Seriously. My group and I finally gave it a go on Friday and we loved it so much that we played for over six hours, broke for rest, came back on Saturday for another six hours and decided to encore it Sunday evening. The game is absolutely fantastic! Lots of good quality models, half the price of GW stuff, with way, way better rules! On top of all that it has a fantastic community army list app, and shares enough similarities with Armada that really make it fun and easy to learn and build lists for on the fly. Very simple setup with lots of terrain viability, the card system is fantastic and adds a lot of depth and complexity to the game. Mission selection is also fun and unique, setup is really quick! No fighting with bulky books and codexes that are out of date a week after you buy them, all the points and rules updates are provided online in FREE PDFs. It's really such a well done game, with loads of content and more coming. We are even thinking about replacing 40K with this game.

It has exploded in popularity in the last year, the may the 4th bundles sold out pretty much every where globally. I would not be surprised to see it being the second most popular game now behind 40k.

 ingtaer wrote:
It has exploded in popularity in the last year, the may the 4th bundles sold out pretty much every where globally. I would not be surprised to see it being the second most popular game now behind 40k.

I am really glad to hear it. I bought into Shadow Collectives as I was a huge fan of Maul's storyline in Clone Wars. I also split a starter with a friend and took the Clones, which I plan to expand at a later time. The Blizzard Force and Echo Base Defenders boxes that are coming out soon also have me really excited about doing some themed tables. I've found a lot of great 3rd party terrain online. My only complaint with the game thus far is how easy it is to pick your own activation cycle. I wish that was a little more random.

As far as non-GW games go it's extremely popular, but that still puts it at something like 1/10th the numbers of 40k and that is enough to keep people clinging to the GW bubble.

 Togusa wrote:
I bought into Shadow Collectives as I was a huge fan of Maul's storyline in Clone Wars.

I have played against them a few times now but have yet to even open my own box, they are both fun and good (maybe a little too good in the case of Pykes!)

The Blizzard Force and Echo Base Defenders boxes that are coming out soon also have me really excited about doing some themed tables. I've found a lot of great 3rd party terrain online.

Blizzard force looks really good (especially in skirmish), EBD and Invasion force seem pretty middle of the road, unfortunately 501st looks a little under the curve. Hope that when Giddeon comes out they do a themed box around him (and a Mando covert).

My only complaint with the game thus far is how easy it is to pick your own activation cycle. I wish that was a little more random.

Not sure what you mean by this can you elaborate?

Its incredibly hard for any game but 40k to make traction in my wargamibg group. Teo of us have been trying to get more folks playing underworlds (unsuccessfully) for the past couple of years. We just don't have the time for multiple game systems, and we are all so invested in 40k already.

Most of us are lucky to play more than 8 hours of miniature games a month.

It had a strong, but questionable launch mainly. The starter boxes were exciting, but the 2 faction issue took a long time to grow into something that didn't feel like one dominant list and an also ran see sawing between the two. It didn't help that the PVC models didn't have the best detail made worse by studio paint schemes that made the models look somehow much worse.

Early alternating activation sins made spamming snipers out of costly packs absolutely necessary for competitive play and when the prequel armies launched they were a notable step above. None of this is terrible or anything, but it gave the game a couple years of feeling like it wasn't living up to its potential. Then you've got the uncertainty of FFG losing the helm and it getting dumped on AMG who were not prepared or staffed to manage it.

Through all of that though the game has proven to be a solid system and the brand has definitely ensured its retained fans. Now that most of the really obvious stuff has been released, the ability to release more niche stuff and create a much wider build variety within factions. Where the meta once felt dominated by cookie cutter builds there's definitely more options these days that makes the game feel more interesting than it ever has.

I think the new Battleforces are definitely the kind of product that's bringing the game's strengths to light. Locally we're seeing a lot of interest and its hitting the table regularly again. I think its a great time to be getting into the game overall. Definitely the best state the game has been in.

 Arbitrator wrote:
As far as non-GW games go it's extremely popular, but that still puts it at something like 1/10th the numbers of 40k and that is enough to keep people clinging to the GW bubble.

I finally got fed up with Warhammer. I can see it now for what it is, and I see how insidious the level of control the company exerts over the game and thus the community really is. I really enjoy the fact that with the AMG products, use of 3rd party tools isn't just allowed, its encouraged.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ingtaer wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
I bought into Shadow Collectives as I was a huge fan of Maul's storyline in Clone Wars.

I have played against them a few times now but have yet to even open my own box, they are both fun and good (maybe a little too good in the case of Pykes!)

The Blizzard Force and Echo Base Defenders boxes that are coming out soon also have me really excited about doing some themed tables. I've found a lot of great 3rd party terrain online.

Blizzard force looks really good (especially in skirmish), EBD and Invasion force seem pretty middle of the road, unfortunately 501st looks a little under the curve. Hope that when Giddeon comes out they do a themed box around him (and a Mando covert).

My only complaint with the game thus far is how easy it is to pick your own activation cycle. I wish that was a little more random.

Not sure what you mean by this can you elaborate?

Basically with the way activations are handled by cards, I can always set it up so that the unit I want to go first, does. Every time without any chance of failure. So far it hasn't caused us any issues, but I can see this system being extremely abuseable for the competitive crowd.

I don't really know what the meta is, but since I play in a small group of five people for fun, I'm not too worried about it. I'm looking forward to the 501 box.

It's not as bad as it used to be. Early on list construction was heavily influenced by the ability to build to a specific type of unit and use command cards to fill the gaps so you had perfect activation control. On top of that, there were cheap units that were easy to spam activations so you could reliably go last/first on turn 2/3 and really break up the flow of the game. These are still kind of problems, IMO, but they don't weight the game down nearly as badly as they did early on.

PVC minis, although I like the Republic so that's less of an issue to me.

30+ years of collecting scenery in 25-28mm. A lot of it is fine, a lot of it really looks out of place, with doors that don't even reach a figure's chest on those tall bases.

I find FFG games to be a bit off for me. Piles of different chits just rub me up the wrong way, and the rules feel heavily (over-)structured. X-Wing was fine (to start with), but I also found Imperial Assault to be overly gamey, weirdly flavourless, and mired in analysis paralysis because the scenarios were often so tight.

The new army sets look great, so a couple of us locally are tempted, but maybe for a different game system.

 Momotaro wrote:
PVC minis, although I like the Republic so that's less of an issue to me.

30+ years of collecting scenery in 25-28mm. A lot of it is fine, a lot of it really looks out of place, with doors that don't even reach a figure's chest on those tall bases.

I find FFG games to be a bit off for me. Piles of different chits just rub me up the wrong way, and the rules feel heavily (over-)structured. X-Wing was fine (to start with), but I also found Imperial Assault to be overly gamey, weirdly flavourless, and mired in analysis paralysis because the scenarios were often so tight.

The new army sets look great, so a couple of us locally are tempted, but maybe for a different game system.

I would encourage you to try out the game. It's very, very good and the rules in use are both functional and tight in terms of ensuring balanced play. Missions are fun and varied as well.

I can only speak for myself but it's mostly

- bland setting
- poor faction variety

that made me not consider this when I was looking for new games to try out.

Tbh mechanically it also looked pretty bland and shallow in the reviews (unlike Armada which has great mechanisms full of player agency and decision points, but again - uninteresting setting and factions, unfortunately).

I Love classic Star Wars and love the models myself, absolutely hate the game mechanics. i have friends who play it but i just could not get into it. the card based initiative and the FF proprietary dice were a big turn off. along with all the tokens required to play the game. i have been spoiled by other AA games that were better written.

I also use the armada models to play the B5 wars conversion for Star Wars fleet battles.

Most of us are lucky to play more than 8 hours of miniature games a month.

I do 12-14 hours every Saturday...of course i run late night gaming at the FLGS so i kind of have to be there.
My wife is a gamer as well, so she doesn't care if i spend all night. most of the other guys are currently single and the ones that are in relationships/have families are in a similar situation as i am..... or their significant other plays with us as well.

That is how i get away with playing so many other game systems than just 40K. in fact GW games are actually less played at our FLGS. usually WM/H, specter operations, classic battletech, infinity, DUST 1947, FOW see more play, SW legion shows up every now and then as well.

 Togusa wrote:

 Momotaro wrote:
PVC minis, although I like the Republic so that's less of an issue to me.

30+ years of collecting scenery in 25-28mm. A lot of it is fine, a lot of it really looks out of place, with doors that don't even reach a figure's chest on those tall bases.

I find FFG games to be a bit off for me. Piles of different chits just rub me up the wrong way, and the rules feel heavily (over-)structured. X-Wing was fine (to start with), but I also found Imperial Assault to be overly gamey, weirdly flavourless, and mired in analysis paralysis because the scenarios were often so tight.

The new army sets look great, so a couple of us locally are tempted, but maybe for a different game system.

I would encourage you to try out the game. It's very, very good and the rules in use are both functional and tight in terms of ensuring balanced play. Missions are fun and varied as well.

I certainly won't dismiss it out of hand.

 Momotaro wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 Momotaro wrote:
PVC minis, although I like the Republic so that's less of an issue to me.

30+ years of collecting scenery in 25-28mm. A lot of it is fine, a lot of it really looks out of place, with doors that don't even reach a figure's chest on those tall bases.

I find FFG games to be a bit off for me. Piles of different chits just rub me up the wrong way, and the rules feel heavily (over-)structured. X-Wing was fine (to start with), but I also found Imperial Assault to be overly gamey, weirdly flavourless, and mired in analysis paralysis because the scenarios were often so tight.

The new army sets look great, so a couple of us locally are tempted, but maybe for a different game system.

I would encourage you to try out the game. It's very, very good and the rules in use are both functional and tight in terms of ensuring balanced play. Missions are fun and varied as well.

I certainly won't dismiss it out of hand.

I'm glad to hear it, we had a couple of perspective players at the LGS yesterday evening who did and it made me quite sad.

I don't like games that use too many tokens

locally the biggest obstacles to adoption are:

1. People reluctant to play anything other than 40k/GW ecosystem

2. People reluctant to play games based on licensed properties.

3. People who don't like proprietary dice.

4. People who don't like Legions resolution mechanics (closely related to those who don't like proprietary dice).

5. People who don't like games that use tokens (like Too fast - I find this a completely arbitrary complaint as 40k is a game that would benefit from tokens to track rules, and may of these players end up basically marking up small bits of paper to track their rules and buffs, etc. which are effectively just shittier tokens).

6. People who don't like Atomic Mass Games/who don't trust AMG to handle the game properly (especially not after their soft-cancellation of Armada and the changes they made to X-Wing, which didn't sit well with quite a few in the area).

What is the actual complaint about the proprietary dice? Is it because you can't just easily go out and buy them from 3rd parties?

Because frankly, I find the dice system to be far more interesting when compared to "roll a D6 and fish for two's, rerolling 1's!" which is how 40K especially, but AoS and 30K feel to me now.

Likewise, the tokens are great and help you remember your abilities, rather than constantly forgetting them. Legion actually has less tokens than Armada does, but they haven't really caused our group any major issues.

