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.
An allied Acastus Knight ain't no artillery ^^. And artillery was a single example. There's a lot more lacking. Transports for Auxilia, melon-fething Land Raiders, Drop Pods (and if there's something that says more "GW Space Marines" than drop pods, I'm not sure what it is, Land Speeders, bikes, scouts.... many mainstays of what makes "40k" armies what they are are currently a no-show.
It does feel very empty, for the most part, to me.
Can you sort-of-but-not-quite substitute with other stuff? Well, yeah. Of course. But that des not mean there is not a truckload of stuff that should be there and ain't.
Crablezworth wrote: The game is a bit too permissive in army construction as it is IMO, especially with space marines and legal armies that resemble boxes of crayons.
I'm sorry... what?
I think he means that it's possible to have different formations be different Legions but still be one 'Space Marine' faction. Personally I like the 'multi-force' nature of it, that's how I've always played epic (but then we played really big games).
Crablezworth wrote: One side doesn't even have a single ground transport, one of the single most highly awaited models is the dracosan they previewed. It's also significant in that it can seemingly sacrifice half it transport capacity to take a demolisher cannon which certainly has my attention. I'd feel a lot more complete with the rules for it.
The Arvus Lighter is pretty much the Solar answer to the Rhino, and why they're releasing a similar pack of 8 aircraft.
An allied Acastus Knight ain't no artillery ^^. And artillery was a single example. There's a lot more lacking. Transports for Auxilia, melon-fething Land Raiders, Drop Pods (and if there's something that says more "GW Space Marines" than drop pods, I'm not sure what it is, Land Speeders, bikes, scouts.... many mainstays of what makes "40k" armies what they are are currently a no-show.
It does feel very empty, for the most part, to me.
Can you sort-of-but-not-quite substitute with other stuff? Well, yeah. Of course. But that des not mean there is not a truckload of stuff that should be there and ain't.
Sorry, but an Acastus isn't artiliary? Quite literally a heavily armoured Howls Moving Castle with two large cannons strapped on either arm, designed for ranged mass-destruction, signed up for the lead role in the remake of The Guns of Navarone, and you say...
"ain't no artillery"?
...its bad enough not having a faction to play in this crappy game but now I have to take these insults as well?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/02/02 19:44:24
Crablezworth wrote: One side doesn't even have a single ground transport, one of the single most highly awaited models is the dracosan they previewed. It's also significant in that it can seemingly sacrifice half it transport capacity to take a demolisher cannon which certainly has my attention. I'd feel a lot more complete with the rules for it.
The Arvus Lighter is pretty much the Solar answer to the Rhino, and why they're releasing a similar pack of 8 aircraft.
An allied Acastus Knight ain't no artillery ^^. And artillery was a single example. There's a lot more lacking. Transports for Auxilia, melon-fething Land Raiders, Drop Pods (and if there's something that says more "GW Space Marines" than drop pods, I'm not sure what it is, Land Speeders, bikes, scouts.... many mainstays of what makes "40k" armies what they are are currently a no-show.
It does feel very empty, for the most part, to me.
Can you sort-of-but-not-quite substitute with other stuff? Well, yeah. Of course. But that des not mean there is not a truckload of stuff that should be there and ain't.
Sorry, but an Acastus isn't artiliary? Quite literally a heavily armoured Howls Moving Castle with two large cannons strapped on either arm, designed for ranged mass-destruction, signed up for the lead role in the remake of The Guns of Navarone, and you say...
"ain't no artillery"?
...its bad enough not having a faction to play in this crappy game but now I have to take these insults as well?
I guess I'll buy some arvus's then... oh wait
And artillery refers to the ability to target units out of los, at least how I'd be using the term and largely how the game seemingly will re basilisks ect.
Crablezworth wrote: The game is a bit too permissive in army construction as it is IMO, especially with space marines and legal armies that resemble boxes of crayons.
I'm sorry... what?
I think he means that it's possible to have different formations be different Legions but still be one 'Space Marine' faction. Personally I like the 'multi-force' nature of it, that's how I've always played epic (but then we played really big games).
Correct, and my concern isn't really with interesting fluffy large armies, it's facing like 5 legions at 2k, you can do cynically small detachments to take advantage of each given legion rule, and it gets a bit cynical, fast. I love the idea of multiple legions fighting, but in larger multi person games imo, as it stands the current army construction is very very permissive in addition to unlimited formations/legions.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/02/02 20:02:55
SamusDrake wrote: Sorry, but an Acastus isn't artiliary? Quite literally a heavily armoured Howls Moving Castle with two large cannons strapped on either arm, designed for ranged mass-destruction, signed up for the lead role in the remake of The Guns of Navarone, and you say...
"ain't no artillery"?
...its bad enough not having a faction to play in this crappy game but now I have to take these insults as well?
