Legions Imperialis Legions Imperialis

[BolterZorro]

3 minutes ago, DuskRaider said:

Yeah, I’m a bit miffed about this. I have a bad feeling Titans are going to be nerfed into the ground and any Titan v Titan battling or even against tank columns is going to be unrealistic and over very quickly. 

This is also my point. But on a business point of view, it was forseeable.  GW want to sell tanks! I think that in the futur, the balance will be adjusted. Exactly like they did in 40k where the previous formations were given up completely.

Edited July 31, 2023 by BolterZorro

[Cyrox]

Interesting that its a 5 x 4 board, that's bigger than I thought, and makes the tiles a pain in the rear seing as they come in a pack of 6. Guess my board will be a mixture of rough terrain and and tiles haha.

3k points recommended is pretty much akin to 2k recommended in 40K, so you can still go smaller, if you forgive the pun!

 

 

On a side note - feeling rather pleased as I got some hate in the YT comments of my latest Heresy video last week when I said we are getting a rules preview this week - I don't normally post hearsay rumours, I usually wait for confirmation on stuff, but had to mention this one when i was told about it! 

[DuskRaider]

Just now, BolterZorro said:

This is also my point. But on a business point of view, it was forseeable.  GW want to sell tanks! I think that in the futur, fome balance will be added. Exactly like they did in 40k where the previous formations were given up completely.

I agree with you on that, but I do hope we eventually get rules for full Maniples and Knight Houses that are actually playable and not weakened by the rules. 
 

Otherwise, the players may need to come up with our own system that hybridizes LI and AT. 

[Colman]

Unsupported knight or titan armies should get squished by combined arms armies, just look at the lore. Giant cannon are no good when there are space marines inside your legs.

 

I'm guessing that we'll be waiting for Mechanicum troops before they put Legiones Titanicus armies on the table, complete with required  Secutari.  

[Marshal Rohr]

Kinda sad we gotta wait for a full Mech Army List to run our Titans at full steam but I can also see why they wanted to make sure no one trying out the new game system was showing up to a table and their opponent drops THE Legio Mortis

[Noserenda]

31 minutes ago, Lord Marshal said:

Titanicus didn't let you run Knight-only armies initially, did it? So I wouldn't be surprised if they're locking Titan and Knight-heavy armies behind a splatbook. A Mechanicum Knight Formation feels appropriate at any rate when looking at Liber: Mechanicum. Could also just be they're conscious of, "if you want to play an army of Titans there's a game called Titanicus you might enjoy..."

 

 

 

But then they really had no idea Knights would be popular in their own right, we have that direct from the designers mouth, so they quickly hashed out a system for that and published it. They do not have that excuse now, in fact with those forces established the pressure should have been even more obvious.

And as ill cover below, Knights/Titans primary does not mean just Knights/Titans, obviously.

 

9 minutes ago, DuskRaider said:

Yeah, I’m a bit miffed about this. I have a bad feeling Titans are going to be nerfed into the ground and any Titan v Titan battling or even against tank columns is going to be unrealistic and over very quickly. 
 

Quick Edit: no, Knight House rules did not release until Doom of Molech, which if memory serves me right was the second Campaign Book for AT, with Titandeath being the first of I recall correctly. 

Yeah it feels like they are taking the titan weaknesses from Space marine, but not their strengths. So far anyway, it does not bode particularly well, but we are missing 90% of their rules at this point.
 

6 minutes ago, BolterZorro said:

This is also my point. But on a business point of view, it was forseeable.  GW want to sell tanks! I think that in the futur, the balance will be adjusted. Exactly like they did in 40k where the previous formations were given up completely.

1. The Rules teams only rarely build to commercial pressure, and from what i have heard that pressure is significantly lower in Specialist games, so the business point of view is fairly irrelevant outside of the book having limited room :D 

2. If you expect Specialist games to make balance adjustments, you need to look at their history! They might begrudgingly produce an faq to fix game destroying problems. Might. They dont like admitting mistakes, even really understandable or fixable ones and they dont really care about actively balancing the game.
 

Just now, Colman said:

Unsupported knight or titan armies should get squished by combined arms armies, just look at the lore. Giant cannon are no good when there are space marines inside your legs.

 

I'm guessing that we'll be waiting for Mechanicum troops before they put Legiones Titanicus armies on the table, complete with required  Secutari.  

Oh just so, if you skew wildly in any direction your list is going to be weak in certain areas, infantry (paper), tanks (Rock) or titans (scissor)  just the same and the majority of people doing so are well aware of that fact. But this isnt about running a pure army of any kind really, (For me anyway) its about what you spend the 70% of your list on, id expect to run some infantry and tanks alongside to capture objectives and the like, preferably Secutarii like you said but i guess i can do something else in the meantime.



