State of the Union (Heresy)

[Slips]

Yeah, dude, it was explained to you already but you seemingly just chose to ignore it?

[bushman101]

I think a lot will depend on the RoWs themselves, since they dictate a lot of what our 'lists' do. Especially legion specific ones.

I've been eyeing the spoilers a good bit, but I'm holding judgement until I play a few games with book in hand.

[TheTrans]

The 'explanations' weren't anything other than 'it rarely came up' or 'it was forgotten', it still doesn't remove the fact we've had a huge paring back of the fluffier rules, much more in line with your 9th edition vibes.

If the leaks are anything to go by, there list building restrictions in the RoWs aren't all that either. 

[spessmarine]

The upgrade sprues allow the one infantry kit to cover a lot of ground (tactical support and heavy support), so it's weight is reduced due to that.

 

I'm glad off the bat we're getting vehicles moving out of resin, I think that's a good move.

 

I wouldn't be shocked to further see the Land Raider come up sooner rather than later.

I imagine there are some definite favourite variants, but I hope they cover the main vehicles before diving into variants.

I'm just saying I'd like to see a flyer before any land raider variants.

[Slips]

The 'explanations' weren't anything other than 'it rarely came up' or 'it was forgotten', it still doesn't remove the fact we've had a huge paring back of the fluffier rules, much more in line with your 9th edition vibes.

 

If the leaks are anything to go by, there list building restrictions in the RoWs aren't all that either. 

But, like, what does fluffier rules mean?

Rules that were there and thematic but functionally did nothing (Like Wrecker on Grenades for Iron Warriors 99 times out of 100)? Or rules that encourage you to play your legion in a fluffier way? Because the latter still very much exist and are there if not even more prominent.

 

The Bitter End as a rule wasnt so much a fluffy rule as it was a mechanic for your opponent to try and squeeze out a victory in a close game when it would otherwise never come into play.

 

And if you took the time to really look at army comps people would put together, the negative "fluffy" rules pretty much never came into play. The ones that did were from the RoWs not the Legiones Astartes Rule.

 

I'll say it again because it definitely bears mentioning but: A LOT of people are conflating Legion Specific Wargear, Special Unit rules, ICs and RoWs with Legiones Astartes: (x) and failing to realize that the LA rules we're about to get aren't any more different than what we had previously they just took out all the stuff that essentially did nothing but waste ink on paper.

 

The Rules are just as fluffy as they were before and I dont know how you're not seeing it.

 

I even made this long post that contained only the Legiones Astartes rules in HH1.0 and you can see that not much is changing and if it is, its for the better http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/369602-state-of-the-union-heresy/?p=5821491

Edited May 11, 2022 by Slips
Clarifications.

[Petitioner's City]

The 'explanations' weren't anything other than 'it rarely came up' or 'it was forgotten', it still doesn't remove the fact we've had a huge paring back of the fluffier rules, much more in line with your 9th edition vibes.

 

If the leaks are anything to go by, there list building restrictions in the RoWs aren't all that either.

Also 9th is the fluffy edition to end all fluffy editions

[tinpact]

Brothers, please explain to me how +1 to x, y or z is particularly creative? By comparison to the variety (however useful, forgotten or not) of flavoursome stuff you got rolled into your Legiones Astartes trait before hand. 

 

From a purely competitive stand point, sure they are much more useful than many of the older rules, doesn't mean they are particularly inspiring, exciting or interesting.

They aren't, really (although I don't think that's the point; rules are meant to facilitate gameplay, not to sit there and look pretty - to which end, more useful and interactive rules are in every way a positive).

 

In general, regardless of how flavorful they are, I don't think many incremental bonuses are significantly more fun or interesting than a single one during actual gameplay. To represent their finesse, Emperor's Children have a bunch of rules dedicated to making them better at combat, but it pretty much boils down to "run a little farther, win combat a little harder, and add 1 to your Initiative (unless you're using a power fist/power axe, in which case get bent)." In the playtest rules, they still get an Initiative bonus, and the rest is spread between Rites, their reaction, and warlord traits. In terms of decision-making, the rules in both the current edition and the new one just encourage you do to things you were already going to do (maneuver, charge, fight).

