never stuck to a marines,something else pattern in previous editions does not mean they wont do so in this edition.


----------



## Chaosftw (Oct 20, 2008)

TheSpore said:


> excuse me for being a lil wrong and frogetting to leave a lil out. When I research and analyze data to predict or asses future occurances I have to check both sources history and try to find commonalities that form a pattern.
> If my research shows more data to support the most likely scenario then that is what I must go with , vut at the same time I cannot rule out the least likely. I may be still quite new to the analyst game but I do know quite a bit. So for that I am sorry if I got things a lil wrong but you must agree when looking at the current stat of GW a Pattern does form.


I dont know anything about predicting what is coming out nor do I care for the most part. Putting all this thought into hypothesis' just seems like a waste of time. Just wait for them to tell you and go with that... but anyway....

yes... your data shows that your theory is true but the point I was making is anyone can select specific data to make their theory true.

At the end of the day it does not matter ether way.

Chaosftw


----------



## TheSpore (Oct 15, 2009)

Honestly when looking at it. It seems that everyyear there is somethinig done diffrently. I still asses you will se the crons next the SoBs. In all honesty it also seems that GW is tring to start getting releases every month rather than every few or so months. Right after the GKs GW already has a new army book set in stone for next release in may. So I am assuming we will here soon what is coming next after the either the first of may or the 7th


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)

[joke]
Actually, i am almost certain that the next codex to be released will be WardMarines, a sub-chapter of the UltraMarines.
The main HQ will be UberWard, a reincarnation of the Emperor himself, armed with a DCCW and a Demolisher Cannon, who single-handedly defeated Khorne and created an unbalance in the warp, causing the entire Daemon realm to cave in on itself and cease to exist.
Against any non-imperial army, you automatically win the game if you roll a 2+ on a D6 at the start of the game as they are too overcome by the awesomeness of UberWard, and against loyalist armies your opponent will join your forces instead of fighting.
For an extra 10 points he can make Heavy Support choices a Troops choice, and if you take his sidekick LittleWard for an extra 50 points then all dedicated transports are free.
[/joke]
:laugh:




Honestly though, i dont think there is any real pattern in GW release strategy.
They could release 2 marine in a row, or 2 non-marine.
The only pattern that will remain consistent will be that 50% of the releases will be loyalist marines of some sort.


----------



## TheSpore (Oct 15, 2009)

Chaosftw said:


> I dont know anything about predicting what is coming out nor do I care for the most part. Putting all this thought into hypothesis' just seems like a waste of time. Just wait for them to tell you and go with that... but anyway....
> 
> yes... your data shows that your theory is true but the point I was making is anyone can select specific data to make their theory true.
> 
> ...


Yes that is true you can select only data that meets your point. Lawyers do it all the time. But when coming form my background of being a military intel. analyst we must look over all aspects of the data and information given. We cannot create bias assesments it has to all coincide and meet in the middle.


----------



## Underground Heretic (Aug 9, 2008)

I would be rather happy to see Kelly writing the new Tau codex. I've been playing Eldar for a while and they still viable in 5th. Space Wolves and Dark Eldar, Kelly's two 5th ed codices, are both very powerful even if Dark Eldar are flimsy. Both codices can do what they need to in 5th well and I would love to see a 3rd, 4th, 5th troops choice for Tau so I can have more than one that isn't bubble wrap.


----------



## Chaosftw (Oct 20, 2008)

TheSpore said:


> Yes that is true you can select only data that meets your point. Lawyers do it all the time. But when coming form my background of being a military intel. analyst we must look over all aspects of the data and information given. We cannot create bias assesments it has to all coincide and meet in the middle.


I find this some what comical because I practice Law and to assume that is how we work as a whole is for the most part incorrect. 

As for your comment I am somewhat confused. You were the one who made a bias assessment by "only [selecting] data that meets your point" which is why I commented when I did. This comment now seems like your contradicting yourself and saying I made the data selection :S.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

I would not mind seeing this happen. Phil Kelly normally writes decent codexes with good rules and holds back the fanboyism (He even managed it with Eldar which surprised me to no end).

