19 hours ago, Norsehound said:

In the end IA and Legion are still pushing around individual troopers on the board.

And again you prove you simply don't get it.

I get you wanted a 15mm game involving AT-AT's and the like, but that's not what they are making and they never had any intent of ever making it. In the TC interview Alex was clearly surprised at the suggestion the TC guys made.

But if you don't see the difference between individual heroes and squads... There's no point in discussing it further.

15 hours ago, Norsehound said:

Not necessarily... you have to dig, but Rebel units are out there, from Empire at War to Battlefront. Besides in a large-scope battle game I figured the Rebellion would lean harder on combined arms and raiding forces than walk'n'stomp of the Empire. It's kind of the dynamics going on in Armada right now, though hopefully without giving too much of an advantage to the side with the most units like what's happening in Armada now with Rebel ship swarms.

Honestly, I'd love to paint up some Skyhoppers in unit colors to augment some T-47s. Take Rebel pathfinders, a couple of units of Wookie shock troops, and some Rebel combat speeders as a fast attack unit. Drop a couple of Torpedo artillery trucks from Empire at War to use as bait, or suppressive fire against Imperial AT-ATs to immobilize them with terrain and then hit them with air units.

Part of the thrill of such a game would be seeing all these vehicles across Star Wars get the plastic treatment and actually look good. That, and having a game big enough to pair with Armada to use in a campaign system to play out the GCW over a few months. These little man-skirmishes in Legion don't seem grand enough to determine who holds a planet. They never did for IA either, which like X-Wing are better used for simulating surgical strikes.

Don't get me wrong, I like Empire at War. But this is no true Star Wars. No more than lego star wars or other games like this.

In Star Wars universe, Rebels are few, they are fighting hit and run and got their asses kicked every time Empire move it's big guns. Romantic David vs Goliath fight.

In EaW universe Rebels swarm Empire with numbers and conquer planets. This is fight of equals. Totally different universe. And it does not sell well.

FFG comes to right conclusion, that Luke and Vader will sell themselves better than AT-AT and some torpedo artillery truck that very few of the most hardened nerds ever heard about. Also, Your idea might be a good game, but it would require a lot of space for air units, so we are talking about "AT-ST is 32mm miniature" game and this is just out of topic. The point is there is not enough table space to give AT-AT justice in Legion. FFG chose this scale, because this is land version of "Armada". The largest engagement the Rebels in Star Wars OT reality can hope to win. Squads of troops, speeders, walkers, force, all the stuff general public knows as "Star Wars".

The AT-AT is doable in this scale, it is only 22.5m tall so depending on what the exact scale of the miniature is (32mm or 35mm) you are basically looking at a foot tall and about as long which isn't all that big and actually smaller than a 40k Reaver Titan would be at the same scale.

28 minutes ago, brettz123 said:

The AT-AT is doable in this scale, it is only 22.5m tall so depending on what the exact scale of the miniature is (32mm or 35mm) you are basically looking at a foot tall and about as long which isn't all that big and actually smaller than a 40k Reaver Titan would be at the same scale.

Let's take aside the question if this is good for 40k or not.

" there is not enough table space to give AT-AT justice in Legion ". Keyword "justice". Of course You cen fit the model on the table, but this supposed to be wargame and not scenery building. In wargame, every piece needs to have counter, so every player might have fun playing the game. In 40k, titans will face titans or super heavy tanks. (Making this game effective skirmish of 2 models vs 2 models). In Star Wars, only reasonable counter to AT-AT that the other side can think about is air strikes or artillery.

So, we have the picture of 1 feet long miniature on 3 feet long table. And on the other side of 3 feet long table stands "heavy artillery piece" ready to shoot at this 1 foot long miniature. They shoot at each other for 3 turns and then one of them is gone. Certainly it looks like lot of fun.

1 hour ago, Bohun242 said:

So, we have the picture of 1 feet long miniature on 3 feet long table. And on the other side of 3 feet long table stands "heavy artillery piece" ready to shoot at this 1 foot long miniature. They shoot at each other for 3 turns and then one of them is gone. Certainly it looks like lot of fun.

Wouldn't it be 6' long table since 800pts is played on 6 x 3?

14 minutes ago, Kardek said:

Wouldn't it be 6' long table since 800pts is played on 6 x 3?

I don't know how do You play wargames my friend, but when I live, we sit at longer side ;). It would be 3 ' long and 6'wide.

Aaand we know deployment zones. Corner to corner deployment is just as propable as long side to long side.

