21 minutes ago, kingargyle said:

Hopefully he's learned because Wave 4 - present had him involved especially Waves 4 - 9, in X-Wing and that is when the balance went out the window.

I don’t want to derail this thread into a conversation about balance in X-Wing, but I have to say that, looking at long-running, expansive competitive miniature games, I personally think X-Wing is in a really healthy place, comparatively speaking. When games continue to grow in that way, power creep is pretty much inevitable, and still seeing ships from Wave 1 and Wave 2 in competitive lists, with arguably the broadest meta I can remember (and I’ve been playing competitively since Wave 5), it’s as good as we can reasonably expect.

In short, I trust FFG, and I trust Alex Davey. I’m going to sit back, relax, and enjoy the ride they take us on!

2 hours ago, kingargyle said:

Hopefully he's learned because Wave 4 - present had him involved especially Waves 4 - 9, in X-Wing and that is when the balance went out the window.

I think he has. I can't speak for X-Wing, but I feel he took all the bad things about Armada and fixed them for Legion.

The game is entirely objective based, which is a step up from Armada, and Armada is a step up form X-Wing in that regard. No longer can I create a list to exploit 3 objectives and camp to win.

Deployment is varied, which means you don't play your army the same way every time and gets rid of the same-i-ness that can happen in Armada.

Troop movement is very fast and simple, where as squad movement in Armada is meticulous.

Most importantly, the activation system has been totally reworked so you don't have the monstrosity of last/first that plagues Armada.

I'm quite excited.

2 hours ago, kingargyle said:

Hopefully he's learned because Wave 4 - present had him involved especially Waves 4 - 9, in X-Wing and that is when the balance went out the window.

I think he has. I can't speak for X-Wing, but I feel he took all the bad things about Armada and fixed them for Legion.

The game is entirely objective based, which is a step up from Armada, and Armada is a step up form X-Wing in that regard. No longer can I create a list to exploit 3 objectives and camp to win.

Deployment is varied, which means you don't play your army the same way every time and gets rid of the same-i-ness that can happen in Armada.

Troop movement is very fast and simple, where as squad movement in Armada is meticulous.

Most importantly, the activation system has been totally reworked so you don't have the monstrosity of last/first that plagues Armada.

I'm quite excited.

7 hours ago, kingargyle said:

Sorry I lost it here.... after seeing what happened in Imperial Assault... and X-Wing since Wave 4 to the present. Game balance is one thing they have to constantly correct for with FAQs and errattas.

never played IA, so no comment on that, I do play a crap ton of X-wing and honestly, the only true erratta that I have seen totally screw a chip is the Biggs nerf, ( not that biggs was ever a real issue for me ) and the bump masters of course they were a bit over powered but hardly unbeatable, all the other changes never really seemed to mean anything when you got right down to game play.

But you are right game balance needs to be adjusted from time to time, we are lucky enough to have a company that cares enough to keep that in mind.

As for my balance comment I stand by it in regards to Legion, as an avid war gamer I have seen game go pear shape when you have lopsided lists

Does the snowspeeder have any moveable parts such as the tow cable gun oder the air brakes???.....likewise, does the tow cable gun as a hard point; and pegged where can replace?? Wunderbar...

....vielendanke

3 minutes ago, wintermoonwolf said:

Does the snowspeeder have any moveable parts such as the tow cable gun oder the air brakes???.....likewise, does the tow cable gun as a hard point; and pegged where can replace?? Wunderbar...

....vielendanke

From what we understand not moveable, but the can be assembled in different positions and with different weapons

On 11/3/2017 at 6:26 PM, Undeadguy said:

I think he has. I can't speak for X-Wing, but I feel he took all the bad things about Armada and fixed them for Legion.

The game is entirely objective based, which is a step up from Armada, and Armada is a step up form X-Wing in that regard. No longer can I create a list to exploit 3 objectives and camp to win.

Deployment is varied, which means you don't play your army the same way every time and gets rid of the same-i-ness that can happen in Armada.

Troop movement is very fast and simple, where as squad movement in Armada is meticulous.

Most importantly, the activation system has been totally reworked so you don't have the monstrosity of last/first that plagues Armada.

I don't think much if any of that is "lessons learned from Armada", so much as just the result of the difference in style of game.

If anything, it feels like "lessons learned from years of being angry at 40k", or whathaveyou.

Armada is a very unique game (for it's popularity and playerbase - of course almost any idea has been done before by some niche game somewhere), whereas Legion seems to be more of an established formula given a few creative twists and some spit-polish. I do agree that everything you listed will be great for Legion; but I don't think those things could've been translated into Armada had they started making it today.

Just as an example - the (6?) deployment types in Legion couldn't be a feature of Armada, because Armada's slow ship turn rates (which are themselves core to the game's long-term, strategical bent) would create a huge potential imbalance. Objectives like Blockade Run or Superior Positions show how heavily a non-standard deployment can cripple a fleet composed of ships not equipped to react.

Whereas in Legion, you can turn quickly, move fast, and change direction easily (infantry move freely, and even vehicles can just hook a pair of speed 1 moves if they need to completely turn around in a single activation).

Certainly there are insights learned from Armada, but Legion is a wholly different genre from FFG's spaceship games.

1 hour ago, svelok said:

I don't think much if any of that is "lessons learned from Armada", so much as just the result of the difference in style of game.

If anything, it feels like "lessons learned from years of being angry at 40k", or whathaveyou.

Armada is a very unique game (for it's popularity and playerbase - of course almost any idea has been done before by some niche game somewhere), whereas Legion seems to be more of an established formula given a few creative twists and some spit-polish. I do agree that everything you listed will be great for Legion; but I don't think those things could've been translated into Armada had they started making it today.

Just as an example - the (6?) deployment types in Legion couldn't be a feature of Armada, because Armada's slow ship turn rates (which are themselves core to the game's long-term, strategical bent) would create a huge potential imbalance. Objectives like Blockade Run or Superior Positions show how heavily a non-standard deployment can cripple a fleet composed of ships not equipped to react.

Whereas in Legion, you can turn quickly, move fast, and change direction easily (infantry move freely, and even vehicles can just hook a pair of speed 1 moves if they need to completely turn around in a single activation).

Certainly there are insights learned from Armada, but Legion is a wholly different genre from FFG's spaceship games.

Here's the thing though, for better or worse you can see the advancement through ffg's last mini releases

xwing -> armada -> runewars -> legion

For the most part they aren't just staying static with a different skin and a few bolt on rules to accommodate the setting . One could say the commands system is an evolution of armada's dials. They dumped the you have a full turn i have a full turn that sucks from competitors very early on. Everyone in the preview interviews seems to be gushing about how thought out and simple yet still having tactical depth the ruleset is so far.

I'll admit i'm personally starting to share some of the concerns about imperial costing and stats hamstringing them in wave 1...... but i've really got to put it on the table and see before i make a full call.