 

With regards to rules being pared down because they had a low impact on the game - firstly, that's a totally valid explanation. Adding more rules for fluff reasons just adds bookkeeping if they're not impactful. Secondly, I think you're focusing too hard on the passive rules when 2E has clearly made a point to shift power out of those places and into more focused abilities. Legion traits are trimmed down to make room for reactions and better RoWs - and it's not like they removed legion wargear, characters, special units, etc, all of which come with their own rules.

 

As far as restrictions go, in reference to meaningful rules, giving armies both significant universal bonuses and penalties runs the risk of creating doubly-weak points where armies' strengths overlap with the opponent's weaknesses and/or skew lists that bypass the penalties completely. Furthermore, I don't think adding more restrictions to RoWs makes them more fluffy - they're instructions for recreating certain tactics and formations. The restrictions exist to balance out the bonus rules they get.

[MichaelCarmine]

Also - i don't think, that Lascannons loosing sunder is just a "slight weapon profile change".

That's a huge deal, buffing everything with an armor value, since its one of, if not THE main AT-weapon in the game.

[Joe]

 

Emperor's Children today. I dig that they are doing these quick and dirty painting videos aimed at newer people / younger blood.

[BitsHammer]

[Balthamal]

Let's be brutally honest here, we can have the argument, we HAVE had the argument, about how the leaks are portraying the changes to the Legiones Astartes (X) rules. We know. What we don't know, yet, is how all 18 Legions Phase 3 leaks (Phase 1 in the case of traitors) are translating across. We've got nothing in print. I don't care how many pages a PDF has, nor how detailed it is, until the actual book is in hand. And as other people have correctly emphasized above, CONTEXT is everything.

 

It's not just how the Legiones Astartes rules affect generic units, it's not how it's affects Legion specific units, it's not how that fits together with an amended ruleset, it's not how they interact with reactions, it's not how they synergise with rites of war, it's not about the give and take when 1 set of Legiones Astartes is pitted against another. It's ALL of them.  Saying that this looks :cuss or that is garbage as of right now is worthless. Utterly worthless. Because until we see everything, until there's actual games played with all of it interacting, all that cause and effect stuff going on, we just don't know. 

 

Can we make pre judgements based on what looks good or bad on paper? Abso-:cuss-lutley. My Alpha Legion look beyond insane with how good Lernaeans and the way mutable tactics now function, and that's even before rewards of treason enters the convo. But until I actually get them on the table and use them, doesn't mean anything.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Honestly, that's a great scheme. Very easy to get to finished standard and then you can go back and add chipping across the models. Plenty of space for transfers to break up larger flat panels on vehicles and dreads.

 

Not every army is going to hit the heights of kizzdougs' emperors children, and some people don't want to jump into oil washes or weathering powders. A simple scheme is very good imo.

[Augusta_Vespa]

You're even more spot on than you realise :).

 

The docs shown at the open day are not the final printed versions. They're very simplified versions.

 

 

Let's be brutally honest here, we can have the argument, we HAVE had the argument, about how the leaks are portraying the changes to the Legiones Astartes (X) rules. We know. What we don't know, yet, is how all 18 Legions Phase 3 leaks (Phase 1 in the case of traitors) are translating across. We've got nothing in print. I don't care how many pages a PDF has, nor how detailed it is, until the actual book is in hand. And as other people have correctly emphasized above, CONTEXT is everything.

 

It's not just how the Legiones Astartes rules affect generic units, it's not how it's affects Legion specific units, it's not how that fits together with an amended ruleset, it's not how they interact with reactions, it's not how they synergise with rites of war, it's not about the give and take when 1 set of Legiones Astartes is pitted against another. It's ALL of them. Saying that this looks :cuss or that is garbage as of right now is worthless. Utterly worthless. Because until we see everything, until there's actual games played with all of it interacting, all that cause and effect stuff going on, we just don't know.

