# Which race should be updated next?



## Shattertheirsky (May 26, 2012)

Which race do you think will be being updated with a new codex next?


----------



## kiro the avenger! (Nov 8, 2010)

Tau, they need a new 'dex


----------



## Big Mek LugNutz (Jul 10, 2011)

Two of the oldest codexes, Necrons & Dark Eldar have received some pretty recent updates, so I think the Tau (deserve to be) on deck next. There has been a lot of talk (or maybe even confirmation of a new Sisters of Battle codex, I'm not sure, I wasn't up on the rumours so I apologize) but I think Tau are much more deserving, especially because of higher support among players than other armies up for updates. Not to mention an update would increase support for the army. The Tau haven't received any major changes since the release of their codex but an update to better organize the army information (ie. from a page by page basis, to an army builder at the back) plus a new codex would definitely kick start their flow of new models (maybe even a few adopted units from Forge World, such as some of the larger battlesuits).


----------



## spanner94ezekiel (Jan 6, 2011)

Should be updated, or are rumoured to be updated?

I think Tau and Sisters both deserve updates (in the case of Sisters, an ACTUAL update). But the rumour mill suggests Chaos Space Marines and Dark Angels are next up. Followed by Tau and then *possibly* Black Templars.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Chaos next, Dark Angels after that. Any further than that it's hard to say, though I do agree that Tau need some attention, as do Eldar.


----------



## Dragblud da scrunka (Mar 26, 2009)

sisters of battle, just because it may also spring some plastic SoB out that dont cost even more than usual stuff that aint cheap... I would start collecting without a second thought if they did


----------



## Dawnstar (Jan 21, 2010)

Should be next?

Either Sisters of Battle (complete with proper 'dex and plastic kits) or Tau

Will be next?

Probably either Chaos Marines or Dark Angels


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Jan 30, 2012)

I personally don't think SoB should be the next in line for the new codex, from a bussiness point of view its definately not the most popular army and I think GW would not gain much profit from it. Unlike Tau and Chaos Space Marines, which are quite popluar armies I'd say they should probably be the next in line, even though I am a Chaos player I do think that the Tau should definately be the next to get an update and some new models. Maybe one unit that is okay in CC? Ha!


----------



## Lucio (Aug 10, 2009)

Chaos should be next imo, they need the update. Dark Angels I would like to be next, though fear what GW will do to them and I fear my army being rendered obsolete. Tau, Sisters, and Eldar should be on deck soon, I especially want firewarriors to be a competitive option and can't wait to see what they will do with the Eldar if they get new plastics.


----------



## Fallen (Oct 7, 2008)

Should; Tau, Demons/CSM, Eldar, BTs, DA, SM in order of what i think is important


----------



## Archon Dan (Feb 6, 2012)

I think Tau or CSM should be next. But I doubt they will be. Strangely, I've heard recently that Tyranids are slated for a new codex. But this could be pure speculation by a 'Nid player who thinks their rules are "messed up."


----------



## Kettu (Nov 20, 2007)

Big Mek LugNutz said:


> or maybe even confirmation of a new Sisters of Battle codex, I'm not sure, I wasn't up on the rumours so I apologize


Sadly, every rumour died and every rumour-monger went silent on the Sisters front when the WDex happened.

Since then, the only thing I have heard was a long discussion featuring a one or two rumour-mongers over on DakkaDakka about how all they have heard about the Sisters is 'not for a long time'. Or words to that effect.

Personally, what should be updated next is Sisters, Tau and Eldar (Preferably in that order). 
Sadly, what is happening is Dark Green Marines, Bad Marines, Black Marines, Tau. (I'm personally betting in that order also) And that'll be the rest of 2012 and all of 2013 at this point.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

TheLaughingMan said:


> I personally don't think SoB should be the next in line for the new codex, from a bussiness point of view its definately not the most popular army and I think GW would not gain much profit from it. Unlike Tau and Chaos Space Marines, which are quite popluar armies I'd say they should probably be the next in line, even though I am a Chaos player I do think that the Tau should definately be the next to get an update and some new models. Maybe one unit that is okay in CC? Ha!


