If X-Wing was, well... X-Wing the game and Armada was Star Destroyer: The Game, I expect this to be AT-AT: The Game.

I'm gonna expect it to play, balance-wise, similar to Armada now. Empire's going to rely on a lot of heavy armor units with disposable infantry (so Hev/medium units with expendable "fighters"), while the Rebels get a few purpose-built armor units (like the speeders), but are packed with all kinds of crazy infantry types that all love hiding in terrain and sneaking around.

If FFG's not careful Legion is going to end up like Armada now: People love the small units that are hard to hit but hurt way out of proportion to their size when activated en-masse (plus deployment and activation advantages, depending). If there's no particular reason to take Armor (like you're not always demolishing bases), people will default to Infantry and fast speeders in skirmish play because they are harder to hit and do more with less.

Though as I think about it... the Rebels had to get creative because AT-ATs were nigh invincible against infantry right? That's more than we can say for the poor ISD being mobbed by fighters here in Armada.

8 hours ago, Dishbird said:

Oh ALSO, according to ICv2, Imperial Assault was #8 ok the list of top 10 selling Hobby Channel board games in the fall of 2016. Case closed.

People aren't saying it's sales are bad but that there may be a legal issue

3 minutes ago, Norsehound said:

If X-Wing was, well... X-Wing the game and Armada was Star Destroyer: The Game, I expect this to be AT-AT: The Game.

I'm gonna expect it to play, balance-wise, similar to Armada now. Empire's going to rely on a lot of heavy armor units with disposable infantry (so Hev/medium units with expendable "fighters"), while the Rebels get a few purpose-built armor units (like the speeders), but are packed with all kinds of crazy infantry types that all love hiding in terrain and sneaking around.

If FFG's not careful Legion is going to end up like Armada now: People love the small units that are hard to hit but hurt way out of proportion to their size when activated en-masse (plus deployment and activation advantages, depending). If there's no particular reason to take Armor (like you're not always demolishing bases), people will default to Infantry and fast speeders in skirmish play because they are harder to hit and do more with less.

Though as I think about it... the Rebels had to get creative because AT-ATs were nigh invincible against infantry right? That's more than we can say for the poor ISD being mobbed by fighters here in Armada.

yea its defined play styles from FFG. although in the movies, the few ground engagements we see the Empire really wallops the Rebels. Rebels will be guerilla warfare as you have said where empire will be a more organized disciplined fighting force.

Honestly, as long as the models look as good as IA quality, im in. I really want a game that is like 20mm scale so that you can have true to scale troops and AT-ATs. This is something I have wanted for a long time.

Years ago, on April Fools, Battlefront Announced they won the licensing for Star Wars and will be putting out a Flames of War scale game for Star Wars. That thread went for many many pages before they told everyone it was a joke. That may have been the saddest day of my life.

2 minutes ago, Norsehound said:

If X-Wing was, well... X-Wing the game and Armada was Star Destroyer: The Game, I expect this to be AT-AT: The Game.

I'm gonna expect it to play, balance-wise, similar to Armada now. Empire's going to rely on a lot of heavy armor units with disposable infantry (so Hev/medium units with expendable "fighters"), while the Rebels get a few purpose-built armor units (like the speeders), but are packed with all kinds of crazy infantry types that all love hiding in terrain and sneaking around.

If FFG's not careful Legion is going to end up like Armada now: People love the small units that are hard to hit but hurt way out of proportion to their size when activated en-masse (plus deployment and activation advantages, depending). If there's no particular reason to take Armor (like you're not always demolishing bases), people will default to Infantry and fast speeders in skirmish play because they are harder to hit and do more with less.

Though as I think about it... the Rebels had to get creative because AT-ATs were nigh invincible against infantry right? That's more than we can say for the poor ISD being mobbed by fighters here in Armada.

Or in the movies........

I will never understand what people with this argument about isds are watching.

We have seen 4 or 5 disabled/destroyed imperial ships in the movies one being a SSD. 2 of the 3 were from rebel fighters (including the SSD). Not to mention 2 death stars.

The others were from a ground based ion Canon and the hammerhead ram.

So stop complaining that fighters are too good against ships.

Hasbro owns the rights, apparently, for Star Wars board games. A case can be made that IA is a "board game" as it's based on the Descent engine. Let the lawyers for both parties discuss this.

