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

Crispy78 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Cybtroll wrote:
I have no issue with them....

HOWEVER, I've never played them and I won't in the future.

I will instead use the model to proxy something else that is in the current Codex.

The idea of Legends itself (the model rule stays as they are, while the core book progress) is utterly ludicrous and honestly a bit insulting.

If GW provided a "Legend Rulebook" with the appropriate core rule, I would play that version instead. But with the current state of things, I prefer to use my model as I like, not as GW think I should like them.

I sure wish i could run my Lord on steed of slaanesh as something else :(

Try modeling it spitting something to make it count as a Combi-Bolter maybe for a Biker Lord?

The biker lord that... isn't in the codex either?

Give it wings and do it as a Jump Lord?
Sorry I forgot it wasn't in the codex either.

16 people so far are angry that we're having fun the wrong way.

I mean, does bringing out my two Griffons somehow make me a bad person? Someone looking for advantage with "discounted" models?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
16 people so far are angry that we're having fun the wrong way.

I mean, does bringing out my two Griffons somehow make me a bad person? Someone looking for advantage with "discounted" models?

Clearly you acquired your old models after the switch to legends to cheat through a loophole in casual play, so yes.

 jaredb wrote:

I don't have an issue with it on face value, but for pick up games I wouldn't want to play against legends units without my opponent asking first.

So you don't have a problem.... But I have to play "Mother May I?" with you on Wed concerning a model you'd have happily played against Tue., in a casual pick up game.

Here folks is an example of the type of person I was referring to in my initial reply.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
16 people so far are angry that we're having fun the wrong way.

I mean, does bringing out my two Griffons somehow make me a bad person? Someone looking for advantage with "discounted" models?

Clearly you acquired your old models after the switch to legends to cheat through a loophole in casual play, so yes.

Is this sarcasm?

Yeah

He's actually right.

I built a time machine so once something hits Legends I can go back in time and buy it when it was new, therefore gaining an advantage now.

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
Seeing as most of the DKoK have been moved to legends, a lot of people are saying you can still use the legends data sheet they will be getting. But I honestly wonder how people feel about them, only in regards to non-tournament play of course.

I have a ton of legends models. Hell I just bought a $270 gorgon a few months ago only for it to be made legends. I'm gonna run the thing at least once dammit

No problem with legends. Most are currently over costed and do not require opponents permission anyway so the point is moot outside of tournament play.

I don't have a problem, in theory, with playing agaisnt legend units.


But in practice, most people that have legend models just use them as something else without a complaint and the only people I have encountered that insists that we should allow legends is people that tried to use character-sniper eldar Autarch with Missile Launchers or stuff like that.

In the campaing I ran we used legends characters to have all the options for people to use, but in tournaments... hmmm...

Is just like FW. In Spain, FW is banned in the country with the exception of some stores or some big tournaments. After months , my FLGS allowed FW after a little lobbying from my part and a friend. I was very happy! I would be able to play with mi saggitarum guard and mi venatari and Achillus (this was in 8th) and my friend would be able to use his Tau's tetras!

First tournament with FW: 4 people we didn't had even see ever in the store appeared with 4 leviathan and/or Chaplain dreadnought lists into the store (And their FW wasn't even FW it was chineforge). The next month the store owner banned FW again.

Thats my sad story.

In theory, I the kind of guy that really allows everything and is happy to play agaisnt even fan codex like the bretonnia fan battletome of Auticus for AoS. But with friends. Everytime we have oppened this kind of legacy options, the people that show with them is the kind of player that will use any loophole.

And I know. The ultimate blame is in GW for doing bad rules and "LOL LEVIATHAN lists WHY YOU DON'T COMPLAINT ABOUT X GW BROKEN COMBO! BA LEVIATHANS WERE FINE". It doesnt make a difference outside internet crapthrowing contests.

@ galas, actually it does matter, because it is frankly pretty hypocritical of your store owner, because if unbalance is supposedly such an issue the first thing on the banlist in that scenario would have been the whole IH supplement and by extension and guilt by association the whole SM 2.0 clusterfeth...

But that would cut into your store owners bottomline, unlike FW which he can't sell.

Not Online!!! wrote:
@ galas, actually it does matter, because it is frankly pretty hypocritical of your store owner, because if unbalance is supposedly such an issue the first thing on the banlist in that scenario would have been the whole IH supplement and by extension and guilt by association the whole SM 2.0 clusterfeth...

But that would cut into your store owners bottomline, unlike FW which he can't sell.

Exactly. At the end of the day both FW and legends cannot be sold by store owners. Thats more of a problem of spain than the world.

