1 hour ago, Jake the Hutt said:

I really feel like the climbing rules are much worse. They really discourage you from ever trying to go up and over any terrain.

Unless you have the equipment to do so, like an ATRT or grappling hooks.

1 hour ago, Jake the Hutt said:

I really feel like the climbing rules are much worse. They really discourage you from ever trying to go up and over any terrain.

Unless you have the equipment to do so, like an ATRT or grappling hooks.

13 minutes ago, syrath said:

Unless you have the equipment to do so, like an ATRT or grappling hooks.

Even then, Climbing or Clambering is so activation intensive that its extremely unappealing. Want to get over a 3 inch tall, 2 inch wide piece of terrain (like a broad wall or big rock)? Spend 1 activation to move to it, 1 activation to clamber, 1 activation to move 2 inches to the far said and 1 activation to move back down. Thats 4 activations, and a minimum of 2 turns, which is 1/3rd of the entire game. Just to move a few inches. If you don't want to risk clamboring you'll spend 6 activations to climb instead, which is half the game. If you're suppressed it could take you 4 or more turns to get over that terrain.

I think its bad design. It discourages engaging with terrain unless you absolutely have to, since moving onto any terrain at all becomes a huge activation sink and is likely to tie the unit up for at least 1/3 of the game. It disincentives having multi-level terrain as well and encourages players to play on a single "ground level". If you're trying to climb to gain a tactical advantage your opponent will almost always have plenty of activation to simply move away before your unit can get into place.

In the great outdoors climbing is a pain but most buildings have ladders and stairwells. Get some Necromundaesque terrain and you'll have battles over 3 tiers in no time. And it will look like an imperial installation because safety barriers aren't cost efficient.

53 minutes ago, Katarn said:

In the great outdoors climbing is a pain but most buildings have ladders and stairwells. Get some Necromundaesque terrain and you'll have battles over 3 tiers in no time. And it will look like an imperial installation because safety barriers aren't cost efficient.

Except according to the rules (as far as I can tell, please show me if I missed something) stairs, ladders, footholds, etc don't actually speed up climbing at all. They just eliminate the danger of taking wounds while climbing (see page 9 and 17 of the rules). Climbing or clambering up a ladder still takes as much time as climbing or clambering up a cliff face or wall.

So for example, moving up 3 tiers of Necromunda style terrain would take you anywhere from half to the entire game. 1 activation to move to the ladder, 1 activation to climb to the first level, 1 activation to move to the ladder on the first level, 1 activation to climb to the second level, 1 activation to climb up the ladder to the third level, then finally at least 1 activation to move to wherever you were going on the 3rd level. Thats a minimum of 6 activations (assuming each ladder can be reached in a tandard move), which is half of the entire game, or the entire game if you're suppressed. Just to climb to the 3rd level of some typical Necromunda or Infinity style terrain. Or any multi-level terrain.

Not to demean your suggestion. I have a lot of terrain just like what you're describing that would be super cool to use with Legion. But the rules just make it frustrating and impractical.

In my head range 1 was 2 levels tall, but you're right.

Maybe just house rule/ organise it at the beginning of the game to allow horizontal and vertical movement to be combined on ladders on battlefields where it will make a difference. As long as both players are aware at the beginning of the game it shouldn't be too big a deal.

I can see why they didn't do that originally- without using measurements for movement it's a bit awkward working out how far you move with the tools so it may not work for tournament type games.

That's two rules I've said to adapt: I'm sounding like an anarchist.

1 minute ago, Katarn said:

In my head range 1 was 2 levels tall, but you're right.

Maybe just house rule/ organise it at the beginning of the game to allow horizontal and vertical movement to be combined on ladders on battlefields where it will make a difference. As long as both players are aware at the beginning of the game it shouldn't be too big a deal.

I can see why they didn't do that originally- without using measurements for movement it's a bit awkward working out how far you move with the tools so it may not work for tournament type games.

That's two rules I've said to adapt: I'm sounding like an anarchist.

I think thats a good idea, and likely what I'll do in casual play. I wish thats how the rules actually worked, or they had found a similar solution.

4 hours ago, Katarn said:

Maybe just house rule/ organise it at the beginning of the game to allow horizontal and vertical movement to be combined on ladders on battlefields where it will make a difference. As long as both players are aware at the beginning of the game it shouldn't be too big a deal.

I can see why they didn't do that originally- without using measurements for movement it's a bit awkward working out how far you move with the tools so it may not work for tournament type games.

That's two rules I've said to adapt: I'm sounding like an anarchist.

How about a house rule that you can climb a ladder for free at the start or end of a move action. That would avoid the awkwardness of climbing in the middle of a move.

