How to fix LI

[Pacific81]

My thoughts on the future of LI is that it will survive based on people collecting the minis and small gaming groups, but it is far short of critical mass that the game will need to become ubiquitous.

 

Some colleagues and I on the Dakka forum tried to run an event earlier in the month. Despite it being held in one of the UK's biggest gaming centres, very cheap ticket prices, it being held as a charity event for ex-WD editor Paul Sawyer, offer of free attendance gifts & the event being advertised exhaustively on both Epic & Horus Heresy social media for months leading up to it we struggled to get 50% attendance. A number of those were people that myself and the co-organiser had brought on the day. Several others were playing the game for the first time.

The positives are that we managed to raise over £300 for charity and the attendees enjoyed the event, but the interest level (and especially there not being repeat players) is not a good sign. Meanwhile, 50 miles down the road the Epic GT group continue to sell out of event tickets for Epic Armageddon, a game that has been out of production for 20 years. 

This isn't just anecdotal as I know of other groups who have similarly struggled with event attendance.

 

You could put this down to LI not suiting the event format (even in a softer 'narrative setting) and I think that is definitely true to an extent; we could only fit two 2k games into the day and even then most players didn't manage to finish their games in the 3hr time slot.

It could also be because LI is not a game that you can take lightly - the extremely granular rules, dozens of special rules, complex unit profiles etc all add to the play difficulty. I've probably played 12-15 games but because I'm not playing week in week out I'm still stood there with a rulebook most of the time, and it makes the games a slog. I found it pretty funny that one opponent and I had a completely different interpretation of a rule, despite having both played a similar number of games. Again we are both stood there leafing through a rulebook.

I do wonder if this is why the game hasn't picked up a solid base from Age of Darkness Heresy; there just aren't the hours in the day to commit to both.

 

My own feeling is that this game definitely has some positives: it has spawned an absolutely wonderful range of miniatures; A poster commented above, it's an excellent site to see them arrayed on the tabletop. But it is dragging along behind it possibly the worst set of rules that GW has released for an Epic scale game. It's the year 2025 and the wargames industry has moved on; we should expect accessibility, speed of play, not to have to carry out pointless and excessive bookkeeping. Most importantly, the game should be 'fun'. I don't think that Legions succeeds on any of those fronts.

 

[Crablezworth]

8 hours ago, Pacific81 said:

My thoughts on the future of LI is that it will survive based on people collecting the minis and small gaming groups, but it is far short of critical mass that the game will need to become ubiquitous.

 

Some colleagues and I on the Dakka forum tried to run an event earlier in the month. Despite it being held in one of the UK's biggest gaming centres, very cheap ticket prices, it being held as a charity event for ex-WD editor Paul Sawyer, offer of free attendance gifts & the event being advertised exhaustively on both Epic & Horus Heresy social media for months leading up to it we struggled to get 50% attendance. A number of those were people that myself and the co-organiser had brought on the day. Several others were playing the game for the first time.

The positives are that we managed to raise over £300 for charity and the attendees enjoyed the event, but the interest level (and especially there not being repeat players) is not a good sign. Meanwhile, 50 miles down the road the Epic GT group continue to sell out of event tickets for Epic Armageddon, a game that has been out of production for 20 years. 

This isn't just anecdotal as I know of other groups who have similarly struggled with event attendance.

 

You could put this down to LI not suiting the event format (even in a softer 'narrative setting) and I think that is definitely true to an extent; we could only fit two 2k games into the day and even then most players didn't manage to finish their games in the 3hr time slot.

 

It's often the case it seems of players wanting/needing the scale to justify itself in terms of having a BIGGER army than they ever would in 30k/40k and the problem is there is never enough time allocated to the point level events try and do. I sorta feel like any event doing more than 2k is a bit out to lunch, especially with only 3 hour rounds. We used to allocate like 6-8-10 hours for big 40k games back in the day, we were at least realistic about what was involved, now a days, no to defend gw, but it feels like players somehow want a game with hundreds of models to play like kill team, and already this games biggest problem is its trying to do that, make alternating activation work at scale, and its one of the games biggest problems. A point myself and others made about 30k 2nd edition was its introduction of reactions would basically destroy larger/multi player per side games, and it created an absolute cluster f for them. LI needed to be like sm2 and suggest 1500pts to start, but modern gw marketing team would never have that. That's also why they don't even bother showing games or trying to have a realistic standard, its all aspirational so no one puts any limits on their spending. 

