Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

One thing that i thought. If you expect something might overwatch you better tempt him before he activates said detachment. Say 10 russ ahead. Park fliers with comparable range you think he will overwatch(not sure how many but thunderhawk's 30-40"). Ideally so that not every russ in range.

If he overwatch then it's not with everything hopefully. You can migate damage.

Then said overwatching unit isn't shooting at later nor can he move(since you pulled ow before they moved). You can ram your anti-tank weapons in their face knowing they can't move nor return fire.

Basically as OW is once per turn when you move dictate when opponent can OW on YOUR terms.

Incidentally thought about this when I was thinking what to do with thunderhawks if there's no good spot T1 to land without risking too risky OW.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

leopard wrote:

I also think the "all knights/titans" games will see different scenarios so the buggers can actually score, unless GW somehow forgets this bit

Well in titan vs titan it's more easy to be on objective alone at which point you control it regardless of are you titan or not.

One thing we did like was that the Knights have far more to do in Legions, and the anti-aircraft role of the of the Porphyrion's Helios missiles. In this regard its a shame that the Questoris is still lacking the Icarus Autocannons, and the Helverin could have an alternative profile for it's Autocannons which includes sky-fire, to bring it more into contrast with the close-quarter Warglaive which also doubles up as a demolisher.

leopard wrote:
They can also only target a single enemy unit, an objective held by two causes a problem (unless you can get some ranged fire to support them of course), and to be honest eight stands with a 4+ save likely won't last long against the enemies fire.

I miss the terminators with a 75% chance of saving all but the heaviest of shots :(


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
I have list in mind with about 200 plus 60 rhinos to haul them.

Won't get for ages enough infantry to run it though. Beside such skew not being #1 to collect gw can't keep marine infantry available for long.

Surely all those first edition plastics mean you can do it now...

A) don't have them b) they look silly next to current ones so sure as hell not going to hunt them from ebay i rather spend that money getting new models as they come available.

 ashlevrier wrote:

 Skimask Mohawk wrote:
Re the kratos autocannons, mathwise theyre the best option to take due to volume of fire and accurate. Ya, the las are 6" longer, but you also already come with an autocannon that breaks that ranged synergy of 20-22". The battle cannon also has the 10" option, so there's a further benefit to pushing up instead of sniping at 20 (on top of los blocking forcing some sort of closer movement to get a shot off anyways. If you build your Kratos with autos, you shouldn't worry at all about that choice.

Contemptors definitely get hosed on the infantry box build, as kheres are complete junk and you're stuck with a couple. The las are really solid, and you're paying 17.5 per model on the initial unit for that on top of it's solid profile. I think them missing rend is kinda deliberate as a result; they're a ranged unit with some melee capabilities to keep them out of trouble. Tacking on rend would make them equivalent to ogryns in terms of dice and modifiers, with an accurate lascannon, a point defence combi, 4+ that nullifies Light AP and allows rerolls, and an invul (plus whatever legion rules), all for 20 points more for the base unit. It's pretty obvious the leviathan is the reverse of the contemptor to force some choice; very short ranged shooting options that are fairly unreliable, but with an extremely capable melee punch. I'd say that you'll usually not choose to use their guns, as they'd probably prefer to march into range or charge once they get there; the volkite bouncing off of the meltas preferred targets doest help. So ya, either mix leviathans in to the contemptor unit to get some dedicated melee in that shooting unit, or take them by yourself if you just want dreads to punch stuff in melee. Contemptors don't need rend (but they do need that lascannon lol).

Re knights and their survivability. Most things in this game die if you put them in front of 18 bases that wound on 4s and can affect their save. Similarly most things die when getting blasted by an airwing lol. As an ally capped at 30% of points and coming in increments of 180, they're very manageable at the moment, as you can respond to the 2-3 that can be taken in 1500-2000 in the same way as a Kratos/baneblade/Russ brick. Dealing with up to 8 knights/4 knights and 12 armigers, all across the board, in 1500 might be a different story though. Light bounces from them, melee mostly fails against them (esp if you're going into double melee quests, Lancers/atrapos, and armigers), they're really fast (18"/16" charges, yay), can hit stuff in buildings with most classes, can get barrage on quests, and more. Them being so hideable doesn't help their ease of charging either.

the kratos autocannons, mathwise theyre the best option to take. i find the heavy bolters to be the best right now.

knights just die. like today. in a knight vs knight fight. one was just shot off the board in a single round of shooting. its only 3 wounds you have to get through and when most AT weapons have -1. they are saving on a 4 most times.

kheres are complete junk. agreed. there pretty bad. i just think of the dreads with the Kheres as body guards for the las dreads. they die first. the dread hand bolter is the most used and best weapon they have.

i dont know how a entire knight army will work. i feel they will die all the same. but even if they dont die. there OC is so low that they cant take objectives. also as they will be bigger than most things even if they are in combat with a unit they can still get shot at.