Necrons and Dark Eldar were both armies that didn't have large fan bases but their updates have breathed a lot of new life (and players) into the codex books. Sisters should be no different with the number of people who want to play but don't want to pay through the nose to play.


----------



## CattleBruiser (Sep 3, 2011)

Should: Tau, Eldar, Dark Angels, Chaos (In that order)

Probably Will be: Dark Angels, Chaos marines, Black Templar, some other marine chapter, Ultrasmurfs


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Jan 30, 2012)

Zion said:


> Necrons and Dark Eldar were both armies that didn't have large fan bases but their updates have breathed a lot of new life (and players) into the codex books. Sisters should be no different with the number of people who want to play but don't want to pay through the nose to play.


But the thing is SoB is an expensive army to play maybe if GW decided to lower their prices (who am I kidding like that's ever going to happen?) or cater to some form of box sets and packages that would get people interested in SoB. Necrons and Dark Eldar, aren't exactly the most popluar but they did alright at my local GW store people did play them so that's why I don't really see what you're saying here. Like Tau, they have been neglected and I think they need an update, I would love to see Eldar too as well I wouldn't mind collecting an Eldar Army....


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Jan 30, 2012)

CattleBruiser said:


> Should: Tau, Eldar, Dark Angels, Chaos (In that order)
> 
> Probably Will be: Dark Angels, Chaos marines, Black Templar, some other marine chapter, Ultrasmurfs


Well I guess it's not all bad for those guys who collect Marines, ha ha ha ha ha. But in all seriousness, I have to agree with you.


----------



## redmapa (Nov 9, 2011)

I'd like it to be:

Tau, BT, Chaos, DA, Eldar


----------



## Haskanael (Jul 5, 2011)

Tau need the update harder then chaos or any other faaction for that matter.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

TheLaughingMan said:


> But the thing is SoB is an expensive army to play maybe if GW decided to lower their prices (who am I kidding like that's ever going to happen?) or cater to some form of box sets and packages that would get people interested in SoB. Necrons and Dark Eldar, aren't exactly the most popluar but they did alright at my local GW store people did play them so that's why I don't really see what you're saying here. Like Tau, they have been neglected and I think they need an update, I would love to see Eldar too as well I wouldn't mind collecting an Eldar Army....


Just because people were playing them locally doesn't mean they were a big seller for GW, and infact both armies were considered big risk armies for GW these days because they were a break from GW's self-imposed Marine culture. Tau need a points update more than anything (namely because that's the biggest thing that hurts them right now since they have wargear that can ignore just about every rule in the book, and the stuff that doesn't do anything anymore could be fixed with an FAQ), they have a decent model range, on the other hand Sisters have 1 plastic model. The Immolator. Even the Exorcist is an Immolator with a large number of metal pieces attached to it.

I'm not saying Sisters should be next, I'm just saying it's not fair to vote anyone off this imaginary list based on sales figures as GW has promised that they aren't dropping any armies that already exist which means eventually Sisters (or Tau or Eldar or Black Templars....ect) will be next.


----------



## CaptainQuackers (Jan 4, 2012)

Realistically, Tau, but as a Nid player I would like to be able to use my bloody Lictors and Fexen again.


----------



## Marius_Ruberu (Feb 15, 2012)

I think the Black Templar are the ones that need the new dex most. A lot of the stufd in their dex is way out dated and needs a major overhaul. It usd to be special that the Templars got cheeper typhoon speeders and could have 2 typhoons in a termy squad, but now the regular space marines get better typhoon because the updated it, and I think all termys can take 2 typhoons.


----------



## Ferrous (Aug 21, 2011)

Just to be different, Orks dammit!


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

Marius_Ruberu said:


> I think the Black Templar are the ones that need the new dex most. A lot of the stufd in their dex is way out dated and needs a major overhaul. It usd to be special that the Templars got cheeper typhoon speeders and could have 2 typhoons in a termy squad, but now the regular space marines get better typhoon because the updated it, and I think all termys can take 2 typhoons.