 

It's a nice thing you guys did for mr sawyer, sad to hear attendance wasn't as high as one might hope for such a thing. 

8 hours ago, Pacific81 said:

It could also be because LI is not a game that you can take lightly - the extremely granular rules, dozens of special rules, complex unit profiles etc all add to the play difficulty. I've probably played 12-15 games but because I'm not playing week in week out I'm still stood there with a rulebook most of the time, and it makes the games a slog. I found it pretty funny that one opponent and I had a completely different interpretation of a rule, despite having both played a similar number of games. Again we are both stood there leafing through a rulebook.

I do wonder if this is why the game hasn't picked up a solid base from Age of Darkness Heresy; there just aren't the hours in the day to commit to both.

 

 

It just deviates too much and in too many ways from sm2 for no real reason. SM2 for example had fairly common sense rules around like march order/transports and they functioned very similarly to older 40k. They've also done zero to even remotely faq/errata anything, so its no surprise to have differing opinions/takes on some rules. Speaking of granularity, just wrapping one's head around order of operations can sorta leave one spinning, like how detachments in transports function, basically we joke the transports are "booting them out" because its not a fluid interaction, one can't have troops get out for example half way through a transports move and get inside a structure, oh no, the transports have to finish their move, and you have to wait for a whole other activation to do anything with the squad that gets out. Then you have stuff like point defense allowing units to move and shoot in the movement phase, what even is first fire then? Why isn't overwatched tied to it? Its complex in a bad way most of the time. It doesn't help either that stuff has been left totally unfunctional, the cyclops bombs still can cause their own formation to break (speaking of pointless book keeping) and worse still, can't actually damage structures because their small blast has to be centered over the cyclops, meaning it will never be able to be over the structure. I feel like enough of these things add up and people just lose interest. 

8 hours ago, Pacific81 said:

 

 

My own feeling is that this game definitely has some positives: it has spawned an absolutely wonderful range of miniatures; A poster commented above, it's an excellent site to see them arrayed on the tabletop. But it is dragging along behind it possibly the worst set of rules that GW has released for an Epic scale game. It's the year 2025 and the wargames industry has moved on; we should expect accessibility, speed of play, not to have to carry out pointless and excessive bookkeeping. Most importantly, the game should be 'fun'. I don't think that Legions succeeds on any of those fronts.

 

 

No question it looks amazing. The book keeping was noticed very early on, tracking break points feels like being an accountant at the morgue, absolute opposite of fun. Add to that, resolving combat is a slog, it feels like working as a cashier in a cash only business and you're forced to do the mental math for every damn transaction. Definitely feels like a slog. I do think the game is at its most "fun" when things are just exchanging fire. But so many things can bog the game down. The fact that templates feel too rare, and things like plasma just feel wrong not having some sort of overheat mechanic or optional fire mode with better ap or range or both but rolls of 1 like cause a wound or something. Also why the titan weapons don't seem very fun either, very little usage of secondary fire modes or any kind of heat damage or risk/reward stuff. Rounding back to how good the minis look, for me that's enough to sustain my interest in the game, just an excuse to photograph cool minis on cool boards. 

 

Because the thread was meant to round back to how to fix li. I still think it's possible to improve it with a clear vision/direction of where to go with it. I still think simple global objectives like shifting back towards more focus on shooting (on account of all the granularity and special rules largely being on the shooting side) and making combat perhaps more difficult to engage in successfully, or more granular/contextual and less hammer loves nails that it is currently. Part of fixing the game is also a re-alignment of expectations. A lot of new players on reddit or facebook are surprised to find people suggesting just a battlegroup box for starters, and that game of 1k are a lot more practical for learning than thinking 3k is the starting point. A lot of people somehow though they'd be banging out 3k games on a weeknight at a games store and like, if that's what makes one stop playing its unfortunate but 3k was never going to work in that amount of time. I get gw marketing doesn't want to show off the game at 1k or 1.5k but we all can. 