I'm not familiar with the AMG drama. Suffice it to say I will accept point six with no contest, provided no one tells me about it, because I don't care. If that's someone's reason, fine by me.

The licensed properties bit confuses me. 40K is a licensed property...isn't it?

The faction issues I can grant folks, but with the game now having more, and more on the way, it's a good time to at least look into it, especially if you're tired of one of the other game companies....crap.

We know Ewoks are coming, which when added to Clones/Rebels, Empire/CIS and now Shadow Collective will make for a nice spread. Depending on support in the future, I'd surmise that an independent Mandalorian faction will appear at some point alongside New Republic and First Order. Though for the latter I would much rather have Old Republic/Sith Empire as that stuff is just objectively better and not essentially reskins of the Rebels and Empire. All in all, I think there is quite a lot of faction potential with the game and I am very excited to see where it goes.

Also, one small gripe. I don't think Armada has been cancelled. There simply isn't any new content coming in the near future. As far as I'm concerned the game is actually complete as it is and I play CIS/Republic.

A lot of people just don't like proprietary dice, full stop. I do understand to a degree, but I don't find them a dealbreaker and they can definitely have their benefits. MCP uses them well for creating a variety of unique effects that you can't do with standard dice.

If I have one complaint with Legion's, its that they ARE effectively, just standard dice with the X+ value baked in. You could replace them with D6/D8s with little issue. The one advantage they carry is that they allow attacks to consist of dice that have multiple probabilities easily, which streamlines a lot of the way different weapons in a unit work by quite a bit. (I am less impressed by their saving throws, fwiw).

A lot of the complaints about Legion are stuff I found to be completely valid growing pains. I think right now the game is really coming into its own. I feel like the release of the new battleforces is doing a great job of serving as a soft relaunch and bringing in a crowd of players who will get to experience it fresh past its growing pains.

 Togusa wrote:


The licensed properties bit confuses me. 40K is a licensed property...isn't it?

The thing with being a licensed property is that GW/Citadel does not license the game out to someone else to be made, they do it in house.

AMG maintains the license, provided by Disney, to make the game.

A lot of people just don't like proprietary dice, full stop. I do understand to a degree, but I don't find them a dealbreaker and they can definitely have their benefits. MCP uses them well for creating a variety of unique effects that you can't do with standard dice.

It isn't just that for me, DUST and MONPOC both use proprietary dice and bot those games are great. the problem with SW legion comes back to them trying to do too much with them. the surge mechanic (and the fact the symbol for it looks so much like a hit symbol) combined with the dice is my problem.

5. People who don't like games that use tokens (like Too fast - I find this a completely arbitrary complaint as 40k is a game that would benefit from tokens to track rules, and may of these players end up basically marking up small bits of paper to track their rules and buffs, etc. which are effectively just shittier tokens).

That may be true of 9th edition with all the aura/faction/strat spam to keep track of. when we play 5th ed there are 22 USRs and i have them all memorized by now and there are no gotcha cards since all the unit's natural abilities are right there in the unit entry. the only "tokens" i have are for the vehicle damage chart...usually just the dead one like a smoke/explosion marker. to add a bit more immersion.

SW legion has buckets of tokens that clutter the entire table.

I mean i understand because FF is more of a board game company that got into miniatures. so, some of the old design hooks are hard to break.

 Togusa wrote:
What is the actual complaint about the proprietary dice? Is it because you can't just easily go out and buy them from 3rd parties?

Because frankly, I find the dice system to be far more interesting when compared to "roll a D6 and fish for two's, rerolling 1's!" which is how 40K especially, but AoS and 30K feel to me now.

Likewise, the tokens are great and help you remember your abilities, rather than constantly forgetting them. Legion actually has less tokens than Armada does, but they haven't really caused our group any major issues.

I'm not familiar with the AMG drama. Suffice it to say I will accept point six with no contest, provided no one tells me about it, because I don't care. If that's someone's reason, fine by me.

The licensed properties bit confuses me. 40K is a licensed property...isn't it?

The faction issues I can grant folks, but with the game now having more, and more on the way, it's a good time to at least look into it, especially if you're tired of one of the other game companies....crap.

We know Ewoks are coming, which when added to Clones/Rebels, Empire/CIS and now Shadow Collective will make for a nice spread. Depending on support in the future, I'd surmise that an independent Mandalorian faction will appear at some point alongside New Republic and First Order. Though for the latter I would much rather have Old Republic/Sith Empire as that stuff is just objectively better and not essentially reskins of the Rebels and Empire. All in all, I think there is quite a lot of faction potential with the game and I am very excited to see where it goes.

Also, one small gripe. I don't think Armada has been cancelled. There simply isn't any new content coming in the near future. As far as I'm concerned the game is actually complete as it is and I play CIS/Republic.

 Togusa wrote:
What is the actual complaint about the proprietary dice? Is it because you can't just easily go out and buy them from 3rd parties?

Because frankly, I find the dice system to be far more interesting when compared to "roll a D6 and fish for two's, rerolling 1's!" which is how 40K especially, but AoS and 30K feel to me now.

I agree, but some people are snobs and think "if it doesn't use regular dice I can buy anywhere from anyone then its an unnecessary cash grab and not a real game".

The licensed properties bit confuses me. 40K is a licensed property...isn't it?

Not even a little bit. GW owns the rights and IP to 40k and will never have that taken away from them. AMG/Asmodee do not own the Star Wars IP. At any time Disney/Lucasfilm can opt not to renew their license or Asmodee/AMG can decide the license is too expensive for the revenue it generates the company, etc. In which case the game is effectively "dead" and a new IP holder will pick up the rights but make a new game using new mechanics and new minis.

We know Ewoks are coming, which when added to Clones/Rebels, Empire/CIS and now Shadow Collective will make for a nice spread. Depending on support in the future, I'd surmise that an independent Mandalorian faction will appear at some point alongside New Republic and First Order. Though for the latter I would much rather have Old Republic/Sith Empire as that stuff is just objectively better and not essentially reskins of the Rebels and Empire. All in all, I think there is quite a lot of faction potential with the game and I am very excited to see where it goes.

Unless I missed something, ewoks aren't a faction, they are just a handful of units being added to Rebels (even that is being presumptive, as they have only revealed a single unit, but we're assuming based on the "battleforce" concept and how the wookiees were handled that there will be more than one ewok unit to be fielded).

Likewise Shadow Collective aren't really a "faction" per se, "Mercenaries" are the faction - shadow collective is a playable limited sub-faction within that. They said very explicitly not to expect regular or ongoing updates for them, there will be more mercenaries - but they won't necessarily be playable within Shadow Collective, and some might form other sub-factions in the future.

I wouldn't expect to see Old Republic/Sith anytime soon, currently it would be entirely non-canon and we're probably still quite a bit off from getting to the point that theres enough on-screen variety to build a playable thing out of it.

Also, one small gripe. I don't think Armada has been cancelled. There simply isn't any new content coming in the near future. As far as I'm concerned the game is actually complete as it is and I play CIS/Republic.

They said they would continue producing existing product and provide occasional rules updates, but that they have no further product in development and nothing on the horizon in terms of future development. That was about 1 year ago this month - they wouldn't have made that announcement if they planned to put someting into development within 6-12 months of that announcement IMO, its doubtful that their position has changed since then. It takes them approx. 2 years to go from product concept to release, so if they started working on something today we wouldn't see it until 2024. IIRC their license expires in or around 2025 barring a further renewal. Its unlikely they will begin product dev work now for an armada product that would release so close to expiration - if I were to guess they won't start dev work at all until they have a renewal in hand (which usually is locked in about a year or so before the license expires), so I'm figuring we won't see any armada products before 2025 or 2026 at the earliest, which is a long time and will probably mean a new edition of the game.

Or...

instead of typing that entire paragraph, you can just say the game is cancelled, because its effectively the same difference from the point of view of a gamer in 2022.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

That may be true of 9th edition with all the aura/faction/strat spam to keep track of. when we play 5th ed there are 22 USRs and i have them all memorized by now and there are no gotcha cards since all the unit's natural abilities are right there in the unit entry. the only "tokens" i have are for the vehicle damage chart...usually just the dead one like a smoke/explosion marker. to add a bit more immersion.

Even in 5th edition I made use of a lot of tokens, well beyond vehicle damage indicators and wound counters for all my multi-wound counters. My 5th ed era eldar army had a bucket load of tokens for all the psychic buffs /nerfsthe army could hand out - fortune, guide, doom, etc. None of which were "natural abilities" or "in the unit entry". Plenty of players tried to go without them and just said "this unit has xyz now", which is fine if its just one such abilitity per turn, but when half the units on the table were getting hit with a buff or a nerf ability you have to keep track of it somehow. Using dice to indicate stuff wasn't much of a help, and scribbling on bits of torn up paper became a paint in the ass and looked like gak, so it was easier to just get tokens to indicate everything.

The need for tokens in 9th is definitely way higher than it was in any previous edition of the game, but lets not pretend that its new.

There are games that needs tokens, and games that do not.

Legion could do very well by removing 90% of their token luggage, The dice situation is imo just looking for issues that are not there, same about the models, they are gaming pieces nothing else and you paint them as sutch, you dont put in hours of job on the minis, but the tokens, stat card and upgrade card spam that is a legit problem, and it is a problem that span across all 3 games.

Not sure I'm understanding you correctly, but one interpretation of what you just said skews dangerously close to "the minis are just gaming pieces and you don't really need them, just use blank bases instead". Thats certainly an interesting take, and one which ironically challenges what seems to be your actual intent of arguing proprietary dice and tokens are unnecessary.

In terms of model quality, part of the problem was just that FFG shot themselves in the foot with their promotional material. The official painted models just looked terrible, and gave people the impression the figures looked absolutely nothing like the icons they were meant to represent. I was SHOCKED when I decided to bite the bullet and buy Granny Solo. In hand, the figure looks dramatically more like Harrison Ford than the promo pictures:

 FrozenDwarf wrote:
There are games that needs tokens, and games that do not.

Legion could do very well by removing 90% of their token luggage, The dice situation is imo just looking for issues that are not there, same about the models, they are gaming pieces nothing else and you paint them as sutch, you dont put in hours of job on the minis, but the tokens, stat card and upgrade card spam that is a legit problem, and it is a problem that span across all 3 games.

The tokens and Stat cards are what make this game for me. I really do not understand the dislike of the their Token system, and that's okay. We're all just different....but there are less than 10 tokens needed, and usually its even less than that. They're extremely helpful and great visual aids for helping to remember all of the stuff going on on the table. In GW games, for example, part of the reason I left them behind is because I'd constantly forget 25% of my rules each turn, only to remember them half way into my friends movement phase. Having to have sometimes 2-3 different books spread open, a pen, my army list, it just got to be too much. But with the AMG games everything I need is right in the box, easily accessible and has most of the rules printed right on them (though not always). I wish that GW games had this type of system. In legion specifically, the 7 card deck and the movement tools are probably the most interesting part of the game for me and seems to be where a lot of the fun comes in, trying to plan out my move and think about all the possibilities that my opponent has in their deck at the same time, seems to me adds a lot of depth to the game. I've been heavily invested in Armada for a couple of years now and the card system there is equally as good for me, though I have no interest in X-Wing so that I can't speak to.

