4 minutes ago, Rumar said:

You don't win by blowing things up. Especially not by blowing armour up.

Depends on the objective, and on what that armour was going to do to your infantry. While ignoring the AT-ST might be a valid strategy, 3 AT-RTs with flamers make it a bit harder to win if you ignore them and let them run rampant. Also literally half of the current objective cards say "Unit leader" not "Trooper leader" so destroying a vehicle removes one of your opponent's "Unit leaders." Destroying enemy units, or rendering them unable to destroy your own as efficiently through pinning makes it much easier to win.

12 minutes ago, Rumar said:

You don't win by blowing things up. Especially not by blowing armour up.

Certainly doesnt hurt!

15 minutes ago, Rumar said:

You don't win by blowing things up. Especially not by blowing armour up.

Just like they said, destroying things does help. If your mentality is you don't need to attack to win, then I suggest you demonstrate your pacifist army that can win without shooting.

The HH12 is one of the best heavy weapons because it has impact 3, and as a rebel player, I hate seeing them because they wreck AT-RTs. I agree DLTs are also great, but impact 1 is kinda lack luster.

14 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Depends on the objective, and on what that armour was going to do to your infantry. While ignoring the AT-ST might be a valid strategy, 3 AT-RTs with flamers make it a bit harder to win if you ignore them and let them run rampant. Also literally half of the current objective cards say "Unit leader" not "Trooper leader" so destroying a vehicle removes one of your opponent's "Unit leaders." Destroying enemy units, or rendering them unable to destroy your own as efficiently through pinning makes it much easier to win.

3 AT-RTs with flamer? You don't need anti-armour specialists to kill them and with barely 25 % of the table covered with terrain, which does not have even have to block line of sight you have some turns to do it. Eliminate the objective cards with "unit leader" and you are good to go.

21 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Depends on the objective, and on what that armour was going to do to your infantry. While ignoring the AT-ST might be a valid strategy, 3 AT-RTs with flamers make it a bit harder to win if you ignore them and let them run rampant. Also literally half of the current objective cards say "Unit leader" not "Trooper leader" so destroying a vehicle removes one of your opponent's "Unit leaders." Destroying enemy units, or rendering them unable to destroy your own as efficiently through pinning makes it much easier to win.

Yeah... if that non-objective scoring armor is running around barbecuing your stormtroopers, you are going to wish you had some HH-12s.

1 minute ago, Orkimedes said:

Yeah... if that non-objective scoring armor is running around barbecuing your stormtroopers, you are going to wish you had some HH-12s.

Yep, my list building philosophy involves having enough Impact to drop BBQ AT-RTs quickly. Having that Impact on things like a Barrage equipped 1.2FD that is also a threat to Troopers seems like a win to me.

18 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

Just like they said, destroying things does help. If your mentality is you don't need to attack to win, then I suggest you demonstrate your pacifist army that can win without shooting.

The HH12 is one of the best heavy weapons because it has impact 3, and as a rebel player, I hate seeing them because they wreck AT-RTs. I agree DLTs are also great, but impact 1 is kinda lack luster.

Pacifist army? Killing rebel troopers is not exactly pacifist. But often it is sufficient to suppress them. With a DLT you can kill AT-RT as well, if you have to. But killing those rebel troopers who can take objectives is simply higher on the list.

1 minute ago, Rumar said:

3 AT-RTs with flamer? You don't need anti-armour specialists to kill them and with barely 25 % of the table covered with terrain, which does not have even have to block line of sight you have some turns to do it. Eliminate the objective cards with "unit leader" and you are good to go.

Uh huh. And if your opponent eliminates the only objective that cares about Troopers?

We play on very different boards then, as my FLGS boards tend to be closer to 33% terrain, with at least a few pieces of LOS blocking and/or area terrain. The more units you have shooting at the AT-RTs to kill them, the fewer units you have to shoot at your opponent's trooper units. DLTs can certainly kill AT-RTs, but it will take more shots from them (on average) in order to destroy a single one of them.

8 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Uh huh. And if your opponent eliminates the only objective that cares about Troopers?

We play on very different boards then, as my FLGS boards tend to be closer to 33% terrain, with at least a few pieces of LOS blocking and/or area terrain. The more units you have shooting at the AT-RTs to kill them, the fewer units you have to shoot at your opponent's trooper units. DLTs can certainly kill AT-RTs, but it will take more shots from them (on average) in order to destroy a single one of them.

33%? Impressive. How many shots on average on a Flamer AT-RT till it is in range? HH12s can certainly kill AT-RTs better, but they tend to have more difficulties with troopers than DLTs have with AT-RTs. And what if your opponent doesn't bring armour whatsoever? A much bigger problem than him bringing all armour there is.