Don't delude yourself. You know it ain't artillery if you need to see what you're shooting at
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/02/02 20:10:47
And artillery refers to the ability to target units out of los, at least how I'd be using the term and largely how the game seemingly will re basilisks ect.
Just put some plastercine balls on the end of cocktail sticks and be patient.
Well, thats GW quality playtesting for you and probably fixed in an FAQ shortly. Or most likely banned, and Albertorius will be mocking me "sorry, you were saying?"
And artillery refers to the ability to target units out of los, at least how I'd be using the term and largely how the game seemingly will re basilisks ect.
Just put some plastercine balls on the end of cocktail sticks and be patient.
Well, thats GW quality playtesting for you and probably fixed in an FAQ shortly. Or most likely banned, and Albertorius will be mocking me "sorry, you were saying?"
Nah man, just good natured ribbing a bit ^^. It's all good, I hope you're not taking it personally, and if you are know that it was not the intention and I'm sorry.
Nah man, just good natured ribbing a bit ^^. It's all good, I hope you're not taking it personally, and if you are know that it was not the intention and I'm sorry.
Sorry, its just that I'm having a hard time dealing with Knights not being allowed their own army. Years of waiting for a superior ruleset and GW takes a crap on my head like a spiteful pidgeon waiting for the precise moment to strike...
...urgh. Well I guess you've all helped me get that off my chest, and should really be thanking you.
I'm teaching Epic 40k this weekend. We're playing Gogard's Last Stand and The Sulphur River Refights, which have a good spread of rules.
I thought that said 'Grognard's last stand' then, which is basically me in this thread and others over the past decade trying to get people to try old Epic
But the core rulebook only contains, what, a third or so of what we already know is coming out?
I hope I'm wrong, but I'm going to guess that we're probably going to accumulate and additional 2 or 3 campaign books that you need to have to get rules to play one army.
Been through the book and it covers enough units - for both Marines and Solar - to build a solid army.
Depends how you define "solid army" I guess.
Lacking land speeders, bikes, land raiders, spartans, whirlwinds, drop pods, vindicators, predator and sicaran variants, basilisks, mastodons, marine baneblades all makes it feel, well, "lacking" I guess.
And those are going to come out across, what, 2 campaign books? 3 campaign books?
Then those campaign books will probably come with their own special rules and maybe tweaks to the core game.
This could very easily turn into a game where you need a librarian's assistance and a trolley full of books to play.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/02/03 04:02:35
And it will end up with compendiums in about two years time, and probably an upset designer whos left the company, telling us what the game was originally intended to be...
SamusDrake wrote: And it will end up with compendiums in about two years time, and probably an upset designer whos left the company, telling us what the game was originally intended to be...
I'm not sure which game you're referencing? Maybe it does end up in a nice neat compendium, maybe it doesn't, we'll have to wait and see. From what I understand, Necromunda is still a pain (I don't collect it though, so correct me if I'm wrong). AI never got a proper compendium, just the HH book which knowing what we know now was probably part of the plan to kill Xenos and move Epic scale stuff to HH.
GW doesn't seem to mind making rules for their games a pain in the arse for customers to figure out what they need and making it cost a fortune to get all the rules you'll likely want.
SamusDrake wrote: And it will end up with compendiums in about two years time, and probably an upset designer whos left the company, telling us what the game was originally intended to be...
I'm not sure which game you're referencing? Maybe it does end up in a nice neat compendium, maybe it doesn't, we'll have to wait and see. From what I understand, Necromunda is still a pain (I don't collect it though, so correct me if I'm wrong). AI never got a proper compendium, just the HH book which knowing what we know now was probably part of the plan to kill Xenos and move Epic scale stuff to HH.
GW doesn't seem to mind making rules for their games a pain in the arse for customers to figure out what they need and making it cost a fortune to get all the rules you'll likely want.
He's referring to Adeptus Titanicus whose original designer, James Hewitt, left GW after disputes over compensation IIRC; despite designing many of their better-regarded games, he was reportedly making 20k annually compared to 30k for some others on the team (which he does point out were more senior) but perhaps more saliently 6k less than the person hired to eventually replace him. He did a Reddit AMA as I recall where he went into how AT was designed and that it had included some mechanisms for tanks and infantry, but that those really hadn't gone much further than the groundwork.
Obviously, LI is it's own game and not a bolt-on to AT so GW opted not to leverage that design space.
the dispute was that he applied for an internal position that was better paid and the leader of his department intervened so that he did not get it and also refused to raise his wages to the same level (with something that he is too important to switch departments but the department not making enough profit to justify him getting paid the same)
but could also be a reference to Necromunda, were the original game planned was split into 2 books as the management felt that having rules for 3D terrain is not appropriate if the initial box does not come with one
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AllSeeingSkink wrote: GW doesn't seem to mind making rules for their games a pain in the arse for customers to figure out what they need and making it cost a fortune to get all the rules you'll likely want.