2 hours ago, brettz123 said:

The AT-AT is doable in this scale, it is only 22.5m tall so depending on what the exact scale of the miniature is (32mm or 35mm) you are basically looking at a foot tall and about as long which isn't all that big and actually smaller than a 40k Reaver Titan would be at the same scale.

Ive said this at least 5 times in multiple posts. Even showed the math for the lazy folk. People still ignore it and continue their crying lol. Im excited for its release eventually.

21 minutes ago, Bohun242 said:

I don't know how do You play wargames my friend, but when I live, we sit at longer side ;). It would be 3 ' long and 6'wide.

Aaand we know deployment zones. Corner to corner deployment is just as propable as long side to long side.

Tables are a 360 playing field in the rest of the world. Deployment zones are for.... deployment. You then use tactics and actually move the minis around the board. And staring down a foot long mini sounds like more fun than i can explain. Just because you like to "sit at the long side" and dont want asymmetrical combat, its not a automatic fact that others agree.

1 hour ago, AldousSnow said:

Tables are a 360 playing field in the rest of the world. Deployment zones are for.... deployment. You then use tactics and actually move the minis around the board. And staring down a foot long mini sounds like more fun than i can explain. Just because you like to "sit at the long side" and dont want asymmetrical combat, its not a automatic fact that others agree.

I cannot comment the fun You can't explain, so I'll leave it to Your taste. But stop putting words in my mouth. I don't like to sit at the long side and I don't mind asymmetrical combat. Quite the opposite.

And 1 foot long minis are soo cool. This is why everyone plays epic format in X-wing...

So we know it's doable in scale, but it could also be done justice wise to. Bolt action has the king tiger and maus for the Germans, and its primary focus is infantry. So let's break down the mechanics for the At-At of it were to come in game:( this is my concept idea of what it should be)

size: this unit is going to be the largest model on the table, even if they expand into Clone Wars era vehicles. You will see it virtually no matter where your at on the table. So no cover bonuses. If this thing is in range, you can shoot at it.

firing arc/weapons: the head can swivel quite a bit so I'm willing to argue 180 degrees, maybe 160 would be more realistic though. However, because the head sticks so far out, I would say it can't hit anything super close, so range 2+ For all it's weapons. It's primary role 3 red/3 white, however a clause for changing a white for a red when attacking vehicles would work. Surges against vehicles would also be welcoming. Alternatively, you could make the weapons only fire white dice at infantry( because their small ), and red dice at vehicles. If that was the case both red and white die values would be 6.

Defense: in case there was any doubt I've been assuming the hoth variant. So not only surging, but also adding evade results on defense much like having cover. The imperials had heavy armor plating on the legs/ front. You might scuff the paint but you're not breaking through with blasters. That being said, the behemoth only has about 10-12 health. Also it's neck has always been a weak spot, so a well placed shot from a rocket launcher or heavy laser cannon would cause significant damage to the walker. So ignoring bonuses if you can get a clean shot on this area would be a must. Not only because fluff, but also gameplay. You'll need special clearly defined arcs on the model indicating what a clean neck shot would be though.

Movement: speed one is a given. Also a minus to weapons if you move and shoot against infantry, that's was shown multiple times in empire strikes back, the walker only consistently hit small units while standing still. Also the walker needs a trample like ability. It's going to crush almost anything it steps on. Troops, buildings, etc. also should it move the very ground near the model shakes so to implement that in game I'm thinking maybe a knock down clause where if your enemy models in move speed one of the at-at you role one atk dice to simulate being knocked over from the force of the walkers steps.

points: for a standard game you'll only be needing a grand total of one. So 400 points for the bare bones is almost a must. Maybe 375 if upgrades get expensive. But my ideal walker would cost about 425-450 points fully kitted out. Similar to in x-wing with ships like the Falcon. Yeah you can take two Falcons, but you'll be paying a penalty game wise if you do. So one walker + troops and a commander/hero unit would be ideal.

Conclusion: I would love to see the at-at play as a monster tank that deals damage but has some very exploitable weak spots. I want the play experience not to be "ew that person brought an at-at gg " but "woah my opponent brought an at-at I'll have a challenging fight but If I play smart I can still win". I also want that same feeling from the imperial player as well. The empire underestimated the rebels on hoth and that cost them some at-ats. Of course the empire also had great effect with them as well.

As for snow speeders and tow cables, if they work similar to the bikes did in the demo but at move speed 3, it would be relatively simple to introduce tow cable rules so you can trip the walker in two-three full turns. Of course with snowspeeders there should be a counter for the empire player so there 400+ point investment doesn't get flushed down the drain early for nothing.