1 minute ago, Rumar said:

33%? Impressive. How many shots on average on a Flamer AT-RT till it is in range? HH12s can certainly kill AT-RTs better, but they tend to have more difficulties with troopers than DLTs have with AT-RTs. And what if your opponent doesn't bring armour whatsoever? A much bigger problem than him bringing all armour there is.

HH-12s actually average more damage per shot to Troopers than the DLT-19 (1.875 vs 1.75). So, it's not like you become worse at shooting Troopers with the HH-12. You just lose some flexibility due to it exahusting. I wouldn't run more than 1 or 2 HH-12s in an army. But if Veers is there to support them, they will get better results than a DLT-19.

10 hours ago, Rumar said:

33%? Impressive. How many shots on average on a Flamer AT-RT till it is in range? HH12s can certainly kill AT-RTs better, but they tend to have more difficulties with trooper than DLTs have with AT-RTs. And what if your opponent doesn't bring armour whatsoever? A much bigger problem than him bringing all armour there is.

The FLGS has a lot of woods and buildings from 40k and Bolt Action, plus some of the Legion players bring things like in-scale model A-Wings or AT-ATs that fill up a board quite well. We're mostly used to setting up terrain for a 4x6, so put about the same amount of terrain down, just condensed slightly.

Needed to dig out my old table of movement measurements, so reposting for other people to reference again:

Base size| Speed 1| Speed 2 |Speed 3

27mm | 4.06 | 6.16 | 8.36

50mm | 4.97 | 7.07 | 9.27

70mm | 5.76 | 7.86 | 10.06

100mm | 6.94 | 9.04 | 11.24

All movements worked out in inches using measurements found elsewhere on the forum in regards to Speed measuring sticks.

So the AT-RT has the option of either moving `@14" in a turn, or @7" and taking some other action, either firing with the 2 white dice rifle, [(EDIT: Standby is Trooper only)Standby (rarely worthwhile)], or dodge to increase survivability. Assuming both units set up directly across from each other, and the troopers set up farthest back while the AT-RT sets up all the way forward, the AT-RT needs to cover 30" in order to be in range. So turn 3, assuming the Stormtrooper doesn't move.

Edit: Assuming Battlelines deployment. Different deployments obviously change the starting distances. Also, typically an infantry unit along an edge is not the best target for an AT-RT flamer, better to build up suppression on it and get it to flee off the board.

Far more commonly, I've seen Flamer AT-RTs used to "babysit" objectives, forcing the opponent to remove them before commiting trooper units to claiming the objective. This can be really key in "Intercept the transmission" since there are certain scoring turns.

I like new and interesting options and this is interesting. It might be a unit that can make some use out of the stand by action. Maybe every once in a while you catch an enemy in a move action and suppress them before they can take another action. Range of 4 clearly fills a rebel hole. I don't think it is a game changer but it is interesting. I don't get what happens when it panics as it can't move?

Still waiting for my Tauntaun and Dewback riders, but obviously I will grab a pair of these for each of my forces... just have to make sure these snow-focused guys look right with my desert troops.... maybe I will swap off the Snow rebels for standard rebel troopers cannibalized from a squad and the same for the snowtroopers/ swap for regular stormtroopers...

I like the idea of heavy weapons holding the flanks and/ or locking down travel routes. Reminds me of setting up M-60s in final protective fire positions where they just churn out lead non-stop and dare anyone to try to walk through it...

1 hour ago, Makwiesel said:

Still waiting for my Tauntaun and Dewback riders, but obviously I will grab a pair of these for each of my forces... just have to make sure these snow-focused guys look right with my desert troops.... maybe I will swap off the Snow rebels for standard rebel troopers cannibalized from a squad and the same for the snowtroopers/ swap for regular stormtroopers...

You'll run into the same issue with the Tauntaun and I think it's best to find a painting solution now. I'm sure someone will have custom model replacements relatively soon after release, but I think a decent effect can be had by just painting the poncho on the 1.4 FD troopers in a camouflage pattern like WW2 smocks rather than white.

The E-web I'll just treat the same as my Snowtroopers, with a non-canon paint job, so they don't look out AS out of place.

13 hours ago, Undeadguy said:

You are deliberately trying to make the laser look like a bad unit. Why are you taking it without the overcharge? I could say the AT-RT is bad against armor because I keep taking the flame thrower.

With overcharge, you get the following:

6 black dice = 6(5/8) = 3.75 damage = 3 crits or 75% chance 4 crits
3 white dice = 3(2/6) = 1 defense
4 white deice = 4(2/6) = 1.33 defense

On average, you can expect to deal 2 damage, or have a 75% to deal 2.67 damage.

I've never seen an AT-ST in cover, and very rarely will an AT-RT be in cover.

