1 hour ago, TauntaunScout said:

Officially (last time I cared anyways) they had to use 51% Citadel parts. Ie, "Do whatever you want but give us your money".

Warhammer world requires 100% these days, some of their stores do as well. Other stores/tournaments have their own restrictions.

With FFG, the models are fairly specific to the unit abilities. Pathfinders and Rebel troopers have very different abilities. So arm swaps to make a new Heavy weapon model still makes the model distinct since only a Z-6 trooper has a Z-6. But the basic weapons (non-modular) look fairly similar, so only the uniforms are distinctive to quickly communicate to your opponent what capabilities the unit has even with rifle arm swaps.

The WYSIWYG issue is going to come to a head with Sabine I think. Do I need to model the Darksaber on the model if I take the upgrade or not? Does a model without the saber cause "significant confusion?"

Reposting something I posedt elsewhere in the forums:

The tournament standards are vague at best. "Significant confusion" is a nothing term, which can only be defined by TOs. Does modifying a Bistan mini to hold a Z-6 cause significant confusion when using it to represent that upgrade? Does using models of Snowtroopers modified to hold a DTL to represent "Winter Stormtroopers" create significant confusion while on a table next to a unit of Snowtroopers (using the Snowtrooper models) with a Flamethrower heavy weapon upgrade? How about an unit consisting of Snowtrooper models in the same army as above with no Heavy weapons?

Depends on who you ask

3 hours ago, Zrob314 said:

I mean if you used a Bistian for a Z6 I wouldn't mind, as long as you weren't putting another Bistian on the board. Still, if you're gonna do anything official then don't go swapping pieces from unit X into unit Y, or if you (the OP) do don't get sore if your opponent exercises their legitimate right to request you use the correct minis.

O I 100% agree with this.

58 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Warhammer world requires 100% these days, some of their stores do as well. Other stores/tournaments have their own restrictions.

That's insane. What about modelling putty and plasticard and such? Even stuff in WD uses found items. Granted I've 99% ignored 40k since Legion came out. The history of the guard minis is quite muddy. They sold around a half dozen regiments until relatively recently. And even reissue them on limited release occasionally.

Quote

With FFG, the models are fairly specific to the unit abilities. Pathfinders and Rebel troopers have very different abilities.

Yeah but they don't need to be. They were usually so in D20 though. Seems to be a good sales move.

Quote

So arm swaps to make a new Heavy weapon model still makes the model distinct since only a Z-6 trooper has a Z-6. But the basic weapons (non-modular) look fairly similar, so only the uniforms are distinctive to quickly communicate to your opponent what capabilities the unit has even with rifle arm swaps.

Pistols don't look like rifles.

1 minute ago, TauntaunScout said:

That's insane. What about modelling putty and plasticard and such? Even stuff in WD uses found items. Granted I've 99% ignored 40k since Legion came out. The history of the guard minis is quite muddy. They sold around a half dozen regiments until relatively recently. And even reissue them on limited release occasionally.

Yeah but they don't need to be. They were usually so in D20 though. Seems to be a good sales move.

Pistols don't look like rifles.

No arguments here on the Warhammer world stuff. I've used more than a little plasticard and putty for my own projects.

Something needs to differentiate the units with special abilities, model poses seem to be the new vogue for different stat lines.

Only one of the Pathfinder models have their A-300 in short range configuration, and one in long range. Neither of them are pistols, one is an short barreled rifle, the other a designated marksmen rifle. I could replace those arms with rifles from the Rebel Troopers squad just because I think either looks silly and still (because of the uniform and poses) reasonable field those models as Pathfinders. However, two of the models do have "standard" A-300s, and those weapons look very similar to A-280s, meaning only the uniform is indicitive that those models are Pathfinders.

37 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

No arguments here on the Warhammer world stuff. I've used more than a little plasticard and putty for my own projects.

I do not get what is going on in the GW business meetings in Nottingham. This is why people are leaving. And they aren't going to the competition, they're finding unrelated hobbies.

37 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Something needs to differentiate the units with special abilities, model poses seem to be the new vogue for different stat lines.

Only one of the Pathfinder models have their A-300 in short range configuration, and one in long range. Neither of them are pistols, one is an short barreled rifle, the other a designated marksmen rifle. I could replace those arms with rifles from the Rebel Troopers squad just because I think either looks silly and still (because of the uniform and poses) reasonable field those models as Pathfinders. However, two of the models do have "standard" A-300s, and those weapons look very similar to A-280s, meaning only the uniform is indicitive that those models are Pathfinders.

This is the problem with the 3 squads of rebels except fleet troopers. They're actually all variations the same uniform. Without things like a different token alien species, there's no hard and fast distinction between them that a laymen would pick up on. I'm not going to eyeball a unit in a custom paint scheme and notice which configuration of blaster most of them have.

@TauntaunScout The main differences are the helmets of the fleet troopers, the prevalence of cloaks on the commandos, and the mixture of helmets on the Pathfinders. Not a big difference to be honest, but there is a difference.