 

A bit of a tangent but, if LI like say full spectrum dominance, could be played initially on a 2x3 at I dunno somewhere between 500 and 1000pts (like not all deployed at once) it would mean gw could make double side card-style boards like they do for kill team. A boxed game with that and a handful of civitas buildings or hell card buildings would do wonders, like the hawk wargames citysape stuff but civitas style. The biggest thing holding this back is the fact that the close combat rules as they stand would make it a silly game. It doesn't make sense at any scale of play/board size, but at this small of one, 10-14 inch blind charges (possibly through empty structures) would do enough on its own to poison th whole thing, So to round back to fixing the game, something closer to sm2 for infantry movement and charge ranges feels like a must, would also make transports more needed. 

 

 

 

[Pacific81]

Yes I agree with most of what you have written there @Crablezworth. Thinking about it for a while it is a very idiosyncratic game and release. It reminds me of a historical rule system I saw from the late 80s which described Roman troops skirmishing, which included absolutely unnecessary details of psychology tables for individual troops in a unit and very specific armaments and where everything had to be recorded in big tables. Or games from that time that were written and played on a very local level. We were a bunch of goofy looking youths wearing horribly unfashionable knitwear, surrounding by piles of the rules paperwork and empty beer cans, listening to the Smiths at 2am on a school night, trying to work out what to do. Legions feels like the same sort of game and perhaps designed for the same demographic! It feels like a game out of time. 

 

I will be honest I've moved back towards NetEpic and Armageddon now, and am looking forward to what Mantic can come up with the new Epic Warpath game. Having a quick look at the rules they look to facilitate fast, tactical play and without unnecessary book-keeping. i.e. what we should expect from a modern gaming system. 

 

To draw on an analogy, watching the opening few minutes of the Godfather films as the credits slowly scroll through over a black background we tolerate that because the film is a classic. We wouldn't tolerate it in a modern film and the industry has moved on to accommodate changing lifestyles and sensibilities. Similarly with wargames mechanics, times have changed, wargaming has to compete with other forms of entertainment (and especially as a lot of people playing this game will be working dads in their 30s or older and people without as much spare time). Whoever wrote Legions Imperialis seems to be completely unaware of this, making a game that is absolutely unsuitable for anyone that is unwilling to dedicate an inordinate amount of time to getting the most from it, or else they are still really into knitwear and the Smiths!

Edited April 2 by Pacific81

[Crablezworth]

Well, gotta say I never thought we'd see the day but they actually did a decent job at least on the core rulebook fixes

 

https://www.warhammer-community.com/en-gb/articles/nlxrvbuq/heresy-thursday-the-legions-imperialis-faq-brings-small-changes-for-the-biggest-battles/

 

The great slaughter one feels very light, they haven't yet tackled the issue where they forgot to give point savings to every detachment. Baby steps I guess. At least the cyclops bombs got sorta fixed, they have yet to address why they'd be factored for break point but at least they can now function against structures. 

 

The changes to mechanicum are weird, they seem more in line with adressing ocd/wysiwyg than making sense rules or balance wise with the exception of the fix to triaros now no longer being able to transport thanatars. They've given both myrmidon secutors and destructors 2 weapons, without adjusting point cost. On the destructor side that's nuts. 

 

Thallax now have the multimeltas they're modelled with instead of the plasma fusils, I think that's an interesting change. 

 

 

 

Overall though, its an impressive set of fixed in terms of dealing with the games number one problem that was infiltrate. Infiltrators now no longer being able to charge is pretty huge. I still think it needs some kind of ultimate cap on account of there being no core pushback mechanic, but its a huge win for quality of game. Another big win was infantry now only march 2x instead of 3x, that's one there was a pretty good consensus on that it rubbed many the wrong way so really glad they fixed that. They even ruled on drop pod doors and los, which I am very happy they did. 

 

 

 

Have they fixed all of the games problems? No, and balance still isn't perfect, neither are point costs. But its a huge step in the right direction. It's good to know they are willing to errata mistakes at a unit/detachment level even if it means invalidating a card/page in a book. (triaros, thallax, myrmidon destructors/secutors). 