The other thing I really like about these games is that even if Disney pulls the licenses, at the end of the day, they'll be playable forever. Even if Armada is officially done, I can play it with the four factions that exist literally until the next century because it's a complete game that doesn't need any updating. I know the Armada community has really been embracing printing and have been making ships and cards for a long time now, it's possible that the Legion community will do the same thing if they aren't already.

 LunarSol wrote:
In terms of model quality, part of the problem was just that FFG shot themselves in the foot with their promotional material. The official painted models just looked terrible, and gave people the impression the figures looked absolutely nothing like the icons they were meant to represent. I was SHOCKED when I decided to bite the bullet and buy Granny Solo. In hand, the figure looks dramatically more like Harrison Ford than the promo pictures:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Even in hand, that model is not something that's going to make me play the game. I would play the game because I liked the rules and setting, but in spite of the mediocre models.

Even in hand, that model is not something that's going to make me play the game. I would play the game because I liked the rules and setting, but in spite of the mediocre models.

The Han Solo model was one of their earlier releases- in my opinion, the models have gotten better and better, and the recent ones all look very good.

 Togusa wrote:


The other thing I really like about these games is that even if Disney pulls the licenses, at the end of the day, they'll be playable forever. Even if Armada is officially done, I can play it with the four factions that exist literally until the next century because it's a complete game that doesn't need any updating. I know the Armada community has really been embracing printing and have been making ships and cards for a long time now, it's possible that the Legion community will do the same thing if they aren't already.

Indeed. Thats why I'm buying multiple copies of *everything*. When that license inevitably does get pulled, I very much doubt I'm going to chase the game over to its next publisher. I'll be quite content continuing to play the game with my massive collection and won't need to chase another copy of xyz on the secondary market at a 1000% markup.

Indeed. Thats why I'm buying multiple copies of *everything*. When that license inevitably does get pulled, I very much doubt I'm going to chase the game over to its next publisher. I'll be quite content continuing to play the game with my massive collection and won't need to chase another copy of xyz on the secondary market at a 1000% markup.

I have pretty much done the same with multiple games. fortunately, DUST has been sold to a new owner but last year i finished off 5 armies, made PDF copies of all the rules, stat cards and missions. same thing with BFG (the minis are quite accessible from third parties), B5 wars, and i just recently did the same for warmachine MK III.

Yep, did the same with DUST (still patiently waiting to hear who the new owner is and what they will do with the property, but I suspect the radio silence is because they intend to move the game in a different direction), doing the same with Mk3 WMHDs themes (but only for those that I intend to continue playing as Prime armies in Mk4).

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Togusa wrote:


The other thing I really like about these games is that even if Disney pulls the licenses, at the end of the day, they'll be playable forever. Even if Armada is officially done, I can play it with the four factions that exist literally until the next century because it's a complete game that doesn't need any updating. I know the Armada community has really been embracing printing and have been making ships and cards for a long time now, it's possible that the Legion community will do the same thing if they aren't already.

Indeed. Thats why I'm buying multiple copies of *everything*. When that license inevitably does get pulled, I very much doubt I'm going to chase the game over to its next publisher. I'll be quite content continuing to play the game with my massive collection and won't need to chase another copy of xyz on the secondary market at a 1000% markup.

I am curious, why do you think it's going to get pulled? I really don't see anything that would point to that being the case at the current time, and if anything I doubt Asmodee will let the license lapse, it's way too lucrative. It's like how GW hangs on to LoTR even though I have never in my life seen that game actually played.

All licenses come to an end eventually, be it 3 years from now or 30 years from now, Asmodee will not have the license forever.

Typically, every time a license comes up for renewal (ESPECIALLY if the license has been doing well and generating grow amounts of revenue for the licensee), the licensor asks for a larger royalty - basically they (Disney) look at it and say "hey last time we did this we asked for a 5% royalty, but 10 years back this license was only generating $5 million a year, now its generating $50 million and we want a larger cut of the pie because you're getting rich off our name, give us 15%" or whatever. Eventually the cost of the license eats into the profit margin significantly enough that if the licensee (Asmodee) invested the same money and resources elsewhere, they could make more money than if they continued to invest it into the current license, and they decide not to renew. And if they do renew the license but theres a sales *downturn* afterwards and the license isn't as lucrative as it used to be? Well, Disney isn't going to give them slack on that, Asmodee would be lucky if Disney simply agreed to keep the same rate for the next renewal - sometimes licensors get greedy and want to keep the cash flows close to constand and ask to hike the royalties again even though the licensee is making less money on it. Asmodee might be finding itself in that situation soon, as Armada is likely not generating the same revenues it was when the game was being actively supported, and if fan pushback to 2.5E is any indication X-Wing is probably in a sales slump - so only Legion looks like its doing well currently in terms of sales. Then you have to remember that Asmodee killed the Star Wars RPGs like 2-3 years ago in order to transfer it to another studio within the organization, and as of yet they still haven't relaunched it, so thats 2-3 years of lost revenue there. And then Star Wars Destiny which was killed by FFG, along with various other products and the general lack of Star Wars board/card games being published by Asmodee all point to a license "crunch" in the works. Simply put, its very possible that Disney asks for more than Asmodee is willing to pay vs acquiring a cheaper license or generating a unique IP (I think Twilight Imperium has legs as it strikes an interesting mix of inspiration from both Dune and Star Wars with some more fantastical elements pulled in).

And it might not even come down to Asmodees decision, Disney could decide to test the market on the license and put it up for auction and see how much they can get for those rights elsewhere, or they could decide that Asmodee isn't the right partner for the license and partnering with another company could be more lucrative. Theres also the potential that they cut a larger licensing deal with another company (say Hasbro) who promise Disney a much better return in exchange for the exclusive license to not just board/card/miniature/role playing games, but also toys and other consumer products, in which case it doesn't matter what Asmodee wants.

Long story short, licensing is more complex and political than you possibly realize.

doing the same with Mk3 WMHDs themes (but only for those that I intend to continue playing as Prime armies in Mk4).

That isn't a concern as our WM/H group has no interest in where the MKIV rules are heading so we need to maintain easy access to MKIII since that is the edition we will still be playing.

chaos0xomega wrote:


Typically, every time a license comes up for renewal (ESPECIALLY if the license has been doing well and generating grow amounts of revenue for the licensee), the licensor asks for a larger royalty - basically they (Disney) look at it and say "hey last time we did this we asked for a 5% royalty, but 10 years back this license was only generating $5 million a year, now its generating $50 million and we want a larger cut of the pie because you're getting rich off our name, give us 15%" or whatever. Eventually the cost of the license eats into the profit margin significantly enough that if the licensee (Asmodee) invested the same money and resources elsewhere, they could make more money than if they continued to invest it into the current license, and they decide not to renew.

This is why WoTC walked from it years ago. I have a friend that worked there at the time and Lucas Arts wanted a huge royalty increase combined with the collapse of the PPM market madeHasbro decide it wasn't worth it. The Star Wars Mini game from WoTC was still selling fine at the time, according to my friend, but it was nowhere near the height of it's popularity sales wise as the game was just repeating a lot of content at that point and that money, as you said, would make Hasbro more invested elsewhere.

It seamed pretty abrupt to the players, like me, but these negotiations probably happen over months as dropping a whole line is something I'd figure a company wouldn't want to have to do due to losses (probably had to destroy a bunch of product) unless the alternative was just not reasonably profitable.

To the original question: I'm not playing as much Legion right now because I really want to see something like the X-Wing 2.5 points system come in to shake up the balance between spending points on dudes and spending points on upgrades. I feel like the FFG systems have taken boys-before-toys to an extreme in general and made spamming cheap units just better than taking the big cool fancy things, and I really like how AMG tried to do something about that with X-Wing, and I'm hoping to see them do that to Legion so the list-building doesn't feel so constrained.

yep, Mongoose Publishing lost the B5 license basically the same way about 10-15 years ago. Game was doing fine, they had just launched 2nd edition, had been releasing new ships and sculpts and had announced new stuff, and then *poof* it was gone, because the license came up for renewal and WB asked for a bigger fee /royalty. Mongoose saw that while the games were profitable, interest and sales were declining and WB wasn't planning on producing any new B5 films or content, so they saw no point in continuing the product line. Rumor has it that WB had given them the license for next to nothing in the first place thinking that it was a deas license with no commercial prospects, but because Mongoose had done so well with it they demanded significantly more for renewal- joke was on them because nobody else went for it after Mongoose dropped it.

A big issue with licensed stuff too is that as a designer/publisher you are often limited in what you can create or add to an IP (the days of West End Games Star Wars RPG where they had a free hand in inventing whatever they wanted to are long over for many franchises) and so you often have to rely on "canon"/established stuff to build out your product line with. When you're starting outits not an issue because theres often enough material to keep you going, but eventually you run out of existing design space snd don't have the authority to create new stuff to diversify with. Pre-Disney this wasn't an issue with Star Wars because there was so much content to work with that you could work on it forever, but Post-Disney that design space has been very severely trimmed and theres a much more limited range of stuff to work with and new content isn't being added at the pace that it used to be (in the past every writer and video game would basically add a few new aliens, spaceships, planets, droid/trooper types etc, but now most media limits itself to only established and pre-existing stuff, with new stuff only being added sporadically and in more limited ways, so the expansion of canon is coming at a slower pace). This is a huge problem because games like this are basically driven by the "cult of the new" - many of these kits and ministures will sell more within a few weeks of release than they will sell over the rest of that products lifetime, so publishers need to constantly be pushing new stuff out to retail in order for that license to remain profitable. If you run out of content to mine and can't create anything new, you don't have very many options left.

I am completely apathetic to the IP so it doesn't matter how great the game is.

We’ve got a small groundswell of interest but 40k and ONLY 40k keeps a steady player base in our area.

Our small 5-man off brand splinter doesn’t really play army level stuff anymore so it’s not on our list. I did buy the commando droids and use them for security bots in skirmish games

As someone who is pretty much over Star Wars, I find some of the miniatures too good to pass up. I have no intention of playing the game, but every intention of buying some of the new mercenaries and aliens.


I can’t help but wonder if the game would be more successful if the IP were viewed in a more positive light.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
As someone who is pretty much over Star Wars, I find some of the miniatures too good to pass up. I have no intention of playing the game, but every intention of buying some of the new mercenaries and aliens.


I can’t help but wonder if the game would be more successful if the IP were viewed in a more positive light.

Me too. I am going to use rebels for some Star Breach skirmish action. Hammerhead, the scouts, they all look so good.

I have no desire to play Legion. Overall I also hate the Star Wars IP now. The Boba Fett series was pretty much was the nail in my nostalgia coffin.

Legion has got a lot of traction over here in the last year, but so far my personal experience with observing their games has been far from great. It's not the game's fault or anything, but pure grey plastic WAAC attitude I often see doesn't make the game appealing.

I got the starter box and a couple kits back when this game came out. But my love for Star Wars in general has diminished significantly in recent years.

And there are a lot of other games out there i'd rather play, too many games and not enough time.

Now I have the chance to sit down and play several games with both my Clones and my Shadow Collective, I feel I can better add to this discussion.