8 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

@TauntaunScout The main differences are the helmets of the fleet troopers, the prevalence of cloaks on the commandos, and the mixture of helmets on the Pathfinders. Not a big difference to be honest, but there is a difference.

The fleet troopers uniforms I will defend as completely different. They carry pistols, have different boots, distinct vests, a dearth of pouches and backpacks. Rebel Troopers (a weird name, they're ALL "rebel troopers"!) are a vaguely ROTJ inspired squad that doesn't look out of place in R1 at all... followed by ROTJ and R1 squads

Though this has no relevance to many players, from a wargaming perspective, would an imperial commander be able to tell the difference between rebel troops at a distance anyway? From that point of view what some would call confusion others would call immersion.

To compound we can houserule that upgrades are not revealed until they are used unless you can see it on the model. Do those troopers have grenades? Can Luke force push? It's a mystery until it's too late. Good times.

If you want to go full fog of war, represent each unit leader with a blank base (with a marking on the underside), leaving the rest of the squad off the table until another unit can draw line of sight to it.

If you want to houserule, have at it, sounds like it could be fun. Competitive play is built upon complete open information though (with the exception of command cards until they are played).

10 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

If you want to go full fog of war, represent each unit leader with a blank base

Oh it can get way crazier than that. You get THREE blank bases per leader two of which are decoys.

That's without even getting into using maps and a gamemaster to simulate very low visibility. You grid off the table and reference the coordinates when you cross into a new square. The table is "wrong" and the gamemaster has a map of where the terrain features/squares "really" touch borders. You can think you're charging the enemy and wind up across the table from them instead.

On 2/24/2019 at 1:05 PM, Tirion said:

After looking at the new Pathfinder models (which are fantastic btw maybe the best yet) many of them, this kind of goes for the commandos as well, can be used as a stand in for rebel troopers. Bistan makes an interesting sub for a z6, the human unit leader could sub in for the rebel trooper unit leader. Those kinds of things. And I to got me thinking what would happen at an official tourny if these things were done. Obviously paint bistan differently if you're going to use him as a a z6 or something. But things like the rebel officer upgrade. Can I just use the normal mini as my rebel officer upgrade? This game has been very vague on this kind of stuff, which I prefer but it does leave questions.

What’s does that long acronym mean?

23 minutes ago, Pooleman said:

What’s does that long acronym mean?

What You See Is What You Get. Its use originated outside of gaming. It can be more or less granular and strict in different games, gaming groups, etc.

On 2/25/2019 at 4:46 PM, Caimheul1313 said:

The WYSIWYG issue is going to come to a head with Sabine I think. Do I need to model the Darksaber on the model if I take the upgrade or not? Does a model without the saber cause "significant confusion?"

That’s not a new issue, actually. It has existed since the release of the game with the AT-STs and AT-RTs. I can’t imagine they would change anything with respect to WYSIWYG rules now.

Honestly with the way some folk talk about "confusion" it's hard not to wonder how these hypothetical opponents they're describing managed to successfully dress themselves and secure transportation to the venue in question without causing themselves some kind of terminal accident.

42 minutes ago, Yodhrin said:

Honestly with the way some folk talk about "confusion" it's hard not to wonder how these hypothetical opponents they're describing managed to successfully dress themselves and secure transportation to the venue in question without causing themselves some kind of terminal accident.

Eh like so many things it's a "Yes but". A lot of people field intentionally confusing collections of haphazard figures, some being cheapskates, some through intent to cheat, some a mix of both. In formal play, where no social contract exists because some people would do ANYTHING for a limited edition set of dice or whatever, the line has to be drawn somewhere. If you field sufficiently confusing blobs of plastic, you can very easily cheat when it comes to various unit upgrades and the like. And as for aesthetics, forget it. It will quickly devolve into using 13 year old broken, half-painted figures off eBay as the latest imbalanced unit type. If there's a trophy to win, people forget to be human. My favorite was a bunch of broken Forge World ork tanks from 40k. They really were beautiful models and the stats were just written to reflect having a bit of fun with a cool model. but what did people do? Find any broken 40k tank on eBay, glue a couple broken 90's plastic gretchin to them as "grot crew" and call it a "looted chassis" and play 3 of the overpowered novelty thing.

IMO use whatever models as long as the conversion shows the proper kit, and the paint job blends with the squad they belong to.

In regards to unit leaders/multiple similar squads. I simply add a matching colored dot to the back of each base of a squad for my own quick reference and in case my opponent asks. Squad leaders bases are clearly marked back and front as I do use some converted and or custom models as squad leaders. Rebels especially.

The goal is to have fun, enjoy your own experience, while not confusing your opponent. Outside of a tournament, people should have no issues as long as everything you present is clear.

In tournament play it is best to use only subtle conversions and or only stock models as the goal is quick play and no time spent explaining your conversions/customs are actually this... Local club events are probably not an issue in this regard as you will usually see a pool of players that you normally play and they know whats what.

