Whether T47 is “better” than xyz is a difficult conversation. Too many variables.

I guess getting the most from the T47 is therefore a good question.

To answer that you you have to look at what it does well.... it’s FAST! (Similar with speeder bikes).

so if tactically you can use the speed to your advantage, it seems you are getting the most out of it. I think in Legion the key to that is lateral movement. Using speed to reposition and change the focus of an attack etc.

It seems using the T47 well is something that is challenging to do - so it appeals to me... but currently I’m all about the Empire, so just apply similar principles to my bikes ?

I think one of the most appealing things about the T47 is the mental image of power harpooning a stormtrooper and then towing him behind like Drax in Guardians of The Galaxy. I may need to make a model of this.

12 hours ago, BigBadAndy said:

I have to say thanks @M.Mustermann for this really detailed reply. I have yet to actually play a game with the speeder so thisbguves me a ton to think about.

as far as displacement, I thought repulsive vehicles didn’t do displacement. Am I wrong on that?

As Garc allready said, you can only do it with the compulsory move. Thats why it is so essential to set it up one turn ahead, especially in turn 4 and 5 of objective based games. There is usually a limted number of objectives that can be claimed by enemy Troopers. There are also often spots on the table where more than one trooper unit is hiding in a relative small area with cover. It is sometimes even possible to displace more than one unit with that large base and move on to avoid providing cover with your base

14 hours ago, garciaj113 said:

In terms of fixing the T-47, me and my friend have been trying an interesting solution. New Keyword: High-flying Target when measuring range to this unit add 1 to your current range (i.e. if you are at range 1 you are effectively at range 2). This prevents things like grenades and flamethrowers hitting the T-47, which is thematic and greatly increases its ability to not get pinged down by range 4 impact weapons. Let me know what guys think.

This is a great idea and would help the T47 out quite a lot I think. No way this would make it broken. Some of the biggest threats to T47s are Impact Grenades and Vaders Saber Throw, which are both ridiculous.

4 minutes ago, Matt Antilles said:

This is a great idea and would help the T47 out quite a lot I think. No way this would make it broken. Some of the biggest threats to T47s are Impact Grenades and Vaders Saber Throw, which are both ridiculous.

So you don’t think making a vehicle completely immune to one of the anti-vehicle weapons available to troopers is a problem? Honestly, if you are parking your very maneuverable speeder in range 1 of infantry with impact grenades I don’t think it deserves to live. It’s not a tank. I don’t think the designers want you to be able to plow it into enemy forces and then absorb a lot of fire.

I don’t know. I find it hard to support “game balance” suggestions that are just “make my stuff better so I can use it in the way I want.”

1 minute ago, BigBadAndy said:

Honestly, if you are parking your very maneuverable speeder in range 1 of infantry with impact grenades I don’t think it deserves to live.

“Range two-ish.”

Move and Shoot, after all.

11 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

“Range two-ish.”

Move and Shoot, after all.

Well, a one move is less than range one for shooting but point taken. So range two-ish of troops carrying impact grenades that are not suppressed. And have a clear pathway to get in range one then attack.

I’m just not sure if there’s enough data to show this is required. I think a speeder that is immune to grenades seems a bit unfair.

Just now, BigBadAndy said:

Well, a one move is less than range one for shooting but point taken. So range two-ish of troops carrying impact grenades that are not suppressed. And have a clear pathway to get in range one then attack.

I’m just not sure if there’s enough data to show this is required. I think a speeder that is immune to grenades seems a bit unfair.

I’m not disagreeing . But I know I’ve been caught a few times by the threat zone of Troopers with impacts.

I think a speeder that is immune to grenades is completely reasonable due to its current cost. Knock 50 points off the T47 and then maybe theres validity to it being vulnerable to grenades...other than dudes being able to hit a flying craft with grenades is a silly idea.

39 minutes ago, Matt Antilles said:

I think a speeder that is immune to grenades is completely readable due to its current cost. Knock 50 points off the T47 and then maybe theres validity to it being vulnerable to grenades...other than dudes being able to hit a flying craft with grenades is a silly idea.

