Legions Imperialis news and rumors

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.

**AllSeeingSkink**

leopard wrote:
2d6 gives a bell curve, it also allows for more modifiers using a wider range

I think you'll find 2D6 gives you a triangular distribution rather than a bell curve.

But in any case, is it really worth the extra effort to have 2D6 and having to add them together for each and every 1v1?

**Billicus**

The 2D6 roll-off and add modifier, loser is dead no saves combat resolution does not seem onerous to me at all. Maybe if *all* your army's infantry bases hit combat with *all* your opponent's in the same turn it might take a few minutes, but even then that seems unlikely with all the big guns around.

**Apple fox**

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
leopard wrote:
2d6 gives a bell curve, it also allows for more modifiers using a wider range

I think you'll find 2D6 gives you a triangular distribution rather than a bell curve.

But in any case, is it really worth the extra effort to have 2D6 and having to add them together for each and every 1v1?

Yes, it’s so worth it.
The extra effort is basically nothing in a good system, and shouldn’t be an issue at all over a game.
In similar games, it takes like a min to work it out and then a couple of seconds to roll dice for each unit/model as you go though each set.
Unless GW blindside us with something crazy next, I really do not think it will take much extra time over a game.

Of course GW could stuff it up, it is GW.. But positive!

**AllSeeingSkink**

Apple fox wrote:
AllSeeingSkink wrote:
leopard wrote:
2d6 gives a bell curve, it also allows for more modifiers using a wider range

I think you'll find 2D6 gives you a triangular distribution rather than a bell curve.

But in any case, is it really worth the extra effort to have 2D6 and having to add them together for each and every 1v1?

Yes, it’s so worth it.

Doesn't seem worth it to me in a game like Epic, but to each their own.

**lord_blackfang**

Meanwhile they eliminated opposed rolls from actual one on one games like Necromunda.

People need to face the possibility that GW don't actually have any particularly clever method of rules design besides sticking a bunch of random mechanics on a wall and throwing darts.

**MajorWesJanson**

lord_blackfang wrote:
Meanwhile they eliminated opposed rolls from actual one on one games like Necromunda.

People need to face the possibility that GW don't actually have any particularly clever method of rules design besides sticking a bunch of random mechanics on a wall and throwing darts.

Mechanics tend to drift between systems and get refined or dropped as a result. AOS has a fixed to hit and to wound roll? 40k gets the fixed to hit in the next edition while keeping variable to wound. Move stat is introduced to 40k, previously in fantasy, and then appears in HHv2.

**Pacific**

Interesting post Xttz - if your calculations are correct there it could actually see a significant increase in overall volume once we know the basic game points size. So in the latter case, I hope there aren't too many traits, granular special rules etc so that larger games become 1.5 evenings plus to play. It will be a difficult balancing act and will be interesting to see where it falls exactly.

Also please stop using the term chaff lol, those little no-saving-throw, hit on 5+ infantry guys have probably got siblings or friends who care about them too!

Apple Fox - that is a good point about the calculations for melee being the same. I guess it depends what the modifiers are and if you need to work out for each base, or do it on a majority basis (i.e. this guy is in the treeline, this one is on higher ground, this one is a Death Guard and gets +1 for defending a charge by another infantry unit, the admech base next to him doesn't get this however but can re-roll due to the presence of a war engine nearby - perhaps a bit extreme, but that's my worst-case imagining here)

**Apple fox**

Pacific wrote:
Interesting post Xttz - if your calculations are correct there it could actually see a significant increase in overall volume once we know the basic game points size. So in the latter case, I hope there aren't too many traits, granular special rules etc so that larger games become 1.5 evenings plus to play. It will be a difficult balancing act and will be interesting to see where it falls exactly.

Also please stop using the term chaff lol, those little no-saving-throw, hit on 5+ infantry guys have probably got siblings or friends who care about them too!

Apple Fox - that is a good point about the calculations for melee being the same. I guess it depends what the modifiers are and if you need to work out for each base, or do it on a majority basis (i.e. this guy is in the treeline, this one is on higher ground, this one is a Death Guard and gets +1 for defending a charge by another infantry unit, the admech base next to him doesn't get this however but can re-roll due to the presence of a war engine nearby - perhaps a bit extreme, but that's my worst-case imagining here)

Yup, even then that’s not to bad as long as you’re not working out a lot all at once.
If you have all your deathguard are +2 trees get a +1 and the cookies buff gives them +1 you can do each one as you go easy, roll dice and ad. Opposing player rolls.
Can fast roll as well placing dice next to base and letting opposing player roll as you go through after unless something pops up.
The reason 40K is ever a issue is a huge burden on each roll, as well as modifying it as you go though sequence and remembering things that go off and things like strats and powers that could further be used and reacting of the other player constantly.
40K is a great template they got for how not to do it!

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

If you really wanted to fast roll?