Wrong on both counts, BT still have the cheapest speeders and are the only codex that can take 2 cyclones per termie unit


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

mcmuffin said:


> Wrong on both counts, BT still have the cheapest speeders and are the only codex that can take 2 cyclones per termie unit


And the ability to take Land Raider Crusaders as dedicated transports for just about everyone (and to make them lance proof), and the ability to rock army wide Preferred Enemy (against everything with a WS!), the ability to have a Ven Dread with the Tank Hunter rule (not to mention the Sword Brethren who can get it too) and the ability to have scouts inside their squads with Marines (great ablative wounds!). They aren't THAT bad overall, sure they're a little old and pay extra for some things and have to shoot the nearest unit unless they pass a leadership test but honestly they're not a bad 'dex, just one that gets passed over for being "too old".


----------



## Archon Dan (Feb 6, 2012)

mcmuffin said:


> Wrong on both counts, BT still have the cheapest speeders and are the only codex that can take 2 cyclones per termie unit


You mean two for every 5-man unit, right?

I want to see Tau updated because I want some fun new twists when I play against them.


----------



## Shas'o Stormforge (May 26, 2012)

It's been long enough the Tau NEED a new codex.


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

Tau, Eldar and CSM are all equally in need of new books.


----------



## D-A-C (Sep 21, 2010)

Chaos Space Marines
Chaos Daemons
Tau
Orks
Eldar
One of the Space Marines


In that order.


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

D-A-C said:


> Tau
> Chaos Space Marines
> Eldar
> Chaos Daemons
> ...


Fixed that


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Sisters no question, any race without an actual book on the shelf is automatically the next in line in my eyes. aftet that tau


----------



## Pssyche (Mar 21, 2009)

Space Marines
Grey Knights
Dark Angels
Grey Knights
Grey Knights
Space Marines

In that order.


----------



## jaysen (Jul 7, 2011)

Here's the post on the matter, I put up a while ago. It's based on how old current codices are.

http://www.heresy-online.net/forums/showthread.php?t=95368&page=5

According to that, Black Templars are due.


----------



## jaysen (Jul 7, 2011)

I really don't mind the current SoB models or dex, if it was just affordable. Give us a $30 boxset of a 10 sister squad, and I'll play them again.


----------



## Archon Dan (Feb 6, 2012)

jaysen said:


> I really don't mind the current SoB models or dex, if it was just affordable. Give us a $30 boxset of a 10 sister squad, and I'll play them again.


Unfortunately, I think GW has decided to let SoB die. It really does suck, because the army has some wonderful potential.


----------



## Marius_Ruberu (Feb 15, 2012)

mcmuffin said:


> Wrong on both counts, BT still have the cheapest speeders and are the only codex that can take 2 cyclones per termie unit


Thanks for the correction mcmuffin, I need it every once in a while:so_happy:. But I still stand that the Templars need to be updated. The cyclones on the speeders are different then the updated ones and I think the old ones are worse than the new. The apothecary still uses the old rules and does not give his unit feel no pain which sucks. The predator is still the old fashion one which can be alittle more expesive then the newer ones, which negates the fact that I save points on the speeders now.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Marius_Ruberu said:


> Thanks for the correction mcmuffin, I need it every once in a while:so_happy:. But I still stand that the Templars need to be updated. The cyclones on the speeders are different then the updated ones and I think the old ones are worse than the new. The apothecary still uses the old rules and does not give his unit feel no pain which sucks. The predator is still the old fashion one which can be alittle more expesive then the newer ones, which negates the fact that I save points on the speeders now.


This was all fixed in an official errata over a year ago.


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

Marius_Ruberu said:


> Thanks for the correction mcmuffin, I need it every once in a while:so_happy:. But I still stand that the Templars need to be updated. The cyclones on the speeders are different then the updated ones and I think the old ones are worse than the new. The apothecary still uses the old rules and does not give his unit feel no pain which sucks. The predator is still the old fashion one which can be alittle more expesive then the newer ones, which negates the fact that I save points on the speeders now.


