[RUMOUR] Blood Angels poster faction for 11th

[Daylight]

I loved the new Blood Claws and the way they blended mark X with Mark VI and VII features like the knees, lower collars, and shoulder pads so the idea of a tactical-squad-esque unit with a similar aesthetic being part of the 11th edition launch gets me hyped. While I do like mark X and uniformity in 30k, I sometimes miss the days of mixed armor marks being more common when many suits looked like they could be ancient relics in 40k. I’m also partial to the firstborn armor look as well, as it’s what I got into the hobby with and associate with Space Marines the most still. 

[DemonGSides]

1 hour ago, crimsondave said:

I didn’t quit playing the game at game stores because of complaints I co-opted from the internet.  Your experience =\ mine.

 

Im not sure you read my comment correctly. 

 

If you're still playing the game than my comment really doesn't apply to you.   If you played one game two years ago of 10th and complain about how busted things are currently, I just don't take that opinion seriously. The game was super imbalanced (I was one of the loudest complainers about it on here at the time) and the game still has plenty of issues (show me one game that has no problems and I'll show you a bridge I have to sell), but opinions from people about a game they don't play don't hold much weight with me.  GW has done a pretty good job making a relatively stable game that still has some ups and downs for the competitive scene but is approachable and playable by the common person. It's not a perfect game, there's some things from older editions I prefer, but as a total package it's pretty alright. 

Edited Friday at 09:00 PM by DemonGSides

[CastellanDeMolay]

14 hours ago, HeadlessCross said:

Legends has multiple issues though. Not only are several keywords, rules, and points grotesquely out of date or non-functioning, there's the sheer audacity for GW to say we need the opponent's permission to run them. 

 

I shouldn't NEED permission to run a unit because they can't be bothered to make sure the half-assed rules are up to date. 

I think it's funny that GW even bothered to codify "opponent's permission" as a rule, at all. Every game of anything is only allowed to happen with your opponent's permission; everyone has a right to refuse to participate in any game, at any time, and for any or no reason at all, without needing a rulebook to tell them they have the option. The only thing GW really got wrong is that it isn't just limited to legends rules. 

Edited Saturday at 06:34 AM by CastellanDeMolay

[The Praetorian of Inwit]

Isn't somewhat depressing that in only 3 years will be back here again discussing 12th? 

 

The 3 year cycle is just...sad. 

[Evil Eye]

7 minutes ago, CastellanDeMolay said:

I think it's funny that GW even bothered to codify "opponent's permission" as a rule, at all. Every game of anything is only allowed to happen with your opponent's permission; everyone has a right to refuse to participate in any game, at any time, and for any or no reason at all, without needing a rulebook to tell them they have the option. The only thing GW really got wrong is that it isn't just limited to legends rules. 

This is a very good point. A wargame is fundamentally a social contract, after all.

 

Now, in ages past there were things that were explicitly labelled as to be discussed with opponents' permission first, but these were 9 times out of 10 things like Lootas using other army's weapons (3E Orks normally let you pick guns from the Space Marine and Guard books, but with the clause you could use other Codices to loot with opponent's permission) or VDR creations. In other words, custom models that sat somewhat outside the normal rules and were as a result impossible to balance the game around, but were too cool to not include the rules for. In the case of the VDR, it should be noted vehicles created with the rules were generally not massively overpowered as they tended to be much less points-efficient than regular vehicles- the clause was there for fringe cases and the simple fact that, as user-created content in a fairly flexible system, it's not possible to account for every single creation being balanced.

 

With Legends, on the other hand, they tend not to be particularly overpowered, and more to the point are written by GW within the existing rules ecosystem. Whilst them not being updated and often getting very slapdash rules that don't work properly with the rest of the game is annoying, the solution is for them to get proper rules and updates with everything else, not to relegate them to permission-only. There are far more unbalanced units in the main books after all.

[Karhedron]

Legends suffer from historical perceptions. Back in 6th-8th editions, a lot of Forgeworld stuff was pay-to-win. We all remember the horrors of Ironhand Dreandought spam from late 8th edition. Even though it has not been true for some years, impressions like that stick and a lot of people at my own club automatically assume that if you bring a Legends unit, it is some sort of cheesy WAAC unit. 

[Evil Eye]

56 minutes ago, Karhedron said:

Legends suffer from historical perceptions. Back in 6th-8th editions, a lot of Forgeworld stuff was pay-to-win. We all remember the horrors of Ironhand Dreandought spam from late 8th edition. Even though it has not been true for some years, impressions like that stick and a lot of people at my own club automatically assume that if you bring a Legends unit, it is some sort of cheesy WAAC unit. 

It is an unfortunate holdover from those days for certain. Some FW units as far back as late 5th were a complete nightmare to face (the Land Raider Achilles springs to mind), even though the vast majority of FW models were either Apocalypse only or pretty situational at best. My beloved Malcador for instance was literally designed to be a slow and unreliable heap of scrap that was obsolete at the time of the Great Crusade, and even the best variant, the Defender, was still far from a WAAC choice. But then you had stuff like the various flyers in 6th and 7th...