But my dissertion was more about how, at the end of the day, this kind of stuff will be used by the most part to find loopholes.

And yes, we all know. "Why is GW proper unbalanced allowed but legends/FW unbalanced put into a different light"? Because "official" and "standard" unbalanced is expected. But add-on baggage it is not.
Theres a reason why Final Destination, No Items, Fox Only became a meme.

 Galas wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
@ galas, actually it does matter, because it is frankly pretty hypocritical of your store owner, because if unbalance is supposedly such an issue the first thing on the banlist in that scenario would have been the whole IH supplement and by extension and guilt by association the whole SM 2.0 clusterfeth...

But that would cut into your store owners bottomline, unlike FW which he can't sell.

Exactly. At the end of the day both FW and legends cannot be sold by store owners. Thats more of a problem of spain than the world.

But my dissertion was more about how, at the end of the day, this kind of stuff will be used by the most part to find loopholes.

And yes, we all know. "Why is GW proper unbalanced allowed but legends/FW unbalanced put into a different light"? Because "official" and "standard" unbalanced is expected. But add-on baggage it is not.
Theres a reason why Final Destination, No Items, Fox Only became a meme.

Fw and Legends are "official" and "standard". Banning those units is no different than banning a supplement or codex. A leviathan without the broken mess that Iron Hands were on release was no more of a problem than 40 PPM eradicators. WAAC players can find plenty of broken stuff in what many consider "mainline" gw.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Galas wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
@ galas, actually it does matter, because it is frankly pretty hypocritical of your store owner, because if unbalance is supposedly such an issue the first thing on the banlist in that scenario would have been the whole IH supplement and by extension and guilt by association the whole SM 2.0 clusterfeth...

But that would cut into your store owners bottomline, unlike FW which he can't sell.

Exactly. At the end of the day both FW and legends cannot be sold by store owners. Thats more of a problem of spain than the world.

But my dissertion was more about how, at the end of the day, this kind of stuff will be used by the most part to find loopholes.

And yes, we all know. "Why is GW proper unbalanced allowed but legends/FW unbalanced put into a different light"? Because "official" and "standard" unbalanced is expected. But add-on baggage it is not.
Theres a reason why Final Destination, No Items, Fox Only became a meme.

Fw and Legends are "official" and "standard". Banning those units is no different than banning a supplement or codex. A leviathan without the broken mess that Iron Hands were on release was no more of a problem than 40 PPM eradicators. WAAC players can find plenty of broken stuff in what many consider "mainline" gw.

And lets not forget that the majority of the stuff in FW and legends are actually bad units, with a few exceptions but just because the FW dreads were strong in 9th doesnt make everything OP.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Galas wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
@ galas, actually it does matter, because it is frankly pretty hypocritical of your store owner, because if unbalance is supposedly such an issue the first thing on the banlist in that scenario would have been the whole IH supplement and by extension and guilt by association the whole SM 2.0 clusterfeth...

But that would cut into your store owners bottomline, unlike FW which he can't sell.

Exactly. At the end of the day both FW and legends cannot be sold by store owners. Thats more of a problem of spain than the world.

But my dissertion was more about how, at the end of the day, this kind of stuff will be used by the most part to find loopholes.

And yes, we all know. "Why is GW proper unbalanced allowed but legends/FW unbalanced put into a different light"? Because "official" and "standard" unbalanced is expected. But add-on baggage it is not.
Theres a reason why Final Destination, No Items, Fox Only became a meme.

Fw and Legends are "official" and "standard". Banning those units is no different than banning a supplement or codex. A leviathan without the broken mess that Iron Hands were on release was no more of a problem than 40 PPM eradicators. WAAC players can find plenty of broken stuff in what many consider "mainline" gw.

that's his point, but one the Game store owner has a vested interest in beeing allowed , the other he has a vested interest in disallowing to force WAAC players tp buy the mainline stuff locally preferably
allbeit when they got chinacast allready you'd think that those earnings margin are not worth the lower visitors list evoked from a FW ban..
however i have no idea about the 40k Scene in spain really so maybee that behaviour works.

A little off topic but why are they banned I Spain? And do you just mean in use or sales?

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:
A little off topic but why are they banned I Spain? And do you just mean in use or sales?

Use, not Spanish, never played in Spain but FW being banned is historically not that uncommon because it was viewed as "pay to win". Either because FW genuinely couldn't balance or because people didn't see or use them enough and unknown things are scary.

For me it depends on the game.

Sometimes I am looking for a casual game or a narrative game. Those days 100% play em.

Sometimes I am looking for an ultra-competitive grudge match.... no dice for those games.

and sometimes, somewhere in between... then I would usually say yes, but as long as we both agreed on it in advance (most likely i would agree).

