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.

Mission from White Dwarf. It seem these are to connect LI with HH. So you first play a LI mission and the winner gets a bonus in the following HH mission:

That's neat

 Albertorius wrote:

 Tyranid Horde wrote:
It really isn't any more crowded than a game of 40k...

...that is not the positive point you think it is. Current 40k looks horribly overcrowded, as if they were fighting on a small parking lot.

Don't know where you read I said it was positive. A table full of models is the spectacle GW want, whether you take issue with it or not, whether you think it is overcrowded or not. If you take issue with it, reduce the points or increase the size of the board, you aren't chained to GW.

Anyway, the missions are pretty cool

Sure. Makes finding opponents harder though

leopard wrote:

RazorEdge wrote:
I'm not happy with that "A table full of Tanks" Batrep here....

Looks like the same overflooded Ghak like 40k to me.

Suspect once the game is in peoples hands it will quickly settle out to what size gives a decent game that takes only a reasonable amount of time. I suspect that and what GW think that is may not be quite the same

the same people that cut off their 6x4 gaming mats because the rulebook defined a new minimum(!!!) size?
as soon as 5x4 at 3k is given as recommended or preferred size somewhere in the rules, this is set in stone and changing that will be harder than getting them playing dropzone commander instead of LI


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
Sure. Makes finding opponents harder though

why do you think GW cares if you play the game?
you bought a 3k army that looks impressive on the table and that is everything they think the people want

As usual, people assume a lot of things from one battle report in the White Dwarf.

I see it as it is : a cool battle report with lot of varied units, simply showing the different tactics and strategies you can build with what LI offers, while not necessarily imposing you to have a huge table to fit the board.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kodos wrote:
why do you think GW cares if you play the game?
you bought a 3k army that looks impressive on the table and that is everything they think the people want

Ah, this conspiracy constantly shows up with GW haters. It's actually a question of customer goal and publicity : having an impressive painted collection is a bit like the "Saint Graal" for a lot of them (and it is also the most appropriate for GW as a company, since it means the customer will kept being engaged with GW for a long amount of time while trying to achieve said goal). In reality, it's far from being GW exclusive - you see that as well in other miniature wargame companies like Warlord Games, Privateer Press or Mantic Games. The more impressive a collection is, the more engaged in these companies the customer is - and the more publicity it attracts. When people see games with painted miniatures - doesn't have to be Golden Demon standard with awesomely custom-made conversions, mind you, even though when it does it's even more to the point -, that's often what gives the spark for other people to get invested too. Much more than when you use a plant pot as terrain on your table with grey plastic half built miniatures, that's for sure (that's how we started at our local club that was a bit too focused on the "rule part" of the games, and we had some problems to recruit new players for a while...it was totally our fault here).

But thinking people at GW don't care at all for the game part ? That's completely false. If that was the case, 40k and AoS wouldn't be so single-mindedly focused on the competitive scene these last editions. However, it is true it's not that important as a lot of people on Dakkadakka with unreasonnable demands believe, I feel. In miniature wargame business, rules are mostly the cherry on top who gives you another motivation to build your collection and keep following that company's products. And it's also true that when a company is too focused on the rule part...well, we saw what happened to Privateer Press being now just a shadow of its former self or the fate of Guild Ball. Whatever someone thinks of what makes a good game in miniature wargames...it's never enough in itself to sell. Because the goal of a miniature wargame customer is more than just the rules...otherwise, he would just play video or board games.

 kodos wrote:

leopard wrote:

RazorEdge wrote:
I'm not happy with that "A table full of Tanks" Batrep here....

Looks like the same overflooded Ghak like 40k to me.

Suspect once the game is in peoples hands it will quickly settle out to what size gives a decent game that takes only a reasonable amount of time. I suspect that and what GW think that is may not be quite the same

the same people that cut off their 6x4 gaming mats because the rulebook defined a new minimum(!!!) size?
as soon as 5x4 at 3k is given as recommended or preferred size somewhere in the rules, this is set in stone and changing that will be harder than getting them playing dropzone commander instead of LI

Doesn't even have to be preferred or recommended but minimum.

Cut cut cut.

I was actually just reading a White Dwarf article by Jervis Johnson (it was an old issue) and he was musing on the creativity and agency that each player of the game has in a friendly gaming setting; not in tournaments, as for those you must follow whatever guidelines the TO has set, but the rules in the book are very much a 'starting point', not an end point, for what players do with their games.

