Digital is a situation where new is almost always better,
In regards to "newer is better", in medium format, I'm not too sure about that.
When you think about it that makes sense because all medium format, except the leica S series were morphed over film cameras, with the same autofocus, same type of usability.
I haven't used a cmos based medium format camera (probably won't).
Though when I added a Lecia S2 and compared it to my Contax and "ancient" p30+ if I was a pixel peeping, chart printing type of photographer,
I'd say the old P30+ produces an equal, maybe even better image than the leica.
I found the same thing when I tested a H5d 40mpx camera am sure it would be the same with the phase backs and cameras.
The image quality is a toss up.
Camera companies want to sell new cameras and people that are camera junkies like to talk about new cameras.
Until there is a medium format camera with multi point autofocus, maybe even a pdaf sensor with focus points that cover the whole sensor, it's going to hold that for slower,
static more contemplative sessions medium format is good if not better, for faster, looser more action oriented imagery, it has, probably always will be 35mm cameras.
In other words, a cmos sensor is not going to make a medium format camera nimble, not in todays form factors.
Actually expert post processing and retouching will make more of a difference than the capture device.
I'm not saying don't buy what you want, or think is better, but no camera will do everything well.
I can do this all day long, talk myself into a new camera, but in the end, it really is the subject, the lighting, the post work, the planning.
These images were shot with more than ancient p21+ and Aptus 22 and P30+ respectfully and still exist today.
The first and third images were shot as nimble as medium format can work, on 20 session days.
No new camera will make them any better.
Really when it comes to innovation, most of it is in the prosumer mirrorless formats.
IMO
BC