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.

Except GW hasn't actually taken a "never again" approach to Legends. They've updated their rules every edition since the concept was introduced to maintain compatibility.

 catbarf wrote:
If Legends units got a balance pass / rules update every 1-2 years (while the main tournament-approved codex-only lists continue to receive quarterly balance updates) I don't think there'd be much complaint. The folks who want to run Legends units aren't the ones clamoring for the highest level of balance possible. It's just the countdown to unusability that makes Legends effectively a death sentence for units that wind up on that list.

Balance passes clearly require a non-trivial amount of work though, and GW is clearly not willing to invest that kind of money into models which have zero chance to return that investment.

To be honest, in practice legends doesn't feel that different from your average FW unit that had its rules printed in some obscure OOP FW book between 3rd and 7th. Printed once, never touched again.

 LunarSol wrote:
Except GW hasn't actually taken a "never again" approach to Legends. They've updated their rules every edition since the concept was introduced to maintain compatibility.

Except thats not really true, a casual perusal of the legends sheets shows theres a number of older sheets that no longer exist. Hell, theres at least one army I can think of off the top of my head that no longer exists - you go and try to play a Legion of Azgorh army in AOS4. You find me those warscrolls. Ill wait.

Then you have Marahal Karis Venner - had legends rules in 9th, none in 10th. Cant find legends sheets for Kabalite Truborn or Bloodbrides either. Quite a few others across different factions.

 LunarSol wrote:
Except GW hasn't actually taken a "never again" approach to Legends. They've updated their rules every edition since the concept was introduced to maintain compatibility.

Where can I find the current datasheet for my Scythed Hierodule or Shrikes? Some Legends units persist, others have just disappeared entirely, there's no rhyme or reason to it and no reason to think that any particular Legends unit will remain supported come next edition.

 Jidmah wrote:
Balance passes clearly require a non-trivial amount of work though, and GW is clearly not willing to invest that kind of money into models which have zero chance to return that investment.

First, sure, it's a non-trivial amount of work, but to do that once every 1-2 years is nowhere near on the same level as quarterly balance updates based on hard tournament data.

Second, it's short-sighted to view it solely as investing in units with no return. Providing ongoing support for legacy models supports the entire product line, by giving players reason to think that their expensive investments will remain usable. It is not healthy if players are hesitant to buy expensive kits or limited-edition models because they can't trust they'll be playable, or because they resent prior invalidation. How much GW cares about customer retention versus pump-and-dump nowadays, I don't know, but this is a pretty common paradigm in other industries.

 catbarf wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
Except GW hasn't actually taken a "never again" approach to Legends. They've updated their rules every edition since the concept was introduced to maintain compatibility.

Where can I find the current datasheet for my Scythed Hierodule or Shrikes? Some Legends units persist, others have just disappeared entirely, there's no rhyme or reason to it and no reason to think that any particular Legends unit will remain in perpetuity.

Well here's your Scythed Hierodule:
https://assets.warhammer-community.com/warhammer40000_legends_tyranids_eng_24.09-zhzcfdwafm.pdf

Your Shrikes? Right there beside my Las/Plas turreted Razorback. :(

For those of us with old/discontinued stuff. If it has Legends rules? Play it while you got it.

The scytged heirodule has a legends sheet, last two pages of the legends doc, youre correct about the shrikes though

ccs wrote:

 catbarf wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
Except GW hasn't actually taken a "never again" approach to Legends. They've updated their rules every edition since the concept was introduced to maintain compatibility.

Where can I find the current datasheet for my Scythed Hierodule or Shrikes? Some Legends units persist, others have just disappeared entirely, there's no rhyme or reason to it and no reason to think that any particular Legends unit will remain in perpetuity.

Well here's your Scythed Hierodule:
https://assets.warhammer-community.com/warhammer40000_legends_tyranids_eng_24.09-zhzcfdwafm.pdf

Your Shrikes? Right there beside my Las/Plas turreted Razorback. :(

For those of us with old/discontinued stuff. If it has Legends rules? Play it while you got it.