If you don't want to use it, that's fine. But the unit only looks bad because you keep making up scenarios where it's designed to fail. As of right now, 2 laser cannons with overcharge is 5 points less than a T47, but has 6 impact at range 4, which is the best anti-armor for Rebels, and is only rivaled by 2 HH12 squads.

I'm not trying to make the laser deliberately look bad. I'm just listing what it does without the upgrade. I feel like I made that very clear in multiple posts. My stated comparison was with a similarly costed Rebel Z-6 unit (just a 2 point difference). Upgrading the Laser makes it significantly more expensive than that unit, and makes them tougher to compare.

By the way, I did also talk about the benefits of the Laser upgrades and how it does make the unit more viable (I guess you missed that), although I still find it underwhelming for its points because it is stationary and because the upgrade is an exhaust option.

15 hours ago, DerBaer said:

Only if there is no blocking terrain. An AT-RT can move around that terrain and still shoot, the Radar Cannon can't do that.

Isn’t terrain placed, then objectives, then units? Seems like if you’re looking to provide overwatch on one or more objectives it’s a fait accompli.

@Caimheul1313 AT-RT can’t standby for an ambush, it’s trooper only.

9 minutes ago, Derrault said:

Isn’t terrain placed, then objectives, then units? Seems like if you’re looking to provide overwatch on one or more objectives it’s a fait accompli.

@Caimheul1313 AT-RT can’t standby for an ambush, it’s trooper only.

Ah, missed that. Thanks!

2 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Ah, missed that. Thanks!

I think it gives a slight efficiency advantage to the 1.4FD when defending a location, as the AT-RT either has to wait until an enemy comes into range to even activate (potentially letting them shoot first?) or move themselves forward, potentially exposing them to even more enemy fire.

I am a little bit sad, that all cannons, and I really love this idea, are comming for the cold surroundings. What do you think, will there be a E-Web with scouttroopers or a rebel-cannon with regular rebel-troopers in the Future?

11 hours ago, DaniDanger said:

I am a little bit sad, that all cannons, and I really love this idea, are comming for the cold surroundings. What do you think, will there be a E-Web with scouttroopers or a rebel-cannon with regular rebel-troopers in the Future?

FFG is in a tough spot with this. They can either (a) make the figures match the movie appearance, or (b) change them to be more generic to match players collections and the visual aspect of the game. I value movie accuracy while my son values the look of the game. They could have multiple options for the sculpt, but that would increase the cost. As much as I would love this, I would side with keeping costs down; I don't want SWL to become GW prices.

I do think this is a relatively easy conversion, though, given that it is either just how you choose to paint or just swapping out the troops. I imagine it won't take long to get 3D printed models designed to replace the existing troops.

On 6/7/2018 at 6:12 PM, Tealadin said:

This is cool and all, but why are there only Snowtrooper/Hoth trooper crew? Yes we only see the 1.4FD on Hoth, but the first time we see the E-Web its used against the Falcon on Tatooine. This should really come with standard trooper crew or snow crew.

Fir people who don’t like them as snowtroopers just pertend that these are heavy weapons specialist gear

48 minutes ago, Jabby said:

Fir people who don’t like them as snowtroopers just pertend that these are heavy weapons specialist gear

I consider mine assault troopers. The close range heavy weapons and the steady, aggressive advance makes sense to me.

Would have been nice if they could have given alternative Rebel Trooper minis so you didn’t have to go with the Hoth look. Same for the E-Web with Stormies, maybe one day

1 hour ago, Chimaera said:

Would have been nice if they could have given alternative Rebel Trooper minis so you didn’t have to go with the Hoth look. Same for the E-Web with Stormies, maybe one day

Unlikely. The models will sell fine with the iconic minis, making new models incurs extra cost between paying the sculptor, making the molds, and setting up production with the end result of no new kit, so won't even get the attention of those of us buying one of everything (cough cough).

Those who want to paint their stuff screen accurate go ahead, I'm sure they'll look great, but I prefer to not let such things limit my customization or painting. In the "Hoth" troopers case the paintjob is what screams "cold weather". Paint up the poncho in greens and browns and it should blend in fine with the "Endor" troopers.

Paint the "Snowtroopers" in different colors to represent some elite force. By painting them in greys and browns you could possible pass them off as "mud troopers" with cloth instead of a rebreather.

14 hours ago, Darth 2Face said:

They could have multiple options for the sculpt, but that would increase the cost. As much as I would love this, I would side with keeping costs down; I don't want SWL to become GW prices.

It really wouldn't increase the cost very much at all. I don' know what their production numbers are or who they manufacture with , but I'm guessing the total cost increase (including development costs) wouldn't be more than 20-50 cents a unit. That might justify a 1-2 dollar MSRP price increase, but that would still be a far cry from GW prices. I would certainly be happy to pay a little more for more options. These kits are pretty bare bones.