I’d be perfectly fine with getting rid of the edge issue if FFG got rid of it from their other Star Wars miniature games too. Alternatively, there could be a simple rule of moving back onto the board required the unit’s next activation (i.e. like the rapid reinforcements card but when the order came up rather than eot).

With climbing, the issue seemed to be based on the usual terrain people use. But, yes, the current rules can discourage climbing. This can be fixed with either redoing the rule or simply adding an upgrade that is better than climb gear.

1 minute ago, Contrapulator said:

How about a house rule that you can climb a ladder for free at the start or end of a move action. That would avoid the awkwardness of climbing in the middle of a move.

As long as both players are on the same page it seems as good a solution as any. It would certainly make climbing/descending a more attractive proposition.

We've been playing ladders and stairs as being the same as open ground. So its not actually a Clamber at all.

8 hours ago, Jake the Hutt said:

Even then, Climbing or Clambering is so activation intensive that its extremely unappealing. Want to get over a 3 inch tall, 2 inch wide piece of terrain (like a broad wall or big rock)? Spend 1 activation to move to it, 1 activation to clamber, 1 activation to move 2 inches to the far said and 1 activation to move back down. Thats 4 activations, and a minimum of 2 turns, which is 1/3rd of the entire game. Just to move a few inches. If you don't want to risk clamboring you'll spend 6 activations to climb instead, which is half the game. If you're suppressed it could take you 4 or more turns to get over that terrain.

I think its bad design. It discourages engaging with terrain unless you absolutely have to, since moving onto any terrain at all becomes a huge activation sink and is likely to tie the unit up for at least 1/3 of the game. It disincentives having multi-level terrain as well and encourages players to play on a single "ground level". If you're trying to climb to gain a tactical advantage your opponent will almost always have plenty of activation to simply move away before your unit can get into place.

I think you're looking at it in way too much of a vacuum. To me, it's like the folks who think standby is a wholly useless action because it can be removed with suppression. There is a time and place where both are useful. Getting an HH-12 or DLT onto a building can give it good sight lines and potentially deny cover to the enemy while keeping cover for itself. It can be a good offensive or defensive position.

I would urge you to take your Necromunda and Infinity terrain for a spin and see how it goes. It may open up some new ideas for you. I've played most of my games on Promethium Forge terrain (the "bulkheads", which I believe was designed for Necromunda?) and both players have explored the 3d terrain in every single game. The tall structures and bridges create some interesting sight lines. If there's an objective up high, the game can break down into a couple of fluid mini fights on multiple levels which starts to become interesting.

5 hours ago, Katarn said:

Maybe just house rule/ organise it at the beginning of the game to allow horizontal and vertical movement to be combined on ladders on battlefields where it will make a difference. As long as both players are aware at the beginning of the game it shouldn't be too big a deal.

I've been using this as a house rule on my terrain, but in my experience there is almost no functional difference (emphasis on "almost"). The length of my stairs is pretty darn close to a speed-2 move, so you end up taking about the same number of actions if your goal is to get on top of the building. The difference, of course, is that you can stop mid-way up the stairs.

9 hours ago, MattShadowlord said:

Correct me if I am wrong, but AFAIK pushing models off the table isn't actually in the rule book, and we're basing this on an email.

If that's the case, it may not even become an official rule if there's sufficient Push back

It’s in the rule book for sure. Leaving the Battlefield, page 31.

9 hours ago, Jake the Hutt said:

Even then, Climbing or Clambering is so activation intensive that its extremely unappealing. Want to get over a 3 inch tall, 2 inch wide piece of terrain (like a broad wall or big rock)? Spend 1 activation to move to it, 1 activation to clamber, 1 activation to move 2 inches to the far said and 1 activation to move back down. Thats 4 activations, and a minimum of 2 turns, which is 1/3rd of the entire game. Just to move a few inches. If you don't want to risk clamboring you'll spend 6 activations to climb instead, which is half the game. If you're suppressed it could take you 4 or more turns to get over that terrain.

I think its bad design. It discourages engaging with terrain unless you absolutely have to, since moving onto any terrain at all becomes a huge activation sink and is likely to tie the unit up for at least 1/3 of the game. It disincentives having multi-level terrain as well and encourages players to play on a single "ground level". If you're trying to climb to gain a tactical advantage your opponent will almost always have plenty of activation to simply move away before your unit can get into place.

I have to agree. It's not the potential for wounds that is the issue, it is all of the extra activations to get where you want. I have found that it is typically better to just move around an object.

This rule seems like it is designed for a RPG rather than a miniatures game.

