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.

And nothing about them is illegal in any respect.

 insaniak wrote:
On what data are you basing this claim? Genuinely curious.

First of all, the fact that virtually every tournament bans legends rules. Any group that is focused on tournament practice will follow the tournament rules, and even outside of that most people treat tournament rules as the default way to play the game. Whether this is a good thing or not is up for debate but we've certainly seen enough discussion, both from people endorsing that trend and from people who are frustrated with nobody in their area wanting to do anything but 2000 point games with the current tournament mission pack, to know that it is the most common way of playing the game. And while that doens't explicitly include tournament policies on legends units it's a pretty reasonable assumption that the people using every other tournament rule probably also include the legends policy.

Adding to that is personal experience. In a variety of groups in different states I have rarely seen people have any interest in legends rules. Not in using them in their own armies, not in playing against them. And "rarely" is putting it generously, I can't remember a single instance of legends rules being used but I won't guarantee 100% that I haven't forgotten one. If legends rules really were popular then it's very unlikely that my random selection of different 40k groups would fail to find them.

And really it's not surprising. Legends rules were badly written to begin with and GW has directly stated that they will not be updating them as the rest of the game moves on, inevitably creating balance and rule compatibility issues that have to be house ruled before you can use them.

Ah, so by 'group' you're referring to public groups that you have personally witnessed. And honestly, regardless of how well-travelled you are, that's going to be a very, very small minority of groups.

Gaming clubs and store groups that focus on tournament play or pick up games may well be largely choosing to exclude Legends rules... but I suspect that the number of those groups would be fairly significantly dwarfed by gaming clubs and home-based groups who couldn't care less about tournament play, and tend to be much more open about what they do and don't allow.

As this poll would seem to indicate, tournament play is not the sole arbiter of what is and isn't allowed in the game.

 insaniak wrote:
Ah, so by 'group' you're referring to public groups that you have personally witnessed. And honestly, regardless of how well-travelled you are, that's going to be a very, very small minority of groups.

You have a jar of black and red balls, supposedly at a 50/50 ratio. You pull a ball, it's black. You pull a ball, it's black. You pull a ball, it's black. How many would you have to pull to conclude that it's most likely the case that if there are any red balls in the jar at all they're rarer than the claimed 50% share?

I suspect that the number of those groups would be fairly significantly dwarfed by gaming clubs and home-based groups who couldn't care less about tournament play, and tend to be much more open about what they do and don't allow.

But over and over again in other contexts we see people complaining that the only groups they have access to are ones that use tournament rules for all games, even outside of tournaments and tournament practice. If there are so many of these clubs that aren't committed to playing by tournament rules then why is it such a common complaint that people can't find them?

As this poll would seem to indicate, tournament play is not the sole arbiter of what is and isn't allowed in the game.

Polls are extremely prone to selection bias. This is a forum that skews in favor of older players, people who have established collections going back multiple editions and a stake in wanting to continue using their old units. The same is not likely to be true of the typical store group, where most people are newer and haven't even heard of most of the legends units.

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

I suspect that the number of those groups would be fairly significantly dwarfed by gaming clubs and home-based groups who couldn't care less about tournament play, and tend to be much more open about what they do and don't allow.

But over and over again in other contexts we see people complaining that the only groups they have access to are ones that use tournament rules for all games, even outside of tournaments and tournament practice. If there are so many of these clubs that aren't committed to playing by tournament rules then why is it such a common complaint that people can't find them?

As this poll would seem to indicate, tournament play is not the sole arbiter of what is and isn't allowed in the game.

Polls are extremely prone to selection bias. This is a forum that skews in favor of older players, people who have established collections going back multiple editions and a stake in wanting to continue using their old units. The same is not likely to be true of the typical store group, where most people are newer and haven't even heard of most of the legends units.

You would appear to be simultaneously considering the forum representative of the gaming community as a whole and also not representative of the gaming community as a whole.

Major league level of hypocrisy...

The Owls language speaks for itself...they have basically zero idea of what goes on outside of their tourney bubble.


Oh and the whole 9 vanquishers comment could be interchanged with (whichever unit is OP currently), it has zero to do with the specific unit, and more to do with the methodology behind its purpose in the list.

 insaniak wrote:
You would appear to be simultaneously considering the forum representative of the gaming community as a whole and also not representative of the gaming community as a whole.

I could see how you could get that impression, but no. When I say "we've seen complaints about tournament-focused play in non-tournament games" I mean "we" in a more general sense, not specific to this forum. I have seen the same complaints consistently on other platforms. The poll, on the other hand, only counts people on this forum and is an outlier compared to my consistent experiences of the opposite everywhere else. And it's an outlier that is IMO convincingly explained by the different demographics of this forum and forums in general vs. the larger community.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Racerguy180 wrote:
The Owls language speaks for itself...they have basically zero idea of what goes on outside of their tourney bubble.

Nowhere in there did I say I'm only involved with tournaments. In fact I was very explicit about discussing games that have nothing to do with tournament play, other than the store/club using the tournament rules by default.

Oh and the whole 9 vanquishers comment could be interchanged with (whichever unit is OP currently), it has zero to do with the specific unit, and more to do with the methodology behind its purpose in the list.

The specific unit is absolutely relevant because it demonstrates a lack of understanding of the game as a whole outside of, at best, one person's casual kitchen table games. Nobody who would make that comment is qualified to discuss balance or design issues, just like someone who thinks a touchdown scores 10 points should not be listened to in a discussion of football strategy.

And that's fine. Not everyone has to pay attention to tournament play or be involved in design or balance discussions. It's perfectly fine to only play casual kitchen table games and never learn how the game works on anything more than the most superficial level. I'm certainly not going to demand that everyone spend their time doing probability math and studying the metagame if that isn't something they're interested in. But if you start talking about 10 point touchdowns and 9 vanquisher WAAC lists it's clear you aren't offering an informed opinion on the subject.

Once again, you're completely missing the point, the 9 vanquishers could be....

Triptides
Taudar
Malefic lords
Iron Hands Chaplain dreds
In any number
Or whichever the current feth OFF unit/list may be.

It is indicative of a thought process and demonstrates a singular focus.

Not playing with SPECIFICALL/UNEQUIVOCALLY legit units is a personal choice and in no way a thing imposed by GW

Racerguy180 wrote:
It is indicative of a thought process and demonstrates a singular focus.

No it isn't, because anyone with even a minimal understanding of unit analysis and tournament play would know that the vanquisher is one of the worst units in the game, a single-role specialist that is worse than the alternatives at even the one thing it is supposed to be capable of doing. If I see a nine vanquisher list my assumption is not single-minded focus on spamming an overpowered unit, it's that someone thinks "big gun = cool" and brought a bunch of their favorite model with no understanding of (or no concern for) how to make a competitive list.

And you're missing the point of that comment, which is that nobody who has a deep enough understanding of the game to contribute usefully in discussions of design or balance would ever accuse a person of being TFG for taking vanquishers to a fun game. It doesn't matter if they theoretically could have complained about triptide or pre-nerf wraithknights instead, they complained about vanquishers. And it's absolutely hilarious that someone would ever complain about one of the game's notorious "worst unit ever" contenders being a favorite of WAAC TFGs.

You're so stuck on the Vanquisher, you can't see the forest thru the trees...

Racerguy180 wrote:
You're so stuck on the Vanquisher, you can't see the forest thru the trees...

The entire point of the post I made starting this chain was specifically about it being a vanquisher. At this point I have no idea what you're trying to argue here, other than sheer stubborn insistence on having an argument.