 

Can we make pre judgements based on what looks good or bad on paper? Abso-:cuss-lutley. My Alpha Legion look beyond insane with how good Lernaeans and the way mutable tactics now function, and that's even before rewards of treason enters the convo. But until I actually get them on the table and use them, doesn't mean anything.

[Joe]

 

WarCom Article.

 

And there's the EC article.

[dicebod]

 

So if I'm reading this right, that means EC's hit with unwieldy weapons at I2 on the charge, since the initiative improvement happens after modifiers. That's a substantial buff!

[Noserenda]

Ech, limitations are crappy game design anyway, like, Dont take those things you werent going to take anyway? Ooohhh nooooes!

I much prefer the positive reinforcement of things like legion wargear, want a legion to theme around a certain weapon? Give em a better version and everyone will take it willingly. Want to emphasise a certain unit, or style of warfare? Legion specific unit! (Assuming it isnt crap obviously :D ) Want to limit slots? Pop in an attractive Rite of War! Simples.

[Slips]

 

So if I'm reading this right, that means EC's hit with unwieldy weapons at I2 on the charge, since the initiative improvement happens after modifiers. That's a substantial buff!

Looking back over the Phase 1 Playtest doc, this rules only change is that it takes effect even if the unit has made a disordered charge where previously it would get turned off.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Yea, the EC have some very good interaction with strike last weapons. Fists and things are even better, and it comes into play with the whole stance thing pheonix terminators and palatines do where they can hit at ap 1, I 1.

 

Even better now that disordered doesn't shut it down, guess it was obnoxious to just get reacted on the key charge and lose your legion bonus. And inconsistent with the world eaters.

 

Also throws a wrinkle in the "rules getting toned down as the playtests go on". At least from what's been shown.

[Marshal Mittens]

Really love all the effort they seem to be putting into this release, hopefully it means it will be very well supported.

[Astartes Consul]

Really enjoying the satiation of reveals as well - and hoping that like last week, Thursday will bring a model reveal we aren’t expecting!

 

Does mean though that every day between now and June I’ll be reading there articles and going ‘Oh, maybe an X allied force or a small army of Y!’

[BitsHammer]

Twunk-grim art aside, that's an interedting preview for the Legion. Doesn't mean all the traits changed or got stronger, but it does show that there are at least some differences from what we "know" from the leaks.

 

Now to impatiently wait for the VIIIth.

[Astartes Consul]

Twunk-grim art aside, that's an interedting preview for the Legion. Doesn't mean all the traits changed or got stronger, but it does show that there are at least some differences from what we "know" from the leaks.

 

Now to impatiently wait for the VIIIth.

 

Imagine being an Alpha Legion played, you've got WEEKS to wait

[Lautrec the Embraced]

 

Twunk-grim art aside, that's an interedting preview for the Legion. Doesn't mean all the traits changed or got stronger, but it does show that there are at least some differences from what we "know" from the leaks.

 

Now to impatiently wait for the VIIIth.

 

Imagine being an Alpha Legion played, you've got WEEKS to wait

 

 

They gonna lean into the Alpha Legion style and when their time for an article comes, we'll just get a blank site, bad gateway notification and of course an I'm Alpharius running joke.

[wildweasel]

Just a directory of links to the previous 17 Legion previews.

[Marshal Loss]

 

 

So if I'm reading this right, that means EC's hit with unwieldy weapons at I2 on the charge, since the initiative improvement happens after modifiers. That's a substantial buff!

Looking back over the Phase 1 Playtest doc, this rules only change is that it takes effect even if the unit has made a disordered charge where previously it would get turned off.

 

Wrong: they also added the provision "after any Initiative modifiers from other special rules have been taken into account", as well as the provision that the defensive weapon bonus only occurs as part of a reaction.

 

Absolutely massive changes for EC. Their trait working even if the charge was disordered is good and puts them in line with other Legions, e.g. BA/WE. But being able to hit with power fists before others is simply colossal. Really excited to put this to use!

 

edit: the power fist changes really make me want to create a Terminator unit inspired by this art...

 

Edited May 11, 2022 by Marshal Loss