Heavy bolters are a great anti infantry tool and pair very well with aggressive movement to bring the melta or 10" shot in range. But if you're not using them like that, it's hard to argue with the longer range guns.

Knights can absolutely die, no argument on that. But it's the details that tend to add up; was it a skew of undercosted guns? Almost double it's points? Dedicated engine killing stuff? I'd also ask about terrain, as this game makes it really easy to hide stuff behind obstructing, while also just blasting through with a huge charge. The lancer and atrapos are very strong melee units, with a 3+ ion and nimble to see them through. Armigers are ogryns on crack. Like, people can't simultaneously have issues dealing with ogryns while easily killing knights, as los blocking is what allows both to perform. Their low oc also only really matters if the units haven't died in combat to them, and with huge access to rending weapons and the reach off the lancer, it's pretty hard to survive.

 Albertorius wrote:
It might be my familiarity with Epic 40k and Epic Armageddon talking, but... boy oh boy, does this game look like you spend more time removing pieces from the board than actually playing or doing much else.

Is it me, or does stuff don't really stay much on the table?

everything dies fast in this game. but the problem now is how to stop the run away if someone has the objectives. by end of turn two i had a lead that he could not over come. we talked about that to do and it seams turn one is march everying to the objectives. turn two is charge turn. turn three is hold.

for me i march the Rhinos up to the objective and drop out the troop. if they are on the objective when they get out then i will give them a advance order. if they need more speed to get there a march order. that means my marines can get 18 out of the transports and 15 with a walk. that a total of 33 inches of move in one turn. 12 stands of dudes makes it hard to brake them too.

 Skimask Mohawk wrote:

 ashlevrier wrote:

 Skimask Mohawk wrote:
Re the kratos autocannons, mathwise theyre the best option to take due to volume of fire and accurate. Ya, the las are 6" longer, but you also already come with an autocannon that breaks that ranged synergy of 20-22". The battle cannon also has the 10" option, so there's a further benefit to pushing up instead of sniping at 20 (on top of los blocking forcing some sort of closer movement to get a shot off anyways. If you build your Kratos with autos, you shouldn't worry at all about that choice.

Contemptors definitely get hosed on the infantry box build, as kheres are complete junk and you're stuck with a couple. The las are really solid, and you're paying 17.5 per model on the initial unit for that on top of it's solid profile. I think them missing rend is kinda deliberate as a result; they're a ranged unit with some melee capabilities to keep them out of trouble. Tacking on rend would make them equivalent to ogryns in terms of dice and modifiers, with an accurate lascannon, a point defence combi, 4+ that nullifies Light AP and allows rerolls, and an invul (plus whatever legion rules), all for 20 points more for the base unit. It's pretty obvious the leviathan is the reverse of the contemptor to force some choice; very short ranged shooting options that are fairly unreliable, but with an extremely capable melee punch. I'd say that you'll usually not choose to use their guns, as they'd probably prefer to march into range or charge once they get there; the volkite bouncing off of the meltas preferred targets doest help. So ya, either mix leviathans in to the contemptor unit to get some dedicated melee in that shooting unit, or take them by yourself if you just want dreads to punch stuff in melee. Contemptors don't need rend (but they do need that lascannon lol).

