Scale is a very tricky issue once you hit that size. It's not even as simple as "if it's the right scale it's all good".

Some models and terrain actually look odd at the correct scale. This is because of things like bases, unrealistic proportions and dramatic posing....it's especially noticeable on buildings where doors and windows sometimes look funny, but you can see it on vehicles too.

Added to that is that some things, if accurately scaled, are just too big for wargaming. Not even things like AT-ATs....Justin take a look around at the buildings and houses near you. Now look at wanes table buildings....in general they are tiny compared to real buildings, because otherwise the table looks odd and plays badly. This is due to ground scale very rarely matching model scale.

Most wargaming stuff takes some degree of liberty with scale so that it "feels right" for these reasons (though I should add at historical gaming tends to be more accurate, as sizes are less insane than fiction).

In regards to an AT-AT specifically, it doesn't necessarily need to be accurately scaled, but it DOES need to look right compared to over models. Accurate scale would actually be enormous (the aforementioned Revell model is roughly correct) at around 35-40cm. That's more than a third of the table width, and leaves very little room for tactical play or movement.

It also absolutely dominates the table aesthetically, which isn't always a good thing. It draws all focus to it, and makes the game as a whole look quite secondary (which might be the case in a gameplay sense too).

So scale....it's tricky. I don't think we'll ever see an accurate scaled AT-AT, and oddly I don't think it'd look amazing if we did. I also don't think it'd play great.

I will still however be getting a Revell one for display purposes....

1 hour ago, Orcdruid said:

So here was my thought process

For the rebs, the at-at is a powerful vehicle and it doesn't seem like the rebels have much to be able to deal with it. So, if it were thematic it would be an instant NPE when it was on the table.

For the imps, when I say story piece i mean tied to one objective or a campaign. Imperial players want to be able to actually play with it so limiting it like that would upset them.

I think with the game focusing on objectives you can have an at-at be insanely powerful and still be balanced. I'm not saying they would succeed at it; I just think it's possible to do and not guaranteed that they won't. Points alone can be used to balance it, make it crazy expensive to the point where you can't legitimately field one at 800 points; I would like to think there will be many people looking to play well above they point cap anyways.

Maybe we will see AT-AT as a "special card" that you can buy to your army, and you can exhaust it to perform special attack from outside of the board.

I'm going to wait for the 25mm game that's neither compatible with my IA or my Legion figures before I even think about wanting an AT-AT

On 8/24/2017 at 10:29 PM, BergerFett said:

scale is something that gets finicky. it works in x-wing and armada because you have a preceive Z axis that you can cheat. you can claim a CR-90 is flying "higher" than the isd and thats why its bigger than it should be. This is much harder to achieve on ground level.

A big draw and selling point to miniature wargaming is the immersion factor. "getting lost in the game" is make or break for a lot of people. If you can start pushing models and rolling dice and forget its a game and let your minds eye wander to just it being a movie or something, those games do the best. This is the one thing GW was able to achieve for a long time. Cinematic games that not only were fun but looked and felt like movies. This was particularly true for Fantasy when you had flying dragons on the same table as Knights and rank and file bricks of infantry. it just looked impressive. Making sure your customers are immersed in the game you sell is one of the top priorities for game companies. its why so many people make 40k-esk terrain because they know there are people willing to pay for the immersion.

I don't disagree with any of that, but for me scale doesn't really affect my ability to feel in the game. If it's close enough, I feel immersed. Like Imperial Assault. Scale for that game is all over the place, but I don't feel any less immersed than I do with X-wing, where all of the standard figures are to scale with one another. Gameplay determines immersion. And I'd rather have a model that's a little too small so it's easier to work with than to not have it in the game at all.

But that's me.

One thing I've learned from the ISD for X-Wing and SSD for Amdada, which is a lot the same issue with AT-AT for IA and now Legion...

Some people simply don't care about scale that much and are more then happy with close enough, because they want that model in the game. Others care about scale and close enough isn't, and so they don't want it if it doesn't fit correctly. Something I've learned is those two camps will never agree, so there's next to no point in discussing it because the two sides will never agree.