On 4/2/2025 at 11:52 AM, Pacific81 said:

Yes I agree with most of what you have written there @Crablezworth. Thinking about it for a while it is a very idiosyncratic game and release. It reminds me of a historical rule system I saw from the late 80s which described Roman troops skirmishing, which included absolutely unnecessary details of psychology tables for individual troops in a unit and very specific armaments and where everything had to be recorded in big tables. Or games from that time that were written and played on a very local level. We were a bunch of goofy looking youths wearing horribly unfashionable knitwear, surrounding by piles of the rules paperwork and empty beer cans, listening to the Smiths at 2am on a school night, trying to work out what to do. Legions feels like the same sort of game and perhaps designed for the same demographic! It feels like a game out of time. 

 

I will be honest I've moved back towards NetEpic and Armageddon now, and am looking forward to what Mantic can come up with the new Epic Warpath game. Having a quick look at the rules they look to facilitate fast, tactical play and without unnecessary book-keeping. i.e. what we should expect from a modern gaming system. 

 

To draw on an analogy, watching the opening few minutes of the Godfather films as the credits slowly scroll through over a black background we tolerate that because the film is a classic. We wouldn't tolerate it in a modern film and the industry has moved on to accommodate changing lifestyles and sensibilities. Similarly with wargames mechanics, times have changed, wargaming has to compete with other forms of entertainment (and especially as a lot of people playing this game will be working dads in their 30s or older and people without as much spare time). Whoever wrote Legions Imperialis seems to be completely unaware of this, making a game that is absolutely unsuitable for anyone that is unwilling to dedicate an inordinate amount of time to getting the most from it, or else they are still really into knitwear and the Smiths!

 

 

Understandable. LI also has ramifications for square/rectangular bases so it makes sense sticking more to netepic/armaggeddon. Will you be reconsidering at all with the release of the new FAQ/ERRATA for lI? 

[Black Cohort]

I am surprised this happened, though given it took like 18 months for the core rules, it seems too little too late.

[Crablezworth]

36 minutes ago, Black Cohort said:

I am surprised this happened, though given it took like 18 months for the core rules, it seems too little too late.

 

Well, certainly took their time. I do think its a pretty big sign of good faith on gw's part. The game feels much less like shovelware now at least. 

[Mandragola]

2 hours ago, Crablezworth said:

Well, gotta say I never thought we'd see the day but they actually did a decent job at least on the core rulebook fixes.

Some of the changes, like infantry losing triple-march, come from contributors to this thread. Thanks all. 
 

There’s more to do and a lot of the problems never should have made it to print in the first place, let alone taken 18 months to fix. But let’s celebrate progress. 

Edited April 10 by Mandragola

[Crablezworth]

8 minutes ago, Mandragola said:

Some of the changes, like infantry losing triple-march, come from contributors to this thread. Thanks all. 
 

There’s more to do and a lot of the problems never should have made it to print in the first place, let alone taken 18 months to fix. But let’s celebrate progress. 

 

That's good to know :)

 

And I agree we should indeed celebrate the progress. I think what's great about so much of the focus being on the core rulebook is that it will help anyone playing li from fluffy to competitive/organized play. The fix to infiltrate will greatly help anyone doing narrative stuff just as much as it will make the organized play side of things less abrasive. I always had an inkling that those who really love it at gw did not love what the meta looked like at some of the earlier warhammer world events, like the classic sea of infantry/pioneer company and a big titan sorta felt like a lot of unit types got lost in the shuffle. 

 

The book 2 faq feels a bit bare but hopefully in time they'll address those detachments not having any point savings. 

 

It was nice they fixed the cyclops, just wish they'd address it still potentially breaking its own formation. Is also an example one of the book 2 units that could benefit from some point savings for expanding the detachment size.  

[Nagashsnee]

This is great first step, it immediately hits some of the worse problems in the game. And while it took it sweet time better late then never, it got people who had shelved it talking again around me, and hopefully they follow up with some points/units tweaks and set the game on a solid path forward. 

[Pacific81]

18 hours ago, Crablezworth said:

Understandable. LI also has ramifications for square/rectangular bases so it makes sense sticking more to netepic/armaggeddon. Will you be reconsidering at all with the release of the new FAQ/ERRATA for lI? 

 

I'm really glad this addresses some of the major, obvious flaws with the game. 