However any chaos player saying their codex "needs" updating before BT and Eldar can fuck right off now. You have a decent codex with more than one build unlike Eldar but it is boring. Quit whining about it and just wait in line like every other poor bugger.


----------



## TheSpore (Oct 15, 2009)

Chaosftw said:


> I find this some what comical because I practice Law and to assume that is how we work as a whole is for the most part incorrect.
> 
> As for your comment I am somewhat confused. You were the one who made a bias assessment by "only [selecting] data that meets your point" which is why I commented when I did. This comment now seems like your contradicting yourself and saying I made the data selection :S.


Look when I created my assesment initially I did take in consideration the data from the past. I did notice that there was no initial pattern, but as I progressed my research I started to see a pattern form. I considered two oiptions 
1. There may be no pattern and GW will release whatever becomes ready first.
2. There is a pattern and it seems every 4 to 6 months there is a codex release and lately it has been imp. and the a non- imp. 

I didnt dicount data to make my own point I only chose what I saw to be the most likely outcome. This is why normally you have several analyst working as a team to derive a proper assesment. It helps rule biasness and many other small things that are completely irrelevent.

As for the lawyer thing Ill be honest I don't know a immense amount on how lawyers do there work. Its just some of what Ive seen from own POV. So if you practice law it was not a pu n aginst you in anyway


----------



## Chaosftw (Oct 20, 2008)

Underground Heretic said:


> I would be rather happy to see Kelly writing the new Tau codex. I've been playing Eldar for a while and they still viable in 5th. Space Wolves and Dark Eldar, Kelly's two 5th ed codices, are both very powerful even if Dark Eldar are flimsy. Both codices can do what they need to in 5th well and I would love to see a 3rd, 4th, 5th troops choice for Tau so I can have more than one that isn't bubble wrap.


I would have to agree with your statement as far as the ELDAR still being viable. I also agree that Tau need some help because they are really falling behind the 8 ball in 5th.




Stephen_Newman said:


> I would not mind seeing this happen. Phil Kelly normally writes decent codexes with good rules and holds back the fanboyism (He even managed it with Eldar which surprised me to no end).
> 
> However any chaos player saying their codex "needs" updating before BT and Eldar can fuck right off now. You have a decent codex with more than one build unlike Eldar but it is boring. Quit whining about it and just wait in line like every other poor bugger.


Hey now BT and Eldar codices only came out 4 and 2 months respectively before the Chaos one. They are all over due for an upgrade. But the main reason Chaos players (IMO) complain now (I am one of them) is because our "New Codex" basically took away a lot of our neat abilities that we had in the previous codex. (Again MY OPINION) The new codex basically dumbed down the play style and the abilities the Chaos players were given two codices ago.

So please don't say Chaos players need to stop bitching because Eldar and BT players deserve codices more (frankly the only reason you hear us complain more is because there are more of us....*side note* uh oh supply demand (we should start that argument again! <kidding :headbutt::headbutt::headbutt:>)). All you are really saying is something along the lines 'Chaos Players stop bitching so that the Eldar and BT players can gripe and moan more and be noticed' :victory::victory:



TheSpore said:


> Look when I created my assesment initially I did take in consideration the data from the past. I did notice that there was no initial pattern, but as I progressed my research I started to see a pattern form. I considered two oiptions
> 1. There may be no pattern and GW will release whatever becomes ready first.
> 2. There is a pattern and it seems every 4 to 6 months there is a codex release and lately it has been imp. and the a non- imp.
> 
> ...


I really dont care that much so please dont make it seem like I do. I see where you are going now and it makes more sense. Again I was making the comment purely on what you said in the first post and nothing more. After all everything is hypothesis so no one can really be wrong at the end of the day.

As for the lawyer bit I only chuckled because its a common misconception. Which is totally fine because a lot of lawyers work that way so based on data you would be inclined to say that ((see what I did there with the whole data thing)Making a bad joke sorry lol) so i truly take no offence and I honestly got a good chuckle.