Really though, it might be the stubborn mule that lives in my head, but every time Specialist games tries to say there is only one (two this time!) way to start an army it makes me angry :D 

[01RTB01]

1 hour ago, BolterZorro said:

First (little) disapointment: the rigid formation which doesn't help much to make thematic armies.

Second (little) disapointment: titans are allied giving max 900pts to them in a standart 3000pts game. Well, I'll try some big titans vs titans or titans vs armors  without constraints to test the rules and have some fun hahaha

third (little) disapointment: table size: 5*4. I thought that with so much units on the table that the 3k point game would be played on 6*4. The table will be crowded.

 

But globaly, the rules seem promising and DEADLY. I like that. Infantry has a chance vs everyone, especially in close combats. GOOD. All formations have  some chance to kill and mark some points. good!

Its not the only formation available so I'm not sure on the issue there. Also marine forces ARE rigid which is thematic. 

 

As such a demi company is what it would be. I really don't get your problem with the organisation there.

 

It also mentioned armoured companies and such so I'm sure once the whole lot is seen it'll be fine.

 

For the titan vs titan grumblers you already have a titan vs titan system available and invariably the grumblers are the ones that already have vast titan legions.

 

The whole point of LI is to represent huge, combined arms forces. The rules so far look like a solid mix of 2nd Ed and EA. Personally I really like what I see.

 

As for fear of titans being overrun. Firstly it'd be appropriate but at the same time we've no idea on their cc capabilities or their ranged capabilities yet. We've seen 3 weapon profiles so far and that's all yet people are fearing the worst on very negligible info.

 

The only shame so far is the tile packing numbers. I'd rather grab scenery first and tiles later though.

 

Looking forward to more rules previews this week. 

[Marshal Rohr]

I don’t think people are grumbling because of the allied cap, I think people are grumbling because everyone coming from Titanicus has an army ready on day one that won’t have an army list. If Heresy’s initial launch is anything to go by the armies that come later don’t get the love and care the initial army did. 

[01RTB01]

4 minutes ago, Noserenda said:

 

 

Really though, it might be the stubborn mule that lives in my head, but every time Specialist games tries to say there is only one (two this time!) way to start an army it makes me angry :D 

 

There's numerous detachments available. There's two different factions available in a setting that's primarily marine vs marine.

 

In many respects this is already ahead of AoD.

 

Where's the excitement in here? I'm really looking forward to epic returning but it just seems like there's a lot of grumbling in here based on speculation rather than evidential.

[Subtleknife]

Well that has saved me some cash I think. System looks a bit too simplistic and not to my liking. It's a shame I was hoping it would be a lot more in depth with toughness etc. I don't like the CC changes either.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

5 minutes ago, Marshal Rohr said:

I don’t think people are grumbling because of the allied cap, I think people are grumbling because everyone coming from Titanicus has an army ready on day one that won’t have an army list. If Heresy’s initial launch is anything to go by the armies that come later don’t get the love and care the initial army did. 

 

I was hoping to main my knights, and avoid having to shell out on another new army I don't have time to paint.

[DuskRaider]

Limiting the amount of points that can be allocated to *any* force representation is the real bugbear right now. As you said though, it may that this is only one of many formations that we will have access to… kind of like Maniples and their restrictions and composition. 
 

Time will tell, but it has less to do with, “we can just play Titanicus or Aeronautica instead”, and more to do with, “if we want to play a Maniple or what have you we should have the ability to do so”. 
 

I do have a pretty big Legio force. I also have a pretty large Knight House and I fully intend on getting a pretty large Legion force as well. I should be able to slap whichever of those three that I want on the table and have a good time. 

[Fire Golem]

I’d have to go back and check for sure but my memory is sort of that the initial announcement they said basically if you had a Titanicus army you’d be able to play it here too?

[Valkyrion]

Am I understanding melee properly?

 

You have 8 marine bases in combat with 8 SA bases.

All units fight together at the same time, rolling 2D6 for each base and adding CAF. The loser takes a wound, no saves.

So me and my opponent both roll 2D6 eight times each?

And each base could have a different CAF (e.g command squad, terminators, ogryns etc)?

And removal of models is done at the point of the attack, not a separate damage phase?

 

It sounds simple, but long winded. Maybe they are expecting that by the time 'Engaged' kicks in there will be fewer bases per detachment so it won't be as drawn out as it sounds.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 31, 2023 by Valkyrion

[Black Cohort]

I like the shown Legion formation, the core is fairly rigid, but there is a lot of flexibility in the optional detachments.  I look forward to seeing the other options for both factions.

 

Also the phrasing implies that the Legion Astartes have core options other than tactical squads and the vanguard unit category looks a lot like an elite symbol rather than a fast attack symbol.