Re knights and their survivability. Most things in this game die if you put them in front of 18 bases that wound on 4s and can affect their save. Similarly most things die when getting blasted by an airwing lol. As an ally capped at 30% of points and coming in increments of 180, they're very manageable at the moment, as you can respond to the 2-3 that can be taken in 1500-2000 in the same way as a Kratos/baneblade/Russ brick. Dealing with up to 8 knights/4 knights and 12 armigers, all across the board, in 1500 might be a different story though. Light bounces from them, melee mostly fails against them (esp if you're going into double melee quests, Lancers/atrapos, and armigers), they're really fast (18"/16" charges, yay), can hit stuff in buildings with most classes, can get barrage on quests, and more. Them being so hideable doesn't help their ease of charging either.

the kratos autocannons, mathwise theyre the best option to take. i find the heavy bolters to be the best right now.

knights just die. like today. in a knight vs knight fight. one was just shot off the board in a single round of shooting. its only 3 wounds you have to get through and when most AT weapons have -1. they are saving on a 4 most times.

kheres are complete junk. agreed. there pretty bad. i just think of the dreads with the Kheres as body guards for the las dreads. they die first. the dread hand bolter is the most used and best weapon they have.

i dont know how a entire knight army will work. i feel they will die all the same. but even if they dont die. there OC is so low that they cant take objectives. also as they will be bigger than most things even if they are in combat with a unit they can still get shot at.

Heavy bolters are a great anti infantry tool and pair very well with aggressive movement to bring the melta or 10" shot in range. But if you're not using them like that, it's hard to argue with the longer range guns.

Knights can absolutely die, no argument on that. But it's the details that tend to add up; was it a skew of undercosted guns? Almost double it's points? Dedicated engine killing stuff? I'd also ask about terrain, as this game makes it really easy to hide stuff behind obstructing, while also just blasting through with a huge charge. The lancer and atrapos are very strong melee units, with a 3+ ion and nimble to see them through. Armigers are ogryns on crack. Like, people can't simultaneously have issues dealing with ogryns while easily killing knights, as los blocking is what allows both to perform. Their low oc also only really matters if the units haven't died in combat to them, and with huge access to rending weapons and the reach off the lancer, it's pretty hard to survive.

i posted a picture of the game. both knights where the same set up. battle cannon, chain sword, rocket pod.

i play the marines agressively so the heavy bolters do lots of work. got to get on those objectives fast and hold them. marines dont have the range of the Aux.

a knight might win in combat. but your knight is fighting one unit. what do you do about the other 3 on the objective taking it from you. i will refur to pics of my last battle

If enemy rush to objective you can still shoot the units off there. Only so much you can cram into the objective...And when you are in objective you are in open and ready to be blown apart.

So yeah rush to objectives early is good but that's going to cost you a lot as you need to expose to shooting lots of units as enemy will be blowing those detachments in range of objective.

assuming the objective doesn't have some terrain deployed masking it from fire from one direction or another

or doesn't have a decent sized building within 3" of it

so far rushing objectives has done me quite well, usually takes 2-3 turns to be removed from them (remembering that reinforcements can move up) and with luck thats 3 turns and the game is mine even if they are lost for the last two

its practically early WW2 Eastern front or WW1 trenchline stuff, human wave assaults and "we have reserves"

just need more bodies than they have bullets for just long enough

Progressive scoring is just not good for this game, infiltrate makes a mockery of it as well.

leopard wrote:
assuming the objective doesn't have some terrain deployed masking it from fire from one direction or another

or doesn't have a decent sized building within 3" of it

Well if you set terrain like that don't be surprised if game goes.

No garrison here inside 3" and los block covers only some directions so move&shoot doesn't make units invincible.

Tradeoffs and decisions. Do you keep units safe or vp's. No have cake and eat it too.

have adopted no structures within 3" here, may revise when more stuff comes out but for now its sensible

however masking terrain doesn't have to be too close, a wooded area between one objective and where the enemy wants to sit is enough, only have to mask some firepower (or distract it) to work.

however not everything and every location on a table will have a clear shot at anything sat on any objective

trick is to put the stuff scoring you points never quite in the position of "I can kill that in one shot" and also never higher than #2 on the enemies "thats got to die and die now" list

works quite well

also works nicely with terrain going down before scenario is rolled for

1d3+1 bits per quarter, players alternate in picking something and placing it - stuff then moved back to be more than 3" from objectives

 Albertorius wrote:
It might be my familiarity with Epic 40k and Epic Armageddon talking, but... boy oh boy, does this game look like you spend more time removing pieces from the board than actually playing or doing much else.

Is it me, or does stuff don't really stay much on the table?