As I mentioned earlier as far as what comes next I truly care. Any update is a good update. :grin::grin:

Chaosftw


----------



## TheSpore (Oct 15, 2009)

Chaosftw said:


> I really dont care that much so please dont make it seem like I do. I see where you are going now and it makes more sense. Again I was making the comment purely on what you said in the first post and nothing more. After all everything is hypothesis so no one can really be wrong at the end of the day.
> 
> As for the lawyer bit I only chuckled because its a common misconception. Which is totally fine because a lot of lawyers work that way so based on data you would be inclined to say that ((see what I did there with the whole data thing)Making a bad joke sorry lol) so i truly take no offence and I honestly got a good chuckle.
> 
> ...


Well im glad I could give a good chuckle anyway. I agree I guess honestly we will find out when GW says so. Until then its not really worth the effort to try create assesments based on research about WH40k.


----------



## The Wraithlord (Jan 1, 2007)

In all honesty I would like to see Ward write ALL the books for 40K. Why would I want this you ask? Simple: then all the books would be balanced for the most part and 40K would work in a similar manner to Warmachine. WM armies are broken, ALL OF THEM. Each WM army and damn near each unit is broken in some way and yet because of that the game is balanced. None of this crap like we get now with Necrons vs Grey Knights or Tau vs Blood Angels where one army is uber powerful and the other is pretty much screwed from the get go because one is cheesy and one is a weak codex. Ward has proven that he can do two things: make the book he is working on ridiculously powerful and he writes a codex that is also fairly balanced within its own units with most units being viable choices instead of just one troop out of 4 for example. So I say let him write all the books.

Actually the rumour I had heard was that Ward was in fact writing the Tau codex which has had me in evil chuckles ever since :so_happy:


----------



## Underground Heretic (Aug 9, 2008)

The rumor I heard was Cruddace, which in my gaming group is thought worse, but any of the three would be good for their own reason. Ward is internally balanced, Kelly always has a 'death star' worthy unit (e.g. seer council, TWC) while the rest are generally viable and Cruddace can write in good shooting and will always make someone mad. There's not much more fun than getting people to rave about guard and tyranids.


----------



## Diatribe1974 (Jul 15, 2010)

Who's to say that GW will release ONLY one codex update at once? Since rumours are constantly suggesting any one of 3 potential updates, what's to stop them from releasing, say....2 at once? Double cash cow coming their direction in the codex department, let alone all the yummy new models they'll release? We're happy. They're happy. Seems like a win-win to me.


----------



## Arkanor (Jan 1, 2010)

Diatribe1974 said:


> Who's to say that GW will release ONLY one codex update at once? Since rumours are constantly suggesting any one of 3 potential updates, what's to stop them from releasing, say....2 at once? Double cash cow coming their direction in the codex department, let alone all the yummy new models they'll release? We're happy. They're happy. Seems like a win-win to me.


Some of the sales from one book would cut into the other. By releasing them sequentially you don't eat into your own market.


----------



## Diatribe1974 (Jul 15, 2010)

Arkanor said:


> Some of the sales from one book would cut into the other. By releasing them sequentially you don't eat into your own market.



There's folks out there (like me) who have ZERO interest in certain armies. I know for a fact, that I will NEVER buy anything related to the Necrons. With that being said, I'll eventually get into Orks, Tau and some other Space Marine chapters for shits & giggles. For me, the more, the merrier.


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

Diatribe1974 said:


> There's folks out there (like me) who have ZERO interest in certain armies. I know for a fact, that I will NEVER buy anything related to the Necrons. With that being said, I'll eventually get into Orks, Tau and some other Space Marine chapters for shits & giggles. For me, the more, the merrier.


erm - how much of a contradicton do you want in one paragraph?

You say in the first sentance that people like you have zero interrest in some armies - but then in the last paragraph say you will also like to get 3 or 4 other armies.

Therefore, if they released those 3 or 4 all at the same time, you will likely only do one of them. However, if they were all done about a year appart, you might actually make all 4!