The other thing I believe is that FFG know exactly how big they will go and have either already started working on a AT-AT or know it will never happen. It's not just a matter of size, it's a matter of price. FFG knows full well how much most people are willing to spend on a single model and make their decisions accordingly. Sure there's some people out there who will drop $250+ on a ForgeWorld Titan, but those are a very small minority.

This is not only a question of model scale, it is also a question of troop scale. A "legion" consists of a reinforced infantry platoon at best. Something an ATAT would annihilate in a couple of bursts. So you need not only scale down the model, but you need to nerf the ATAT considerably. This would feel odd.

9 minutes ago, Rumar said:

This is not only a question of model scale, it is also a question of troop scale. A "legion" consists of a reinforced infantry platoon at best. Something an ATAT would annihilate in a couple of bursts. So you need not only scale down the model, but you need to nerf the ATAT considerably. This would feel odd.

Well said.

Physical scale is less of a concern than "power scale" to me. If it doesn't feel like an AT-AT, there shouldn't be one. And if it DOES, i struggle to see how the Rebels can fight it.

7 minutes ago, Rumar said:

So you need not only scale down the model, but you need to nerf the ATAT considerably. This would feel odd.

True, but it's still the same thing really. It's a question of scale in terms of size and scale in terms of firepower. Both camps seem to feel the same way about both things, more or less.

If you are ok with an undersized AT-AT/SSD/ISD, you are most likely ok with a underpowered one as well. Whereas someone like me wants one that is accurate in terms of scale and firepower. But again the two camps will never agree, because for the 'scale doesn't matter' camp having the model is all that really matters, and what the final form looks and plays like in terms of scale just doesn't matter.

This product is in direct competition to 40k. I wanted a SW equivalent 20+ years ago and its now missed its chance for me.

I finally gave up on GW and 40K a few years back when GW kept relaunching the rules every few years and remodelled everything and got int XW instead. I then got into IA and Armada, all different enough in their own right.

Legion is not a scale of battlefield I want now. They should have done 15mm and had huge Legions, instead, we've got Squads.

If IA is thrown under the bus because of Legion, I will be bitterly disappointed with the decision and FFG in general. Legion, no matter how you try to big it up, is simply the wrong scale.

I'll hang on a couple of years when FFG will inevitably release a 15mm scale version that they should have released in the first place.

Good luck to it and I hope those that DO want it, enjoy it.

Using the Legion scale, it puts an Imperial AT-AT at 13-14 inches tall. Totally probable. No special rules needed. There's a chance they'll get it down to 10 or 11 with a similar sliding scale that they use for X wing Epic Huge ships. But at the full 1:48 scale, a 14 inch Imperial Walker is likely to hit the table. Rules would make it more of a mission based unit, I'm sure. But we'll see it guys, and the $80-100 price tag isn't anything we haven't paid before. Remember, this is a Wargame, not a board game like IA. Wargames take money, time, patience, and a love for the gaming style.

An in scale (which isn't 1/48 thankfully, it's smaller than that by a little bit) AT-AT would be a **** of a lot more an $80-$100. ****, a Tantive IV rrp is $90, and this AT-AT would take up massively more volume and material.

Id estimate around $150 or more.

Mind you, at at point you still might as well buy the almost spot on correctly scaled Revell one, which would save all this arguing too (though an FFG one would probably be a bit nicer on the detail admittedly).

On 8/19/2017 at 5:48 PM, Guest LiveWire X said:

you know that there won't be AT-ATs in the game?

Let's say that they will have other ground based vehicles but given the scale of the individual units, it's hard to picture how they're going to create an AT-AT to scale and it be less than the cost of the core game itself.

So if you knew in advance that there wouldn't be AT-ATs for Legion, would you still buy it?

A crashed AT-AT would be a fantastic terrain piece

I'm more about true scale so for me I would be fine never seeing some of the largest units or seeing them at true scale. Even if that ment that some figures costed 200 dollars. Tens of thousands are spent on other table top games so keeping true scale is not that far fetched. Still that's far into the future. This is still in infancy, so baby steps.

I'm thinking a wrecked AT-AT would make a really cool piece of terrain. Just saw someone said this already.