Basically I can understand various reasons, not enough time and stuff like that. But I really disagree on some of it, especially stuff like the dice, rules and tokens.

We were able to play three games yesterday on our Labor Day holiday, 800 point full games in the amount of time it would take for us to play a normal game of 40K. No constant flipping through books to find rules, no arguments over movement (thank you movement tool!) and the dice are so simple, role, spend any actions or tokens, roll saves, done. I think I'm done entirely with games workshop. Especially if their model is going to continue to be pushing out oodles of expensive books over and over again!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shrapnelsmile wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
As someone who is pretty much over Star Wars, I find some of the miniatures too good to pass up. I have no intention of playing the game, but every intention of buying some of the new mercenaries and aliens.


I can’t help but wonder if the game would be more successful if the IP were viewed in a more positive light.

Me too. I am going to use rebels for some Star Breach skirmish action. Hammerhead, the scouts, they all look so good.

I have no desire to play Legion. Overall I also hate the Star Wars IP now. The Boba Fett series was pretty much was the nail in my nostalgia coffin.

To each their own. I rather enjoyed that series.

I have not picked up the game, as I am not a fan of the design ethos and methods of the game, as it is far too gamey for my liking.

 Togusa wrote:
Now I have the chance to sit down and play several games with both my Clones and my Shadow Collective, I feel I can better add to this discussion.

How are you liking the Shadow Collective? I picked them up, but haven't put them on the table yet. They look like a blast, but I have a hard time seeing how they'll perform best.

Asmoridin wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
Now I have the chance to sit down and play several games with both my Clones and my Shadow Collective, I feel I can better add to this discussion.

How are you liking the Shadow Collective? I picked them up, but haven't put them on the table yet. They look like a blast, but I have a hard time seeing how they'll perform best.

They're extremely fun. I can see the 'competitive' nature of them, but I'm having a lot more fun just trying out different army configurations. So far my general lists are running Gar Saxon with Bounty Hunter Operative support (Either Bossk, Bane or both) along with Pikes as my troops. I like Black Sun a lot, but they really like to play aggressively and that's not really my style. Maul is a beast and a lot of fun, the swoop bikes are great and the party bus is a lot of fun when filled with Commandos. Their basic troops are extremely strong, and the whole army does require a bit of cohesion. It seems like most of Legion, everything has a place and there are lots of fun little tactics and strategies that you can set up for, given the mission and deployment.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Easy E wrote:
I have not picked up the game, as I am not a fan of the design ethos and methods of the game, as it is far too gamey for my liking.

More of a hobbyist? For me, I adore the rules. Our group has no arguments or wasted time, when a conflict comes up, so far the book always has a clear and concise answer and that is something that really stuck with me as my Warhammer games are usually the opposite. We have found that Legion really does shine when the table is drowning in terrain. It makes for some amazing and cinematic experiences. Ironically, the cardboard terrain from Infinity works amazingly well and really fits in with the Star Wars theme quite well! The command cards and movement are really what make the game special in my opinion.

 Togusa wrote:



More of a hobbyist?

No, when he says "gamey" he means it feels too much like a board game or whatever, as in it feels like playing Magic the Gathering with the wombo combos and whatnot rather than a "true wargame". Easy E just has a very traditional interpretation of what wargames should look/feel/play like and how to design them. Its not an uncommon take, many of the people who don't like Legions gameplay will basically say the same thing. It goes hand in hand with the dislike of tokens and proprietary dice in many cases - such things are for children, "real wargamers" use tape measures, good ol fashioned d6s or d10s, and use reference tables and memorization to keep track of stuff rather than tokens.

Yes, you hit a big part of it is the interactions do not "feel" wargame but more CCG, Computer, or board game. I like my wargames grounded a bit more in simulation even though that can really go too far as well. I guess the golden mean is what I am looking for?

However, I also know that my tastes are my own. Others feel differently. I also know I have very clear preferences and tastes.

Ultimately, I am just glad people are having fun and playing games. Whether that is Legion, Warhammer, Team Yankee, War Machine, Command and Colors, Stargrave, something I have never heard of, etc.

 Easy E wrote:
grounded a bit more in simulation

I think thats setting up a false dichotomy, and I'm sure its not intentional but its tinged with a hint of what feels like "old-school elitism" as well (hence my quip earlier about "real wargamers" - that wasn't actually directed at you per se, but you are adequately demonstrating the attitude I was referencing).

Without spilling a mountains worth of digital ink picking apart the entire concept, the idea that chucking one set of click-clack math rocks with numbers on them to figure out what your toy soldiers are doing is somehow more or less "grounded" or a more repreresntative of "simulation" than what you get when you chuck a set of click-clack math rocks with symbols on them is patently absurd. Theres nothing truly "grounded" or "simulation" about the vast majority of wargames (off the top of my head, I would say Harpoon, Mustangs & Messerschmitts, Campaign for North Africa, and Chef de bataillon are the only games I can think of which I would ever describe as being grounded in anything approaching simulation). Both types of dice are otherwise equally valid interpretations of an abstracted reality. If anything, I would say the funny dice are in many cases *more* grounded in simulation because when used properly they can produce more complex probability distributions and mechanical interactions that can factor more complex variables into calculation and do a lot of the math "under the hood" that would otherwise take more dice rolls or more complex resolution systems involving various tables, etc. to accomplish. This allows for resolution systems that can very simply produce wildly non-binary outcomes (i.e. rather than just "pass/fail" you can get pass/fail/bonus/penalty/pass with bonus/fail with bonus/pass with penalty/fail with penalty/unexpected positive outcome/unexpected negative outcome/etc.), which are more reflective of the chaotic and complex realities in which wars and conflicts are actually fought. Conversely, standard dice typically only produce binary outcomes or very limited and simplified non-binary outcomes (e.g. - 6's on to-hit rolls are critical hits, i.e. "pass with bonus") unless they involve lots of repetitive dice rolling and external resolution aids like charts, tables, etc.

Likewise, I think theres a disconnect between perception and reality when one says that the various forms of tokens that games use to track game state and the plethora of status and conditions that might occur in real life is more "gamey" and less "grounded in simulation" than those games which simply ignore those factors altogether due to a lack of an adequate mechanism other than tokens to monitor such events. How is a game which uses tokens to track if a unit is on fire, suffering a debilitating physical condition resulting from the use of a chemical agent against it, suffering flagging morale as a result of witnessing the horrors of war, or has superior accuracy because a spotter/higher command called in target coordinates over the radio *less* "grounded in simulation" than a game which doesn't represent any of this at all? Yes, there are some games which can account for some (maybe even all) of these types of effects, but often they either have limited means to do so (being "on fire" means you suffer an additional point of damage right away and then the fire suddenly extinguishes itself, suffering flagging morale means you make a morale check right then and there and if you pass it then everyone suddenly forgets the trauma they just experienced and goes on like absolutely nothing happened, etc.) or hit you with these game state effects but provide you with no means to keep track of them (see also: 40k which increasingly wants you to remember than unit x is receiving a +1 to hit, unit y is suffering a -2 morale penalty, and unit z was buffed by a psychic shield that allows them to re-roll failed armor saves, but provides you no means of actually tracking that other than the hope that you and your opponent will remember when it becomes relevant).

Point is, while I can understand and fully appreciate that a wargame with weird gimmicky dice and a table littered with various brightly colored pieces of cardboard with various symbols looks less like an imagined miniature war and more like a boardgame than what many people (myself included in many cases) prefer, couching the argument against such concepts in language like "grounded in simulation" communicates the idea of an inherent or assumed superiority of one approach vs the other. I.E. - "I perceive this approach to wargaming as being more "real" and therefore it is more valid to me due to the inherent superiority of it being "grounded" vs other approaches which are not and therefore detached from reality". Ultimately tokens and proprietary dice are just play aids, their form, function, utility, and value are what the designer makes of them. If a game that uses them appears more "gamey" or less "grounded", its not because of the tokens or dice, its because those tokens and dice weren't necessarily used in a manner which effectively communicates their relevance to the "simulation" to the player. Hell - you even designed a game that uses tokens, the "friction markers" in Castles in the Sky? Same thing (yes, they are still tokens even though you call them "markers" ). You provided a clear explanation of what they are and what they represent, and in ones minds eye they imagine explosive bursts bracketing their vessels as they cruise through the sky. If your methodology of marking those Friction markers is to use neon pink poker chips that say "FRICTION" in highlighter yellow, now suddenly your game looks "gamey" and less "grounded in simulation". If on the other hand, your methodology of marking those friction markers is to 3d print miniature explosive bursts mounted to a flying stand and place them around your vessels as they accumulate friction to represent all those near misses, now those tokens are suddenly not only not "gamey", but they actually have made your game *more* grounded in reality. Likewise, a game that uses a d6 but everything you do in the game simply requires a 4+ to succeed is objectively *more* gamey and less grounded in simulation than anything you'll experience playing Star Wars Legion with its proprietary dice. I guess what I'm trying to say is "don't hate the game aids, hate the game" or something like that - i.e. the absence or presence of tokens or the use of one type of dice over another inherently does nothing to make a game more or less gamey/grounded,but the way they are implemented by the game does.

 Togusa wrote:
Seriously. My group and I finally gave it a go on Friday and we loved it so much that we played for over six hours, broke for rest, came back on Saturday for another six hours and decided to encore it Sunday evening. The game is absolutely fantastic! Lots of good quality models, half the price of GW stuff, with way, way better rules! On top of all that it has a fantastic community army list app, and shares enough similarities with Armada that really make it fun and easy to learn and build lists for on the fly. Very simple setup with lots of terrain viability, the card system is fantastic and adds a lot of depth and complexity to the game. Mission selection is also fun and unique, setup is really quick! No fighting with bulky books and codexes that are out of date a week after you buy them, all the points and rules updates are provided online in FREE PDFs. It's really such a well done game, with loads of content and more coming. We are even thinking about replacing 40K with this game.

It has a good rule set, and it seems good overall.

I sold my complete imperial set and some rebels just because you can only game with the limited amount of friendly and enemy units for so long. Even with all of its faults, I like the strategy of 40k better and the evolving ruleset, new rotation of units etc

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
grounded a bit more in simulation

I think thats setting up a false dichotomy. . .

This is extremely well written and I agree. There's definitely this misconception that friendlier UX and game's interface are opposite of the simulation aspect of wargames which I really don't get. In addition, what is considered "gamey" and what is an acceptable and necessary abstraction most often seems to be rather arbitrary and a thing of tradition/habit rather than something supported by any objective argument.

chaos0xomega wrote:


And it might not even come down to Asmodees decision, Disney could decide to test the market on the license and put it up for auction and see how much they can get for those rights elsewhere, or they could decide that Asmodee isn't the right partner for the license and partnering with another company could be more lucrative. Theres also the potential that they cut a larger licensing deal with another company (say Hasbro) who promise Disney a much better return in exchange for the exclusive license to not just board/card/miniature/role playing games, but also toys and other consumer products, in which case it doesn't matter what Asmodee wants.

Long story short, licensing is more complex and political than you possibly realize.