----------



## Diatribe1974 (Jul 15, 2010)

Maidel said:


> erm - how much of a contradicton do you want in one paragraph?
> 
> You say in the first sentance that people like you have zero interrest in some armies - but then in the last paragraph say you will also like to get 3 or 4 other armies.
> 
> Therefore, if they released those 3 or 4 all at the same time, you will likely only do one of them. However, if they were all done about a year appart, you might actually make all 4!


Did I say "Go ahead and release 3-4 codex at the same time?"

No.

No I didn't.

What I did say was that I would "eventually get into Orks, Tau & some other Space Marines chapter".

Now, with that being said, which of those currently are rumoured to have an updated Codex? Oh yeah, that's right: Just the Tau.

But back to what I said originally in that some people don't care for certain armies at all. For me, it's the Necrons. For others, it's the Space Marines. For others, it's Orks. The list goes on and on. Essentially, no matter how cool it is made/updated, they'll never buy into it. What's 1-2 29$ codex update to those folks who paid 50$ for a Horus Heresy novella with 10-45$ shipping added in?

Not much at all.

Someone could argue "Well, there's not only those 2 codex updates that cost 58$ for them, but then all the updated miniatures that'll be released at the same time as well.

Oh, you mean that once an update comes out, that I MUST buy the updated models right away? Really? I thought I had choice here.


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

Diatribe1974 said:


> Who's to say that GW will release ONLY one codex update at once?


Whilst GW have almost certainly been looking at getting codexes out faster it would still be one at a time even without large model releases


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

Diatribe1974 said:


> Did I say "Go ahead and release 3-4 codex at the same time?"
> 
> No.
> 
> ...


Hang on - you answered in response to a quote about ensuring they were released sequentially - if you didnt mean to imply releasing them in pairs/groups/together - then it was a bad choice of posts to quote because thats how it read.



> But back to what I said originally in that some people don't care for certain armies at all. For me, it's the Necrons. For others, it's the Space Marines. For others, it's Orks. The list goes on and on. Essentially, no matter how cool it is made/updated, they'll never buy into it. What's 1-2 29$ codex update to those folks who paid 50$ for a Horus Heresy novella with 10-45$ shipping added in?


So what are you trying to say? I dont understand - just because one person doesnt like necrons should they release something else at the sametime? what happens if he doesnt like that either. You really arent making much sense.



> Someone could argue "Well, there's not only those 2 codex updates that cost 58$ for them, but then all the updated miniatures that'll be released at the same time as well.
> 
> Oh, you mean that once an update comes out, that I MUST buy the updated models right away? Really? I thought I had choice here.


So, you think the best marketing solution is to release the rules and then worry about the models later...

They tried that for years - it FAILED miserably - people want the models to go with the codex - the codex and white dwarf is one massive advert to sell more models - its like advertising a film, spending all that money, and then releasing it 2 years later when all the hype has died down and no one cares anymore.


----------



## Diatribe1974 (Jul 15, 2010)

Bindi Baji said:


> Whilst GW have almost certainly been looking at getting codexes out faster it would still be one at a time even without large model releases


To me, the Tau & Necrons are a far, far stronger draw than the SoB are for the average players. While I could be wrong, all I'm saying is that GW could potentially say: 

"Hey everyone, we're releasing a Tau Codex update in June and Sisters of Battle update in September! Enjoy!"

Yes, it's not exactly a "release at the same time" I mentioned earlier, but in the grand scheme of things, it's better than the "Q3 2011 release of XXX codex, then Q2 of 2012, a codex update for XXX, then in Q4 an update to XXX's codex"


----------



## Diatribe1974 (Jul 15, 2010)

Maidel said:


> Hang on - you answered in response to a quote about ensuring they were released sequentially - if you didnt mean to imply releasing them in pairs/groups/together - then it was a bad choice of posts to quote because thats how it read.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What I said (please re-read it) was that just because they release the codex update & the new models that goes along with it, doesn't mean that I have to buy them both at the same time. Let me expand upon this for you, in an effort to explain my rationale here. If I was a Tau player and I'm getting my codex updated and the Sisters of Battle update came out at the exact same time (or very close to it) as my Tau codex was release and I was somewhat interested in play the SoB, I could pick up both codex updates, but not the new models. Why? It's simple:

1) I already have a standing army to use to apply the new rules/fluff for my Tau army. Sure, the new models would be sweet to add into the mix, but I can honestly get away with not buy the new models for the time being.