Let’s say I have 6 stands in combat, and they all have CAF +3. There, I just need six differently coloured pairs of dice. And admittedly some trust from my opponent ŵhen it comes to pairing them up.

This could work quite nicely if I have a fairly static core to my army, as I can fairly easily ensure I have sufficient uniquely colour pairs of dice for any combat should every stand of a given unit pile in at the same time.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and a hand made chart assigning the colours Left to Right as my opponent sees the board, pre-assigning a pair, so no “this stand am blue, that one are red” etc.

**xttz**

With a little bit of detective work I was able to track down the original source of the pastebin leaks... 4chan of all places. A series of posts were made before and after the game was officially unveiled.

May 18th: "Anyway they’re doing Solar Aux for their new Epic game. It’s called Legions Imperialis by the way."

June 4th: "Legions Imperialis is going to be a remake of Epic Spacemarine. It’s marine on marine but also will use Titans from AT and they’ll be adding Solar Auxilia in the core rules. "

Then from July 1st the poster begins answering specific questions from people, resulting in the contents of the two pastebin links that someone else assembled and shared.
Example: https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/89481992/#89494695 (4chan warning)

However one post from July 4th was accidently missed from this summary.
https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/89440733/#q89450948 (4chan warning)

>Inviolate Armour: Iron Hands models with the Feel No Pain special rule benefit from its effects when they suffer a Wound from a weapon with the Light or Light AT trait, instead of just the Light trait. In addition, any Hits scored against an Iron Hands Vehicle or Super-heavy Vehicle issued with a First Fire Order worsen their AP by 1, to a minimum of 0, e.g., a weapon with an AP of -2 would become -1.

>The First Fire Order must still be in effect (i.e., it cannot have Overwatched or fired yet this round) for this rule to take effect. This does not affect the AP if Hits are allocated to Void Shields

This specifically mentions Light & Light AT traits from yesterdays article, all but confirming that the leaks are genuine.

**Albertorius**

That last box looks entirely too involved for an army-on-army game...

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

Could still be a mix of chain yanking and truth.

**tneva82**

Gimgamgoo wrote:
leopard wrote:
2d6 gives a bell curve, it also allows for more modifiers using a wider range

It also means you can't mass roll handfulls of dice at once, one pair at a time (unless you have a load of dice in different colours, doubled up)

Well you couldn't do all 1d6 ones together either. Or how you determine which dice goes to what stand against what dice from opponent?

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

That’s a fair point.

I can only assure folks, for its limited worth, that I really don’t recall this bogging things down during HTH.

Indeed, where one side has a significant CAF, such as Terminators have +6, I recall their player rolling their dice first, as there were often rolls the opponent would never equal let alone beat.

Of course keep in mind this was literal Garage Hammer, where time meant nothing because we were kids, and thus had Nothing Better To Do. Especially at the age of 16, where I’m an adult yeah. I could join the armed forces yeah, or have intercourse with the partner of my choice, but I could not drink in pubs.

**Vorian**

The system seems quick and simple to me.

Not sure how people are coming up with a handful of opposed dice rolls being a hugely time consuming endeavour.

**SU-152**

xttz wrote:
Pacific wrote:
Well, there are different ways of selling it I guess Xttz! For me, Epic is mass (and I mean mass!) combat of tanks, infantry and war machines and a ruleset that facilitates the wargaming without it taking 6 hours if you try and play a larger game.

From what we have seen, there is a lot more granularity here, which means more detail yes (and perhaps more Heresy-era flavour) and a smaller miniature count. Combat in Epic was fast with 2d6 v 2d6 roll-offs. But, if I am calculating plus and minus factors for each (as looks might be the case) then it won't be.

From the info we have so far I'm not convinced it'll mean significantly less on the board. Here are some basic comparisons using the leaks, assuming a standard 3k pt game of LI versus a typical 4k pts most frequently used in early SMv2 battle reports:

A SMv2 marine tactical company (19 infantry+10 rhinos) was 750pts, and used 19% of your list points.
The minimum Legion command plus two tactical detachments (9 infantry) is 95pts in LI, and uses 3% of your points.
An near-equivalent Legion command, four tactical detachments, and transports (17 infantry & 9 rhinos) is 255pts in LI, and uses under 9% of your points.

Meanwhile:
Four Contemptor dreads are 2.2% of a list in LI, and 2.5% of a list in SMv2
A single Leman Russ is 0.14% of a list in LI, and 0.15% of a list in SMv2
A single Baneblade is 3% of a list in LI, and 4% of a list in SMv2
A single Warlord titan is 16% of a list in LI, and 19% of a list in SMv2

Basically model counts should be very similar if not slightly higher in favour of LI. You're just not forced to build armies around monolithic blocks of 30-60 basic chaff infantry if you don't want to.

I think your calculations are not quite right? Following that, a 3000 point army for Epic: LI would have like 700 Leman Russes. Maybe it is 10 times lower or somthing...

