When the jumpmaster for x-wing first came out, I thought it was junk. In my defense I was new to the game and I clearly needed to learn the game better.

5 hours ago, Mep said:

When the jumpmaster for x-wing first came out, I thought it was junk. In my defense I was new to the game and I clearly needed to learn the game better.

IIRC when it came out it was junk.

10 hours ago, Derrault said:

Are there really people running no vehicle lists?

I see, and personally run, a lot of Imperial lists with no AT-STs. Speeder Bikes are technically vehicles, but without Armor there isn't really a functional difference in what you can/should use to kill them vs infantry.

3 minutes ago, BadMotivator said:

IIRC when it came out it was junk.

You recall incorrectly. The community identified the triple Jumpmaster torpedo list prior to release. It dominated at Adepticon two weeks later (Wave 8 release date was March 17th, 2016).

7 hours ago, WAC47 said:

...

what?

Show your work. Because I honestly have no idea what possibly could have given you those numbers other than dividing the point costs of the vehicle units listed by 2. And there’s no freaking way a single ion token halves a units value.

If the unit can’t act, it’s effectively worth nothing. If it can only half act it’s worth, half value.

Units that can’t contribute are simply wasted points, and ion tokens can create exactly that scenario without having to eat through all their hit points.

Just now, Derrault said:

If the unit can’t act, it’s effectively worth nothing. If it can only half act it’s worth, half value.

Units that can’t contribute are simply wasted points, and ion tokens can create exactly that scenario without having to eat through all their hit points.

Even if a unit can't act for one turn... it still has FIVE OTHER TURNS to act in! You don't pay 195 points for an AT-ST for a single round of actions! You pay 195 points for a unit that will hopefully earn its keep over six rounds.

You mentioned yourself that a unit gets 12 actions over the course of the game. One ion token takes away ONE of those actions... so according to my calculation if you weight all actions equally it earns back one twelfth of the points of the targeted unit. Not half the points.

And even THAT calculation is full of faulty assumptions, because again losing a dodge/aim/etc. is not nearly as damaging as losing an attack.

30 minutes ago, WAC47 said:

Even if a unit can't act for one turn... it still has FIVE OTHER TURNS to act in! You don't pay 195 points for an AT-ST for a single round of actions! You pay 195 points for a unit that will hopefully earn its keep over six rounds.

You mentioned yourself that a unit gets 12 actions over the course of the game. One ion token takes away ONE of those actions... so according to my calculation if you weight all actions equally it earns back one twelfth of the points of the targeted unit. Not half the points.

And even THAT calculation is full of faulty assumptions, because again losing a dodge/aim/etc. is not nearly as damaging as losing an attack.

Yes, and failing to act in some rounds can mean inability to act (usefully) in future rounds even if it doesn’t get Ioned again and again, round after round.

Interesting thread.

Right now the types of lists I am seeing locally are 3 AT-RT or 3 Bikes, I am of the opinion that you could drop down a few Ion guns and probably cause some damage. Any hit that is caused by a unit with the ion gun will give the target a token and in a turn reducing the unit from 2 to 1 action does have a pretty good impact on things.

I tend to try to defeat them and not join them, so there is an interesting choice here.

14 hours ago, Derrault said:

Are there really people running no vehicle lists?

When Veers came out running all Trooper list became a thing. They are also quite good. The stormtrooper rocket can still hit at range 4 even if no armor is on the table. The Ion of course becomes completely useless. With that said, an all trooper list is attractive in part, due to ion troopers. The objectives being heavily dependent on troopers being available to get those VPs is another compelling reason.

18 hours ago, Indy_com said:

If exhaustable weapons didn't have exhaust, vehicles would be unuseable.

Absolutely fine with ion having exhaust as it has more utility than just damage. The exhaust means it has to be used tactically, at the right moment, rather than just spammed.

19 hours ago, Undeadguy said:

Are you guys factoring in the cost of exhaust?

Yes.

We essentially have 4 main situations.

shooting at units in the open: reasonably small difference (slight advantage to shotgun) apart from first round of fire where grenade launcher can aim and shoot but needs to recover and shoot after.

Running and gunning: shotgun wins. Exhaust makes this difficult for the launcher to do.

Anti-armour: Grenade Laucher wins. It has impact 2.

Shooting through cover (probably in cover yourself): The shotgunner can aim and shoot every round. The grenade launcher can recover and shoot every round. There is neglidgeable difference in damage here once cover, blast and pierce have been taken into account.

So what we have here are two weapons that have their niches but one of those niches comes up more often (vehicles seem to make up small parts of most lists)

They both do similar damage per round otherwise.

They seem fairly on par but one of those weapons costs more. Which one do you take?

Unless you know for certain the majority of lists you will be facing are vehicle heavy, you take the shotgun.

I just feel like two weapons that are of equal effectiveness should be costed similarly. Or keep the increased cost and remove exhaust. Then you're actually paying for increased effectiveness.

The idea that vehicles can't achieve objectives sounds false to me.

Breakthrough: Vehicles can breakthrough.

Key Positions: Vehicles can hold key positions.

Recover the supplies have been claimed, the trooper unit can move off and you can sit an AT-ST on top of the objective. The AT-ST has to be destroyed for an enemy trooper to make base contact with it.

The only objective they're not so useful for is intercepting transmissions.

Admittedly the airspeeder and bikes are less useful for these missions but AT-STs in particular can be used in such a way that they have to be dealt with. They still cost a lot more points than troopers but they're never going to panic and if everyone stops using their AT weapons they're going to be harder to deal with.

I'm not saying the infantry horde isn't going to be powerful, it's just that vehicles aren't as useless for objective play as a lot of people seem to assume.



Unless I've misread the rules which is entirely possible.

On 5/23/2018 at 1:01 AM, Katarn said:

Recover the supplies have been claimed, the trooper unit can move off and you can sit an AT-ST on top of the objective. The AT-ST has to be destroyed for an enemy trooper to make base contact with it.

Can’t sit on the objectives. Would’ve been rather cheesy, I think:

Quote

Page 35:

Miniatures can move through but
cannot overlap objective tokens.

Everything else is right, though. Vehicles can’t score objectives in half of the current scenarios. I take them with the intent of filling a support role. If we play one of these objectives, that’s a bonus. The advantage of the trooper horde is that your whole army is guaranteed to be able to score points.