GW makes the rules in the way they think it makes them the most profit
and their yearly report shows that it works is no matter how much of pain their rules are and how badly written they are, people buy them
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/02/03 14:17:07
Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise
Crablezworth wrote: The game is a bit too permissive in army construction as it is IMO, especially with space marines and legal armies that resemble boxes of crayons.
I'm sorry... what?
I think he means that it's possible to have different formations be different Legions but still be one 'Space Marine' faction. Personally I like the 'multi-force' nature of it, that's how I've always played epic (but then we played really big games).
It's the complete lack of limitations that I take issue with. As stated earlier, the game is too permissive in army building already, there aren't any limits on formations. To make my point, you could have an army with like 18 different formations and 18 sets of legion special rules and and it would not only be legal, it wouldn't even break 3k. Now there isn't quite any reason or incentive for one to go that far, but it is possible. The more likely reality is cynical stuff like taking a minimum detachment of emperor's children to get a once per game auto win on imitative roll. White scars detachment so air force benefits from better jink save, ect. I feel like players are on a spectrum of what is reasonable to include within a given point level, if I'm playing a 1500pts game, is it at all fair to think 5 legions is a bit much at that point level? And in that case it may not even be trying to max rules, it could be for fluff or any reason, still looks awful and like a box of crayons/power rangers sorta vibe. I get marine fought each other and along side one another, but after a few legions it just starts to blur. I'd think the same of someone painting their solar aux formations by drastically different colour schemes to excess.
Players also hope for legion specific units in future books, that given the current army construction rules complete lack of containment seems doubtful, especially if solar aux in future books doesn't get any sub factions in the way marines do.
Side note on the delay, I've seen one store owner mention that in discussion with his gw account guy, the account guy did mention the red sea in relation to the delay in releases. No specifics past that, as far as I know march 2nd is still the current rumour.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/02/03 15:08:19
I hope Solar get more Velatarii with volkite chargers, they are printed on the box and two per sprue are ridicolous as number. And Auxilia with rotor cannon.
Side note on the delay, I've seen one store owner mention that in discussion with his gw account guy, the account guy did mention the red sea in relation to the delay in releases. No specifics past that, as far as I know march 2nd is still the current rumour.
Starter set is made and printed in the UK, maybe further stuff come from far away?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2024/02/03 23:47:07
I'm not sure which game you're referencing? Maybe it does end up in a nice neat compendium, maybe it doesn't, we'll have to wait and see. From what I understand, Necromunda is still a pain (I don't collect it though, so correct me if I'm wrong). AI never got a proper compendium, just the HH book which knowing what we know now was probably part of the plan to kill Xenos and move Epic scale stuff to HH.
GW doesn't seem to mind making rules for their games a pain in the arse for customers to figure out what they need and making it cost a fortune to get all the rules you'll likely want.
Adeptus Titanicus. They're taking the same approach with Legions in that the core book gets you up and running with a legal army, but following supplements will provide new options to spice things up. Its also similar in that whatever content they release in any of the supplements, you'll be able to use it in your marine or solar army, thanks to the 30% ally budget.
Eventually, there will be so many of these supplements( and White Dwarf articles ) that they'll need to recompile them into fewer, thicker books.
I personally prefer the earlier approach as I'm not interested in any supplement unless it significantly adds to the game. If I were buying into Legions( not for the time being, but you never know ), then I'd probably leave it at the core book.
He's referring to Adeptus Titanicus whose original designer, James Hewitt, left GW after disputes over compensation IIRC; despite designing many of their better-regarded games, he was reportedly making 20k annually compared to 30k for some others on the team (which he does point out were more senior) but perhaps more saliently 6k less than the person hired to eventually replace him. He did a Reddit AMA as I recall where he went into how AT was designed and that it had included some mechanisms for tanks and infantry, but that those really hadn't gone much further than the groundwork.
Obviously, LI is it's own game and not a bolt-on to AT so GW opted not to leverage that design space.
Also that James had pretty much designed AT as a titan combat simulator, and GW duct-taped Knight banners on to it.
When going through the Legions Imperialis rules, I get the impression that GW had changed intentions for army composition at some point in it's development. Its like they want us to embrace multiple Imperial factions as one large army( each having it's part to play ), but end up falling back to Heresy's approach of one primary faction with a little support from allies, probably for cross campaigns with that game.
The Solar & Marine formation feels like GW want us to play with Marine & Solar primary forces but have cold feet about it. Yet as Crablezworth says, they have this combo-chain of multiple Marine Chapter bonuses which seems far worse a crime than allowing marine and solar formations as part of a primary force.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/02/03 23:25:30
The one first one they had to replace was china I believe, reason they printed the new book in uk was likely to get it out before the end of the year.
