I think we will get ATATs since both WEG and Wizards miniature games had them. Fighters/ships could be included if a game mechanic similar to Bolt Action or Battletech/Alpha Strike fighter/ship rules.

11 hours ago, Gunbunnie said:

I think we will get ATATs since both WEG and Wizards miniature games had them. Fighters/ships could be included if a game mechanic similar to Bolt Action or Battletech/Alpha Strike fighter/ship rules.

An AT-AT in the same scale as the T-47 would be roughly over a foot long, and over a foot tall, and cost over $100. I'm not certain it would even fit in some of the deployment options. Not to mention the AT-ST is 200 points, so an AT-AT would be almost the entire army.

For "Epic" play maybe, but I would rather they just focused more on the standard game and kept the bombers, AT-ATs, and artillery abstracted.

Edit: The analog to Bolt Action's air/artillery strikes would be Veer's/Leia's Command cards. At least in Legion the observer is something other than an order die and maybe a couple rifles after calling in support.

On 2/8/2018 at 1:58 PM, Caimheul1313 said:

Fair point, it does depend on how the measuring tools translate to actual measurements. A smallish ground based transport, I could see, like the ITT. But the size of many of the known air transports is prohibitive for inclusion as actual models and not just Command card effects.

One thing of note is that Rapid Reinforcements condition card already simulates auxiliary troop deployment(whether by lambdas, ATAT,U-wing is up to imagination) and the "activated that turn" simulates them taking a round to drop off. I don't think a variation of this in a future expansion is unlikely, considering in Armada the Raddus commander card does a different version of what Hyperspace Assault objective does(both drop ships mid-way into the battle), but like Armada it will likely be a card/commander upgrade(i.e. Crix Madine's Spec ops?).

I do think however that by taking a more general/rules-based approach to simulate mechanics in the game ffg allows us the freedom to modify and immerse in the game how we want. I think it would be simple and cool to place a X-wing's Lambda model near my Rapid Reinforcements troops on the turn they deploy to awe my opponent.

On 2/10/2018 at 4:14 PM, Caimheul1313 said:

An AT-AT in the same scale as the T-47 would be roughly over a foot long, and over a foot tall, and cost over $100.

At 22.5m x 20m x 6m it would be about 45cmx40cmx12cm (18" high give or take and 16" long and 4" wide) Take bit of card board and prototype the base for the model, if you allow just a half-inch over for the base you'll have a base for the model that is 19x5" that is crazy just there for the size, once the game comes out cut out a piece of paper or card and just see what area the model would take on the table.

Now consider movement, you line up the front hole, pick up the model and place it down, the dang thing just moved 14" or so further than a regular vehicle because of the size of the base. So you would require special rules for movement to make the At-AT move like an Armada spaceship.

Now while I wouldn't be upset to learn that they were making one, there does seem to be some issues to overcome.

@Amanal Thanks for doing the actual math. I could maybe see it for an Epic style release with special movement tools. A model of that size would be very expensive!

I am of the opinion that if we did get an AT-AT we would probably purchase a base and cards, but the actual model would be a 1:50 kit from Revel or Bandai.

2 minutes ago, Amanal said:

I am of the opinion that if we did get an AT-AT we would probably purchase a base and cards, but the actual model would be a 1:50 kit from Revel or Bandai.

I don't see that as a good idea for FFG. Then they are beholden to another company to continue producing the model, and are missing the profits from selling a model.

Although Bolt Action aircraft mechanic has been mentioned a Bolt Action version I have seen is Experimental Aircraft rules and that's what I had in mind when I started the post. That has aircraft which may or maynot come on, fighters can intercept bombers. Different wound levels per aircraft, and seems to be a workable system for aircraft in a platyoon/company level wargame. Also AT-At peeps, that's off topic gents, sure AT-ATs have been debated to death already.

1 hour ago, LordAdmiralAndy said:

Although Bolt Action aircraft mechanic has been mentioned a Bolt Action version I have seen is Experimental Aircraft rules and that's what I had in mind when I started the post.

The Bolt Action option rules for Aircraft are held by all the players in my area as broken, in that they are very bad. I am unaware of anyone making frequent use of those rules.

10 minutes ago, LordAdmiralAndy said:

Although Bolt Action aircraft mechanic has been mentioned a Bolt Action version I have seen is Experimental Aircraft rules and that's what I had in mind when I started the post....

I find that miniatures gaming aircraft rules are often times the equivalent of putting a square peg in a round hole.

1 hour ago, LordAdmiralAndy said:

Also AT-At peeps, that's off topic gents, sure AT-ATs have been debated to death already.

The AT-AT came into discussion partially as it's model would be roughly the same size as many of the ships that would be used for ground support/transport, and partially as the Veers's Maximum Firepower abstracts the AT-AT in a similar fashion to Leia's Coordinated Bombardment abstracts Artillery/Aerial bombardment.

16 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

The Bolt Action option rules for Aircraft are held by all the players in my area as broken, in that they are very bad. I am unaware of anyone making frequent use of those rules.

As I've not tried those, most of my BA experience is the smaller scale without aircraft or tanks, shame to hear they maybe broken, does Flames of War or the Battletech/Alpha strike someone mentioned have workable aircraft rules?