You have to say, stuff like the change to infantry movement, it's so major and why did that not come out in their playtesting?

 

If someone wants a game with me I'll give it a whirl but TBH have already moved on. When you come to the conclusion you don't enjoy a game, I don't have enough hours in the day for the things I do enjoy so it doesn't make sense to carry on really. :) I am really happy though for the people that love the game and for now having some of these major, non-sensical stumbling blocks removed. 

[Mandragola]

1 hour ago, Pacific81 said:

 

I'm really glad this addresses some of the major, obvious flaws with the game. 

You have to say, stuff like the change to infantry movement, it's so major and why did that not come out in their playtesting?

 

If someone wants a game with me I'll give it a whirl but TBH have already moved on. When you come to the conclusion you don't enjoy a game, I don't have enough hours in the day for the things I do enjoy so it doesn't make sense to carry on really. :) I am really happy though for the people that love the game and for now having some of these major, non-sensical stumbling blocks removed. 

I think unfortunately this is where a lot of people have found themselves with LI. The launch was such a disaster that now, 18 months later, it's too late to recover. 

 

The rules were just one of the unforgivable mistakes. The stock issues, and most notably the fact that you couldn't even buy space marines for months after release, meant that people actually could not make their armies - except of course by printing them.

 

So yeah, the damage is done now. This FAQ partially fixes some of the most egregious nonsense and rules like quake that simply didn't work at all. But this is stuff that should never have been written, let alone made it through playtesting and into print. There are other games out there we could be playing instead - ones where you can actually finish a game in a reasonable amount of time.

 

It's such a shame they pretty much killed off AT for this. And epic could have been great, but it just isn't. 

[DuskRaider]

I wouldn’t say AT is dead, I’d say it’s a well preserved time capsule. Obviously they haven’t completely  forgotten about it, seeing as they released the Dark Mechanicum Constructs with AT rules, weapons year or so ago, and now all the Mechanicum Knights are making the leap to plastic (albeit with a focus on LI). If anything, the rules :cuss: for Legions should make you thankful they haven’t made a new edition of Titanicus, I can’t imagine how they would mess it up on release. 
 

I’m very happy about the March change, it made no sense and now it places an emphasis on transports. I understand why they changed the Triaros and it wasn’t like it affects me too much since I’m very limited when it comes to Automata in the first place. Myrmidons certainly got a boost. 
 

I appreciate that Infiltrating units cannot Charge Turn One, but I still think allowing them to garrison buildings 4” outside of the opponent’s DZ is a mistake. Allowing First Fire Turn One is…. not fun. I’ve had this experience in the first games we played, and while it didn’t work out for my friend in the end, it did essentially cut the board down to a roughly 16” space for the majority of it and it was just plain annoying. The good news is that we have access to a lot more units with Wrecker than we did when the game first launched, so at least there’s that I suppose. 

[Mandragola]

AT isn't dead but it took an enormous hit because of LI. The mess they made of the release meant that titans weren't on sale for months on end. A game inevitably takes a major hit if you aren't able to access any of its products.

 

Hopefully they'll carry on improving LI. 

[Interrogator Stobz]

Don't upscaled AT rules get used for 28mm Titan Walks?

Would love to play that.

 

The fixes are good, not nearly far enough by far, but good.

We house ruled all of it anyway, but good news for tournament and those who play random players and need to follow a standard.

 

[Deschenus Maximus]

My sincere hope is that they expedite a LI v2.0. I think it's the only thing that might allow the game to regain momentum. As was already said, there's been too many missteps that I don't see how they can turn things around at this point. And its not like a whole new edition wouldn't be warranted, because even though the FAQ helps A LOT, sorting out melee is still a massive chore, and the internal unit balance remains completely out of whack. 

[DuskRaider]

1 hour ago, Mandragola said:

AT isn't dead but it took an enormous hit because of LI. The mess they made of the release meant that titans weren't on sale for months on end. A game inevitably takes a major hit if you aren't able to access any of its products.

 

Hopefully they'll carry on improving LI. 

This is very true. Seeing the markup on Titans during that time was nauseating. 
 