This happened to the Star Wars CCG in the late 90s. Decipher had a solid card game running, strong sales, releases timed in with the prequel trilogy films releasing etc. The license was not renewed with them, WOTC took it over. Decipher was willing to give them the rules/mechanics so the game could continue, but WOTC declined and made their own dumpster fire of a game that was dead and discontinued within 3 years.

I'd like to get into it, but I'm torn between certain units I would prefer to collect and paint. I am simply not a fan of most all of the core units, apart from basic Clone and Storm Troopers. All the units I would enjoy are tied up in the Elite slots across four factions.

I'm a big Mandalorian and Clone Trooper fan. But I'm torn between Rebels for Sabine, Clan Wren and potentially Ashoka, Galactic Republic to for Rex, Ashoka, Clones and ARC Troopers, or the Shadow Collective for Super Commandos, Gar Saxon and Rook Kast.

The new battleforce boxes look great buys. The 501st would get me everything to run and then I guess I could expand into Galactic Republic later - but it lacks Mandalorians. The Shadow Collective is also great, I really like all the Mando options including Gar Saxon with his shield, but the core troops and Maul don't appeal to me.

So I hit the dilema with the game for whether I should take a bite with the Shadow Collective and hope that the Super Commandos can be included in other factions (don't think they can?). Ideas on a postcard, would be really interested in reading them please

My annoyance with the franchise aside, Legion is really big in Central California. Probably the largest consistent active player base after Song of Ice and Fire, which has, believe it or not, supplanted 40K concerning regular store presence.
I play AOS and it is like a minor league team in the game community in comparison to Legion and Ice / FIre.

infyrana wrote:
I'd like to get into it, but I'm torn between certain units I would prefer to collect and paint. I am simply not a fan of most all of the core units, apart from basic Clone and Storm Troopers. All the units I would enjoy are tied up in the Elite slots across four factions.

I'm a big Mandalorian and Clone Trooper fan. But I'm torn between Rebels for Sabine, Clan Wren and potentially Ashoka, Galactic Republic to for Rex, Ashoka, Clones and ARC Troopers, or the Shadow Collective for Super Commandos, Gar Saxon and Rook Kast.

The new battleforce boxes look great buys. The 501st would get me everything to run and then I guess I could expand into Galactic Republic later - but it lacks Mandalorians. The Shadow Collective is also great, I really like all the Mando options including Gar Saxon with his shield, but the core troops and Maul don't appeal to me.

So I hit the dilema with the game for whether I should take a bite with the Shadow Collective and hope that the Super Commandos can be included in other factions (don't think they can?). Ideas on a postcard, would be really interested in reading them please

Shadow Collective Mauldalorians are not useable in any faction bar the Shadow Collective, no.
Something else to consider is that the Rebels will soon be getting Din, Grogu, IG11 and Ashoka (soon meaning within a year), we have no news of the Republic getting anything new bar a trio of releases for the 212th (Cody, Boil and Waxer) and it seems SC are done as a faction.
If you are that much into Clones I would say that they are your better option but if you really want Mandos then maybe Rebels with just the minimum of reb squads needed to fill out the compulsory options.
Though if you have an established group they will probably be happy to let you run whatever you want and then it will only matter if you want to attend events.

 ingtaer wrote:


Shadow Collective Mauldalorians are not useable in any faction bar the Shadow Collective, no.
Something else to consider is that the Rebels will soon be getting Din, Grogu, IG11 and Ashoka (soon meaning within a year), we have no news of the Republic getting anything new bar a trio of releases for the 212th (Cody, Boil and Waxer) and it seems SC are done as a faction.
If you are that much into Clones I would say that they are your better option but if you really want Mandos then maybe Rebels with just the minimum of reb squads needed to fill out the compulsory options.
Though if you have an established group they will probably be happy to let you run whatever you want and then it will only matter if you want to attend events.

Thanks for the reply! Sucks about the Mandos not usable in other factions, this for me personnally, is such a gate keeper from my desire to invest. Do we know for sure if there won't be a 'merc' faction where the Shadow Collective models will be 'housed'?

Yeah, the idea of seeing many of the favourites in Rebels is pushing me to consider them, but I'm really not a fan of the core models and would rather go the route of Clones, especially with waxer and boil on the horizon.

They have said that a catch all 'merc' faction is unlikely, apparently Disney licensing department does not like it though no evidence to support that has been released.

GAR is a good faction and the new 501st box set is a great starting point, Cody, Boil and Waxer are not due out for a while though (its a box of all three). Wookies are also in the faction if they are your cup of tea.

Cyel wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
grounded a bit more in simulation

I think thats setting up a false dichotomy. . .

This is extremely well written and I agree. There's definitely this misconception that friendlier UX and game's interface are opposite of the simulation aspect of wargames which I really don't get. In addition, what is considered "gamey" and what is an acceptable and necessary abstraction most often seems to be rather arbitrary and a thing of tradition/habit rather than something supported by any objective argument.

We should take it to the wargame design section and leave Legion alone on this one.

I will just say that preference is preference, and leave it at that.

Is my opinion better than anyone else's? No. Like I said, I am glad people are having fun with Legion, and will gladly play it when it is on offer.

 ingtaer wrote:
They have said that a catch all 'merc' faction is unlikely, apparently Disney licensing department does not like it though no evidence to support that has been released.

GAR is a good faction and the new 501st box set is a great starting point, Cody, Boil and Waxer are not due out for a while though (its a box of all three). Wookies are also in the faction if they are your cup of tea.

For all of that, I have to say that my Shadow Collective "Feels like a Merc" faction and I really like it. Also, I too am awaiting Cody, Boil and Waxer as I'm doing my clones up in the 212 scheme. That yellow looks so good on the white based background!

 AnomanderRake wrote:
To the original question: I'm not playing as much Legion right now because I really want to see something like the X-Wing 2.5 points system come in to shake up the balance between spending points on dudes and spending points on upgrades. I feel like the FFG systems have taken boys-before-toys to an extreme in general and made spamming cheap units just better than taking the big cool fancy things, and I really like how AMG tried to do something about that with X-Wing, and I'm hoping to see them do that to Legion so the list-building doesn't feel so constrained.

So far I can't say my group has had too much trouble with that. I don't play competitive tier so I can't say much about it, but my guess is it's the same old wargame issue of fun vs. winning. I'm about 12 games into legion now and I can say with certainty, losing in Legion is a lot more fun than losing in Warhammer.

Well, I don't play competitively, so balance on that level isn't something I could talk about in any meaningful way. But casually, my Rebels don't leave home without their happy pills.

Postponing wounds and deaths is an upgrade I happily pay for, and that worked pretty well for me.

I find the concessions you have to make for a winning list far less severe in the game now than they were when the game first launched. That said, I do find the points system overly granular and not a lot of fun to work with. It's not terrible by any means, but enough that I often feel like if I want to swap in a new release or even change characters in some way I have to start the whole list over because of the way points work out and I despise the bidding rule. None of it is a dealbreaker and if you're dedicated to just this game its a lot to chew on, but as someone who just wants to jump in casually now and then, it often feels like there's more pregame prep than actual table time.

As to the original question, I strongly considered Legion. I'm an indie gamer mostly but Runewars (got a free core at Adepticon, traded armies and got hooked) had actually warmed me up a bit to the use of special dice and tokens. Despite myself, I really enjoyed it and I actually didn't feel too burned when it died because I had paid bargain prices overall and always expected it to die and for the 28mm figs to find a home in KoW. So, as a SW fan with a good sized collection of Imperial Assault, I was ready to take the Legion plunge and go in hook line and sinker.

Until I saw the scale. Just too big to look good next to the rest of my Sci-fi figures, especially the Star Wars CMG and Imperial Assault figures I already have. I was pretty disappointed.

It didn't have to be this way. FFG games are so dependent on proprietary bases, tokens, cards, etc, it wasn't like they were going to lose money if someone decided to incorporate a few Imperial Assault or CMG figures, to say nothing of the great options for bringing Legion into IA games. It could have been a fantastic crossover. but instead they gave a big "screw-you" to the folks who had spent hundreds on Imperial Assault and so, turnabout being fair play, I say "right back atcha buddy".

Almost 3 decades in, I've learned to play the long game in this hobby. Most wargames (and nearly all FFG wargames) die, and when they do I want the figures to be compatible with my collection and with whatever ruleset I chose to play with. Legion just doesn't play well with others and if figures in a proprietary scale are the norm now, I don't see me buying any of these types of games again. Further, as the organizer of a club that generally feels the same way I have no need to chase Legion just to get a wargaming fix that isn't 40k.


PS As for Marvel Crisis Protocol, a buddy of mine went in pretty big and the figs are fantastic, but the even-bigger scale and price-per-fig killed it any interest I might have had also.

Funny enough, I find Legion figures some of the smallest of the games I get to the table regularly these days.

 LunarSol wrote:
Funny enough, I find Legion figures some of the smallest of the games I get to the table regularly these days.

If you're playing the latest coolness I have no doubt that's true. What other games are you playing with big figs?

I might be fooling myself, but I think 28-30mm still has alot of life in it especially with indie and legacy games. I mean, despite Necromunda, even GW is still mostly sticking with it.

As a postscript regarding FFG/Asmodee/Atomic: It's been on my shelf for year but I played Battlelore 2nd Edition for just the second time tonight and dang is it a good game. Really delivers the tabletop wargame experience in a boardgame which as it was the pinacle of C&C evolution is no surprise. I'll probably never buy one of their tabletop wargames again, but Battlelore has a place on my game shelf forever.

I have all the 1st edition stuff!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(Sorry referring to Battelore)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
(I did play the iOS second edition game)

 Eilif wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
Funny enough, I find Legion figures some of the smallest of the games I get to the table regularly these days.

If you're playing the latest coolness I have no doubt that's true. What other games are you playing with big figs?

Warmachine, MCP, Malifaux, Infinity, Bushido, Legion have been the top dogs lately along with the GW stuff (40k, Sigmar, Blood Bowl)

Good games, but unless their scales increased, all those are smaller than Legion except MCP and possibly Malifaux.

Hmm.... direct comparison I guess you're right. Not sure what it is about the Legion figures but they feel very small for some reason.

I really like the scale of the game. I was able to get a nice case right off amazon and I didn't have to fiddle with BattleFoam or Citadel cases. That was nice.

The models are a lot lighter to carry around than other games I've played in the past too.

 LunarSol wrote:
Hmm.... direct comparison I guess you're right. Not sure what it is about the Legion figures but they feel very small for some reason.

Entirely understandable.

It's an optical illusion because the figures come from a Galaxy far far away.

Figures from games based in our galaxy naturally seem larger.

This reason will sound super petty..... but I honestly do not trust myself to be able to paint up Han Solo to look like Han Solo, or Bobba Fett to look like Bobba Fett, or Vadar to look like Vadar.

I do not trust myself to make a stormtrooper or clone look reasonably like the source materials and that would disappoint me during every game I player.

Super petty, and a challenge for all licensed games and even many historical games for me.

 LunarSol wrote:
Hmm.... direct comparison I guess you're right. Not sure what it is about the Legion figures but they feel very small for some reason.