If cover wasn’t capped at 2 and being elevated and in cover improved your cover by one it might encourage more terrain.

It's always been a problem in wargames. You want terrain to FEEL like terrain. Like it's difficult to traverse and hard to climb, etc etc. But at the same time, you don't want all terrain to effectively become impassable simply because actually moving through it is too much of a headache.

12 hours ago, nashjaee said:

I think you're looking at it in way too much of a vacuum. To me, it's like the folks who think standby is a wholly useless action because it can be removed with suppression. There is a time and place where both are useful. Getting an HH-12 or DLT onto a building can give it good sight lines and potentially deny cover to the enemy while keeping cover for itself. It can be a good offensive or defensive position.

I would urge you to take your Necromunda and Infinity terrain for a spin and see how it goes. It may open up some new ideas for you. I've played most of my games on Promethium Forge terrain (the "bulkheads", which I believe was designed for Necromunda?) and both players have explored the 3d terrain in every single game. The tall structures and bridges create some interesting sight lines. If there's an objective up high, the game can break down into a couple of fluid mini fights on multiple levels which starts to become interesting.

I've been using this as a house rule on my terrain, but in my experience there is almost no functional difference (emphasis on "almost"). The length of my stairs is pretty darn close to a speed-2 move, so you end up taking about the same number of actions if your goal is to get on top of the building. The difference, of course, is that you can stop mid-way up the stairs.

I appreciate the advice. I do play on dynamic multi-level terrain, and it just doesn't work well for this game in my experience. As you said, getting a DLT squad up in a good vantage point seems like a great idea. In practice that can sometimes take half the game (or longer). Thats the problem.

If your house rule is that stairs are about the length of a Move 2 move, so you can move up them as normal, you may actually be speeding things up quite a bit. Remember that when climbing a model needs to move into contact with the object it wants to climb, then come to a dead stop. Then spend another action to climb to the top, then come to another dead stop at that ledge, then use a third action to start moving again. if you're able to just move onto the stairs as part of your normal move (and I don't know if thats how you're actually doing it) you're greatly increasing your action efficiency. Also, being able to stop part way up the stairs is a huge benefit.

11 hours ago, BadMotivator said:

If cover wasn’t capped at 2 and being elevated and in cover improved your cover by one it might encourage more terrain.

I agree.

The invader league decider last night was ended by one Luke force-pushing the other off the board, leading to a forfeit. Both players knew it was coming, I'm not saying anyone played badly, but still, what a shi**y way to finish a game.

Change the rules, FFG. Only panicked units should be removed.

6 minutes ago, colki said:

The invader league decider last night was ended by one Luke force-pushing the other off the board, leading to a forfeit. Both players knew it was coming, I'm not saying anyone played badly, but still, what a shi**y way to finish a game.

Change the rules, FFG. Only panicked units should be removed.

That seems like a colossal tactical error given that it’s only a speed 1 move.

It's a fine rule. If your commander is cowering on the edge, he deserves to be thrown off the board.

I don't really object with the mechanics of the rule so much as the fluff of it. If games took place on a giant plateau or a sub-orbital gas mining platform or the back of a giant At-At it would make sense that troopers pushed of the edge would no longer be in the fight. But in this case its just Luke shoving the commander 3 feet over an imaginary line and the commander and his unit giving up and going home. Its weird. Of course its also weird that the battle has an imaginary boundary lines.

2 hours ago, Memorare said:

It's a fine rule. If your commander is cowering on the edge, he deserves to be thrown off the board.

Well in this case he was actually all the way into the enemy deployment zone, and had just killed an ATRT next to the objective (that while it lived meant he could not reach the board edge with a 1-move).

I'm not saying the winning player did anything wrong by exploiting the rule, I'm saying the rule is immersion breaking nonsense.

4 hours ago, Derrault said:

That seems like a colossal tactical error given that it’s only a speed 1 move.

Unfortunately this rule creates "safe zones" for units close to the table edge if melee attackers (like Luke) need to put themselves in the danger zone of a force push to engage.

4 hours ago, colki said:

Well in this case he was actually all the way into the enemy deployment zone, and had just killed an ATRT next to the objective (that while it lived meant he could not reach the board edge with a 1-move).

I'm not saying the winning player did anything wrong by exploiting the rule, I'm saying the rule is immersion breaking nonsense.

How is killing a commander this way any different than SoS? You still need to use Luke, a 160 point investment, and traverse the battle field to be able to do this. And with SoS or force push, you end up killing a commander regardless. It's a game mechanic. X-Wing and Armada have the same rule. Fly off the table and it's destroyed. It doesn't make sense thematically, but it's a game.