Oh cool, my mistake and I stand corrected. Guess I lost track when it got shuffled over to Legends.

But yes, I'm in the same boat: I play my Legends units because I like them, I have no expectation of them remaining supported in the future. I think it is misrepresentative to portray Legends as an actively-supported-just-not-tournament-approved unit set rather than bare minimum rules until they decide to sunset them entirely. Still feels lame that my Red Terror is just another Ravener now.

 catbarf wrote:
Second, it's short-sighted to view it solely as investing in units with no return. Providing ongoing support for legacy models supports the entire product line, by giving players reason to think that their expensive investments will remain usable. It is not healthy if players are hesitant to buy expensive kits or limited-edition models because they can't trust they'll be playable, or because they resent prior invalidation. How much GW cares about customer retention versus pump-and-dump nowadays, I don't know, but this is a pretty common paradigm in other industries.

Thing is, legends already serves that purpose as it is today. Most limited edition models and expensiv kits regularly sell out. There is no evidence of people being hesitant.
All that extra effort of updating hundreds of datasheets for weeks just change the mind of the hand full of people who buy an extra two or three models a year is just a waste of money.

Companies don't care about their customers. Customers are just a means to earn money. Supporting old models beyond making them baseline playable is not earning money.

This is true, and it's why you should never care about companies or consider a company to be the purveyor of your hobby.

 Da Boss wrote:
This is true, and it's why you should never care about companies or consider a company to be the purveyor of your hobby.

As an idea that sounds great. On the other hand we have a milion dead games, editions that people may like more then the current one. That are not played. The only time when I have seen the game separate from the company and still be succesful was with Fantasy Battle. But that was very Poland specific, WFB specific and GW had to REALLY drop the ball with what they did to the game.

I hear you, it's definitely easier to rely on a company for your community but I play old editions or niche games with my regular opponent. You only need one person to be interested to do it.

 Jidmah wrote:

Companies don't care about their customers. Customers are just a means to earn money. Supporting old models beyond making them baseline playable is not earning money.

While true; very true; never forget how true; its important to remember that companies don't make games, their employees do. GW is absolutely filled with underpaid, hardworking designers that absolutely do care. Some degree of cynicism is wise you also need to cheer on the people advocating for customers from within whenever they get a chance.

Karol wrote:

 Da Boss wrote:
This is true, and it's why you should never care about companies or consider a company to be the purveyor of your hobby.

As an idea that sounds great. On the other hand we have a milion dead games, editions that people may like more then the current one. That are not played. The only time when I have seen the game separate from the company and still be succesful was with Fantasy Battle. But that was very Poland specific, WFB specific and GW had to REALLY drop the ball with what they did to the game.

It's not WHFB, GW, or Poland specific.

There's plenty of people around the world still playing both "dead" games & previous editions of stuff. Minis games, RPGs, boatdgames...

After seeing what GW design studio produces, especialy for w40k. I am not sure about the hard work part. We arrived at a point where people with a working index, dread getting a codex, because the codex will be worse then the index. Which is mind blowing. AoS and Fantasy are better. But from the little expiriance I have the most happy with state of things are those fandoms that GW left alone. Bloodbowl, BFG, Warmaster. Full of happy people, dreading the potential attention from GW.

 Da Boss wrote:
I hear you, it's definitely easier to rely on a company for your community but I play old editions or niche games with my regular opponent. You only need one person to be interested to do it.