Everything you have mentioned here has been covered and updated in the FAQ. Cyclones and typhoons are updated to the new ones, the apothecary has been updated, the BT pred can take PotMS, which is a pretty big advantage. Termies with cyclones can have tank hunters, so 4 S9 shots per unit, which is pretty good. all in all the codex is still solid.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Archon Dan said:


> Unfortunately, I think GW has decided to let SoB die. It really does suck, because the army has some wonderful potential.


Source? Because the last rumors I heard had models at least attempting to be developed and GW saying they weren't going to pull another Squat manuever on anything with a codex at the time (which includes Sisters). 

Seriously, can we go more than a page when someone mentions Sisters before someone brings up that GW is going to get rid of them? If GW got rid of every under-performing/underselling army we'd be playing Marines vs Marines in SPAAAAAAACE not 40K.


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

It is like Godwin's law, except about squats. As an internet discussion about 40k goes on, the probability of someone mentioning squats approaches 1.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

mcmuffin said:


> It is like Godwin's law, except about squats. As an internet discussion about 40k goes on, the probability of someone mentioning squats approaches 1.


And when Sisters are mentioned the probability of Squats being mentioned or implied becomes 2-300% more likely. 

Seriously, one of the Developers HAS a Sisters army. Why would they squat them if one of them actually collects/plays them?


----------



## Marius_Ruberu (Feb 15, 2012)

mcmuffin said:


> Everything you have mentioned here has been covered and updated in the FAQ. Cyclones and typhoons are updated to the new ones, the apothecary has been updated, the BT pred can take PotMS, which is a pretty big advantage. Termies with cyclones can have tank hunters, so 4 S9 shots per unit, which is pretty good. all in all the codex is still solid.


 
Really!!! Thanks again, where can I find this new FAQ. I am in despite need of it now, and had no idea one came out.


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

Marius_Ruberu said:


> Really!!! Thanks again, where can I find this new FAQ. I am in despite need of it now, and had no idea one came out.


It's on the GW website Go => Gaming => Errata & FAQ Articles => Warhammer 40000.


----------



## Archon Dan (Feb 6, 2012)

Zion said:


> Source? Because the last rumors I heard had models at least attempting to be developed and GW saying they weren't going to pull another Squat manuever on anything with a codex at the time (which includes Sisters).
> 
> Seriously, can we go more than a page when someone mentions Sisters before someone brings up that GW is going to get rid of them? If GW got rid of every under-performing/underselling army we'd be playing Marines vs Marines in SPAAAAAAACE not 40K.



I'll admit that I have no official source and am perhaps pessimistic, but I believe actions speak louder than words. Every action GW has taken since the WD codex appears to be an attempt to reduce sales to a point where they can say maintining the army is costing them money. New players who want to start the army can't even get ahold of the "codex," unless it is hidden on GW's website somewhere I didn't look. To get started it is one of the more expensive armies($17.25 US for three Troop models with a minimum squad size of 9). It's also the only army to have no Finecast models. This was no idle comment or hunch I had. I can back this up with things I see happening. But I hope I am wrong.

As I said, it would be unfortunate if they got rid of Sisters as a playable army. It has a lot of potential if they just work out how some things work better. I certainly don't want to see all Marine vs. Marine, so the more armies available the better.


----------



## Shattertheirsky (May 26, 2012)

I've heard rumours that the SoB are in development, but they are having problems casting the hair?


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Archon Dan said:


> I'll admit that I have no official source and am perhaps pessimistic, but I believe actions speak louder than words. Every action GW has taken since the WD codex appears to be an attempt to reduce sales to a point where they can say maintining the army is costing them money. New players who want to start the army can't even get ahold of the "codex," unless it is hidden on GW's website somewhere I didn't look. To get started it is one of the more expensive armies($17.25 US for three Troop models with a minimum squad size of 9). It's also the only army to have no Finecast models. This was no idle comment or hunch I had. I can back this up with things I see happening. But I hope I am wrong.
> 
> As I said, it would be unfortunate if they got rid of Sisters as a playable army. It has a lot of potential if they just work out how some things work better. I certainly don't want to see all Marine vs. Marine, so the more armies available the better.


