Transport vehicles. Any thoughts?

Certainly plenty in Star Wars fluff, so might well see some of the smaller ones.

Most likely they will be some Transport vehicles.

Something like; Transport X - in deployment phase you may choose X troop unit to be transported by this vehicle. If you do so, put that unit of troopers aside. Action: Deploy one of the units transported by this vehicle within range 1 of this vehicle base. Deployed unit may take immediately one action. Treat deployed unit as it moved. If this vehicle is destroyed - every troop unit inside take one wound, one supression token and must be deployed immediately - treat unit deployed that way as it was activated, and cannot take any actions to the end of the round.

It can be probably shortened, but that's my way of thinking how that could work.

Yeah. Transport is a funny rule mechanic. My current WW2 rule set makes transport a function of the vehicle, not the infantry unit, so it runs very smoothly.

If you are faffing about with getting infantry into range of a door, etc, it does become quite cumbersome.

So far, ffg look like they are very anti-faff rules, so im hoping it works something like you suggest.

Just for those who don't get the reference, METAL BAWKSES is a 40k meme.

Soulstorm Metal Boxes Cut scene

Most likely we will see a "Imperial Troop Transport" , what we can see from Rebel TV series. Its not huge vehicle (so good in Legion scale), it can tak 1 or 2 troop units, have some armament. For more pics you can search in google.

And for the rules - if you want more "casual" players (with are important if you want that player base will grow) you need to keep in mind one rule - KISS ( K eep I t S imple and S tupid). And FFG does a great job with this (look -> X-wing).

I hope that transport doesn't appear, though I suspect you're right. It's such an incredibly dumb design, even by Star Wars levels (which is strongly "form over function").

And it's sooooo ugly.

Depends on how much freedom ffg gets with legion. I expect they will pull heavily from the rts games, if the mouse will sign off on it.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/TX-225_GAVw_"Occupier"_combat_assault_tank

Rather than kyber crystals in storage containers like Rogue One, seats for a small squad, or a mounting for E-Web heavy blaster in the back.

Or maybe we will see a " Imperial Troop Carrier". Its ugly -but thats something.

P.S. Personally I would like to see "Atmospheric Assault Lander" but it is too huge, and from First Order...

What's the use of transports on that scale? How many turns to cross the table on foot? Just fire support.

1 minute ago, Rumar said:

What's the use of transports on that scale? How many turns to cross the table on foot? Just fire support.

If (no clue how they'd implement it) transports move even one distance further than infantry, then infantry deploying at range one of the transport for one action, then moving for their last action. That would provide very effective board control and tactical control in regards to application of force.

People are paying a lot more attention to the PC in APC than the A. Movable cover seems good if it's not too expensive. What soldier, given the option, says "heck, no. I'd rather hoof it across contested territory to the objective instead of riding in this giant small arms fire sponge."?

Edit: How the heck am I supposed to talk about **** if I can't say ****?

They are going head to head with GW so there will be transported infantry.

If you watch the Gencon video with Team Covenant. The game designer same as admitted that the AT-ST and the Snow speeder were on their way. He also mentioned terrain.

8 minutes ago, qwertyuiop said:

People are paying a lot more attention to the PC in APC than the A. Movable cover seems good if it's not too expensive. What soldier, given the option, says "heck, no. I'd rather hoof it across contested territory to the objective instead of riding in this giant small arms fire sponge."?

Edit: How the heck am I supposed to talk about **** if I can't say ****?

If you're sure there is only small arms fire, then it is worth it. If not, the opposition can kill two birds with one rpg.

4 hours ago, Gadgetron said:

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/TX-225_GAVw_"Occupier"_combat_assault_tank

Rather than kyber crystals in storage containers like Rogue One, seats for a small squad, or a mounting for E-Web heavy blaster in the back.

Why not the version that was supposed to appear in first place? Note this is a GAVr instead of a GAVw. I guess it was changed due to plot requirements, or maybe because is easier to make if it does not "hover".
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/TX-225_GAVr_"Occupier"_combat_assault_tank

I wouldn't think they need transports because the map is so small but... They have this nifty system all in place for setting up the game. So part of someone's strategy could be having transports and trying to get the deployment zones that are furthest apart when setting up the game if the other person doesn't have a transport in their army. Giving the army with transports an advantage for moving to objectives more quickly.

The dev guy made a point about that sort of strategic thinking when he mentioned when he was play testing with another guy, that guy employed a strategy where he picked the divided 4 deployment zones because he had 2 commanders and the dev only had 1 commander.

6 hours ago, Frodos said:

And for the rules - if you want more "casual" players (with are important if you want that player base will grow) you need to keep in mind one rule - KISS ( K eep I t S imple and S tupid). And FFG does a great job with this (look -> X-wing).

Oooh...what's the last time you went to an X-Wing tournament?

I kid of course, but it's a bit of a sore spot with some of us X-Wingers lately. There's so much rules creep. What with all these zero-point upgrades and fix cards and condition cards, tournament games are virtually unrecognizable. I'd really hope they keep upgrades in this game fairly minimal, just so that the board doesn't get too cluttered and complicated. A few keywords is all you really need. I certainly agree with the KISS principle.

Do you really want to enrage Lord Carron even more?

About transports, it is certainly possible.