Not saying it is impossible and definitly having a large collection of games/armies can soften the blown. But that is like with everything. Having an army for X,Y and Z game . Army X is not fun play Y or Z. Problems start when stuff happens that have one game and/or faction they like. I don't play w40k as much, as I did AoS for the last 2 years. And my best friend with the start of this edition had his whole beastman army end up in legends. He can play it in 9th age, he will be able to play it in old world. Which is not as bad as it could be. Thing is, I don't have a Fantasy army I could use in 9th age or Old World. And I am definitly not buying one just to play him. It gets even worse for teens, stuff becomes illegal and suddenly you have parts of your army unusable or even the whole army. And no one is going to play prior editions just so you can have fun. And I am talking friends one has, games with strangers are always last mission pack, last legal edition, terrain set up according to a specific scenario pack. At least here, this isn't just a GW games thing. I know that Warmachine was once very popular around here. But the modern one never took off here, mostly because people couldn't use their collections of models. And people still have all the cards, models etc. but no one plays it. SW games the same. With historicals, infinity, Warlord stuff no one plays prior editions.

And again I think it would be nice if people could, but that is a bit like me wanting to earn as much as a bouncer in a club in Atlanta. It would be awesome if I could earn that kind of money.

The issue I see with legends is that they are not meant to be future proofed and don't anticipate detachment interactions. Grot tanks and Grot mega tanks do super well in Dreadmob. Legends units are stuck in the early 10th Index mindset.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
The issue I see with legends is that they are not meant to be future proofed and don't anticipate detachment interactions. Grot tanks and Grot mega tanks do super well in Dreadmob. Legends units are stuck in the early 10th Index mindset.

Flipping that around, I don't think they wanted to limit DreadMob to assuming everyone needs a swarm of Grot Tanks to play it.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
The issue I see with legends is that they are not meant to be future proofed and don't anticipate detachment interactions. Grot tanks and Grot mega tanks do super well in Dreadmob.

I think that was done intentionally.
But don't worry tourney dwellers, you're safe from the mean old Grot Tanks.

Now here is the sub-question to this legends debate: Horus Heresy models! Are THOSE okay in a casual game?

My own policy is to never say no to an opponent so I'm fine with people bringing whatever, but I also try to limit my list building to non legends/horus heresy just so that no one else gets upset.

leerm02 wrote:
Now here is the sub-question to this legends debate: Horus Heresy models! Are THOSE okay in a casual game?

If it's got 10th ed rules why wouldn't it be?

ccs wrote:

leerm02 wrote:
Now here is the sub-question to this legends debate: Horus Heresy models! Are THOSE okay in a casual game?

If it's got 10th ed rules why wouldn't it be?

Because not everyone plays with Legends.

I don't mind Legends, you don't mind Legends, but we're not everyone.

If it isn't a tournament game - and you've ensured you have the rules with you - I'm pretty sure they can't object (other than running away).

Same as any other legends. If you are using it to have a fun and cool model, sure. No problem .

If you are doing it to exploit bizarre rules interactions I have an issue.

I’ll still play, mind you. But I’ll be a little salty, and probably won’t play another game vs. that list.

 Dysartes wrote:
If it isn't a tournament game - and you've ensured you have the rules with you - I'm pretty sure they can't object (other than running away).

Or turning the game down.

No one is forced to play someone else (except at a tournament).

 Nevelon wrote:
If you are doing it to exploit bizarre rules interactions I have an issue.

This, to me, is more about the player than the Legends. Playing a Legends model is fine with me; playing the RULES like that makes you TFG in my eyes.

 BorderCountess wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
If you are doing it to exploit bizarre rules interactions I have an issue.

This, to me, is more about the player than the Legends. Playing a Legends model is fine with me; playing the RULES like that makes you TFG in my eyes.

Give me an example of a 10e Legends unit with what you'd consider a bizarre rules interaction.

ccs wrote:

 BorderCountess wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
If you are doing it to exploit bizarre rules interactions I have an issue.

This, to me, is more about the player than the Legends. Playing a Legends model is fine with me; playing the RULES like that makes you TFG in my eyes.

Give me an example of a 10e Legends unit with what you'd consider a bizarre rules interaction.

How many models/units can ride in a Terminus Ultra?

Breton wrote:

ccs wrote:

 BorderCountess wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
If you are doing it to exploit bizarre rules interactions I have an issue.

