warhammer 40k 10th edition Mainline Legends

[Doctor Perils]

1 hour ago, Urauloth said:

Quite like the Chaos content tbh. The volt cultists in units of 4 is... weird, though.

That's because they only came in 4s in BSF

[irlLordy]

They should be added to the app with an option to toggle displaying them on or off. It shouldn't be rocket science to add them.

[Cactus]

12 minutes ago, irlLordy said:

They should be added to the app with an option to toggle displaying them on or off. It shouldn't be rocket science to add them.

It isn't rocket science to make default wargear appear by default but here we are anyway.

[Marshal Reinhard]

16 hours ago, Orange Knight said:

I honestly wouldn't want to be in GW's shoes when it comes to this. It's such a delicate balance, and there is no win win solution.

 

1: You can't keep every kit in production forever.

2: You can't write rules for units that are no longer in production indefinitely. 

3: If you attempt to maintain the rules for OOP units in a 100% playable way, you ultimately punish new players that don't have access to the kits

 

Endlessly bloating the range and rules hurts the game, and in turn hurts the hobbyist.

Dropping units and rules can hurt the hobbyist and in turn their enjoyment of the game.

I pretty much agree fully with all of this.

 

But.

 

It could still have been handled better than it did. Much better. There wasn't really much an excuse for the shoddy state of the rules. Like contradictionary handling of the presumably same rules between different units etc. Mistakes etc. In an all digital environment, sure, but get them fixed. But, not if you're printing them and asking money for them.

 

Like it can still be salvaged just fine, but we should not be in the situation where that's neccessary. GW: Spend. More. On. The. Game.

[aura_enchanted]

imperial space marine continues his long history of being grandpa and telling people to get off his lawn

 

[Urauloth]

13 hours ago, Doctor Perils said:

That's because they only came in 4s in BSF

Yeah, but... if you could at least double up on them for more points or something they'd be more useful. It would be nice for people who kitbashed them for old editions of Kill Team, too (GW don't care about this, of course, but still)

[Captain Idaho]

On 7/22/2023 at 2:06 AM, Orange Knight said:

I honestly wouldn't want to be in GW's shoes when it comes to this. It's such a delicate balance, and there is no win win solution.

 

1: You can't keep every kit in production forever.

2: You can't write rules for units that are no longer in production indefinitely. 

3: If you attempt to maintain the rules for OOP units in a 100% playable way, you ultimately punish new players that don't have access to the kits

 

Endlessly bloating the range and rules hurts the game, and in turn hurts the hobbyist.

Dropping units and rules can hurt the hobbyist and in turn their enjoyment of the game.

 

It's literally the easiest thing GW can do to fix this situation. Employ someone to do it.

 

For 30K a year they can employ someone to update rules full time. They are making record profits after all.

 

Done.

 

[Orange Knight]

But as I said, you can't expect to produce every model in perpetuity, and you can't expect to have all models supported by rules indefinitely. 

 

Look at this way - Microsoft eventually stops updating old operating systems. There are no more updates, patches or security upgrades for Windows XP. That's a multi-TRILLION dollar corporation that can afford to do anything.

 

Some of the models in the Legends catalogue are older than Windown XP, and some haven't been on sale in over 10 years.

Edited July 23, 2023 by Orange Knight

[Captain Idaho]

That's a bad example.

 

When Microsoft create a new Windows (operating system to use your example) they keep all the features that people require, or it flops and they lose lots of money.

 

So if 40K is to Windows that GW is to Microsoft in your example... 40K needs to keep the same features that it's customers want.

[Orange Knight]

It's not a bad example at all, and all the features are not kept as things get updated. People and businesses don't have a choice once an old OS is no longer supported- you upgrade, simple as that.

 

In the past you could buy Word and Excell, now you have to subscribe to them as a service. Things change, sometimes for the better and sometimes not.

 

Ultimately it's not in the interest of the game to maintain completely valid rules for a hundred+ models that have simply been replaced, retired or discontinued. Not only does it increase the complexity of the system, it can adversely affect balance and it punishes new players that simply won't have access to all the options.

 

 

Edited July 23, 2023 by Orange Knight

[phandaal]

8 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

In the past you could buy Word and Excell, now you have to subscribe to them as a service. Things change, sometimes for the better and sometimes not.

 

Funny enough, I am still using my versions of Excel and Word from before the "you will own nothing and be happy" days. And my personal computer keeps telling me I do not meet the requirements to upgrade to Windows 11, which seems like a feature to me.

 

But I see where you are coming from. The "feature creep" of 40k cannot go on endlessly. People already have their sides on this, depending on which set of models or lore we like better, so I am not throwing my opinion in there.

 

However, I would say that GW can only pursue the endless addition of new units because people keep buying them. If that changes, the strategy would have to change as well.

[Marshal Rohr]

1 hour ago, Orange Knight said:

But as I said, you can't expect to produce every model in perpetuity, and you can't expect to have all models supported by rules indefinitely. 