Mark Sorastro was in discussions about a super secret project for him to be contracted for work by FFG a few months ago. His speciality is 28mm figures - so either Runewars or Imperial Assault or another 28mm system

Games Workshop and Fantasy Flight had a major falling-out previously, which resulted in GW pulling the license from FFG for all the 40k product. If FFG is going to compete for market share in the 40k sphere of influence, that'd be a pretty good reason for GW doing what they did.

Using the Runewars system for a Star Wars product could really damage the RW brand. Using a licensed Flames of War system though wouldn't. But that's epic minis versus 28mm...

Do any of these relate to each other? Maybe! We'll find out tomorrow I'd think.

8 minutes ago, Slugrage said:

Hasbro owns the rights, apparently, for Star Wars board games. A case can be made that IA is a "board game" as it's based on the Descent engine. Let the lawyers for both parties discuss this.

Mark Sorastro was in discussions about a super secret project for him to be contracted for work by FFG a few months ago. His speciality is 28mm figures - so either Runewars or Imperial Assault or another 28mm system

Games Workshop and Fantasy Flight had a major falling-out previously, which resulted in GW pulling the license from FFG for all the 40k product. If FFG is going to compete for market share in the 40k sphere of influence, that'd be a pretty good reason for GW doing what they did.

Using the Runewars system for a Star Wars product could really damage the RW brand. Using a licensed Flames of War system though wouldn't. But that's epic minis versus 28mm...

Do any of these relate to each other? Maybe! We'll find out tomorrow I'd think.

I do think the FFG/GW thing was a bit of GW wanting to take it in house, FFG cramping on their style.

Rune Wars and Legion will most likely be comparable to Age of Sigmar and 40k. Mechanically and thematically.

I do hope that this is "armada" scale so we can have AT-ATs and such. I would be a tad disapointed if this is IA scale and the vehicles we see are mostly AT-STs, hover tanks, and whatever the rebellion conjures up. I mean if you can have snow speeders you can have X-wings they are almost the same size. making it 15mm would mean that you could really enact the epic battle of hoth easily. Also 15mm is generally easier to paint but just requires a different style and approach.

26 minutes ago, Tirion said:

So stop complaining that fighters are too good against ships.

Why do you think the entire Bay Area hates rebel fighters (or takes it)? Everyone here's tried to engage Mythic's Rieekan aces list long before he took it to Utah to give it some outside exposure. Between the CC aces and just how good Rebel fighters are everywhere else (except speed, I guess), I have plenty to complain about with fighters being strong. Especially if they can nuke an entire ISD-II in a single turn!

But it makes sense. Asymmetric warfare is the Rebels' specialty because they can't go toe-to-toe with the big things the Empire brings to the table. It's why in Rebellion of all places they have to use their leaders and mission cards (not their combat units) to fulfill their objectives, because they have no direct equivalent against the AT-ATs.

What I'm saying is FFG needs to be careful so as to not make those bigger units impotent. We're in the middle of more attacks = better as far as I can see, where VSDs have lost their power because how easily destroyed they are and where ISDs are taken only because they are simply the biggest thing in the game. If Legion gives us Imperial armor, give it some ability to protect against multiple small-damage (attrition) attacks if you actually want to make them tough. Fortunately we Imperial players have this mantra to say to ourselves when wondering if Ground-Yavaris with Ground B-Wings is about to pummel us: "That armor's too strong for Blasters!"

Also watching Baze's rocket attack bounce against the AT-ACT is promising. Sure X-Wings can take them out, but air strikes are an entirely different set of dynamics.

Quote

I do hope that this is "armada" scale so we can have AT-ATs and such. I would be a tad disapointed if this is IA scale and the vehicles we see are mostly AT-STs, hover tanks, and whatever the rebellion conjures up. I mean if you can have snow speeders you can have X-wings they are almost the same size. making it 15mm would mean that you could really enact the epic battle of hoth easily. Also 15mm is generally easier to paint but just requires a different style and approach.

I'd think so. Consider the universe and what the bracket is for the largest and smallest units. Smallest is infantry groups... largest is the AT-AT. I think it could work... the only way to get bigger in my estimation are the First Order walkers, but like in X-Wing you call that an Epic unit and we're good.

Why would FFG make it the same size as IA? Why create an entire new game and then use the same models? Wouldn't it make more sense to just release larger expansions for IA?

I hope this is FoW scale so we can have squads of soldiers being represented like squads of fighters is for Armada. Then the real battles focus on the deployment and movement of vehicles supported by squads. As much as I wanted to get into IA, I always wanted a game like FoW for Star Wars where you control an army rather than a squad.