47 minutes ago, FlyingAnchors said:

Movement: speed one is a given.

Actually, it apparently can move at about 60km/h, it just looks slow because its so big. As for its defenses, it really should have some sort of immunity to weapons that don't have impact, and even then maybe only take damage on crits. No way a blaster rifle can destroy an AT-AT (famous last words of an AT-AT commander)

The AT-AT can be balanced by making it slow, hard to turn - which with the variable deployment is a gamble.

Add in it rolling 8 white dice on a main cannon attack, maybe focus = crit crit. And adding 5 supression tokens makes it scary to corps units.

8 hours ago, FlyingAnchors said:

So we know it's doable in scale, but it could also be done justice wise to. Bolt action has the king tiger and maus for the Germans, and its primary focus is infantry. So let's break down the mechanics for the At-At of it were to come in game:( this is my concept idea of what it should be)

True. But Bolt action is infantry vs tank game and have spotting rules that let this infantry play cat and mouse with tanks. In BA You can outsmart Your opponnent to avoid Tiger. No such rules in Legion and complicating entire ruleset for the sake of one model would be foolish.

If You really want to play tank game, You play FoW, not BA. In this scale, tanks can shine.

Also keep in mind Legion seems to be objective game. And Your prototype looks to be quite week in objective capture.

14 hours ago, brettz123 said:

The AT-AT is doable in this scale, it is only 22.5m tall so depending on what the exact scale of the miniature is (32mm or 35mm) you are basically looking at a foot tall and about as long which isn't all that big and actually smaller than a 40k Reaver Titan would be at the same scale.

Its not a foot height its 40cm which is a bit more. Lets say its about the height of a 40K reaver then the AT-AT would still be like two reavers standing in line. How much do you pay for two 40K reavers?

I'm hoping there will be anther game for vehicles.

I'd rather the game was in one scale, like 1/270, but focused on the vehicles. It could include squadrons of Infantry and Flotillas of speeder bikes, but it's the tanks, walkers and atmospheric craft that are the focus of the game.

Epic 40,000 (and its predecessors and successors) was a lot like that.

At 1/270, you could even use X-Wing Miniatures spacecraft for ground attacks. Or scale it up a bit, and Armada 3-ship squadrons could be used instead.

Throw in some "orbital tactical strikes" and even Armada capital ship models could see play.

6 hours ago, Bohun242 said:

No such rules in Legion and complicating entire ruleset for the sake of one model would be foolish.

I'm not expecting to see an AT-AT and kinda hope we never do see one, because I don't want to pay for one...

But to say that there's no such rules in Legion is simply asinine, since we don't actually know what is or isn't in the rules yet. For all we know FFG has a very good way of dealing with something like an AT-AT in the rules, but was never mentioned in the demo games for reasons that should be self-evident.

36 minutes ago, VanorDM said:

I'm not expecting to see an AT-AT and kinda hope we never do see one, because I don't want to pay for one...

But to say that there's no such rules in Legion is simply asinine, since we don't actually know what is or isn't in the rules yet. For all we know FFG has a very good way of dealing with something like an AT-AT in the rules, but was never mentioned in the demo games for reasons that should be self-evident.

You are right, I kind of assume there is no such rules. But still i think it would be foolish to include them. Overcomplication is never good.

Sure, a 1 foot ATAT is possible at Legion's scale, but it doesn't allow for the Battle of Hoth to be recreated (5-6 AT-ATs), or any similar battle such as the Battle of Scarif. There are very few ground battles in the movies and Hoth and Scarif are the most iconic. It's a shame we can't play out either of these battles in entirety.

19 minutes ago, Thraug said:

Sure, a 1 foot ATAT is possible at Legion's scale, but it doesn't allow for the Battle of Hoth to be recreated (5-6 AT-ATs), or any similar battle such as the Battle of Scarif. There are very few ground battles in the movies and Hoth and Scarif are the most iconic. It's a shame we can't play out either of these battles in entirety.

I honestly don't want to keep playing out the scenes from the films

1 hour ago, Bohun242 said:

Overcomplication is never good.

I agree, although you can go too far the other way and make a game that's too simple. 40k 8th is close to this in some ways, like with the new vehicle rules. I like that they took away the penetration rules and charts and all so it's just effectively HP's. But taking away facing was a mistake.