As far as my perception goes, Legion models aren't all that large when it comes down to it. They fit pretty well in the 35mm scale bracket. Next to GW models that have scale crept up to 32mm from 28mm, they look just that little bit taller. Just as for instance 35mm Wild West Exodus models do. But at the end of the day, a human being a head taller than another human isn't that much of a departure.

They have deceptively tall bases, too. I frequently get the impression that Legion models tower over other models I have on my desk at the same time, but if I compare one that isn't glued to a base yet, much of that is just revealed to be an illusion.

Personally I like the size and proportions of Legion models better than any other range. They hit that sweet spot for me of proportions erring on the realistic side and being just the right size, still small and not a chore to paint as larger models can be, but large enough for my aging eyes to make out all the details at arm's length. I don't get the latter from smaller models, and it's something I can really appreciate.

I will say Eilif's earlier point about Legion using its own scale (or going up into the 35mm range, if you prefer) even though it didn't have to resonates with me. I'd prefer to see more compatibility between manufacturers and model ranges, and some consideration for consistency with older ranges and collections of the same franchise, but as unfortunate as it is, that's not a reasonable expectation for a number of reasons. Additionally, as explained this is my sweet spot, so I'm happy with Legion's models and would prefer other things to line up with them. That makes the whole thing a bit ambivalent to me.

Prepping for LGT currently but thought I would throw up a size comparison pic, here we have a new Pyke, a GW Deathguard and a PVC Bossk.

 ingtaer wrote:
Prepping for LGT currently but thought I would throw up a size comparison pic, here we have a new Pyke, a GW Deathguard and a PVC Bossk.

So the smaller of the SW races in Legion is the same height as among the tallest of the SW races in 28mm?

I've got a buddy bringing a trooper from Legion over at the next club meeting and when I do my review of WGA Eisenkern, I'll compare scale with troopers from Legion, WOTC SW:CMG, Imperial Assault, GW Cadian, and I might even throw in a vintage WEG figure for kicks if I can find the one naval trooper I kept. If my statements about heights turn out to be incorrect I'll eat the appropriate Crow.

 Geifer wrote:
[
As far as my perception goes, Legion models aren't all that large when it comes down to it. They fit pretty well in the 35mm scale bracket. Next to GW models that have scale crept up to 32mm from 28mm, they look just that little bit taller. Just as for instance 35mm Wild West Exodus models do.
.

As for 35mm and WWExodus, I found them completely incompatible with my collection that ranges mostly between 28 and 30mm. If your collection is mostly recent GW in the 32mm range, you may feel differently. I had a huge collection of WWExodus come through and opening a couple boxes I quickly saw that they were virtually incompatible and quickly sold them on.

28 to 30mm is average human differentiation. 28 to 32mm is about a head height difference, but there's room for a few 32mm figs and I have a few. 35mm in a 28mm-30mm collection and the question becomes "how many Andre the Giants do you want on your table?"

There was one small light at the end of the tunnel I thought I saw for scale creep a few years back when some companies started going 35mm and then Legion followed suit. My thought was that if scale creep could stabilize at 33-35mm'ish, then you've arrived at 1:48, which is a recognized scale for models, trains (O-Guage) lots of die-cast, structure kits, etc and could be a very good thing for hobbyists. Bandai's ATAT and Snowspeeder are both in that scale and are fantastic kits. I use a good bit of 1:48 with my 1/56 wargaming because the increasd bulk and height-with-base of 28mm figures makes them look quite appropriate together. However, then MCP came out with 40mm figs and I realized that the cash grab for incompatible-scale games never ends and that since the 28mm is still by far the scale with the most available figures I'd just stick with that.

 Geifer wrote:
[I will say Eilif's earlier point about Legion using its own scale (or going up into the 35mm range, if you prefer) even though it didn't have to resonates with me. I'd prefer to see more compatibility between manufacturers and model ranges, and some consideration for consistency with older ranges and collections of the same franchise, but as unfortunate as it is, that's not a reasonable expectation for a number of reasons. .

I appreciate the partial agreement, but as for "not a reasonable expecation for a number of reasons" if you've got some insider info please share it, because I've been listening and I've yet to hear a single good argument from FFG as to why they decided to make their Legion figs all a head taller. No one playing Imperial Assault (which I heard was still selling well and continues to sell today) was crying out for giant figures and even a modest increase to 30mm would have put them in line with expectations from most gaming fans.

I suppose I just don't expect customer friendly behavior form companies, and with my expectations so set, don't find it reasonable to expect of companies to make more than the slightest concessions to customer considerations when formulating their business plan. A bit cynical, I know, but it is what it is.

I'll throw out one point though. I wouldn't call it a good argument, but a logical one. Detail on PVC casts is comparatively soft. The smaller you go, the worse your models look. If FFG wanted to sell their game at least to a degree on the strength of their models, especially in an environment where the competition has such quality models as GW, scaling up their models to hold better detail and improve how they look makes sense.

Of course that is based on the decision to make PVC models in the first place, which is a stupid ass decision in itself. But that just takes me back to my expectations of how companies act.

 Geifer wrote:

I'll throw out one point though. I wouldn't call it a good argument, but a logical one. Detail on PVC casts is comparatively soft. The smaller you go, the worse your models look. If FFG wanted to sell their game at least to a degree on the strength of their models, especially in an environment where the competition has such quality models as GW, scaling up their models to hold better detail and improve how they look makes sense.

Of course that is based on the decision to make PVC models in the first place, which is a stupid ass decision in itself. But that just takes me back to my expectations of how companies act.

I'm not totally sure I buy it (Imperial Assault figs are pretty darn good looking), but you have a good point the PVC factor is a consideration. I didn't realize that Legion models were PVC. That is disappointing. I kind of expected it with a Board Game like IA, and maybe even a proprietary game like Runewars. For a SW property I assumed they'd have gone hard plastic.
Interestingly -and partially in favor of your thesis- is that when I reviewed the Runewars figures (a good example of what is possible in 28mm PVC), one of the things I noted as a positive in my conclusion was that the miniatures appeared to be sculpted with PVC in mind. Simple, bold detail that won't get lost in the material the way that many originally-metal figures lost their finer detail in the first generation of Bones.
https://www.chicagoskirmishwargames.com/blog/2017/04/runewars-painting-the-daqan-lords-part-1-creative-assembly/

Loads of Legion models are HIPS, if not the majority, all of the latter stuff from the wave after the CW initial release is (bar Dooku and Rex?). We did have a thread on it previously.

 ingtaer wrote:
Loads of Legion models are HIPS, if not the majority, all of the latter stuff from the wave after the CW initial release is (bar Dooku and Rex?). We did have a thread on it previously.

Good to know. I had assumed everything was HIPS.

For reference this is the thread I said about - https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/802981.page.

Everything released for the Shadow Collective is HIPS as well.

It's correct that loads of models are hard plastic by now, and possibly even more than half at this point. The change to plastic is great and I certainly wish they had started out with it because there is a very unfortunate side effect to switching materials halfway through. PVC legacy isn't something you'll get around if you fancy Rebels or Empire. They only got plastic infantry very late in the game, and that's only a box each of special forces and a couple of side characters. It's a shame that two full factions have to deal with that, and I'm not just saying that because Imperials are my favorite, honest.

 Geifer wrote:
I suppose I just don't expect customer friendly behavior form companies, and with my expectations so set, don't find it reasonable to expect of companies to make more than the slightest concessions to customer considerations when formulating their business plan. A bit cynical, I know, but it is what it is.

I'll throw out one point though. I wouldn't call it a good argument, but a logical one. Detail on PVC casts is comparatively soft. The smaller you go, the worse your models look. If FFG wanted to sell their game at least to a degree on the strength of their models, especially in an environment where the competition has such quality models as GW, scaling up their models to hold better detail and improve how they look makes sense.

Of course that is based on the decision to make PVC models in the first place, which is a stupid ass decision in itself. But that just takes me back to my expectations of how companies act.

What is the hate for the PVC models about? I have a ton of them and they're fine. I've had zero issues with them, they look nice on the field and they're a breeze to build compared to the mess that is GW modern sprue deisgn.

Generally because the details are softer and you have to cut rather than scrape the mould lines off.

It's also not a joy to convert as it doesn't cut very well.

Then there are the bent barrels that may or may not stay straight after you tried to fix them.

Also on the point of detail, particularly the basic Stormtroopers were cast in as few pieces as possible because PVC casting allowed for it, which doesn't just leave them with additional mold lines in places you might not expect, but ungainly smudged detail like on the lower part of the helmet.

 Geifer wrote:
It's also not a joy to convert as it doesn't cut very well.

Then there are the bent barrels that may or may not stay straight after you tried to fix them.

Also on the point of detail, particularly the basic Stormtroopers were cast in as few pieces as possible because PVC casting allowed for it, which doesn't just leave them with additional mold lines in places you might not expect, but ungainly smudged detail like on the lower part of the helmet.

I understand. It seems like you might be more into it for the hobby aspect where as they're just game pieces to me. I will say the plastic kits are loads nice though, they're so much better than fiddling around with 40K kits, especially recent ones.

Yeah, the main draw for me are the models, and the lore and setting after that. I like a good game, but I'm far more tolerant of mediocre rules than I am of mediocre models. It'll take some serious effort like what GW did with 8th ed 40k to put me off a game whose models I like.

Being Star Wars ground combat and a genuinely good ruleset, Legion hits all the right buttons with me, except a little in the area I would scrutinize the most. I try not to be too negative about the whole PVC deal (most of the time ), as the miniatures aren't horrible or anything. A good paint job still turns them into pretty display models and after a dodgy first batch of Imperials and Rebels, the sculptors embraced naturalistic poses that I like a lot. Like Death Troopers for instance that look pretty awesome in their believable soldier poses. But there's always room for improvement, and the material the models are cast in stands out to me the most in this regard. On the bright side, I'd much rather deal with PVC than metal, so there's that.

I'd agree that the simpler plastic sculpts of Legion have something going for them over modern GW plastic jigsaws. They're far less of a chore to assemble, yes. That's a good thing for people who want to put their new models on the table. But it's also better for conversions if you have discrete body parts instead of the left hand being attached to the right shin and half the head coming as part of the backpack and similar nonsense. I used to have a great time converting GW kits before they turned into the current mess. I'm hoping to have that again with Legion models, although I have yet to find the time to go conversion heavy. I'm still too busy with painting my stock models first. Conversions like the Shoretrooper Captain I just started working on are still a bit of a luxury at this time. Who knows, maybe there will even be more Rebel and Imperial plastic kits by the time I get around to it.

Was a "thing" at local club for a while, and again when the prequal robot things came out

so I had a look, watched a few games and.. it just didn't appear to do anything for me, the cards, tokens etc are a negative for me I admit but not a terminal one. the models looked "ok" but there was nothing really dragging me in

it still gets played, have heard a few comments about how it plays, but a lot of salt from whoever lost a game so largely ignore it. Enjoyed Armada, X-Wing was ok but not amazing.

just it seemed to score a solid "meah", so stuck with other games, it just looked a bit average, a few trick mechanics to add flavour which is fine but nothing that stood out to say "if this wasn't star wars would people still think it was a great game?"

leopard wrote:


just it seemed to score a solid "meah", so stuck with other games, it just looked a bit average, a few trick mechanics to add flavour which is fine but nothing that stood out to say "if this wasn't star wars would people still think it was a great game?"