First off, I really hope it's true. Secondly, I think it should be 10 or 15mm. Otherwise how could you possibly come close to scaling AtAts and ground support fighters. And that's the size you need for a real battle. Even 40k is really just squad engagements. Epic and Warmaster are where the real battles are fought.

PS, anybody around here play warmaster revolution?

15 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

Why would FFG make it the same size as IA? Why create an entire new game and then use the same models?

Because they may lose the rights to sell those models for a boardgame - but they can still sell them for a miniature game.

Just now, DiabloAzul said:

Because they may lose the rights to sell those models for a boardgame - but they can still sell them for a miniature game.

Both games are miniature games? Honestly, the distinction between what is a board game and what is a mini game is dumb.

if the troopers are rebellion sized and everything is based off that scale id be perfectly happy

2 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

Both games are miniature games? Honestly, the distinction between what is a board game and what is a mini game is dumb.

Of course.

But its also contentious and legal.

Mostly because old agreements were drawn up on "Board Game" distinctions. But Miniature Game had an ill-defined definition. So its a way for sub-licensees to get in on some action, potentially at the expense of the previous licenseee.

For example, in this situation, Hasbro got the license for Star Wars for "Board Games".... As far as they are concerned, Board Games encompasses all Toys and Games that are involved with it. That's their area. To prompt and print out all of that stuff.

But of course, without that distinction, we wouldn't get anything more than what Hasbro wants to produce - which are essentially Star Wars versions of classic games... (Monopoly and Operation come to mind)

I've said it in the past - sub-licensing into differnet areas is good for the Franchise. It allows more companies to get their hands on and produce works for which they are suited, and in doing so, enhance the franchise. It also isolates the franchise's losses if things don't pan out - you don't hinge everything on one thing.

But for the licensee of an exclusive agreement, its all about money. And FFG Making Money on a Miniatures Game, as far as Hasbro is concerned, is taking money from Hasbro's pocket.

16 hours ago, Norsehound said:

So, this means rebellion will be a campaign system to wage battles with Legion and Armada, right?

Glorious....

And "Special Ops" missions could be played with IA and X-wing

Just saying

I honestly don't care about the legalities of how this game comes to be.

There is a design space for an army based Star Wars game and I don't see how that space is filled by using IA minis. WotC had similar sized minis and their AT-AT was massive. I can't imagine having 1-2 of them on one side facing another 1-2 on a 6x3 area. And a sliding scale on IA minis would not do an AT-AT justice.

Guess we will have to wait and see.

1 minute ago, Undeadguy said:

I honestly don't care about the legalities of how this game comes to be.

There is a design space for an army based Star Wars game and I don't see how that space is filled by using IA minis. WotC had similar sized minis and their AT-AT was massive. I can't imagine having 1-2 of them on one side facing another 1-2 on a 6x3 area. And a sliding scale on IA minis would not do an AT-AT justice.

Guess we will have to wait and see.

We will.

Part of the issue is as well, is you can't go to small. They have stated they want the Iconic Characters to still be taking a part as well, and if you minimise the ground forces too much, that becomes much murkier to do as well, both in scale and an effect.

10 hours ago, Dishbird said:

Okay... Settle down, people. First of all, I'm a little skeptical about your source.

I'm an FLGS employee (hobby job as I await the kiddo) and I'm looking at the email right now. Check your email inbox. You should be looking for an email titled "Alliance Midwest Daily Receiving 8/16/17." Most of the time, the solicitation emails from distributors are ignored by everyone because they're glorified spam, so I'm not surprised it snuck past most people.

58 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

Why would FFG make it the same size as IA? Why create an entire new game and then use the same models? Wouldn't it make more sense to just release larger expansions for IA?

I hope this is FoW scale so we can have squads of soldiers being represented like squads of fighters is for Armada. Then the real battles focus on the deployment and movement of vehicles supported by squads. As much as I wanted to get into IA, I always wanted a game like FoW for Star Wars where you control an army rather than a squad.

It's not the same size as IA. they state there is some assembly required.

Just now, Tirion said:

It's not the same size as IA. they state there is some assembly required.

Some assembly. Like attaching an AT-AT to it's base like Armada is

38 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Of course.

But its also contentious and legal.

Mostly because old agreements were drawn up on "Board Game" distinctions. But Miniature Game had an ill-defined definition. So its a way for sub-licensees to get in on some action, potentially at the expense of the previous licenseee.

For example, in this situation, Hasbro got the license for Star Wars for "Board Games".... As far as they are concerned, Board Games encompasses all Toys and Games that are involved with it. That's their area. To prompt and print out all of that stuff.