 

Look at this way - Microsoft eventually stops updating old operating systems. There are no more updates, patches or security upgrades for Windows XP. That's a multi-TRILLION dollar corporation that can afford to do anything.

 

Some of the models in the Legends catalogue are older than Windown XP, and some haven't been on sale in over 10 years.

40K isn’t an operating system it’s a game engine. 

[Sky Potato]

1 hour ago, Orange Knight said:

But as I said, you can't expect to produce every model in perpetuity, and you can't expect to have all models supported by rules indefinitely. 

 

Look at this way - Microsoft eventually stops updating old operating systems. There are no more updates, patches or security upgrades for Windows XP. That's a multi-TRILLION dollar corporation that can afford to do anything.

 

Some of the models in the Legends catalogue are older than Windown XP, and some haven't been on sale in over 10 years.

Windows is a poor example, as changes in hardware will force changes to operating systems at some point. As a counter point, I assume you’ve seen this video - 

 

 

The only thing stopping rules support or service for a physical item after production finishes is a business decision. 

All GW need to do is pay an employee to write rules for models they made for years. It’s not like GW can’t afford it.

 

[Rain]

1 hour ago, phandaal said:

 

Funny enough, I am still using my versions of Excel and Word from before the "you will own nothing and be happy" days. And my personal computer keeps telling me I do not meet the requirements to upgrade to Windows 11, which seems like a feature to me.

Ha! I get the same message on my gaming build, despite it being a pretty high end build. No clue why it’s there, but then I have no particular interest in W11, so, like you say, feature not a bug. The Software as a Service model is a plague. Word and Excel worked fine 15 years ago, they do not need to be a service. I bough permanent license keys to Word and Excel 2019(or thereabouts) and use them for work. They work fine. Microsoft can shove Office 360 up their 180.

Change for the sake of change is not a good thing. Ah well, we are ultimately tilting at windmills here.

 

Edit: in reference to @Sky Potato ‘s post, I’m a huge Porsche nerd, and this is my dream Porsche:

 

 

Hybrid power before it was cool. Bet those holes in the camper vans would move over when you take this thing to the canyons 

 

 

Edited July 23, 2023 by Rain

[Doctor Perils]

11 minutes ago, Sky Potato said:

Windows is a poor example, as changes in hardware will force changes to operating systems at some point. As a counter point, I assume you’ve seen this video - 

 

 

The only thing stopping rules support or service for a physical item after production finishes is a business decision. 

All GW need to do is pay an employee to write rules for models they made for years. It’s not like GW can’t afford it.

 

I don't see why you'd assume everyone had seen that video, but I hope you realise that's a publicity stunt - good luck getting spare parts for a 40 year old car let alone an 80 year old tractor in most companies.

 

And there are definite changes to:

a - the model production capacities at GW that means they can't go on selling older models when there are new ones

b - there are changes to the game design standards that also apply outside pressure on GW's games.

 

So the windows example is actually fairly apt.

And if you and enough other people are fed up of GW's churn of new editions and losing model rules, there's nothing stopping you from going by another example: linux, and free software in general. There's nothing stopping you legally from creating your own game for all these models, because you can't copyright rules Systems.

 

Of course, you're going to turn round and say "ain't nobody got time for that"... which is exactly the point for GW: There's no point in them using development resources for models that are OOP, because not enough people are going to spend money with them for that, there's no return on investment

 

The fact they've released rules for these models at all is pretty impressive in a way - for free no less! Sure, they leave somewhat to be desired, both in balance and in coverage, but it's at least a starting point

[Sky Potato]

Yeah, of course it’s a publicity stunt. But the underlying point is valid - Porsche have made the decision to support their product for as long as they are in business. Including parts. 
 

There’s no reason why GW can’t support their own models with rules. There are models in the indexes proper (so will presumably be in the codex) that aren’t available for sale on their website. All they need to do is write rules for models, at the same time as they write the other rules.

[Orange Knight]

Alternatively, through Warhammer+, GW could keep digital PDF files of old edition rule and codex books, as well as Imperial Armour, so the old models always have access to the rules written for them at the time. I actually think this will be more elegant, as opposed to the halfway house of poorly written current edition rules.

 

I had a long think about this and discussed it with friends. There is a lot to be unhappy about, but ultimately we decided to come to terms with it and move on. GW should approach this through the lens of game preservation and maintain a repository of old rules and codex books in a readily available digital format.

[Orange Knight]

That tractor example isn't a fair comparison.

 

If Porsche had created a bunch or custom parts that made that tractor compatible with all the modern, computer based farming attachments then it would be a more accurate comparison.

What they have done is simply restore it to original spec. Nothing stopping anyone here from playing with the old rules as they were written at the time.

The 1:1 GW comparison would be preserving access to rules from old editions, as I mentioned in my previous post.

Edited July 23, 2023 by Orange Knight

[Rain]

A couple things:

 

(1.) There is no reason that entire unit types need to be dropped or replaced. By which I mean, e.g. boxnought being replaced with the bellynought which is technically a new unit and not an updated sculpt; but one that effectively replaces the old unit.