This is from Jervis Johnson - one of the principle authors of previous versions of Epic. So, you can have your eyes roll up into the back of your head and blindly follow all of these table size and point guidelines that GW *recommend*, but is entirely your own agency and decision of what you do and how you play the game. This is such a creative setting, originally created by a bunch of fantasy/sci-fi fans sat in the back room of a pub in the 80s, and there is so much enjoyment to be had from losing your water wings/bike stabilisers and going off piste (to use some terrible metaphors). Table size/points are such a minor thing and really you can go much further, your hobby will thank you for it.

if GW would care about gaming at all, they would actually play test their games
that recommended board size, army size and play time don't fit together at all just tells me that they never played their own game
that marketing is targeting events because they make a lot of money does not change that at all

that GW write in the books that the rules are just guidelines as excuse to do proper rules writing and people taking them as hard facts simply because the only advantage the rules by themselves have is that everyone is using the same

if people would go the recommended "use more house rules" stuff, you get the complains about the "fragmentation of the community and just for the sake of a healthy community we should not do that"

 kodos wrote:
if GW would care about gaming at all, they would actually play test their games
that recommended board size, army size and play time don't fit together at all just tells me that they never played their own game

They do test their games. They simply don't have necessarily all the time in the world, or the same view than you about what makes a game fun or not.

By the way, you seem to already know all LI rules to declare that recommanded board and army sizes as well as play time "don't fit together". Which is quite a feat, since you know, game is not released yet and we only have pictures of a single battle report in the White Dwarf so far. Maybe wait for more information and, well, actually reading the rules before making such a statement ?

"playing 4 games per week during the design phase" is not testing a game
and not having the time and people to play the game with 2 factions involved is simply a lie for a big company like GW because they can find people that will play 20 games a week for free just to make sure it works
and "wit and see how good that game will be", I am happy to be proven wrong but the chance is very low that this will work as you think

 kodos wrote:
"playing 4 games per week during the design phase" is not testing a game

You just don't know how game design works, that's all. Or maybe you'd rather believe Matt from Mantic Games when he says they tested Dungeon Saga Origins for 7 years and think they did play games of it daily ?

I know, on a personal level, many published game designers. Both miniature war game and board game. Some of them will collect data from 1000-2000 playtest games before sending their games to publication. These are not short games either, often they are fairly complex games with 2+ hr play times.

Sarouan wrote:

They do test their games. They simply don't have necessarily all the time in the world, or the same view than you about what makes a game fun or not.

Its completely fine if they have a different view of their games and test them with that view. But if they release erratas for their releases before they are even out then obviously something was missed that isn't just a different view as they wouldn't change it if it was irrelevant to them. And if it happens for every release its no longer just a mistake but their playtesting thats the problem

 Matrindur wrote:


Its completely fine if they have a different view of their games and test them with that view. But if they release erratas for their releases before they are even out then obviously something was missed that isn't just a different view as they wouldn't change it if it was irrelevant to them. And if it happens for every release its no longer just a mistake but their playtesting thats the problem

You're talking about Warhammer 40k 10th edition specifically here, and that's fine. But the LI team isn't the same than the 40k team, and they don't have to cover more than a hundred profiles spread around 20 factions with the imperative to balance everything and not make a mistake while being under pressure with a specific release time imperative (and certainly also working on other projects as well). The scale isn't the same, litterally.

Sometimes it should be good to remember that game designers / playtesters are only humans and they can do mistakes too. Mistakes don't invalidate the rest of work they've done so far and that is perfectly fine...and they can be corrected, as erratas show. If you can't accept that, just stop playing miniature wargames. The whole market is litterally full of them - and most players do tend to shrug and keep playing when they spot them while making their own corrections or roll a die to decide which version is better. It's just a game, in the end.

I would put may hand into fire (local idiom) that GW played exactly 0 games of Necromunda 2017 before publication.

 Tyranid Horde wrote:
Don't know where you read I said it was positive. A table full of models is the spectacle GW want, whether you take issue with it or not, whether you think it is overcrowded or not. If you take issue with it, reduce the points or increase the size of the board, you aren't chained to GW.