2) Since the Sisters of Battle are one of those "Hmm, let me see if I like them" category, simply buying the codex and reading up on them is one thing. Since they're not my main army (in this theoretical scenario, the Tau are), I'm in no real hurry to build a SoB army.

3) Even in spending the money on 2-29$ codex updates, I'm only out 58$ plus whatever shipping was (if ordered, otherwise, figure in whatever VAT or Sales Tax applicable, or both), who's to say that I couldn't pick up both the codex updates and the new models at the same time? Are you suggesting that GW would release 200-300$ of new models for each army? (unless you do a Pokemon in which you "Gotta collect'em all", there was about 95-105$ worth of new GK's that folks shot for with their codex update).


----------



## Maidel (Jun 28, 2009)

Diatribe1974 said:


> 3) Even in spending the money on 2-29$ codex updates, I'm only out 58$ plus whatever shipping was (if ordered, otherwise, figure in whatever VAT or Sales Tax applicable, or both), who's to say that I couldn't pick up both the codex updates and the new models at the same time? Are you suggesting that GW would release 200-300$ of new models for each army? (unless you do a Pokemon in which you "Gotta collect'em all", there was about 95-105$ worth of new GK's that folks shot for with their codex update).


You absolutely dont understand GW marketing strategy.

They want to make each army they release 'the greatest thing ever' and they want to recuit new gamers each time they release an army (when I say 'new' I mean new to that army, new or old gamers in general makes no difference).

When I worked in GW I had this carefully explained to me. GW does not give a rats backside about veteran gamers. They dont spend anywhere near as much money as 'new' gamers as all they are doing is picking up a codex and some paints and the odd model kit - they want people to spend money buying entire armies - thats their entire aim.

They want you to pick up the white dwarf and scream 'screw these imperial guard I bought in 2001, I want to go and spend my money buying an entire grey knight army because they are just that damn cool'.

This is the thing that people cant get their head around - they dont want you to simply 'buy a codex' (which is what most long term players will do) - they want people to buy models - models keep them in business. Therefore everything is placed around big releases - codex, 2-5 new plastic kits, shiney expensive new character models. Releasing the codex and then trying to build up hype to buy the models later on just doesnt work. They are trying to drag it out a bit using the split release and as far as I know the sole reason for that is that it lets them split their design team a bit so as to let them get the codexes out faster, but allow longer times for some of the model designers to finish off the models without delaying the codex.


----------



## ashikenshin (Mar 25, 2010)

that makes sense

*hides his brand new dark eldar army*


----------



## Arkive (Jan 18, 2010)

WOW, nice system... I'm a victim to "new army" syndrome, now im making a tau army and GK army on top my necron, my bro's SM and Jungle fighters


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

Phil Kelly on Tau? 

I rate this as good news. He knows how to write a xeno codex without destroying them.


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)

Serpion5 said:


> Phil Kelly on Tau?
> 
> I rate this as good news. He knows how to write a xeno codex without destroying them.


I agree.
I think Phil Kelly is definately one of the better codex authors on the team.
His Eldar codex has stood the test of time far better than most others have.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

I was quite impressed with Dark Eldar as well. A solid and competitive list, but still well fallible, as my nids soon proved. :good: 

If only he had been given necrons.


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)

Necrons have a 3+ save.... so they automatically go to Matt Ward.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

But they are also xenos, so I was hoping for Phil Kelly. Really hoping. :wasntme:

I know Matt Ward will write a solid and competitive list, what really worries me is what he`s going to do with the fluff. There`s potential for fantastic storywriting here if he only keeps his enthusiasm in check. 