I won't say the pessimism is unfounded, but at the same time GW has thrown us curveballs regarding armies they update (Dark Eldar and Necrons,Imperial Guard (because they weren't all that good and weren't that popular recently until they got their 5th edition update), Blood Angels (the previous 40K army to get a White Dwarf codex and survived despite rumors of squatting) puts enough out there to balance it out to at least say it's unclear what GW is trying to do with Sisters. The hopeful fanatic in me says they'll get an update but the more pessimistic heretic side says we're just being strung along.

Either way I just get tired of seeing people claiming that they -know- that GW is going to Squat the Sisters. They've been harping this claim for YEARS and honestly it's time to let it go. It doesn't paint anyone in a good light to be telling a player who loves an army that it won't exist anymore and GW is just going to get rid of it. It makes the person claiming it look like a tosser and makes the person who reads it feel bad. No one should wish for an army to go away. Instead we should be wishing that everyone will get good, solid, codexes with a lot of variety in them. This way no one looks stupid if a book gets updated and if an army DOES get canned then we don't have it devolving into an argument about how someone was telling us for years about how the evil GW was going to take our fun away and that we should have listened to them and got out early and all the fallout that brings.

Patterns are good and all too, but we also have to remember that the human brain makes patterns that aren't there. There are a many optical illusions out there that capitalize on just that and many conspiracy theories start with that same problem. A pattern that may not even be real. 

So before we start claiming GW -is- going to can the Sisters (or anyone else's army) how about we try being positive, supportive people and wait for the facts to come in before we leap to conclusions that might just be figments of our imaginations? It's the kind of thing that'll make us a better internet community and better wargamers because we'll be supportive of each other rather than destructive.



Shattertheirsky said:


> I've heard rumours that the SoB are in development, but they are having problems casting the hair?


Sleeves, hair and robes from what I last heard. But the Dark Eldar have a lot of those smaller fiddly bits that reportedly helped work the problems out for the Sisters. Time will tell if they started this back up or if the models are delayed even longer while they work on another army instead while the codex gets worked on or if it really is a long term plan to can the Sisters.


----------



## Archon Dan (Feb 6, 2012)

Zion said:


> I won't say the pessimism is unfounded, but at the same time GW has thrown us curveballs regarding armies they update (Dark Eldar and Necrons,Imperial Guard (because they weren't all that good and weren't that popular recently until they got their 5th edition update), Blood Angels (the previous 40K army to get a White Dwarf codex and survived despite rumors of squatting) puts enough out there to balance it out to at least say it's unclear what GW is trying to do with Sisters. The hopeful fanatic in me says they'll get an update but the more pessimistic heretic side says we're just being strung along.
> 
> Either way I just get tired of seeing people claiming that they -know- that GW is going to Squat the Sisters. They've been harping this claim for YEARS and honestly it's time to let it go. It doesn't paint anyone in a good light to be telling a player who loves an army that it won't exist anymore and GW is just going to get rid of it. It makes the person claiming it look like a tosser and makes the person who reads it feel bad. No one should wish for an army to go away. Instead we should be wishing that everyone will get good, solid, codexes with a lot of variety in them. This way no one looks stupid if a book gets updated and if an army DOES get canned then we don't have it devolving into an argument about how someone was telling us for years about how the evil GW was going to take our fun away and that we should have listened to them and got out early and all the fallout that brings.
> 
> ...


You make some very good points. I didn't realize I was dumping gasoline on such a big fire. My apologies. I'll leave the rumors to those with sources. I really do hope SoB get updated though. They have some really interesting things already and so much potential.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Archon Dan said:


> You make some very good points. I didn't realize I was dumping gasoline on such a big fire. My apologies. I'll leave the rumors to those with sources. I really do hope SoB get updated though. They have some really interesting things already and so much potential.