Anyway, the missions are pretty cool

Well, you said it as a counterpoint to some people sayng it was very overcrowded, so one would usually assume you were trying to refute the assertion.

As to the rest... yeah, no gak, I kinda know that already . I can also even play some of the other Epic games that seem to cater more to tactics and maneuver instead of just slugging it out in the middle

But yeah, the missions are a nice touch.

The Topic is Legions Imperialis, folks. If you want to talk about the game design and/or playtesting process, Dakka Discussions would be more appropriate.

Getting a feeling that this isnt coming out before Xmas....or anytime soon...

VAYASEN wrote:
Getting a feeling that this isnt coming out before Xmas....or anytime soon...

Pretty sure Epic has taken the originally-rumoured November release slot for TOW, since that now been confirmed as 'early 2024'.

This series of LI-focused Thursday reveals seem like a way to restart the marketing hype again.

VAYASEN wrote:
Getting a feeling that this isnt coming out before Xmas....or anytime soon...

IIRC, there were some comments from GW shortly after the delay was announced that indicated that LI was expected out before the end of the year. Doesn't mean that it won't slip again, possibly without us being any the wiser this time. But at some point after the slip, GW had it slotted into the calendar for a release by the end of the year.

One possibility - they've slotted both the game and the first expansion into what would have been the release slot for just the first expansion.

Why do both of the forces from the battle report seem so short on troops?

Eumerin wrote:

VAYASEN wrote:
Getting a feeling that this isnt coming out before Xmas....or anytime soon...

IIRC, there were some comments from GW shortly after the delay was announced that indicated that LI was expected out before the end of the year. Doesn't mean that it won't slip again, possibly without us being any the wiser this time. But at some point after the slip, GW had it slotted into the calendar for a release by the end of the year.

One possibility - they've slotted both the game and the first expansion into what would have been the release slot for just the first expansion.

This sounds like a logical thing to do. Surely the.battle report wouldn't have been published if the game was too far away? It would be making a sales pitch for something that customers then cannot buy.

 schoon wrote:
Why do both of the forces from the battle report seem so short on troops?

Because they're playing an advert to show off all the lovely things for sale.

 Pacific wrote:

Eumerin wrote:

VAYASEN wrote:
Getting a feeling that this isnt coming out before Xmas....or anytime soon...

IIRC, there were some comments from GW shortly after the delay was announced that indicated that LI was expected out before the end of the year. Doesn't mean that it won't slip again, possibly without us being any the wiser this time. But at some point after the slip, GW had it slotted into the calendar for a release by the end of the year.

One possibility - they've slotted both the game and the first expansion into what would have been the release slot for just the first expansion.

This sounds like a logical thing to do. Surely the.battle report wouldn't have been published if the game was too far away? It would be making a sales pitch for something that customers then cannot buy.

Assuming they would have been able to alter wd by then.

tneva82 wrote:

Assuming they would have been able to alter wd by then.

The originally scheduled LI release was months ago. If the first scheduled battle report couldn't be pulled at the last minute, then we should have seen something before now. Further, this new LI battle report explicitly uses equipment that's only available in the first expansion, again suggesting that it's not the article that was supposed to herald the launch of the new game. This is a "game + expansion" article.

Also, it's been mentioned more than once in this thread that the WD staff is capable of swapping out an article at the last minute, and has done so from time to time in the past. That leads to the same point - that this battle report was released at this time because LI is on the way soon.

Vorian wrote:

 schoon wrote:
Why do both of the forces from the battle report seem so short on troops?

Because they're playing an advert to show off all the lovely things for sale.

and they are using the Evey Metal armies which won't be more than one box of anything for each faction generally

Did we have any news in terms of why it was pulled and what they have to do to get it out again?

When they said they were delaying it from whatever it was (August?) I figured it would have been out by now, especially when we saw a reviewer with a nearly fully painted army.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Did we have any news in terms of why it was pulled and what they have to do to get it out again?

Like with Cursed City, we'll probably know in 30 years when it's declassified

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Did we have any news in terms of why it was pulled and what they have to do to get it out again?

When they said they were delaying it from whatever it was (August?) I figured it would have been out by now, especially when we saw a reviewer with a nearly fully painted army.

Word is reviewers had to return book so looks like they had to reprint it, repack all boxes and with time required to transport thjt takes time despite gw paying extra to get new print run from uk rather than china.