But then, these are not astartes, so maybe he won`t go so overboard? :scratchhead:


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

TheSpore said:


> Yes that is true you can select only data that meets your point. Lawyers do it all the time. But when coming form my background of being a military intel. analyst we must look over all aspects of the data and information given. We cannot create bias assesments it has to all coincide and meet in the middle.


You come from a military intel background? I can see now why Military Intelligence is an Oxymoron. You analysis is flawed you must be able to see that.


----------



## Stephen_Newman (Jul 14, 2009)

Phil Kelly normally does write good codexes. It is why I was annoyed Robin Cruddace wrote the current Tyranid Codex. The last one was a work of art and worked really well. I still think they would hold well in the current game.


----------



## The Wraithlord (Jan 1, 2007)

Isn't Phil Kelly the one that wrote the utter joke that is the Chaos codex? If so, I hope to all the gods that they don't let him get a hold of either the Tau or Chaos for a second time.


----------



## TheSpore (Oct 15, 2009)

The Wraithlord said:


> Isn't Phil Kelly the one that wrote the utter joke that is the Chaos codex? If so, I hope to all the gods that they don't let him get a hold of either the Tau or Chaos for a second time.


that was gav thorpe and some other dude. I know it wasnt phil though


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

Yeah CSM was Gav Thorpe and Alessio Cavatore. That can't really be held up as a good example though as the whole design team had an input and tried to move the game in a different direction which didn't work so well (Well the idea was good, people just hated it).

The CSM Codex negitive reaction is why we have the Grey Knight codex that we've got, you get what you whine for.


----------



## KingOfCheese (Jan 4, 2010)

Yet Alessio Cavatore wrote the rules for Kings Of War, which i enjoy playing a lot more than i do playing 40k.


----------



## Hammer49 (Feb 12, 2011)

TheSpore said:


> that was gav thorpe and some other dude. I know it wasnt phil though


The chaos codex was written by Gav thorpe and Alessio cavatore, and they ttook the whole streamlining objective to far.

Fingers crossed that Phil kelly writes the codex, as he usually does a good job


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

KingOfCheese said:


> Yet Alessio Cavatore wrote the rules for Kings Of War, which i enjoy playing a lot more than i do playing 40k.


That's the thing, the CSM codex is good and Cavatore was correct it's just people are too precious over having rules to represent things which makes it impossible to streamline. That's why every man and his dog has an actual rule to say what a special snowflake they are.


----------



## SilverTabby (Jul 31, 2009)

I play using the current Chaos Codex. There is nothing wrong with it. The main reason people complain about it is because they remember the previous one, in which every single unit had it's own special rules, and each God had it's own special rules, and it took 5 hours to write a 1K list because the layout was frankly _horrendous_. 

The current 'dex wins games, has options to make god-specific armies that work, includes daemons in a way that encourages their use rather than limiting it (if I had to take daemonettes I wouldn't bother - I'd rather have marines stats and the ability to assault after DSing, thank you!). 

Not everything needs a special rule to make it 'good'. Some writers realise this, some don't. Some players realise this, some don't. Unfortunatly, the ones that don't tend to be the loudest and most vocal, and constantly complain that they've somehow been 'jipped'. 

Another case in point - I regularly play Sisters of Battle. It's an ancient codex, and despite often forgetting I have access to Acts of Faith and never once having remembered the psychic shield rules, I can win because at it's core, even without the special snowflake rules, it's a solid army list. If they change or take away Acts of Faith, if it's got a solid core then I'll still be happy. 
The same happened with my 'nids. A lot of the special snowflake stuff and customisability went, but it was still solid at it's core which is why I can still win with it. 