Feel like that isn't completely fair, I don't think Legion is a great game just because of "Star Wars", but it is a great game given a chance to grow because of "Star Wars".

Tons of other generic or new IP tabletop games flounder and die because unlike Legion, somebody walking past won't be able to stop and immediately recognize Vader, speeder bikes, and an AT-ST.

If Legion was a generic ruleset, I would still play it over 40k, I just know I would have a harder time people getting to play the game because it isn't something immediately recognizable from pop culture, or a 40k Space Marine.

 Togusa wrote:


What is the hate for the PVC models about? I have a ton of them and they're fine. I've had zero issues with them, they look nice on the field and they're a breeze to build compared to the mess that is GW modern sprue deisgn.

As you have prolly allready seen from other replys, two camps of humans at play here; gamers vs hobbyists.

I am a gamer, i dont care for complex models or painting, i hate to paint. The clouser the minis are to boardgame pieces, the happier i am. I love the pvc model line for the empire and the lack of details they have means they are fast to paint with rattlecans and washes. They can allso be dropped or mistreated whitout shattering in several parts. However, majority of tabletop gamers are hobbyists and for them they want compex kits and maximum detailed models as it gives them something to do when they dont game and the models are mutch more suited for high end paint jobs and clouse up photo shots.

It is a trend i see growing, avrage paint jobs or easy done paint jobs from low detail models are no longer generaly accepted or promoted and games that features models that cant easily achieve competition level paint jobs gets looked down on.

If one can see beyond GW, it do not take mutch to see that Legion is better then the 3 core games from GW. (but we are in a GW fan forum after all)

Legion is clearly a better ruleset than GW. Virtually all FFG games are tighter, better written, less ambiguous and faster playing than GW's core offerings.

However, that doesn't necessarily make them more appealing. FFGs wargames also tend to be card and chit heavy combo fests with echoes of CCG deck building. If list building and combo stacking is something you enjoy in GW, Legion does it better and with far less mess and confusion. If you find that sort of thing annoying, Legion may be nearly as unappealing as 40K.

 NH Gunsmith wrote:

leopard wrote:


just it seemed to score a solid "meah", so stuck with other games, it just looked a bit average, a few trick mechanics to add flavour which is fine but nothing that stood out to say "if this wasn't star wars would people still think it was a great game?"

Feel like that isn't completely fair, I don't think Legion is a great game just because of "Star Wars", but it is a great game given a chance to grow because of "Star Wars".

Tons of other generic or new IP tabletop games flounder and die because unlike Legion, somebody walking past won't be able to stop and immediately recognize Vader, speeder bikes, and an AT-ST.

If Legion was a generic ruleset, I would still play it over 40k, I just know I would have a harder time people getting to play the game because it isn't something immediately recognizable from pop culture, or a 40k Space Marine.

agree it may not be totally fair, the guys who play it locally love it, mostly, some grumbling about the hero characters but then if any IP can get away with a named hero in a small fight its Star Wars. Its more just watching the game being played did nothing for me, the cards, counters etc put me off visually - the models look decent, tempted to get a few for roleplay games.

and yes totally agree some great games have failed because without the IP the background is nothing and people don't look, e.g. I think Gates of Antares is a decent game, but its very manufactured background is so bland its not worth looking at sadly.

if you enjoy it, play it, heck if it was a case locally of play this or play nothing I'd probably go for it, but as it is watching the game being played did nothing to make me want to play it. will give you its recognisable, very obviously Star Wars in a way a lot of other games lack, and painted up it looks good, just lacked the "OMG I have got to get this" that I got with Flames of War 2 when I first played that, or warhammer fantasy had..

as for 40k.. painted up etc it looks good, but that too these days is more or less a pass just for how it plays

 FrozenDwarf wrote:
It is a trend i see growing, avrage paint jobs or easy done paint jobs from low detail models are no longer generaly accepted or promoted and games that features models that cant easily achieve competition level paint jobs gets looked down on.

have seen that too, but this is more the instagram side of things, were everything has to be a perfect display model
this is also the part the hobby where price does not matter because you only need 1 model/unit for the perfect picture and never an army of all the same

I personally have no problem with PVC though I like HIPS more but have a dislike if people want to have display models as gaming pieces and only accept 1 quality for everything

yet for Legion itself, think this is less of a problem, and the 2 main reasons I think why it is slowly growing are:
it is hard to get the stuff you need and FFG/AMG has a terrible reputation regarding keeping things in stock, so people hesitate to start an army because they don't know if they ever have the chance to get the units they want (or need to make a viable list)

the other one is the IP, and this might be an unpopular opinion but the modern movies with all the controversial stuff around them, prevent people committing to a game just to avoid arguments (Legion is a great game, but had bad timing)

fist one is partly solved with the theme boxes and card packs, the 2nd just needs time and other SW movies/shows to come along

Is disgruntlement over the sequel trilogy really a concern in a game that notably skipped sequel releases? They started with Galactic Civil War, went to Clone Wars, passed the sequels right by and went straight to Mandalorian. What arguments are there to be avoided?

usually there are none, but avoid the game simple because it is Star Wars as any nerd talk about the IP sooner or later comes town to the sequels (no matter if those are present or not) hence some people are tired of that and stay away from the IP in general

the more time goes by, the less of an effect it has, but 1-2 years ago "it is a good game, but I am not in the mood for Star Wars" was an excuse to not start it

The goodwill of the Mandalorian seems to have done a good job of sidelining the sequel controversy. Granted, this wasn't the case when the game launched.

 LunarSol wrote:
The goodwill of the Mandalorian seems to have done a good job of sidelining the sequel controversy. Granted, this wasn't the case when the game launched.

Interesting to hear this. I wasn't paying much attention but as a potential gamer and SW fan, when the game was released, the sequels (which I wasn't terribly impressed with) had zero effect on my interest in the game. My reasons for not buying in were mostly based on Scale with some additional consideration around price and gamplay.

As I recall, the span of reactions to Legion that I personally saw were yay Star Wars, yay Empire, yay Rebels, I'd like Clones please. Anecdotal, I know, but I never witnessed any negative response to the sequel movies translate to Legion. Lucky me, I guess.

 Geifer wrote:
As I recall, the span of reactions to Legion that I personally saw were yay Star Wars, yay Empire, yay Rebels, I'd like Clones please. Anecdotal, I know, but I never witnessed any negative response to the sequel movies translate to Legion. Lucky me, I guess.

I haven't either. Some of the discussions that have come up at our local Legion post have been mostly asking "why?" since there is basically no different, other than the unique characters between Resistance troops and Rebels, and First Order Stormtroopers and Empire Stormtroopers. A lot more discussion has been about the interest in having High Republic units and characters in a future release.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eilif wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
The goodwill of the Mandalorian seems to have done a good job of sidelining the sequel controversy. Granted, this wasn't the case when the game launched.

Interesting to hear this. I wasn't paying much attention but as a potential gamer and SW fan, when the game was released, the sequels (which I wasn't terribly impressed with) had zero effect on my interest in the game. My reasons for not buying in were mostly based on Scale with some additional consideration around price and gamplay.

Same for me. I didn't jump into it until I could get stuff like Shadow Collective and Clones, as I personally think Clone Wars Animated stuff is the best Star Wars content. So when a lot of those characters and units were avaliable to me, I was ready. The fact that the game was really, really good was just a bonus.

It probably helps that Mandalorian content can still nearly fit into 'Rebel' and Empire.

I recently got into a bit of a star wars kick again, and started assembling the Shadow Collective box.

1) Details on the models are rather soft and shallow. I keep being disappointed when I pick up a box because the cover models look neat, but the plastics end up lackluster. At least it's HIPS (because saying hard plastic apparently gets people to nerd rage). Compared to Dystopian Wars or GW, the difference in mini quality is stark. They'll probably look ok painted, but I enjoy the assembly and low quality plastics just ruins that.
2) I tried reading the rules . . . why do we need a page of tokens, bespoke rulers, and different dice for the same thing? It probably plays ok, but all this trash makes me uninterested in reading further. All the upgrade symbols are also annoying. Give us a proper orbat/codex, stop trying to sell us cardboard and bespoke everything.

If I do end up using the minis, I'll probably stick to OPR or something.

The biggest problem is finding players to play against, would like to play starwars legion or shatterpoint.
The mini's from shatterpoint are great they even have the details on it (dark maul his black and red tatoo's),
but they are to great to play in legion :(

 skeleton wrote:
The biggest problem is finding players to play against, would like to play starwars legion or shatterpoint.
The mini's from shatterpoint are great they even have the details on it (dark maul his black and red tatoo's),
but they are to great to play in legion :(

I'm also having trouble finding players. Where abouts in the Netherlands are you? I'm trying to stir up interest in my FLGS (Titan Games in Boxtel).

Irdiumstern wrote:
I recently got into a bit of a star wars kick again, and started assembling the Shadow Collective box.
...

....2) I tried reading the rules . . . why do we need a page of tokens, bespoke rulers, and different dice for the same thing? It probably plays ok, but all this trash makes me uninterested in reading further. All the upgrade symbols are also annoying. Give us a proper orbat/codex, stop trying to sell us cardboard and bespoke everything.

If I do end up using the minis, I'll probably stick to OPR or something.

Because it's way FFG and it's descendants have always created their bespoke gaming experiences. The advantage has generally been very well written unambiguous rules. The disadvantages you have noted.

I've generally been impressed enough with with the Legion figures I've seen. I've only purchased vehicles and a bunker so far for use with my 28mm stuff, but the detail is great on them.

Also, there's no shame in buying the figures you like (if you don't like official figs there are other options) and then playing with OPR. With the new community army lists there are allot of options for Star Wars armies.

 skeleton wrote:
The biggest problem is finding players to play against, would like to play starwars legion or shatterpoint.
The mini's from shatterpoint are great they even have the details on it (dark maul his black and red tatoo's),
but they are to great to play in legion :(

That is the whole point of the minis, they get the Legion players to buy the same models again, if shatter used the same scale as legion there would be no profit in the shatter game for AMG.

 FrozenDwarf wrote:

 skeleton wrote:
The biggest problem is finding players to play against, would like to play starwars legion or shatterpoint.
The mini's from shatterpoint are great they even have the details on it (dark maul his black and red tatoo's),
but they are to great to play in legion :(

That is the whole point of the minis, they get the Legion players to buy the same models again, if shatter used the same scale as legion there would be no profit in the shatter game for AMG.

The irony is that the SW universe is so vast and the characters so diverse (even versions of the same characters) that the scales could be compatible and they could still make a crapton of cash if they make the Shatterpoint characters unique versions. Even more cash could be made from conversion kits providing stats, cards, etc for each unit to make it usable in the other game. Further, they could have been doing this since Legion/IA.

Imagine if they had built a gaming dynasty based on the 40k/Killteam/SpaceHulk sort of model, instead they went for the quick cash grab. That the board, battle and skirmish games are in different scales is a huge missed opportunity for building a legacy stable of games that can compete long term with Games Workshop.