 

No units were dropped 3rd through 7th IIRC except for fringe examples like sonic vehicles for EC, and even that caused a big uproar when it happened. Most of the Dark Eldar range is from 5th, and somehow GW still manages to produce it. It’s fine. Directly replacing units with a technically different unit that does the same thing is a cynical planned obsolescence ploy that ultimately builds customer resentment.

 

(2.) The “but think of the balance” argument is questionable to say the least given GW’s demonstrably flippant attitude toward balance and playtesting. If the game is going to be a beer and pretzels dice chucker, let us chuck dice for our esoteric units.

 

(3.) Given the lack of apparent playtesting, writing the rules is not that labor intensive. It’s just not. A single decently dedicated person could write these indices in about a week of actual work (as in, 8 hours of working and not browsing Instagram or self caring in the bathroom) given that no apparent time is/was dedicated to playtesting, A/B testing of rules alternatives, etc. as we can tell by the delivered result.

 

 

 

 

[Rain]

3 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

That tractor example isn't a fair comparison.

 

If Porsche had created a bunch or custom parts that made that tractor compatible with all the modern, computer based farming attachments then it would be a more accurate comparison.

What they have done is simply restore it to original spec. Nothing stopping anyone here from playing with the old rules as they were written at the time.

The 1:1 GW comparison would be preserving access to rules from old editions, as I mentioned in my previous post.

Kind of OT, but Porsche makes head units that are compatible with (some of) their old cars, and allow said old cars to have Bluetooth and even CarPlay. Porsche engineered a new engine version for an older generation of GT3 (2014-2016), after that gen of car was out of production because the actual production cars had a design flaw that could cause engine failure. Porsche will install this new engine on their dime if your engine dies even if the car is out of original warranty up to 10 years after original in service date for the car. Porsche supports their products.

[Lexington]

28 minutes ago, Rain said:

(2.) The “but think of the balance” argument is questionable to say the least given GW’s demonstrably flippant attitude toward balance and playtesting. If the game is going to be a beer and pretzels dice chucker, let us chuck dice for our esoteric units.

Yeah, this is the dividing line for me. I was okay with Legends back in the 8th - 9th era when GW was ostensibly trying to make a balanced game. Now that they’ve clearly dumped that as a priority, jettisoned most of the balance mechanisms from the game system and said “oh, no, it’s all balanced, just trust us,” I don’t have any sympathy for them on the matter. Just put the options in the book, whatever.

 

Like, I understand why they don’t - the purpose of game rules is to give customers a vector for miniature purchases, and those models aren’t in production anymore - but I also, as a customer, don’t give half a damn. I want a better product.

Edited July 23, 2023 by Lexington

[Interrogator Stobz]

1 hour ago, Sky Potato said:

.....

The only thing stopping rules support or service for a physical item after production finishes is a business decision. 

All GW need to do is pay an employee to write rules for models they made for years. It’s not like GW can’t afford it.

 

100% this^^^

 

They literally just released rules for almost all the main Legends a month after we collectively lost it at them. A Month.

They can 100% write rules for every unit they have ever released super easily. 

The complexity is so unlike an operating system it's not the same game, hell it's not even the same sport.

 

We just created a business case for them doing it. Old players still count.

And if they want a cent more of my hobby money they should keep paying someone to do this once every couple of years. 

 

 

[Scribe]

On 7/21/2023 at 3:34 PM, Interrogator Stobz said:

Lolz, I just checked, and a month into this simplified Edition I need to play:

 

Core rulebook.

Core Rules Commentary.

Index Dark Angels.

Index Space Marines.

Munitorium Field Manual pdf.

Forge World Datasheets pdf.

Legends of 40k Datasheets pdf.

Legends of the HH Datasheets pdf.

Legends Field Manual pdf.

Legendary Units pdf.

Lolz, and Unaligned Units pdf.

 

Just imagine if there was a way to collate all the non-index units into one place.

Now Imagine what it could be called, maybe a Compendium?

Imagine if something like that had been done properly at the beginning of this Edition....

 

 

 

Now imagine it being kept digital so detail errors could easily be fixed....

Wow, the potential for that kind of simplified delivery is fantastic. 

 

At this point, its clear there needs to be a massive consolidation/purge of units. That is not sustainable, especially since codex books are not even out, and it will only ever get worse.

[Sky Potato]

1 hour ago, Orange Knight said:

That tractor example isn't a fair comparison.

 

If Porsche had created a bunch or custom parts that made that tractor compatible with all the modern, computer based farming attachments then it would be a more accurate comparison.

What they have done is simply restore it to original spec. Nothing stopping anyone here from playing with the old rules as they were written at the time.

The 1:1 GW comparison would be preserving access to rules from old editions, as I mentioned in my previous post.

It’s probably a fairer comparison than software - it’s company support for an out of production physical product we’re talking about after all.

 

I do like your suggestion of maintaining old rule sets however.

[Khorneeq]

I wonder if Legends will get update nearby because Dreadnought Drop Pod has it's points listed but with no Datasheet and lot of people mentioned other omissions