Stuff like the ruins terrain boxes I believe are mostly china, for example. It's also possible stuff like boxes/packaging is made in china even for domestically produced kits. Could LI kits for wave 2 sitting waiting for boxing material to come from china perhaps.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/02/04 00:02:30
The one first one they had to replace was china I believe, reason they printed the new book in uk was likely to get it out before the end of the year.
Stuff like the ruins terrain boxes I believe are mostly china, for example. It's also possible stuff like boxes/packaging is made in china even for domestically produced kits. Could LI kits for wave 2 sitting waiting for boxing material to come from china perhaps.
Yes, things like boxes and assembly guides can be printed (and presumably usually are, due to cost) but the finished product can still be labelled as "Made in the UK", if packaged there, with UK-produced contents or components, as is the case.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: GW doesn't seem to mind making rules for their games a pain in the arse for customers to figure out what they need and making it cost a fortune to get all the rules you'll likely want.
GW makes the rules in the way they think it makes them the most profit
and their yearly report shows that it works is no matter how much of pain their rules are and how badly written they are, people buy them
Do they give numbers on their sales of rules? And any numbers that suggest they've found peak rules sales?
I'm not going to argue GW don't make money hand over fist, obviously they do, but I also think Necromunda could be more popular without having to waste so much time figuring out what book you need to buy, and while it wasn't the only problem with Aeronautica I think there was definitely a negative impact that you couldn't just point to one book and say "that one, that's the one you want to buy".
I'm not sure which game you're referencing? Maybe it does end up in a nice neat compendium, maybe it doesn't, we'll have to wait and see. From what I understand, Necromunda is still a pain (I don't collect it though, so correct me if I'm wrong). AI never got a proper compendium, just the HH book which knowing what we know now was probably part of the plan to kill Xenos and move Epic scale stuff to HH.
GW doesn't seem to mind making rules for their games a pain in the arse for customers to figure out what they need and making it cost a fortune to get all the rules you'll likely want.
Adeptus Titanicus.
Okay, even though I own some AT stuff I've never actually played it or got into the rules, I glanced through the rulebook and didn't really like the rules.
They're taking the same approach with Legions in that the core book gets you up and running with a legal army, but following supplements will provide new options to spice things up. Its also similar in that whatever content they release in any of the supplements, you'll be able to use it in your marine or solar army, thanks to the 30% ally budget.
Eventually, there will be so many of these supplements( and White Dwarf articles ) that they'll need to recompile them into fewer, thicker books.
I personally prefer the earlier approach as I'm not interested in any supplement unless it significantly adds to the game. If I were buying into Legions( not for the time being, but you never know ), then I'd probably leave it at the core book.
Given it's GW, I'm going to guess the compendiums pull together stuff that gets released in white dwarfs or online articles, but stuff that comes out in campaign books will remain in those campaign books. At least that's the worst case (but I think still likely) scenario so that in a few years we end up with a core book with some rules, a few campaign books with a few rules, and a companion or compendium with a few rules.
If I were buying into Legions( not for the time being, but you never know ), then I'd probably leave it at the core book.
If that's what you want to do, but I think the core book is overly limiting.
I did buy the starter set, but as time goes on I think I'm more likely to stick to older or fan editions of the game, so if I don't buy the campaign books it's probably because I'm not playing it rather than because I'm satisfied with an army made from the selection of troops offered in the core book (no fast attack, no artillery troops/tanks).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/02/04 02:43:21
Yeah, and the binding on mine reminds me of the binding of UK-printed GW books from days long ago, lol. It creaks and feels...loose?...already and I've barely read it. And I'm careful with new hardcovers.
My understanding is that so much of the printing market is in China/Overseas that the UK really doesn't have the infrastructure/skillset any more. At least outside of likely luxury/limited production type deals that are likely way more expensive than GW wants to spend on for their style of product.
I seem to recall that and sourcing raw materials are a reason GW has never bought their own printing press machinery to bring that in house
Yes. Reread what I wrote. Note how I said originally. Remember the delay from original launch day? That was due to gw reprinting rulebook. We have seen cover of original rulebook and apart from front looking different it had printed in china.
Doing another print run at china would have taken longer(what with boats being slow) or cost lot more via air transport so gw went for uk for new print run. Presumably they prefered shorter delay at expense of cost.
The Ruins Set has a Sticker with "Made in China" on it. Under the Sticker, they printed "Made in the UK" on the Box.
Hm.....
I have three Rulebooks from three Core Sets, one of them has a different binding Quality. That Book (from the first release run) has binding issues and starts to fall apart while the other two (from the first restock) have a clearly higher production quality. All three of them are printed in the UK.
Cadre Coronal Afterglow w1;d0;l0 