It's not your fault Archon Dan, I've just noticed that there has been a loooooooong running trend saying Sisters are going to get canned (in fact I'm pretty sure there is a trend saying the same thing about Tau if I look around enough) and there seems to always be a trend to do this, and in the end it rather bugs me. Why tell people their army is going to be canned? Is it just wishful thinking from some hateful players? Sometimes, yes. Is it fan-rage gone wild with assumptions? Other times yes. There are a lot of reason to put out that kind of statement but I've yet to see it come from someone with any contacts on the inside or GW themselves saying that they've decided that the popularity and sales of an army just aren't doing it and aren't going to support that army anymore. In fact, considering the public announcement some time ago that they were rather ashamed on how they handled the whole Squat mess I don't think they really want to do that -again- in this age of technology considering how hard the backlash would be. They got it hard back in the day when gaming communities were smaller and less connected, could you imagine now with the kinds of traffic they get on their site, much less their Facebook pages and Flickr accounts? They know we're out here and sometimes I think we scare them a little.


----------



## Archon Dan (Feb 6, 2012)

Tau is another army I want to see updated. The more armies the better. Maybe the owners of the "fringe" armies should flood GWs Flickr pool with images of their beautiful models. Kind of a scream, "We won't be ignored!"


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Archon Dan said:


> Tau is another army I want to see updated. The more armies the better. Maybe the owners of the "fringe" armies should flood GWs Flickr pool with images of their beautiful models. Kind of a scream, "We won't be ignored!"


That's actually a REALLY good idea. I like it!


----------



## The Irish Commissar (Jan 31, 2012)

I think Eldar should get an update soon enough after tau and sob because although they still are a competitive army there points value for wargear and there tanks are a bit expensive and it would be nice for a few more aspect warriors but i do understand that tau and sob need the update more but i just dont want to be waiting till late 2013 or early 2014 for a new codex


----------



## Arcane (Feb 17, 2009)

It doesn't matter what should be done. GW will do what they want, which is pump out several more Sace Marine based codex before giving any others attention.


----------



## experiment 626 (Apr 26, 2007)

I personally think it will go;
late 2012 - Chaos Marines
Jan 2013 - Dark Angels
March/April 2013 - Eldar or Tau
July 2013 - Daemons
late 2013 - Templars
Febuary 2014 - Tau or Eldar
May 2014 - Space Marines
Sept 2014 - Orks
late 2014 - Sisters

Then start looking back on all the current 5th ed books and seeing who's got the most messed-up book that needs re-working.

Here's hoping the design team can start doing for 40k what they've achived with the new 8th edtion Fantasy books!
They're actually quite well balanced and the supossed power creep between what's considered the 'worst' book (Tomb Kings) and what's considered the 'best' book (Ogres) is pretty small overall.


----------



## Blacksword72 (Apr 23, 2012)

Orks have not been updated codex-wise for a very long time (Except for the flyers in WD)


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Blacksword72 said:


> Orks have not been updated codex-wise for a very long time (Except for the flyers in WD)


Orks were one of the last books of 4th Edition. While they have not aged well, they are among the youngest of the various books that need to be updated.


----------



## d3m01iti0n (Jun 5, 2012)

BT, since GW has a hard on for Marines but the most badass of the bunch is left out in the cold. Im sure if DMO werent near-vaporware you would see a BT codex quick, as they were the featured chapter.


----------



## Psychocath (Mar 22, 2010)

Chaos could use an update, especially seeing as more flyers are trickling in now (I don't want to have to buy Imperial Armour and a pair of £98 Hell Talons to keep up with the feckin' Necrons. Tight budget, dammit! And I certainly don't want to butcher a Stormtalon and have to ask every opponent if I'm permitted to field it once it has a Khorne-ish makeover).

But I think Tau should get it first. I personally hate Tau and all they stand for (Greater good? Pffft.) but I've heard some nasty horror stories about their ballistic skill.


----------