Where am I going with this post? Not entirely sure, but one thing I'm basically saying is _stop whinging about the bloody Chaos Codex based off comparisons to the previous edition._

Back on topic: 
Phil's a lovely bloke, who enjoys playing games for fun. If he's writing a Codex then it may not be the most broken and tourney-winning thing out there, but the lists you can make will be fun. Which to me, is the most important thing in a _game._ So I'm happy for Phil to write the Codex for any of the armies I play :biggrin:


----------



## TheSpore (Oct 15, 2009)

SilverTabby said:


> I play using the current Chaos Codex. There is nothing wrong with it. The main reason people complain about it is because they remember the previous one, in which every single unit had it's own special rules, and each God had it's own special rules, and it took 5 hours to write a 1K list because the layout was frankly _horrendous_.
> 
> The current 'dex wins games, has options to make god-specific armies that work, includes daemons in a way that encourages their use rather than limiting it (if I had to take daemonettes I wouldn't bother - I'd rather have marines stats and the ability to assault after DSing, thank you!).
> 
> ...


I agree with the current chaos book. It can feel a little limiting at times because of the undivided legions but you can still do a good fluffy army based around them if you want. The main reason I started doing CSM is just to help prove that it is a good solid dex that can have plenty of options and fun builds within it. The sisters however I can't really comment on since its been almost 4 years since ive ran a sisters army but I still love that army and just get all giddy thinking about them gettin a new book soon.


----------



## Abomination (Jul 6, 2008)

Seeing as Phill Kelly is an exceptionally talented individual I can't think of anyone better to be writing the codex. Kelly gives his codex's awesome fluff without going into Matt Ward levels of tomfoolery while ensuring the army list has synergy, multiple builds, balance (Phill Kelly does not undercost his units, other authors merely over-cost there's, deal with it) and competitiveness. He is a genius and I'm sure the Tau Codex will be awesome as a result if he does indeed end up being the writer.

It makes sense, Necrons would probably be either Ward or Cruddance (I'm leaning towards cruddance given he's TK and Necrons are TK in space) while a SoB would likely go to which one of those guys was free (Kelly ain't to fond of writing Imperial dex's, SW's are the exception because we are so much more awesome than the rest of you) and Ward does do alot of Imperial dex's.


----------



## TheSpore (Oct 15, 2009)

I think ward will be involved with the sisters but I don't think he will be the main writer


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

Yeah Ward made an "oops" statement in White Dwarf making it sound like he was involved with Sisters.

But I don't think Cruddace will be allowed to write another Xenos codex after slaughtering every Tyranid player's hopes and dreams, relegating them from top tier to absolutely-freaking-bottom-of-the-barrel.

So it's Cruddace on Sisters, that much I'm convinced. And I don't think Kelly is on Necrons, I just can't see it.

Kelly -> Tau
Cruddace or more likely Cruddace & Ward -> Sisters
Ward -> Necrons

Seems to be the best bet.


----------



## experiment 626 (Apr 26, 2007)

Abomination said:


> It makes sense, Necrons would probably be either Ward or Cruddance (I'm leaning towards cruddance given he's TK and Necrons are TK in space) while a SoB would likely go to which one of those guys was free (Kelly ain't to fond of writing Imperial dex's, SW's are the exception because we are so much more awesome than the rest of you) and Ward does do alot of Imperial dex's.


It's not that Phil hates writing Imperial 'dexes, he simply dislikes marines since;
a) He likes being different from the norm
b) One of his best gaming mates is a massive space marine nutter!
He loves space wolves, because of the fact that they farted on the codex astartes as a bad joke, they're all about personal honour & deeds and the norse mythology! Space Wolves are vastly different from every other marine army - almost to the point of being more akin to chaos marines at times with their tactics & playstyle.

I wouldn't be surprised if he's helped out with some of the necron backstory though. (especially with all the rummors that Ward was having alot of trouble with it...:scratchhead I remember how excited he was when they did the first 'cron book as the true visceral sci-fi horror really appealed to him.

If Phil's getting the tau codex, then you can bet they'll have a bit more of a darker edge to them, and they'll come across a wee bit more like the liars & slimey politicians that they really are too, who are simply out to use other races for their own filthy means! (which I really like as they're seen as a bit too 'goody-too-shoes' IMHO right now...)
Mind you, there's also been a few rummors that Phil's been working on the Templar 'dex too?