This, to me, is more about the player than the Legends. Playing a Legends model is fine with me; playing the RULES like that makes you TFG in my eyes.

Give me an example of a 10e Legends unit with what you'd consider a bizarre rules interaction.

How many models/units can ride in a Terminus Ultra?

8 Adeptus Astartes Infantry models.
Jump Pack, Wulfen, Gravis, and Termis take up two spots each.
Centurions take up three.

 JNAProductions wrote:

8 Adeptus Astartes Infantry models.
Jump Pack, Wulfen, Gravis, and Termis take up two spots each.
Centurions take up three.

Not anymore. I just pulled up the SM Legends. Terminus Ultra has the Transport Keyword, it has an Assault Ramp, it has no Transport Capacity.

Edit to Add: Just realized the "Relic Razorback" is not the Lascannon+2Plasma Guns razorback, its the same as the current one just still with the option to swap to twin linked Assault Cannons. And for 10 points more.

Telion + the new Scout Squad which matches the units he can join but might not be what was intended can have some squirrely interactions. Two Precision Missile Launchers + 2 Sniper Rifles, plus Precision Bolter chip damage, plus Telion's own Sniper Bolter could get pretty mean. I haven't mathed it out yet, but the back of my mind is wondering what happens if you do frags instead of kraks and just overwhelm the CHARACTER with AP- wounds - 19 S4 Ap- D1 + 2 S4 -2 D2, plus 2 S4 -0 D3.. at a certain point it doesn't matter what their armor save is, they're going to roll some 1's.

 LunarSol wrote:

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
The issue I see with legends is that they are not meant to be future proofed and don't anticipate detachment interactions. Grot tanks and Grot mega tanks do super well in Dreadmob. Legends units are stuck in the early 10th Index mindset.

Flipping that around, I don't think they wanted to limit DreadMob to assuming everyone needs a swarm of Grot Tanks to play it.

Legends is not a question of army/detachment design though . It is a question of IP protection and making people rebuy their army. Even units that GW left in the sm codex, that aren't legends, may as well be legends. GW didn't even give them the last hurra, so people could have fun with them. No they made tacticals, devastators, razorbacks/rhinos really bad. And they were going head over heals to make land raiders bad too. Heck when venguard veterans were okey/good in BA, and only because of jump pack S.Prists, GW nerfed the hell out of the unit. For all marines, and that is after they removed the option for S.Priests to take jump packs.

GW if they wanted could fix big problems (rules based) in a week or two, but they don't want to, because it either could/would impact the sells the wrong way, or it is a problem only for people who already bought models/armies, and GW isn't really interested how those people are doing.

Karol wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
The issue I see with legends is that they are not meant to be future proofed and don't anticipate detachment interactions. Grot tanks and Grot mega tanks do super well in Dreadmob. Legends units are stuck in the early 10th Index mindset.

Flipping that around, I don't think they wanted to limit DreadMob to assuming everyone needs a swarm of Grot Tanks to play it.

Legends is not a question of army/detachment design though . It is a question of IP protection and making people rebuy their army. Even units that GW left in the sm codex, that aren't legends, may as well be legends. GW didn't even give them the last hurra, so people could have fun with them. No they made tacticals, devastators, razorbacks/rhinos really bad. And they were going head over heals to make land raiders bad too. Heck when venguard veterans were okey/good in BA, and only because of jump pack S.Prists, GW nerfed the hell out of the unit. For all marines, and that is after they removed the option for S.Priests to take jump packs.

GW if they wanted could fix big problems (rules based) in a week or two, but they don't want to, because it either could/would impact the sells the wrong way, or it is a problem only for people who already bought models/armies, and GW isn't really interested how those people are doing.

I don't want to defend GW and their treatment of OG Marines, but in my very little experience with 10th my classic army fared just fine. Devastators and Land Raiders in particular seemed like great units, and Tacticals just brought more Lascannons to the party. I remember being impressed by the potential of Whirlwinds too.