I think formations of legend are geared more towards narrative play and so using “half the points” isn’t really an issue. Things you ‘need to do’ is really a construct of competitive play. Armies don’t always have the optimal build for 1:1 balanced games. I really like the formations of legends as it shows [good] examples of how forces should be built, and I for one embrace the the notion of larger more coherent formations over the min/maxed approach most players use. I like the idea of playing LI as a historical game, exploring what if scenarios and retelling the stories of the heresy, we all already know who “wins” and competitive play comes down to a function of who has the most money and time (Meh). More narrative play! IMO
Your idea of a historical approach is a good one! And I agree that these are more for narrative play, but I don't think that means we can't look at them in terms of whether or not they are effective on the table. Of course, until we see the actual rules, this is all speculation.
@@tacticaeimperialis for sure. I didn't mean to imply folks can't play however they wish - only that evaluating formations of legend (specifically) towards cost and effectiveness in competitive games will likely leave folks wanting but also that using these formations takes a different mindset... probably isn't the point of formations of legend. I believe these are more of a glimps into the specific forces which were there [when horus slew the emperor] so to speak; not all that dissimilar to reading about the disposition of 101st airborne at Bastogne (not optimal).
I wish I had more than one other player near me (that I get to play every other month or so), but I am really liking the attention to narrative campaigns. Even if I can't really enjoy it, I like seeing it.
@@kglguy All it takes is one! If you both keep playing regularly I'm sure others will find their way to you -- especially if you play at game stores. Legions is such an eye catching game that people will want to come watch.
The formations are just abusively [wallet] hammer. 1x $50 infantry box comes with 2 myrmidon secutor bases. That formation has 12 bases. $300 of boxes to use maybe 10% of the models from The box.
@@tacticaeimperialis If it wasn't the MBAs writing the formation rules, they could have written it to be: 12 bases of secutors (myrmidon or destructor). You could do that with 2x boxes of infantry. Totally reasonable.
@@JasonWolfeYT Maybe? I'm not sure how useful eight bases of Destructors in Triaros transports would be, but either way it's an unfortunate aspect of these formations.
Large games are fun and look quite amazing, but I’d rather they focus on making scenarios based around 1-3k points and not seemingly 12k+. I enjoy my time but I don’t want to spend 14 hours at my LGS for one game.
It seems like we're getting at least three new regular sized missions as "Flashpoints", which I think is about what we've had in each of the previous campaign books. The Grand Clash is going to be a capstone of a campaign, and definitely not the standard.
Great breakdown! Thanks for putting this out, nice and thorough analysis. I will most certainly be trying to get that mega battle to happen!
Hopefully the escalation component will help you get people into the game and with armies big enough to play it!
6’x10’ is damn big
An epic table size for epic games
@@tacticaeimperialis it's what we need after the scale increase from 6mm to 8mm :D
@@makinote Absolutely 😅
I think formations of legend are geared more towards narrative play and so using “half the points” isn’t really an issue. Things you ‘need to do’ is really a construct of competitive play. Armies don’t always have the optimal build for 1:1 balanced games. I really like the formations of legends as it shows [good] examples of how forces should be built, and I for one embrace the the notion of larger more coherent formations over the min/maxed approach most players use. I like the idea of playing LI as a historical game, exploring what if scenarios and retelling the stories of the heresy, we all already know who “wins” and competitive play comes down to a function of who has the most money and time (Meh). More narrative play! IMO
Your idea of a historical approach is a good one! And I agree that these are more for narrative play, but I don't think that means we can't look at them in terms of whether or not they are effective on the table. Of course, until we see the actual rules, this is all speculation.
@@tacticaeimperialis for sure. I didn't mean to imply folks can't play however they wish - only that evaluating formations of legend (specifically) towards cost and effectiveness in competitive games will likely leave folks wanting but also that using these formations takes a different mindset... probably isn't the point of formations of legend. I believe these are more of a glimps into the specific forces which were there [when horus slew the emperor] so to speak; not all that dissimilar to reading about the disposition of 101st airborne at Bastogne (not optimal).
@@christopherm4510 I think that's a good way to look at and play the game. Narrative is definitely the strong point for Legions.
I wish I had more than one other player near me (that I get to play every other month or so), but I am really liking the attention to narrative campaigns. Even if I can't really enjoy it, I like seeing it.
@@kglguy All it takes is one! If you both keep playing regularly I'm sure others will find their way to you -- especially if you play at game stores. Legions is such an eye catching game that people will want to come watch.
The formations are just abusively [wallet] hammer. 1x $50 infantry box comes with 2 myrmidon secutor bases. That formation has 12 bases. $300 of boxes to use maybe 10% of the models from
The box.
That seems to be unfortunately typical of these formations.
@@tacticaeimperialis If it wasn't the MBAs writing the formation rules, they could have written it to be:
12 bases of secutors (myrmidon or destructor).
You could do that with 2x boxes of infantry. Totally reasonable.
@@JasonWolfeYT Maybe? I'm not sure how useful eight bases of Destructors in Triaros transports would be, but either way it's an unfortunate aspect of these formations.
Large games are fun and look quite amazing, but I’d rather they focus on making scenarios based around 1-3k points and not seemingly 12k+. I enjoy my time but I don’t want to spend 14 hours at my LGS for one game.
It seems like we're getting at least three new regular sized missions as "Flashpoints", which I think is about what we've had in each of the previous campaign books. The Grand Clash is going to be a capstone of a campaign, and definitely not the standard.