...

But for the licensee of an exclusive agreement, its all about money. And FFG Making Money on a Miniatures Game, as far as Hasbro is concerned, is taking money from Hasbro's pocket.

Sure, but I'm skeptical this is proving to be a problem for one big reason.

Whether or not IA is or is not a 'board game' vs a 'miniature game'...'Star Wars: Rebellion' is definitely and unquestionably a board game. And we've got that on store shelves, with expansions coming.

So one must assume that FFG has some kind of deal either with Hasbro or Disney to allow that to happen.

(Now, the 'boardgame' vs 'miniature game' thing is really only one potential area of conflict. It's entirely possible that Hasbro and FFG *are* having problems with each other over the figures. IE., who gets to make action figures of Darth Vader, Luke Skywalker, etc. But if that's the source of the dispute, I don't think 'Legion as a way of re-using IA molds' is a likely path forward.)

14 minutes ago, Tirion said:

It's not the same size as IA. they state there is some assembly required.

IA has some assembly required as well, the AT-ST comes to mind.

I never looked into Flames of War until someone mentioned it above. After some quick Google-fu I say yes please ro Star Wars on that scale.

Just now, xanderf said:

Sure, but I'm skeptical this is proving to be a problem for one big reason.

Whether or not IA is or is not a 'board game' vs a 'miniature game'...'Star Wars: Rebellion' is definitely and unquestionably a board game. And we've got that on store shelves, with expansions coming.

So one must assume that FFG has some kind of deal either with Hasbro or Disney to allow that to happen.

(Now, the 'boardgame' vs 'miniature game' thing is really only one potential area of conflict. It's entirely possible that Hasbro and FFG *are* having problems with each other over the figures. IE., who gets to make action figures of Darth Vader, Luke Skywalker, etc. But if that's the source of the dispute, I don't think 'Legion as a way of re-using IA molds' is a likely path forward.)

I completely agree... Rebellion is so unquestionably so, I wonder if its a matter that FFG can make new board games, but Hasbro is limited to reprinting board games with the Star Wars Skin, perhaps? But then that ifringes that way with Descent / IA....

It is a 'nice to know' sort of thing, for sure. And without being a lawyer on these things, we'll never know.

If nothing else, developing molds for mass plastic production is a double edged sword... Yes, they are very expensive (most of the startup cost of the project), and can sink a project before it even starts... So you'd like to reuse as many assets as possible, wether that is 3D asset or Physical asset. (For example, the Rebellion Y-Wings are the Armada Y-Wings, only scaled up 33% - they even have the spot on the bottom for the peg).

But on the flipside of that, you want to limit direct cross compatibility. Especially if the new project is more expensive than the older project - you want the newer project to be purchased on its own to make its investment back.

With Molds as well, you don't want to overstress them - because they'll damage far before they'll break - and that's when you start getting the horrible mis-molding and mold-line issues that have plagued other companies... A Damaged mold through overuse doesn't just need replacing itself, it can also cause irrepairable damage to the whole project through perceived lack of care. If the models are bad, people won't buy any models of a set, let alone the damaged ones, for example...

The Legalities are tricky. But FFG if nothing else is an established company with Disney behind them - they wouldn't be doing something that wouldn't be Approved in the end.

Hopes:

1) Unpainted models are tournament-legal. Honestly, the bare plastic will look better than my paint job. And I won't be able to afford both the models and paying someone to paint them.

2) The scale is as small as possible. Simply, the smaller the vehicle models are, the cheaper they will be by far.

3) The positioning rules aren't floopy. Something that really bothers me about Armada and Warhammer 40 000 is how the models are placed in an inexact blob -- but then their exact position does matter for measurements. I really like the exact positioning of X-Wing units using templates.

Edit: Whoops, I just realized I'm actually in the Armada forums -- not even sure how I ended up here. Sorry for the dig -- an outsider's perspective only.

I'd put good money on this being a 28mm game, 32mm at the most.

This is the market FFG are clearly trying to break into with Runewars. All popular skirmish wargames are 28-32mm: Warhammer AoS and 40K, Infinity, Warmahordes, Knight Models, Malifaux, Guild Ball, Prodos, Warlord Games, ad infinitum.

Then theres the added benefit of using the pre-existing molds for unique characters, such as Solo, Skywalker, Vader and Fett.

I'll be very surprised if it's not.

Note that FFG does not sell Rebellion or IA through its online store - this is because they can't "sell" board games themselves.

They can still develop them though.