Part of this is deliberate, they're expecting 3000 as a baseline and doing all they can not to discourage the spamming of any one unit for the most part, but speed of play would be drastically affected if both side were arguing % of cover constantly. Stuff does die very easy, but a fix could be as simple as letting units of infantry burn their order tokens to "go to ground" like the 40k mechanic, basically self pin and gain a cover save/-1 to hit. Tanks and vehicles could similarly burn orders tokens to use counter measures like popping smoke.

This is also an artifact of alternating activation in a game where the most common order allows just about any detachment to move its full movement stat and fire at full range. Like titanicus, sadly for all the strategy and tactics sometimes it does feel a bit to predicated on winning that initiative roll. The tit for tat destruction possible at like 3000-4000 points with fully maxed out units just seems a bit nutty, but GW is like a casino, they of course want this game to skew more towards larger battles and armies than smaller skirmishes because it sells more models, to their defense they could have gone much more cynical by not limiting knights and titans but thankfully they did and the game is better for them only accounting for 30%. A lot can be done to reduce the deadliness of each activation, very easy to force a bit more msu by reducing detachment's max sizes or even changing their min sizes. The good news for the games simplicity there is its very easy to do and might reduce the deadliness of each activation.

The last straw is just playing with a tonne of area terrain with very healthy cover saves/hit modifiers.

GW also skew towards randomness being more important that skill, both matter but the skew makes it easier for a new player, in theory, to pick up

and then the units they put out cancel it out

SamusDrake wrote:


In hindsight - but with only one game under our belt - I do think that Epic 40K fans dodged the bullet on this one, ...

I wonder why you think that....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

leopard wrote:
first turn sees a lot die, if one or both players advance, after the first turn the amount of firepower has dropped significantly

but yes lethality is currently too high, to the point as I've suggested stuff needs more wounds

anything scale 2 should have 2, scale 3 three, scale 4 at least 4 and so on, in effect infantry in the open still suffer, but other stuff sticks about longer

I also think the "all knights/titans" games will see different scenarios so the buggers can actually score, unless GW somehow forgets this bit

I would suggest to remove "6s always hit" for 7+, 8+ & 9+ mechanic.

tneva82 wrote:
If enemy rush to objective you can still shoot the units off there. Only so much you can cram into the objective...And when you are in objective you are in open and ready to be blown apart.

So yeah rush to objectives early is good but that's going to cost you a lot as you need to expose to shooting lots of units as enemy will be blowing those detachments in range of objective.

did you not see the pics of the game i posted. he tried to shoot me off of the points. but i had 18 VP to his 3VP.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:

leopard wrote:
assuming the objective doesn't have some terrain deployed masking it from fire from one direction or another

or doesn't have a decent sized building within 3" of it

Well if you set terrain like that don't be surprised if game goes.

No garrison here inside 3" and los block covers only some directions so move&shoot doesn't make units invincible.

Tradeoffs and decisions. Do you keep units safe or vp's. No have cake and eat it too.

your argument is basicaly. if terrain is not right game is broken. yah that sounds like a good system. how many games have you played. i want to see pics of your games


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crablezworth wrote:
Progressive scoring is just not good for this game, infiltrate makes a mockery of it as well.

i think we are going to try and use the flames of war missions next time. they will at least make more narative sense.

 Crablezworth wrote:
Progressive scoring is just not good for this game, infiltrate makes a mockery of it as well.

Progressive scoring has over DECADES proven to be better though. With end game there's no reason whatsoever to go to objectives. All that would then archieve is losing your units FOR NO GAIN. There's no benefit for exposing your army to maximum damage output.

Opponent will just shoot at your units at objective, charge, kill your units faster than you and then at the end when your army is dead take one objective. Your army dead=0 vp, he scores something=he wins.

This has happened again and again and again over cause of decades. End game isn't some new untested system. It's been used and it results in static gunlines again and again and again. Not surprising since there's no incentive to move and lots of penalty from going forward...

For end game to have any reasonable chance you would need game to have lethality down so much that at least 70% armies are still on board toward the end...

Guess your army is long range armoured company that wants to spend most of game first firing. As only static gunline armies prefer end game scoring.

Just learn to play vs infiltrate. Shoot at units at objectives. And charge front line. Player who goes army front will struggle to have army LEFT after 2nd round. 2 round scoring vs 3 round scoring...

Also you can transport stuff forward. Every army has transports. Multiples even.

tneva82 wrote:


Just learn to play vs infiltrate.