“Flying” is kind of a misnomer here...

I mean, a Speeder seems to fly in the same way that a submarine “swims”...

7 hours ago, M.Mustermann said:

As Garc allready said, you can only do it with the compulsory move. Thats why it is so essential to set it up one turn ahead, especially in turn 4 and 5 of objective based games. There is usually a limted number of objectives that can be claimed by enemy Troopers. There are also often spots on the table where more than one trooper unit is hiding in a relative small area with cover. It is sometimes even possible to displace more than one unit with that large base and move on to avoid providing cover with your base

Repulsor vehicles don't provide cover only ground vehicles count for that.

I’m not sure its durability is even the problem, given how fast it is. Really, it just doesn’t feel like it hits hard enough, especially against troopers. Speeder bikes average the exact same number of hits for half the cost.

It’s supposed to be a fast, mobile glass cannon. But it really feels more like a glass rifle.

I think a small tweak to its damage would make all the difference; either giving it offensive surge or maybe replace one of the main gun blacks with a red die.

16 minutes ago, Orkimedes said:

I’m not sure its durability is even the problem, given how fast it is. Really, it just doesn’t feel like it hits hard enough, especially against troopers. Speeder bikes average the exact same number of hits for half the cost.

It’s supposed to be a fast, mobile glass cannon. But it really feels more like a glass rifle.

I think a small tweak to its damage would make all the difference; either giving it offensive surge or maybe replace one of the main gun blacks with a red die.

I've also wondered if offensive surge would be the best fix for the T-47

I think I'm starting to get the hang of the T47. Setting up the compulsory move to disrupt an enemy unit is really powerful. If the positioning is right you may be able to fire into the unit without moving but I've found that moving off and firing the harpoon into the same unit while the main guns light up another squad works quite well. The key is to have the rest of your army ready to take advantage of the situation, moving up and further suppressing the enemy troopers.

This would obviously be a terrible idea against impact grenades and ion weapons but happily the internet has decided vehicles are pretty terrible so they may turn up less often than you'd think.

I think one more problem is how the T-47s “cover 1” ability is built into its cost. In theory, this should mitigate one damage each time the T-47 is shot at, as it does with the speeder bikes.

However, in practice, because of the timing, usually you are blocking a hit that would drop off anyway because of the armor keyword, unless you are getting shot with a high impact, low dice pool weapon like the RT laser cannon. It would be much more interesting and useful if you could block a crit after impact conversions, and actually get consistent value out of cover 1.

I'm wondering how useful a single T-47 will be if my local group starts shifting towards the E-Web/1.4FD units. Stationary units like these are susceptible to being flanked and if they pivot to face the T-47 then they aren't shooting at your other units.

4 minutes ago, Orkimedes said:

I think one more problem is how the T-47s “cover 1” ability is built into its cost. In theory, this should mitigate one damage each time the T-47 is shot at, as it does with the speeder bikes.

However, in practice, because of the timing, usually you are blocking a hit that would drop off anyway because of the armor keyword, unless you are getting shot with a high impact, low dice pool weapon like the RT laser cannon. It would be much more interesting and useful if you could block a crit after impact conversions, and actually get consistent value out of cover 1.

Y'know, you may have a point. Cover 1 seems much more beneficial on the unarmored bikes than it feels like it is on the T-47.

10 minutes ago, NeonWolf said:

Y'know, you may have a point. Cover 1 seems much more beneficial on the unarmored bikes than it feels like it is on the T-47.

Hmm... Maybe an interaction between the cover and speeder keywords is worth investigating to combat this, however that would also apply to bikes. A conundrum has been presented.

2 minutes ago, Crawfskeezen said:

Hmm... Maybe an interaction between the cover and speeder keywords is worth investigating to combat this, however that would also apply to bikes. A conundrum has been presented.

I could also be that Cover seems better on the bikes because they get shot at with things that don't have Impact so they rely on Cover more than the T-47?