No sense in building a legacy when that legacy will someday be yanked away by Disney.

Also, fwiw, if Shatterpoint used Legion models it would be no where near as successful and more treated as a side game. No one wants to buy 7 stormtrooopers to use 2.

The increased scale also results in models that are just a lot nicer, which is important when there's only 8 of them.

Agreed. While I would have preferred a common scale, the reality is that it would have resulted in Shatterpoint being a side game that barely gets played ala Kill Team instead of a stand-alone independent game with its own distinct playerbase and community.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Agreed. While I would have preferred a common scale, the reality is that it would have resulted in Shatterpoint being a side game that barely gets played ala Kill Team instead of a stand-alone independent game with its own distinct playerbase and community.

So without a scale change, Shatterpoint would barely get played? I don't buy it. Lots of folks want a detailed skirmish game. If the rules are good and unique characters and character versions can be attached (Star wars fans are no strangers to collecting....). Shatterpoint could be successful without a scale change.

I get that the immediate cash grab with a new scale is tempting and they are running a business. However, the crossover potential of folks from other SW games buying other games' figures for their games would surely yield dividends. I can't be the only IA collector who rejected Legion for the scale change and I'm sure a fair number of Legion and Shatterpoint players won't be playing each other's games for the same reason. Neither have seems to have suffered too much, but that's got to have taken a bite out of the playerbase for each game.

You kind of just torpedoed your own argument. Star Wars fans are no strangers to collecting - ergo give them more stuff to collect by giving them products in different scales. It will pay dividends and you'll make money hand over fist by giving yourself an even larger pool of potential products to sell. to an even larger audience of people then limiting yourself to a single product line that has a more limited appeal.

Yeah, lots of folks want a detailed skirmish game - not everyone that wants a detailed skirmish game also wants to play a company scale battle game like Legion, and vice versa. Some people like larger miniatures, some people like smaller miniatures. There are different market segments with different interests and demands for different products, a one size fits all solution leaves a lot of people out in the cold and underserved.

The two games appeal to different audiences and markets. The overlap between them is probably smaller than you realize, as overwhelmingly people tend to stick to one game and not bother with the others. E.G. - know easily 50+ 40k players, I can count the number of them who have played any iteration of Kill Team on one hand. Most of them buy Kill Team branded products of course, but they aren't doing it for Kill Team, and they would still buy those products even if they weren't branded for Kill Team. While GW has been successful with that approach, there are certainly arguments to be made that Kill Teams relegation to a "secondary game" has strangled its potential and limited its audience, as there isn't a dedicated audience for it willing to invest into items which are only usable in a Kill Team setting. Contrast this with Necromunda, which has very limited crossover potential with 40k (as a result of it being a very slightly different scale, combined with there not being an obvious crossover into 40k usage ruleswise without significant conversion work and expense), but has its own dedicated community of players who are willing to invest heavily into terrain and models with limited/no crossover potential with 40k proper.

As for "rejecting" games, I know plenty of people that play Legion that would have never touched IA regardless of scale, because they just aren't interested in that type of game. Likewise I know plenty of people who jumped ship from IA the moment Legion became available, scale differences be damned. Likewise I know people who wouldn't touch Legion at all that jumped right into Shatterpoint, as well as plenty of people who were in Legion that jumped into Shatterpoint as well.

Its all meaningless anecdote, basically. Asmodee and AMG did their market research and figured out that they could make more money doing what they were doing than if they did it your way, and invested their time and resources appropriately. Simple as that.

adding to this, with 40k and KT, you have the KT players who are grumpy as the stuff they want to buy to play the game is sold out because the 40k players wants to models to add to their collection

Shatterpoint would have similar problems when people buy the boxes for the single hero to use in Legion and put the rest on the 2nd hand market while those that want to play the game have hard times to get those heroes (and specially in europe supply is always on the low end)

 kodos wrote:


Shatterpoint would have similar problems when people buy the boxes for the single hero to use in Legion and put the rest on the 2nd hand market while those that want to play the game have hard times to get those heroes (and specially in europe supply is always on the low end)

Selling more of a product is a problem? Trying to make a product less appealing is not a good solution to under-supply. Most companies would be happy if they were fighting more against under-supply than against lower demand.

if you are already not able to fulfil the demand for a product, making it appealing to a another group of people who just want the models but not playing the game is a disadvantage

everything being sold out but no one being able playing the game (because those who want to cannot buy it) is the worst situation for a new game as the playerbase and popularity cannot grow

chaos0xomega wrote:
I can count the number of them who have played any iteration of Kill Team on one hand. Most of them buy Kill Team branded products of course, but they aren't doing it for Kill Team, and they would still buy those products even if they weren't branded for Kill Team....

This is my core argument. Same scale, useable figures in both games equals more sales.

chaos0xomega wrote:
.
.... Contrast this with Necromunda, which has very limited crossover potential with 40k (as a result of it being a very slightly different scale, combined with there not being an obvious crossover into 40k usage ruleswise without significant conversion work and expense), but has its own dedicated community of players who are willing to invest heavily into terrain and models with limited/no crossover potential with 40k proper.

Necroumunda to 40k is a weak comparison to IA/Leg/Shat as there are very, very few miniatures that have utility in the larger 40k game. I still wish they hadn't changed the scale but the limited overlap makes it largely a non-issue.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kodos wrote:
if you are already not able to fulfil the demand for a product, making it appealing to a another group of people who just want the models but not playing the game is a disadvantage

everything being sold out but no one being able playing the game (because those who want to cannot buy it) is the worst situation for a new game as the playerbase and popularity cannot grow

Again, the solution is increased production, not decreasing demand. This is basic economics.

no, the solution is to make sure that the product only appeals to the target group and not so someone else

increasing production does not solve the problem that those who want it won't get it if it is more appealing for salvage to a much larger group

same problem with Kill Team, those who want to play don't get the boxes because a much larger group (40k players) want them for salvage
increasing the production to make sure there are enough leftovers for people who want to try the game is not easily done

The greater issue is just that people don't like to buy card packs for minis games. Needing to buy Legion models then needing to buy Shatterpoint cards is just not happening, particularly with the dice and measurement tools on top of that. X-Wing couldn't even do this with their own game. Skirmish Legion has never been very popular. Selling a game to people that don't want to buy things just isn't a real market.

 LunarSol wrote:
The greater issue is just that people don't like to buy card packs for minis games. Needing to buy Legion models then needing to buy Shatterpoint cards is just not happening, particularly with the dice and measurement tools on top of that. X-Wing couldn't even do this with their own game. Skirmish Legion has never been very popular. Selling a game to people that don't want to buy things just isn't a real market.

This is a good point. Counter/Card heavy games like Legion do have a barrier to cross-game use if the game materials for both games aren't included with the miniatures. Doesn't seem like an insurmountable barrier to me given the relatively high price of miniatures in each game, but it's certainly something to consider.

FWIW, managing upgrade cards is easily my biggest Legion deterrent currently. I just find finding and storing multiple copies of upgrade cards every time I want to change a list incredibly cumbersome.

 Eilif wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
I can count the number of them who have played any iteration of Kill Team on one hand. Most of them buy Kill Team branded products of course, but they aren't doing it for Kill Team, and they would still buy those products even if they weren't branded for Kill Team....

This is my core argument. Same scale, useable figures in both games equals more sales.

Except thats not more sales. Its sales they would have had either way. The packaging/label they put on the product doesn't change that - those who were already buying legion would continue to buy that product, and those who werent buying legion would also generally continue to not buy it. Producing a bespoke separate product that appeals to a different set of customers actually increases sales, not whatever it is you're trying and failing to advocate for.

Necroumunda to 40k is a weak comparison to IA/Leg/Shat as there are very, very few miniatures that have utility in the larger 40k game. I still wish they hadn't changed the scale but the limited overlap makes it largely a non-issue.

Exactly my point. Necromunda is a game that stands on its own legs. I know a surprisingly large number of people who play Necromunda but don't play any other GW games (same with Blood Bowl, but thats a different story). It appeals to a different market, it sells products to customers that GW wasn't necessarily selling 40k to. Same exact thing that Shatterpoint does.

Its not a hard concept to wrap your head around.

 LunarSol wrote:
FWIW, managing upgrade cards is easily my biggest Legion deterrent currently. I just find finding and storing multiple copies of upgrade cards every time I want to change a list incredibly cumbersome.

Which is why I'm not buying into another AMG/FFG style game.
I feel I'm storing as many cards as I did when I played MtG. Not to mention it brings in so many gotcha moments in games.

I love the SW Legion minis, so now I use them with the Xenos Rampant rules. I'm having far more enjoyable games.

I don't find it as bad in MCP and Shatterpoint personally. Those games both have a fair number of cards, but since there's no duplicates I don't find it nearly as problematic. This is particularly true with MCP after they purged most of the generic cards and moved to a more character/affiliation locked design.

 Gimgamgoo wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
FWIW, managing upgrade cards is easily my biggest Legion deterrent currently. I just find finding and storing multiple copies of upgrade cards every time I want to change a list incredibly cumbersome.

Which is why I'm not buying into another AMG/FFG style game.
I feel I'm storing as many cards as I did when I played MtG. Not to mention it brings in so many gotcha moments in games.

I love the SW Legion minis, so now I use them with the Xenos Rampant rules. I'm having far more enjoyable games.

I feel similarly. I enjoyed my foray into Runewars and I did collect a complete IA, but I'm very much over the card-heavy play. In hindsight it's probably good for me that Legion changed scale and gave me an excuse to get off the merry-go-round.

How is Xenos Rampant working out for you? My son and I have acquired a bunch of the WOtC SW minis (enough to have Droid and Clone armies) and are looking at using some of the fan-created lists for Grimdark Future as a way to possibly get them on the table. I like Dragon Rampant, but I'm wondering if Grimdark might be the best path for pulpy sci-fantasy battles.

We do have a solid group of Legion players in our club, but the reason they struggle to attract new players is more a question of game support by AMG/FFG. Our local store really has difficulties to get new boxes of popular miniatures (if they're still available at all), and then there's the matter of Shatterpoint that is felt as a replacement for Legion in long term. Since scale is different, you can't even use their miniatures for Legion if you want to find some you can't have because stock is out...

Basically, it's not really a question of the game or the miniatures being good or not. It's more a question of trust in AMG/FFG, that has an infamous history of dropping / stop supporting their good games for pure greed and don't care at all about their faithful players. They're even lower than GW on that matter in terms of reputation, I feel.

Sarouan wrote:

Basically, it's not really a question of the game or the miniatures being good or not. It's more a question of trust in AMG/FFG, that has an infamous history of dropping / stop supporting their good games for pure greed and don't care at all about their faithful players. They're even lower than GW on that matter in terms of reputation, I feel.

I wonder if this is a factor for other folks as well. The FFG/AMG reputation for dropping games (Runewars, Dust, Battlelore etc) is well established. I was aware of it enough that when I bought into Runewars that I fully expected that the game would die in a couple years (it did) and I only bought in because I was able to secure some great deals on figures and I liked the figures enough to know I'd want to use them in other games afterwards.