Cheers!


----------



## Bindi Baji (Apr 23, 2009)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> But I don't think Cruddace will be allowed to write another Xenos codex after slaughtering every Tyranid player's hopes and dreams


Don't go betting anything on that, 
there wasn't actually that many 'nid fans that were unhappy with the codex and the ones that were just happened to be very noisy, which is usually the case anyway


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

Bindi Baji said:


> Don't go betting anything on that,
> there wasn't actually that many 'nid fans that were unhappy with the codex and the ones that were just happened to be very noisy, which is usually the case anyway


I live in a town where all Tyranid players are still using the 4th ed. codex with the blessing of all their opponents.

The Cruddace Tyranid codex is widely recognized as one of the trashiest rules releases GW have made, possibly only topped by Codex: Shittyfight.


----------



## Purge the Heretic (Jul 9, 2009)

I've heard different on the writer for the SOB dex (ie not Cruddace) but I'm not 100%.

Also, have had some word that BT seem to be done...or mostly done. But they are holding off on their release. 

Maybe because of the 6th ed box...though this is more speculation than the others.


----------



## Wolf_Lord_Skoll (Jun 9, 2008)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> I live in a town where all Tyranid players are still using the 4th ed. codex with the blessing of all their opponents.
> 
> The Cruddace Tyranid codex is widely recognized as one of the trashiest rules releases GW have made, possibly only topped by Codex: Shittyfight.


Hah, how many people in your area use vehicles? 4th Ed Nids was horrible against vehicles, the new one is faaaar better. The Nid players there mustn't have put much effort in trying to get the new codex to work at all.


----------



## Kalishnikov-47 (Jun 4, 2008)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> I live in a town where all Tyranid players are still using the 4th ed. codex with the blessing of all their opponents.
> 
> The Cruddace Tyranid codex is widely recognized as one of the trashiest rules releases GW have made, possibly only topped by Codex: Shittyfight.


If anything the old Daemonhunters was the worst book. The 5th Edition Nids book is a great codex. My friend and I have been hammering at the Tyranid Codex and we have come up with many wins in both tourney and for "shits and giggles" games. There are some really good lists out there for Nids. 

Its just people bitch and moan that they lost their Carnifex, when in turn they gained something waaaay better in the form of the Trygon. The Nid codex also happens to be one of the few books out there that really depends on synergy. Each unit has a purpose(yes some do their job better than others) and require each other to really do better than the sum of their parts. 

In particular, the Tervigon and the Hive Guard come to mind. The Hive Guard are the ranged protection for the Tervigons, while the Tervigons provide cover, CC supports, close range fire support, and in most cases a more convincing target. Sorry your friends abhor such a good book. The cover could use some work though, not too impressed by it, and I think we can both agree on that.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> I live in a town where all Tyranid players are still using the 4th ed. codex with the blessing of all their opponents.
> 
> The Cruddace Tyranid codex is widely recognized as one of the trashiest rules releases GW have made, possibly only topped by Codex: Shittyfight.





Wolf_Lord_Skoll said:


> Hah, how many people in your area use vehicles? 4th Ed Nids was horrible against vehicles, the new one is faaaar better. The Nid players there mustn't have put much effort in trying to get the new codex to work at all.


I agree with Wolflord here. I have always been a tyranid player first and foremost. If the nid players in Metal`s area cannot make the book work, then quite honestly they must not be good players. 

It plays differently to the last one. That is all. Deal with it.


----------



## Drannith (Sep 18, 2010)

I quite like the DE codex so I hope these rumors are true cause Tau really need more than a super build, they have so much potential just waiting to be tapped. I've boxed my army up until the new codex drops.


----------



## MaidenManiac (Oct 2, 2008)

Go Phil!
Go Phil!
Go Phil!

Id like to see this true as I think his 5th ed Codices are the most enjoyable to read so Ill defo join the ship


----------



## MadCowCrazy (Mar 19, 2009)

Not news or rumours so off to General


----------