Alright, so maybe they have mostly abandoned (Titanicus) / sacrificed (Aeronautica) for an inferior game. They also never released potential money makers like a Corruption kit, which I’m sure would or would have sold pretty well considering there was a major shift toward Traitor Legios post-Traitor book. 

I think I would still be perfectly happy getting nothing else for the system and keeping it as-is ad infinitum than have the current Design Team meddling with it and potentially (most likely) making it bad. I have absolutely no faith in GW’s rules making anymore at this point, from the massive issues with LI (some of which still exist, at least IMO) to the bland, tournament-centric mess that is current 40K, to the enormous downgrade that is 30K. 

[Interrogator Stobz]

I agree their rules team are awful. 

 

But occasionally they improve things, KT is now a good system, once you get your head around how terrain affects shooting.

 

I look forward to 2.0

1.1 is still rubbish, just a better grade of rubbish.

[Mandragola]

On 4/11/2025 at 5:18 PM, DuskRaider said:

This is very true. Seeing the markup on Titans during that time was nauseating. 
 

Alright, so maybe they have mostly abandoned (Titanicus) / sacrificed (Aeronautica) for an inferior game. They also never released potential money makers like a Corruption kit, which I’m sure would or would have sold pretty well considering there was a major shift toward Traitor Legios post-Traitor book. 

I think I would still be perfectly happy getting nothing else for the system and keeping it as-is ad infinitum than have the current Design Team meddling with it and potentially (most likely) making it bad. I have absolutely no faith in GW’s rules making anymore at this point, from the massive issues with LI (some of which still exist, at least IMO) to the bland, tournament-centric mess that is current 40K, to the enormous downgrade that is 30K. 

I find it incredible that this company with its enormous turnover invests virtually nothing in game design. There are a handful of guys writing specialist games and some people playtesting for free, whose feedback isn’t necessarily listened to. It’s bizarre because they’re spending millions on the models, making all these boxes that we only need one or two of each, but spending nothing on the actual games. 
 

A FTSE 100 company shouldn’t be publishing rules like quake that don’t work at all. It shouldn’t then take 18 months to fix that. It’s absurd. That’s before you talk about the gross imbalance between units or the clunkines of trying to play a game with 30+ activations. 
 

I hope they do a second edition and it’s nothing like this. 

[DuskRaider]

Their track record for new editions is pretty dismal, at least IMO. I know I’m probably in the minority, but 40K has been a shell of itself for a few editions now. I’m a vocal detractor of 8th+, I think the game was “kidified” in both rules and model design.
 

We won’t even talk about 30K, they somehow found a way to simultaneously dumb it down and make it more complicated. 
 

I really don’t think LI has been a commercial success for them thus far, and they only have themselves to blame for it. 

[Interrogator Stobz]

You're not wrong, nor alone Brother, their track record for rules is truly horrendous. 

 

But, optimistically, I'd still like a 2.0 Edition.

If it sucks worse than this 1.1 Edition, then I'll definitely move on to one of the old Epic rule sets.

I'm only ever going to play casual or death; so apart from getting a collection of books, which actually makes sense, I don't have a bunch of skin in it.

 

I have 20 activation tokens per side atm, I refuse to get more, even for bigger games, it's just stupid bad.

[Mandragola]

People are entitled to their own opinions on rules. I liked 8th at the start. I prefer save modifiers and multiple wounds to the 3rd edition system of AP and vehicles having a different mechanism to other stuff. But certainly over time it went weird, and the game has never been balanced either, with Ynnari being the most obvious mistake at the start of 8th, then Eldar again being ludicrous at the launch of 10th. And that’s their flagship game that’s supposedly balanced. 
 

I understand the fear over new editions. They don’t necessarily seem to really improve over time, just replace old problems with new ones. I don’t know if I’d want a new edition of AT, as it’s currently very good, though a rebalancing of some things (Acastus, plasma blastguns, vortex) would be nice.  
 

But for LI I think there’s very little to lose. the rules are rubbish and nobody wants to invest in the game. A refresh can’t really hurt. 

Edited April 13 by Mandragola

[Deus_Ex_Machina]

The business model says to do a new edition after X years. It´s not the goal to improve the game but to have the means of extracting cash for a product for which you have already spent money.