Long story short, use regular models for events. Use whatever in casual play (hence casual) as the goal is to have fun.

30 minutes ago, Wes Janson said:

Long story short, use regular models for events. Use whatever in casual play (hence casual) as the goal is to have fun.

I prefer to call tournaments "formal play". There's nothing casual about skillfully converting figures and writing your own material.

6 hours ago, nashjaee said:

That’s not a new issue, actually. It has existed since the release of the game with the AT-STs and AT-RTs. I can’t imagine they would change anything with respect to WYSIWYG rules now.

I slightly miss-typed, what I meant was bringing the issue back into debate. As big convention tournaments to have more restrictive WYSIWYG rules than FFG's OT rules, then the question becomes if FFG is going to follow suit or continue to allow tournament rules to differ from the posted official.

For reference, Adepticon requires all models to be painted to a 3 colour minimum, in addition to the following WYSIWYG rules, which are used for all games:

Quote

Units must always be represented by appropriate models. This is the single, most important rule. The 'What You See Is What You Get' (WYSIWYG) rule is in effect for all tournaments. That means all units MUST be easily identifiable as the choice they represent and that all weapons/options taken for a unit MUST be clearly represented on the model(s). Models not appropriately represented will be removed from the game.

I've seen similar restrictions from other large tournaments.

Since, as others have mentioned, the Rebels are very samey across units and I'm converting a lot (I can't help it ok) I'm leaning towards labeling bases... I've been introducing some new gamers to Legion and I'm worried about improving the clarity.

Something simple... like "RT I" for Rebel Trooper Squad 1... maybe the letters in Aurabesh? I dunno I'll post pics when I get that far.

30 minutes ago, BucketheadBits said:

I'm worried about improving the clarity... (a moment later)... maybe the letters in Aurabesh? I dunno

🤣🤣🤣🤣 Poor lads

Are they fluent in Huttese? "This squad is called Yoka to Bantha poodoo and this one E chu ta!"

@Senjius hahaha! I know, but it'd just be a little icon + a roman numeral. That's not unreasonable design, but you're right, it might be too cute.

2 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

I slightly miss-typed, what I meant was bringing the issue back into debate. As big convention tournaments to have more restrictive WYSIWYG rules than FFG's OT rules, then the question becomes if FFG is going to follow suit or continue to allow tournament rules to differ from the posted official.

For reference, Adepticon requires all models to be painted to a 3 colour minimum, in addition to the following WYSIWYG rules, which are used for all games:

I've seen similar restrictions from other large tournaments.

Lolz legion doesn't follow that at all

2 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

I slightly miss-typed, what I meant was bringing the issue back into debate. As big convention tournaments to have more restrictive WYSIWYG rules than FFG's OT rules, then the question becomes if FFG is going to follow suit or continue to allow tournament rules to differ from the posted official.

For reference, Adepticon requires all models to be painted to a 3 colour minimum, in addition to the following WYSIWYG rules, which are used for all games:

I've seen similar restrictions from other large tournaments.

Ah ok.

Yeah, I remember seeing those restrictions for Adepticon and thinking that maybe they're just applying blanket logic to all the games hosted there (which may be reasonable for the most part because as I understand those are standard rules for most of the games), without looking at what the actual rules are for Legion specifically. If people complain, I would hope FFG addresses it and asks organizers of large events to follow the tournament regulations a little more closely.

32 minutes ago, nashjaee said:

Ah ok.

Yeah, I remember seeing those restrictions for Adepticon and thinking that maybe they're just applying blanket logic to all the games hosted there (which may be reasonable for the most part because as I understand those are standard rules for most of the games), without looking at what the actual rules are for Legion specifically.

NO games that I've ever played actually say in the rulebook that models MUST be painted. It's a cultural thing: you played with painted models, or you played a different genre of game. If anyone doesn't like how Adepticon or anyone else runs it's tournaments, they can go run their own. It's a huge thankless hassle to run a tournament, even more work to run a con. Painting an army to 3 colors is a snap compared to what others go through to put this event together for you. This is a "red carpet event". You show up dressed to the nines. If you can't be bothered to paint your army or cause it to be painted, why should anyone be bothered to setup the tables and stuff for you?

Quote

If people complain, I would hope FFG addresses it and asks organizers of large events to follow the tournament regulations a little more closely.

All FFG is likely to say is "thank you for all the free work you've done to promote our product for us". FFG has more to lose from Legion not being played at Adepticon, than its organizers do.

1 minute ago, TauntaunScout said:

It's a huge thankless hassle to run a tournament

[...]

they can go run their own

As someone who is doing exactly this (we're organizing an event here in the California Bay Area): yup, that can be pretty accurate. I just categorically disagree with the notion that the players owe me anything as far getting their stuff painted. I just want them to show up and play. I feel it can present as a bit "elitist" to say only the people with the time to paint up their stuff can show up to my event.