3 minutes ago, NeonWolf said:

I could also be that Cover seems better on the bikes because they get shot at with things that don't have Impact so they rely on Cover more than the T-47?

I think you hit it on the head before. Cover on the T-47 is removing a die that potentially won't be doing any damage to it anyway. Of course if the attacker has impact then that is a different story but in the situation where an attacker gets a hit and two crits and does not have impact then the T-47 removes the hit that would have done nothing anyway and still had to make a defence roll for two damage.

2 hours ago, Katarn said:

I think I'm starting to get the hang of the T47. Setting up the compulsory move to disrupt an enemy unit is really powerful. If the positioning is right you may be able to fire into the unit without moving but I've found that moving off and firing the harpoon into the same unit while the main guns light up another squad works quite well. The key is to have the rest of your army ready to take advantage of the situation, moving up and further suppressing the enemy troopers.

This would obviously be a terrible idea against impact grenades and ion weapons but happily the internet has decided vehicles are pretty terrible so they may turn up less often than you'd think.

Except the player who just got disrupted is the one who places his figures, so why would he place them in your front OR rear arc?

The issue, in general, isn't that the T-47 is an unusable tool.

More accurately, the issue is that for the price, there are categorically better tools available.

In your example you are putting out a maximum of three suppression and a bit of damage, assuming a lot of placement works to your advantage. Why not just take 3 AT-RTs for the price? That's still 3 suppression and a lot more damage, all while NOT depending on fiddly placements.

Part of the issue is that it costs too much, but part of the isssue is that it jsut doesn't work as a concept.

It has arsenal 2, so paid for that rule. Except that to apply that rule, you need upgrades, and these upgrades are only available when you are in the middle of the opponent's lines, where you do not want to be.

It has range 3 weapons, that means to get within effective range it has to be within enemy weapon range. Remember that this is basically a gunship/helicopter in modern terms, and imagine if a helicopter could only fire within rifle effective range... Pretty pathetic. It should have had a 2-4 range to represent its height (can't shoot close, sees afar).

It has armour and cover 1. Cover 1 prevents some impact from applying, but most of the time this impact 1 isn't enough to actually cancel the number of regular hits that can convert, even if you dodge. So it's paying a lot for something that doesn't actually have a purpose. Cover 2 might have started being interesting.

It is very hard to use it effectively, because of its base size which makes its path rather predictable. Compared to bikes too, bikes are able to move with a much smaller base and the second dude can just be placed behind any sort of cover/building within cohesion to provide the squad with heavy or light cover because it doesn't care about orientation: Not so much with the airspeeder.

It is immune to melee... But not to sabre throws and grenades, which means it cannot do what it seems designed to do: Zoom through the length of the enemy battle line. It crashes and burns way before it can actually do anything.

Finally, the biggest nail in the coffin is its relative unreliability. It doesn't have surge to hit or crit which means... It often rolls rather poorly or forces you to aim. You're going to score about 3 or 4 hits with it on average, most of which being cancelled by cover (because unlike biked you aren't nimble enough to move behind msot cover on properly made maps). And sicne you're aiming, you aren't dodging or moving again.

It's 1/4 of your army that you must hold in reserve but can easily get sniped (veers and bikes shred it, as well as sabers being thrown). Worst of all, it doesn't actually have a target of choice (no armoured unit in the imperial army except for the AT-ST).

Anybody running two? I'm going to give it a try soon and let you know how it goes.

1 hour ago, Deuzerre said:

Worst of all, it doesn't actually have a target of choice (no armoured unit in the imperial army except for the AT-ST).

This is the part that rings most true to me. The airspeeder seems designed as an armor hunter, so it won't really shine in a trooper-dominated meta.

22 minutes ago, Contrapulator said:

This is the part that rings most true to me. The airspeeder seems designed as an armor hunter, so it won't really shine in a trooper-dominated meta.

I agree with your point. One would think it would have some good use against the double ST lists that you see from time to time.