That's not an argument.

Tneva, the game that this is based on (Epic Space Marine) did not have progressive/cumulative scoring for objectives though, which is perhaps the more important point. So in SM2 you had a VP 'benchmark' that you needed to hit for victory which was based on the total points value of each army. You got VPs calculated at the end of each turn (5VP per objective marker, plus VPs for breaking units) and the first person to hit that total won the game, otherwise it was a draw. This meant very mobile armies could go racing forward (Marines, Eldar etc.) and grab as many objectives as they could, but they then had a race to 'hold on' and try and break some units while the more ponderous but powerful armies (Orks, Chaos, Imperial Guard etc.) came back at them by damaging them and eventually force them back off objective markers (you then lost those VPs). I think it was a really balanced dynamic and more often that not you ended up with very close games and coming down to the last roll of the dice.

The designers of Legions, whoever they might be, have decided to go with a different approach here. I won't say it's better or worse until I have thoroughly playtested, but it definitely produces a different type of game. The picture I am getting is of massive armies (and this is why the 3k points comes in), smash together in the centre of the table over the objectives (the increased movement and firepower means this new game is extremely deadly and most of that mass of soldiers/tanks are destroyed) and it's 'smash and grab' as quickly as you can. I suspect it is an attempt to create the extremely brutal warfare described in the HH books and the like as the marines annihilated each other. But, it's definitely a design decision, and where the designers have moved away from the work of Rick Priestley, Andy Chambers, Jervis Johnson etc.

There are many ways to skin the "how do I win?" cat

GW like a victory point based system for most of their games, though how you score them varies.

Flames has it as "sudden death" - capture the objective and you win, with then a points system based around your losses

some games do it based on damage scored or a ratio of damage scored and damage taken

have also seen a wonderful WW2 air combat system that has no point values, each aircraft is worth "1" victory point, you can bring whatever sized force you want, to win you need to score victory points equal to half the size of your own force.. so bring too much and winning could be impossible, whereas a small force need only ping a bit of a larger one to win - with some extra points laid over this for doing specific things

GW seem to have moved to progressive scoring over time (Middle Earth being the exception here, you have a defined win condition to end the game, and then score), largely to avoid the game turning into a static fire fight with a last turn dash which has hurt earlier editions of some games and bled over into others.

what would probably be useful for Legions is to have different scenarios score differently, so some are progressive some are pure win/lose, or potentially lose/lose (something Flames 3 had and was excellent), some based on doing specific things, some based on casualties

heck throw in asymmetric games too, you both build your army but maybe one side only gets half their force, but is fighting a delaying action or something

across the gaming world there are a lot of scenarios and a lot of ways to win, a decent game system can cope with using several

I'm a handful of games in, maximum 1500p yet. So far liking it a lot even though it has its issues.

Here are some quick lessons our group has learned so far (only Astartes vs Astartes yet).

-Playing tactically for the Scenario at hand is rewarded
-Going overly aggressive to score VPs turn 1 is punished by Divide & Conquer and the other player has so far swing round and won for us (not yet tested infiltrate, this is with turn 1 March/air deployed assault marines. Infiltrate is stronger, so looking forward to facing that, except maybe in Retrieve & Forward Push)
-Overwatch is crucial, it's much easier to stop Infantry/transports BEFORE they can garrison
-Buildings within 3" of an Objective are a death trap. They go down easily. So far I've stayed maximum 1-2 turns in a Garrison, using Transports to redeplpy before it collapses
-Point Defence is a strong ability both in Overwatch & firing out of sequence/split fire
-Flyers deal pain but are taken out easily by weight of fire since everything can shoot at them (boo)
-Reaver is a bit too strong at 1500p, where not enough detachments are available to strip its Shields & overwhelm it. We'll probably leave it to 2000+ and go for a Warhound next time round.
-Knight Questoris are pretty deadly but also far from Invulnerable
-A & B weapon choices for the same points cost aren't balanced at all. Case in point Contemptors, TLLC is crazily betterer than AssCans.

Here's my review & Comparison with EA30K/EpicAU 30k that I really like.

I will update after bigger games and any Erratas and if course once we get more complete army lists with core transports & artillery.