In the Pastebin leaks, Leman Russ is more or less 45+weapons, right?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Billicus wrote:
The 2D6 roll-off and add modifier, loser is dead no saves combat resolution does not seem onerous to me at all. Maybe if *all* your army's infantry bases hit combat with *all* your opponent's in the same turn it might take a few minutes, but even then that seems unlikely with all the big guns around.

Big guns + it seems lethality in this game is way way higher than in Epic: Armageddon for example. So only a few will reach close combat unless flying.

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

Epic really relies on terrain for blocking LoS, so that’s another factor to consider, and a particularly tricky one.

For instance, on a heavily urbanised board? Rhinos and other fast transports really come into their own, as they can typically scoot from cover to cover remaining mostly out of line of sight.

Does make me wonder if not hope Overwatch is in from day one.

**xttz**

SU-152 wrote:

I think your calculations are not quite right? Following that, a 3000 point army for Epic: LI would have like 700 Leman Russes. Maybe it is 10 times lower or somthing...

Well spotted! Yes both Russ figures were off by one decimal place. I've fixed the original post to say 1.4% and 1.5%.

**lord_blackfang**

Vorian wrote:
The system seems quick and simple to me.

Not sure how people are coming up with a handful of opposed dice rolls being a hugely time consuming endeavour.

From having played such games, for example MESBG

**Billicus**

MESBG's way more onerous. You pair people off, and first you have a choice! Does my model shield, perhaps parry, perhaps stab? I have a support! So I roll two dice. I have a pike! So I roll three. Then we roll off. I have the higher dice, who has the higher fight value? Normally me but you used such and such so now it's you! Do I have might? I do? I use my might! I win! Nudge your model back. Now, roll to strike. Consult the str vs defence table for target number. Wait! You're trapped, I make double strikes. Sadly I didn't wound you. Nothing happens. Next turn we get to do this again!

VS we each roll two dice, add modifier, loser's dead

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

Also HTH is just far more common in MESBG than 2nd Ed Epic.

Yes it is near inevitable in Epic, but it’s far from the best or only way to do hefty damage to the foe.

**tneva82**

lord_blackfang wrote:
Vorian wrote:
The system seems quick and simple to me.

Not sure how people are coming up with a handful of opposed dice rolls being a hugely time consuming endeavour.

From having played such games, for example MESBG

Not exactly same though. For one values arent always same so can't just quick roll. Every fight also has decisions to make before roll. Loser is also moved. And then rolled damage which most of the time results in no damage. Vs LI loser dies in general(super heavies etc might not)

**Vorian**

Yeah, MESBG comparisons are a good way to show how quick close combat will be.

**Pacific**

Thanks for work on that Xttz - that does make it definitely sound like the leaks are genuine, as they have been correct up until now

Agree with Albertorius about the complexity. A faction-specific special rules that updates the effects of an existing special rule text for certain units only? Goodness me.

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

‘Ere, it’s GenCon this weekend. And no a sosig about GW hosting anything?

**vadersson**

I really hope they demo LI. I’ll be there Sunday and hope to play. Hope, hope, hope.

(How not grimdark!)

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

If they do, and you don’t give it a try?

There’ll be a shunning.

**Sotahullu**

I wonder if you can take entire detachment of Assault Marines, load them in Thunderhawk(s) and drop them behind enemy lines to mess them up or, better yet, on top of an Warlord Titan?

Well last part is probably very stupid idea but coolness factor makes it worth it.

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

Warlords seemingly can be taken down that way. Sort of. Ish.

If you mob it, it’s predictably high CAF can be overwhelmed through sheer numbers, as for every fight beyond the first, each stand I control gets +1D6.

Article wrote: When faced with uneven numbers, you’ll have to “pair off” your models with more than one enemy each. Your outnumbered models will still fight each of their foes individually, but your opponent gets to roll an extra D6 for every time you’ve already fought. This means that the most elite fighters can still be worn down if you’re not careful to support them…

Of course, this makes giving your Titan an escort of even super cheapo “nobody is ever going to miss them” infantry of whatever stripe you fancy, as you may* be able to force your opponent to engage both units, preventing an old fashioned mobbing.

*We’re yet to see the full rules, so how charging against mingled/close proximity units works remains to be seen/

**Sherrypie**

Sotahullu wrote:
I wonder if you can take entire detachment of Assault Marines, load them in Thunderhawk(s) and drop them behind enemy lines to mess them up or, better yet, on top of an Warlord Titan?

Well last part is probably very stupid idea but coolness factor makes it worth it.

One would assume so due to historical precedent with other Epics and common sense, but from the look of the leaks, who knows. Assault marines and terminators might very well be tacked-on upgrades to tactical detachments, limiting their usage.

If not, you can certainly do that with the previous editions, to which these models will fit right in (even if an unsupported assault jump on a Warlord will remain just as stupid there)