[Marshal Rohr]

7 minutes ago, Valkyrion said:

Am I understanding melee properly?

 

You have 8 marine bases in combat with 8 SA bases.

All units fight together at the same time, rolling 2D6 for each base and adding CAF. The loser takes a wound, no saves.

So me and my opponent both roll 2D6 eight times each?

And each base could have a different CAF (e.g command squad, terminators, ogryns etc)?

And removal of models is done at the point of the attack, not a separate damage phase?

 

It sounds simple, but long winded. Maybe they are expecting that by the time 'Engaged' kicks in there will be fewer bases per detachment so it won't be as drawn out as it sounds.

 

 

 

 

 

I think you’re rolling once with 2D6 and then adding each bases CAF to that number. So a Legion Command base Vs a Auxilia base goes 

 

both sides role 2d6

caf is added

wounds determined by results

[Valkyrion]

you might be right, @Marshal Rohr, but it reads to me that each model (or base) fights off against one enemy model.

 

emphasis mine;

 

Combat, however, is a little different. The system harks back to the epic scale games of yore, in which individual models are paired off against each other. Then they make Fight rolls, rolling off with 2D6 and adding their Close Assault Factor (CAF) to the roll. Models get a bonus if they charged, and the loser takes a Wound, no Saves allowed – melee is seriously deadly, and even tanks can be overrun

When faced with uneven numbers, you’ll have to “pair off” your models with more than one enemy each. Your outnumbered models will still fight each of their foes individually, but your opponent gets to roll an extra D6 for every time you’ve already fought. This means that the most elite fighters can still be worn down if you’re not careful to support them… 

[lightinfa]

14 minutes ago, Marshal Rohr said:

I think you’re rolling once with 2D6 and then adding each bases CAF to that number. So a Legion Command base Vs a Auxilia base goes 

 

both sides role 2d6

caf is added

wounds determined by results

 

As much as I'd prefer this to the case, the wording to me pretty clearly suggests you roll for each base-to-base contact:

 

"Combat, however, is a little different. The system harks back to the epic scale games of yore, in which individual models are paired off against each other. Then they make Fight rolls, rolling off with 2D6 and adding their Close Assault Factor (CAF) to the roll. Models get a bonus if they charged, and the loser takes a Wound, no Saves allowed – melee is seriously deadly, and even tanks can be overrun.

 

When faced with uneven numbers, you’ll have to “pair off” your models with more than one enemy each. Your outnumbered models will still fight each of their foes individually, but your opponent gets to roll an extra D6 for every time you’ve already fought. This means that the most elite fighters can still be worn down if you’re not careful to support them… "

Edited July 31, 2023 by lightinfa

[Marshal Rohr]

I can see that also being the case, it definitely can get tedious if that is the case. 

[Valkyrion]

I suppose having no saves to make speeds up the process by virtue of its absence, so I presume 30k equivalent of AP3 or Rending or multiple attacks will be represented by an increase in CAF?

[BolterZorro]

Do I read 150pts 1 kratos or 1 unit of 2 kratos in the leaked list? In the first scenario, 6 kratos is already 900pts. In later scenarion, wow, that'll be expensive!!!

[Valkyrion]

6 minutes ago, lightinfa said:

 

*snip*

 

I like how we both emphasised different parts of the text to make our points!

[Black Cohort]

I don't see how close combat will take that long.  It is a series of opposed 2d6+mod die rolls, loser takes a wound (which for a lot of stuff probably means it dies).  Unless there are many different special rules it should be quick.

[01RTB01]

Based on second Ed and what's written, you roll for each base/ unit. It'll be quite quick once underway and isn't as horrific as it sounds.

 

You could potentially speed it up by rolling pairs of different coloured dice each which could help. 

 

I really like the turn structure and secret orders returning. I'd like to see how large a chunk of force operates at a time.

[01RTB01]

41 minutes ago, DuskRaider said:

Limiting the amount of points that can be allocated to *any* force representation is the real bugbear right now. As you said though, it may that this is only one of many formations that we will have access to… kind of like Maniples and their restrictions and composition. 
 

Time will tell, but it has less to do with, “we can just play Titanicus or Aeronautica instead”, and more to do with, “if we want to play a Maniple or what have you we should have the ability to do so”. 
 

I do have a pretty big Legio force. I also have a pretty large Knight House and I fully intend on getting a pretty large Legion force as well. I should be able to slap whichever of those three that I want on the table and have a good time. 

I don't disagree so long as both sides are having a good time. 

 

It'll be interesting to see if they've got titans "right" in LI because in 2nd Ed they were excellent but in Armageddon they were largely pointless. Hopefully they've got the balance here. Time will tell.