 

In regards to the FAQ:

I won´t read it because it´s a ton of additional information which should have been included in the game from the start. So I will be perfectly fine with the couple of house rules I have implemented by myself.

 

The game would have drastically benefitted from having unit cards like it was the case in the 90s but apparently Gee-Dubbs was too cheap for that.  I will be sticking with the LI 1.0 ruleset and the same applies to HH when the Age of Darkness receives it´s new edition this summer.

 

Edit:

Modern 40K is in the worst spot in regards to rules. These change multiple times a year in an edition and the 40K community has been brainwashed by corporate to gobble it up without complaining. This does not only include beginners in the hobby who can´t naturally know that they are being fooled but even to gamers who have been decades into the wargaming hobby. There is a German YT channel in particular that sings high praises of modern 40K on a regular basis and when I hear it I just shake my head and think that these dudes should know better but still allow themselves to be duped.

Edited April 13 by Deus_Ex_Machina

[DuskRaider]

13 hours ago, Mandragola said:

People are entitled to their own opinions on rules. I liked 8th at the start. I prefer save modifiers and multiple wounds to the 3rd edition system of AP and vehicles having a different mechanism to other stuff. But certainly over time it went weird, and the game has never been balanced either, with Ynnari being the most obvious mistake at the start of 8th, then Eldar again being ludicrous at the launch of 10th. And that’s their flagship game that’s supposedly balanced. 
 

I understand the fear over new editions. They don’t necessarily seem to really improve over time, just replace old problems with new ones. I don’t know if I’d want a new edition of AT, as it’s currently very good, though a rebalancing of some things (Acastus, plasma blastguns, vortex) would be nice.  
 

But for LI I think there’s very little to lose. the rules are rubbish and nobody wants to invest in the game. A refresh can’t really hurt. 

Yeah see, I miss the AV, facing, templates, etc. of Pre-8th (and 1st Ed 30K which I think perfected that rule system). Wounds on tanks / walkers makes absolutely no sense to me and the deletion of templates for D3 or D6 instead is just… yeah, no. 
 

The funny part is that I miss templates even though they hurt me more than helped (just ask my Blood Axes). 

[Mandragola]

I don't think either system is perfect. Getting rid of facings and fire arcs wasn't necessary with the switch to wounds. LI actually manages this, with worse saving throws for vehicles shot in the rear arc.

 

Having different systems for vehicles and living things might make sense but unfortunately in this universe the line between what counts as a vehicle and what doesn't has never been clear. If you're playing with marines then all your models from your basic infantry upward are covered in thick armour made of the same metal. Yet the same gun will affect some models very differently to others, for fairly arbitrary reasons. 

 

I've got no problem with the idea that a gun should sometimes be able to pop a tank in one shot, or to blow an important bit off so it doesn't work as well. But I think that's just as true of dreadnoughts and people like terminators. 

 

Having said that, it's perfectly functional as a rule set despite its weirdness. And the "other" system is weird too.

[Nagashsnee]

On 4/13/2025 at 1:07 AM, Mandragola said:

I find it incredible that this company with its enormous turnover invests virtually nothing in game design. There are a handful of guys writing specialist games and some people playtesting for free, whose feedback isn’t necessarily listened to. It’s bizarre because they’re spending millions on the models, making all these boxes that we only need one or two of each, but spending nothing on the actual games. 
 

A FTSE 100 company shouldn’t be publishing rules like quake that don’t work at all. It shouldn’t then take 18 months to fix that. It’s absurd. That’s before you talk about the gross imbalance between units or the clunkines of trying to play a game with 30+ activations. 
 

I hope they do a second edition and it’s nothing like this. 

 

It is maddening isnt it?

 

Second ed before at least pretending to fix 1st would for me cause more damage, i need to know that they have a grip on things before investing ANYTHING more into this game. Rushing out a new edition on just 'we fixed it trust us bro' wont do anything. There are too many people who feel cheated already. They need to seriously show they are on top of 1st and get it to a point where it feels like a proper well thought out game. Only then can they justify a new vision and cost of a new edition.

 

Otherwise its just 'haha you paid us for a unplayable mess now pay us again and MAYBE we will fix it.' People have switch off and many have moved on, a new edition asking them to invest more will not bring them back.