15 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

The AT-AT came into discussion partially as it's model would be roughly the same size as many of the ships that would be used for ground support/transport, and partially as the Veers's Maximum Firepower abstracts the AT-AT in a similar fashion to Leia's Coordinated Bombardment abstracts Artillery/Aerial bombardment.

I can see your point there, an actual AT-AT model without a 12ft table doesn't seem workable, but I wonder how T-47 is ever supposed to interact that given the AT-AT off-table abstraction, whilst the T-47 is an inplay unit?

3 minutes ago, LordAdmiralAndy said:

I can see your point there, an actual AT-AT model without a 12ft table doesn't seem workable, but I wonder how T-47 is ever supposed to interact that given the AT-AT off-table abstraction, whilst the T-47 is an inplay unit?

T-47s aren't supposed to be able to interact with AT-ATs. It was only really in one battle that Luke figured out an alternate use for the grappling hook. Basically a freak occurrence. The two vehicles are in vastly different leagues.

1 minute ago, Vandallorian said:

T-47s aren't supposed to be able to interact with AT-ATs. It was only really in one battle that Luke figured out an alternate use for the grappling hook. Basically a freak occurrence. The two vehicles are in vastly different leagues.

Except the designer has said if its in the movies you shouldn't rule it out. Perhaps a bit too broad a statement given some fans expectations.

3 minutes ago, LordAdmiralAndy said:

Except the designer has said if its in the movies you shouldn't rule it out. Perhaps a bit too broad a statement given some fans expectations.

By that logic we can assume that this will be played as a three player game so that Vader can attack the Emperor while fighting Luke.

Official Multiplayer Format Confirmed.

4 minutes ago, LordAdmiralAndy said:

Except the designer has said if its in the movies you shouldn't rule it out. Perhaps a bit too broad a statement given some fans expectations.

Shouldn't rule it out does not equal will be included. The grappling hook rules just change the facing of a vehicle, they wouldn't allow for wrapping around the legs of an AT-AT.

Also, by that logic, we should expect if Chewbacca is included, he will have rules allowing him to take over your opponent's AT-ST.

23 minutes ago, LordAdmiralAndy said:

Except the designer has said if its in the movies you shouldn't rule it out. Perhaps a bit too broad a statement given some fans expectations.

Star Destroyers in Legion confirmed!!!

A few new types of cards to show off board support is a must for the complete battle.... just the odd attack here, or a explosion going wide there.... for most battles the sky would be buzzing with craft......

17 minutes ago, soulman said:

A few new types of cards to show off board support is a must for the complete battle.... just the odd attack here, or a explosion going wide there.... for most battles the sky would be buzzing with craft......

Are the Veers and Leia command cards what you're referring to?

8 hours ago, soulman said:

A few new types of cards to show off board support is a must for the complete battle.... just the odd attack here, or a explosion going wide there.... for most battles the sky would be buzzing with craft......

This is why I think a weather condition card would work. The ground pounders don't care that there are 6 x-wings fighting 10 tie fighters. All they care about is the strafing runs, bomb drops and crashing wreckage falling from the sky. Aerial combat could be a weather card that says that on turns 2, 4 and 6 you take fire when you are out of cover. It really doesn't make sense in the star wars universe for only one side to have air support present anyways.

9 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Shouldn't rule it out does not equal will be included. The grappling hook rules just change the facing of a vehicle, they wouldn't allow for wrapping around the legs of an AT-AT.

Also, by that logic, we should expect if Chewbacca is included, he will have rules allowing him to take over your opponent's AT-ST.

Fan expectation is shouldn't rule it out does infact equal will ne included. Henve 6 months in we still get shout outs for they could have an At-At, they could it'd be ok...

I agree with you concerning that, and there does need to be something in the Rebel army lists about procureded Imperial equipment, it happens in Rebels, ROTJ (Speeder bikes and shuttles), TFA, A New Hope & ESB (Stormtrooper armour and weapons). Something like 1 Rebel unit with 1 Imperial Unit but with Rebel rules to distinguish it.

8 hours ago, soulman said:

A few new types of cards to show off board support is a must for the complete battle.... just the odd attack here, or a explosion going wide there.... for most battles the sky would be buzzing with craft......

This is my feeling too, given aircraft directly influence the outcome of more than 1 fight in Star Wars Universe, not just the movies but in the Cartoon shows as well.

When someone wants to add very large vehicles in a platoon level game, I think they looking for another gaming scale. Drop Zone Commander is on a much larger scale than Legion, I am not in favor of an AT-AT or any other large craft being part of the game, even though I plan to use some AT-ATs for static terrain. If I do Rey's AT-AT home, I will need at least a 20" square board. I think that is minimum size for that, larger would be better. For this scale, 12" x 12" should be sufficient size for a terrain piece, vehicles should not exceed 6" in my opinion.

6 minutes ago, Bohemian73 said:

For this scale, 12" x 12" should be sufficient size for a terrain piece, vehicles should not exceed 6" in my opinion.

Given that the two of the deployment zones only provide a deployment area that is Range 1 deep, and the demo videos have said Range 1 is six inches, I agree, as otherwise the vehicle will either overhang, need special rules, or be unable to deploy facing towards the other long edge of the table.