Rules 8/10
Balance 5/10
Weighted 7.5/10

+Good terrain rules that really affect gameplay, same as EA30k, but also terrain that you can affect (by targeting structures)
+Balancing mechanics built into Army building, Formations limiting what you can take to limit spam & Strategic assets being limited
+Detachments with higher initial cost and reduced expansion cost forces you to choose if you want more activations or larger Formations/Detachments that are harder to break
+Multiple Victory Condition scenarios
+Objective Control/Tactical Strength values is a good mechanic
+Scale rules, larger units can shoot and/or leave cc and move over smaller units
+/- The USP of LI, its Hybrid phase/alternating activation system. Orders locked in start of turn forces you to think ahead but at the cost of reactivity during the turn. Subphases of taking turns activating vs true alternating activations. Means no possibility to move after everything has shot.
Also activations are not necessarily alternating, if player 1 has chosen fewer or no prders for a certain phase player 2 potentially gets to do lots in a row
+/- Legion Traits add flavour, but at the cost of balance as the power level is very unequal. Could have cost points per Formation to balance them?
-A bit slow. Very granular with (too) many special rules and traits for large games. CC with one vs one pairing also slows the game.
-No supression/pinning mechanic. Just focus fire to kill and hope to break as there is no pinning units you can't kill enough of to break. Morale plays little role over all as even broken formations' units can be ordered to Move & Shoot & charge
-No degradation of Multi wound units as they are damaged. Together with lack of supression this means everything is at full capacity until dead. Which will again reward larger/tougher units and make it sometimes pointless to shoot at things you can't finish. e.g. a Warlord Titan with 1W remaining is as dangerous to you as an undamaged one.
-Bad internal balance. A&B weapon choices for the same points where one is clearly statistically better. Also Titans in particular gain more in power level than points increase, bigger is stronger per point
-Everything gets to shoot at flyers

Here images from our last games for terrain density reference, if your group has come to other conclusions. We are working on more scatter, obstacles & obstruction area terrain.

The balance can be improved by Erratas & house Erratas.

Its also early days, incomplete game without assault/core transports & artillery.

100% agree on scatter terrain being needed, stuff to slow movement, obstacles that can provide cover

For sure. We realized early we are lacking in that department. But one can only paint so many things in a given time, so they will be added as soon as we can get some painted. We're pretty good on LOS blocking though IMO. Big terrain painting effort coming up I sense. Buildings, scatter, obstacles, area terrain.

the tables look very good. I've got some 3d print buildings aimed for Titanicus, they largely sit on raised plinths which provide nice obstacles to hunker down behind. printing some Jersey barriers

think also barricades, burnt out wreckage etc will be good

also pondering industrial areas that can be considered area terrain with pipework etc over it so good for infantry to lurk in and while passable for vehicles slows them down

Sounds good, we are planning for industrial pipelines, barrricades, ruins, wrecks.

Plinths are an interesting idea, hadn't thought about that.

the files come with three heights of them, end up about 8" square or 8"x4" roughly, the lowest is enough for infantry generally to be out of sight behind, the highest will hide tanks, medium lets turrets fire over but thats about it

not got enough for a large area done yet but they look decent and give defined roadways that can then be further blocked

have also noted the lowest as an obstacle for vehicles and the other two as impassable, the highest impassable to all but infantry. medium and low have stairways for walkers etc

I’m really hoping the next wave of LI is soon.

I feel a nearly maxed out Demi-Company is a good start for infantry. But whilst I could certainly go another, I want different Dreadnoughts, and some Tarantula or Rapiers to mix up my tactical options some.

I'm dying for some drop pods and jetbikes for my blood angels

high speed stuff and hopefully flanking stuff is going to mix the game up a fair bit, especially drop pods

I know I gave some of y'all a lot of crap over all the bitching about some of the stuff like drop pods and bikes/land speeders, etc. not being part of the core rulebook... but I've come to the conclusion that most of the second wave content should have been included in the first wave.

In my efforts to try to build thematically and fluffily appropriate lists for multiple legions, I've hit various roadblocks due to the absences of various key units (how are you supposed to build a white scars army without bikes!?). Insofar as I can tell, once this next wave releases that should no longer really be an issue (though not having things like recon marines or breacher marines, etc. is still a bit disappointing) and there will be enough variety to actually start getting into specialized formations and the like, but the first wave I think was overly limited and vanilla.