[Magos Takatus]

54 minutes ago, Evil Eye said:

It is an unfortunate holdover from those days for certain. Some FW units as far back as late 5th were a complete nightmare to face (the Land Raider Achilles springs to mind), even though the vast majority of FW models were either Apocalypse only or pretty situational at best. My beloved Malcador for instance was literally designed to be a slow and unreliable heap of scrap that was obsolete at the time of the Great Crusade, and even the best variant, the Defender, was still far from a WAAC choice. But then you had stuff like the various flyers in 6th and 7th...

...furthermore you had units like the Sentinel power lifters and the Trojan recovery vehicle that were behind the lines logistic units with almost no combat value that were only good for narrative scenarios, but the majority of the time you hear people complaining about that guy that spammed tons of missile drop pods. It was all boiled down to a few bad actors overusing the most optimum units of the selection. That is no different from loading up on the most broken plastic kits at any available time, apart from the fact that the WAAC player is even more out of pocket after the flavour-of-the-month Forge World Legends unit was hit with the nerf bat. Let's not kid ourselves, Warhammer is pay to win whether you are playing units that are obsolete in the lore like the Malcador or you are stacking Space Marine Repulsor tanks with 115 weapons each.

[Sete]

Hopefully better power swords and Sanguinary guard.

Edited Saturday at 10:51 AM by Sete

[Kyari]

19 hours ago, HeadlessCross said:

Legends has multiple issues though. Not only are several keywords, rules, and points grotesquely out of date or non-functioning, there's the sheer audacity for GW to say we need the opponent's permission to run them. 

 

I shouldn't NEED permission to run a unit because they can't be bothered to make sure the half-assed rules are up to date. 

 

I don't know that this is necessarily true of 10th edition. Most of the Legends datasheets got pretty interesting and usable rules when the transition into 10th happened, and they've updated keywords on them multiple times through out the edition where appropriate now.  
I agree there's a broader cultural problem where the toxicity of "Matched play tournament legal only" mindset has been too pervasive, but a lot of Legends units are genuinely more interesting to use in 10th edition than their rules ever were in 8th or 9th before they became Legends.

[Magos Takatus]

11 hours ago, Kyari said:

 

I don't know that this is necessarily true of 10th edition. Most of the Legends datasheets got pretty interesting and usable rules when the transition into 10th happened, and they've updated keywords on them multiple times through out the edition where appropriate now.  
I agree there's a broader cultural problem where the toxicity of "Matched play tournament legal only" mindset has been too pervasive, but a lot of Legends units are genuinely more interesting to use in 10th edition than their rules ever were in 8th or 9th before they became Legends.

I wish that was trued of the Mega and Meka Dreads for the Orks. The latter lost almost all of it's ranged weapon options and they both lost optional upgrades that were created for the purpose of creative conversions.

[ThaneOfTas]

4 hours ago, Magos Takatus said:

I wish that was trued of the Mega and Meka Dreads for the Orks. The latter lost almost all of it's ranged weapon options and they both lost optional upgrades that were created for the purpose of creative conversions.

This is the sort of thing that gets me, legends itself wouldn't be so bad, if things weren't then still getting erroded away from even being in the legends list edition by edition.

 

Take the Sanguinary priest, yeah the jump pack version is still available as legends this edition, but last edition I was able to take power weapons on one, and then it got removed this edition, so who's to say if what's legends now will still be here in three years, and it's not even predictable.

[01RTB01]

5 hours ago, Magos Takatus said:

I wish that was trued of the Mega and Meka Dreads for the Orks. The latter lost almost all of it's ranged weapon options and they both lost optional upgrades that were created for the purpose of creative conversions.

Yup, shunta and rattla cannon among other things. Daft really. If they're going to be in legends they should have kept the array of weapons, not removed them.

[jaxom]

More fuel for the rumor fire:

[Blindhamster]

That is indeed a classic look

[DemonGSides]

1 hour ago, jaxom said:

More fuel for the rumor fire:

 

Man yellow weapons look so good with the red.  Don't love the Black eyes, but otherwise this is such a great look.

[Nephaston]

47 minutes ago, DemonGSides said:

 

Man yellow weapons look so good with the red.  Don't love the Black eyes, but otherwise this is such a great look.

I think the black eyes are kept like that because this doesn't include painting the eyes. The metal details and crux terminatus are also blacked out.

[DemonGSides]

1 hour ago, Nephaston said:

I think the black eyes are kept like that because this doesn't include painting the eyes. The metal details and crux terminatus are also blacked out.

 

Ah that makes sense.  I thought some of it looked really unfinished.  I haven't watched a Citadel "how-to" in a long time.