But we shouldn't assume that rules to deal with a superheavy like an AT-AT would make the rules overly complicated.

33 minutes ago, Thraug said:

There are very few ground battles in the movies and Hoth and Scarif are the most iconic. It's a shame we can't play out either of these battles in entirety.

Neither of those battles would be much fun for the rebel player, at least not after the first play. Because in both cases the Empire so massively out maned the Rebels that it wasn't really a true battle. In the case of Hoth it was an orderly retreat and delaying action. Scarif was a suicide mission.

Asymmetrical games can be fun from time to time, but always being the underdog would get old fairly quickly. Star Wars quite frankly doesn't allow for full scale battles without the Rebels being massively outmanned and outgunned. Because at no point could the rebels actually even come close to matching the Empire's numbers.

In fact I doubt the Rebel Alliance could muster much more than a brigade worth of troops.

So at some point FFG may very well produce a 15mm scale game with a larger focus on vehicles... But even then we're still talking about a company and even at that size a AT-AT would be a big model and a huge force in the game, it's unlikely you'd get 5-6 of them in a single battle.

2 hours ago, VanorDM said:

I agree, although you can go too far the other way and make a game that's too simple. 40k 8th is close to this in some ways, like with the new vehicle rules. I like that they took away the penetration rules and charts and all so it's just effectively HP's. But taking away facing was a mistake.

But we shouldn't assume that rules to deal with a superheavy like an AT-AT would make the rules overly complicated.

Neither of those battles would be much fun for the rebel player, at least not after the first play. Because in both cases the Empire so massively out maned the Rebels that it wasn't really a true battle. In the case of Hoth it was an orderly retreat and delaying action. Scarif was a suicide mission.

Asymmetrical games can be fun from time to time, but always being the underdog would get old fairly quickly. Star Wars quite frankly doesn't allow for full scale battles without the Rebels being massively outmanned and outgunned. Because at no point could the rebels actually even come close to matching the Empire's numbers.

In fact I doubt the Rebel Alliance could muster much more than a brigade worth of troops.

So at some point FFG may very well produce a 15mm scale game with a larger focus on vehicles... But even then we're still talking about a company and even at that size a AT-AT would be a big model and a huge force in the game, it's unlikely you'd get 5-6 of them in a single battle.

While that is true until ROTJ, there is an entire period between ROTJ and TFA where the Rebellion transforms into the New Republic and drives the Empire from the core regions. Since in SW space superiority over planets isn't all powerful they had to engage in large ground offensives as is clearly shown by the destroyed AT-AT's on Jakku which apparently only happened a mere 2 years after ROTJ. So in only 2 years they managed to wage large ground offensives and emerge victorious over the Empire's might (which still had billions of troops, thousands of Star Destroyers etc..etc..). So not that much of an underdog. It depends where the line for Legion is drawn, and I hope its Jakku as that allows potential future depth to that battle to be integrated into Legion (new vehicles, troop types etc..)

I love how people are using the Reaver Titan as some kind of example.

The Reaver is an $800 monster that really wasn't meant to see a normal 40k table top.

I'll leave the argument over if it's most appropriate for epic, apocalypse, or the old titan specific game for others. But I do feel confident saying that the Reaver isn't an example proving the AT-AT.

The issue here is pretty straight forward though. The AT-AT, as an odd hybrid of APC, artillery, and main line armored vehicle, is very difficult to get on a table at this scale. I'm not saying you can't do it, but I am saying that it likely won't work as expected, and probably not for normal play.

Star Wars already has some scaling issues and errors that FFG is going to have to confront. So maybe the AT-AT will be able to benefit from that. Still, the game isn't out, and we don't know the details, or plans. Is 6x3 as big as they are going to go? How much leeway are they getting to produce new units and materials? How well received will new material be? How well will things like The Last Jedi and The Young Han Solo Chronicles be at generating content that will be usable?

Lots of other unanswered questions that would be a bigger indication of something like the AT-AT...

"Your [game developers are] so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should ."

1 hour ago, Lord Tareq said:

While that is true until ROTJ, there is an entire period between ROTJ and TFA where the Rebellion transforms into the New Republic and drives the Empire from the core regions.

True, but most people aren't looking at that era, at least they don't seem to be. They want Hoth or Scarif, they want Vader leading troops. They want the OT stuff, but also want mass battles, which don't actually fit the OT era at all.

Which isn't to say that it couldn't work, but it you were going to really make large scale battles part of the game you to a point have to place it after RotJ and that should include excluding the characters that wouldn't be around after that point.