I don't know why I should feel more worried about your lovely converted Khorne Lord on Juggernaut than about those 18 Eradicators on which somebody slapped 3 paints in a hurry. Really I think GWs Codizes are often a higher danger for competitive play than miniatures with 4 years old points costs
Legends models need the same discussion before the game as GWs new hotness. But that's just normal business in any wargame if you ask me.

It's fine. I agree that they probably shouldn't be used in competitive/tournament play, where people pretend their armies are 'balanced', but outside that it's fine.

If they end up a little over or undercosted, fine - so are loads of units.

As to the idea of casual-competitive play, where people want to play casually but ALSO like they're at a tournament, they need to pick what rules they wanna use before they play. You wanna play Matched Play, Open Play or Narrative? There might be the odd Legends unit. You really want to play pickup games using the rules for tournaments? Fine, say that ahead of time. No Legends units.

The issue isn't that there isn't clarity - the issue is the amount of people who want to play tournament 40k all the time.

 ArbitorIan wrote:


The issue isn't that there isn't clarity - the issue is the amount of people who want to play tournament 40k all the time.

Exalted.

As time goes on there will be more and more added to this list. It will become harder to differentiate what is going to be acceptable and what isn't. I've been asked to play against them before in a competitive LGS league. I felt under pressure to say yes because by declining I would have been the bad guy?

The longer they stay in legends the less playable they’ll be - in one direction or the other. Until the next major shakeup and they just won’t be playable at all because the system itself doesn’t support their datasheet format.

Imagine Legends came out before the changes to vehicles. All the Legends vehicles would have facings and AV instead of toughness and wounds. They’d be unplayable. The next shake up like that will be the end of Legends.

 Nithaniel wrote:
As time goes on there will be more and more added to this list. It will become harder to differentiate what is going to be acceptable and what isn't. I've been asked to play against them before in a competitive LGS league. I felt under pressure to say yes because by declining I would have been the bad guy?

I'd say that in something like a league, the organiser should make it clear at the start what the situation is regarding Legends - while it isn't a tournament, it is a form of organised play, so it's a bit of a grey area in terms of intent.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
He's actually right.

I built a time machine so once something hits Legends I can go back in time and buy it when it was new, therefore gaining an advantage now.

Can I borrow that for a FW pilot run?

The whole Legends debate is one of those stupid circular arguments.

We all know it's unreasonable for GW to be expected to permanently, for ever, publish updated and consistently rebalanced rules for every model they've ever made, even ones that have been out of print for years and years. Nobody is seriously complaining right now that GW don't publish rules for their Space Slann or Squat models.

On the other hand, people don't want the rules for models to stop existing the minute they stop being made.

Legends seems like a pretty genuine way to try and solve that - publish rules for all the out of print models, but don't keep them in the constant rebalancing cycle, and say that because of this they're not suitable for 'tournament play'.

Seems fine, until a load of people come along and insist on playing 'tournament play' every time they ever play 40k, even in a non-tournament setting. THAT is the problem.

 ArbitorIan wrote:
...We all know it's unreasonable for GW to be expected to permanently, for ever, publish updated and consistently rebalanced rules for every model they've ever made...

It'd be a perfectly reasonable expectation if GW's release schedule wasn't "new rulebook, push all the army books out at a breakneck pace, half-baked end-of-edition campaign book, rinse, repeat". If they prioritized making the game work over making everyone buy new rulebooks as fast as they can manage then maybe they could make the whole game work instead of deciding to drop bits off.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 ArbitorIan wrote:
...We all know it's unreasonable for GW to be expected to permanently, for ever, publish updated and consistently rebalanced rules for every model they've ever made...

It'd be a perfectly reasonable expectation if GW's release schedule wasn't "new rulebook, push all the army books out at a breakneck pace, half-baked end-of-edition campaign book, rinse, repeat". If they prioritized making the game work over making everyone buy new rulebooks as fast as they can manage then maybe they could make the whole game work instead of deciding to drop bits off.

This...
Exalt..

It's really not. New editions of games don't need to be shackled to everything that has come before it. What 40k needs is a clean slate and a game written from the ground up to be balanced. In some cases that means old units/wargear need to go. In some cases that means expansion of some armies with new units.

The company should NEVER feel beholden to past editions. Make the best product they can today. Not a worse one so bits they made up 15 years ago for a rule set that no longer exists can have bespoke rules.

Tbf, this would be solved if GW just iterated on everything that came before, instead of replacing.

In a stable game system, something could persist with its rules untouched. And that would be fine, if said stable game system also was balanced. I see no need to constantly destabilize the game...

... well except the financial need of course.