Question:

Would you feel the exhaustable weapons would be balanced if they each had their cost reduced by 10 points? Thanks for your thoughts! 🙂

Probably just more free ways to recover at this point.

Depends on the weapon. A few of them have enough limitations as is before the exhaust too.

Maybe but I'm not good enough at math to stat all that out and compare them to everything else. How do you reduce them anyways without re-issuing the boxed game?

I think slightly changing the nature of exhaust and/or recover is a better bet.

Or, maybe just maybe, scarily-statted units are already planned, whose achilles heels will be exploited best by at least 51% of the then-current exhaustible weapons. But I doubt that scenario will come to pass.

My biggest problem with exhaust/recover is that it makes. no. sense. We imagine the squad leader shouting: "Jones is reloading, nobody do ANYTHING." because that's what effectively occurs. Why does private Jones need to wait until morale has gone so far to h**l that it's worth using an action to clear suppression markers, to reload their gun? The whole thing needs to really be looked at. The longer they wait to fix it, the more ripple effects though.

You could fix it by letting those weapons recharge for free under certain circumstances (cover, took no move actions this turn, have no suppression markers, whatever) and maybe that would work.

Any change would need a lot of playtesting.

Not flat 10 points, but maybe a point decrease from 2-8 points depending on the gun.

I would flip the point value of the exhaustible and other weapon around

I think errata the weapons such that a recover OR shoot action unexhausts the weapon. In other words, the rest of the squad shoots and, at the end of that action, the weapon unexhausts.

9 minutes ago, ryanabt said:

I think errata the weapons such that a recover OR shoot action unexhausts the weapon. In other words, the rest of the squad shoots and, at the end of that action, the weapon unexhausts.

I like that idea. I would push it farther and just say that at the end of a unit's activation, if it did not exhaust the card during that activation, it would unexhaust the card. (keeping the normal recover rules intact as well).

1 hour ago, flipperoverlord said:

Question:

Would you feel the exhaustable weapons would be balanced if they each had their cost reduced by 10 points? Thanks for your thoughts! 🙂

No feelings required: they are already balanced for what they do, so yes it would obviously be imbalanced to reduce their cost by an astounding 10 points.

1 hour ago, flipperoverlord said:

I like that idea. I would push it farther and just say that at the end of a unit's activation, if it did not exhaust the card during that activation, it would unexhaust the card. (keeping the normal recover rules intact as well).

I don't feel it suitable for a double move action, though. Thoughts?

Maybe at the end of round you would decide if you want to discard a suppression token or ready a card.

3 hours ago, ryanabt said:

I don't feel it suitable for a double move action, though. Thoughts?

Hmm... I think I could see it being fine either way balance-wise. What's your main reason for not wanting it to auto recover after a double move?

I think it is likely we will eventually see a gear upgrade or a personnel upgrade that will ready an exhausted card equipped to the unit. If it is a gear slot, maybe it should be usable on weapons only to prevent force card shenanigans? It would also be cool if it worked on reconfigure cards as well. I think if it was super cheap and applied to exhaustible weapons only that might fix the problem, though no matter how cheap it was it would still be more points on an already expensive upgrade.

1 hour ago, Jedhead said:

I think it is likely we will eventually see a gear upgrade or a personnel upgrade that will ready an exhausted card equipped to the unit. If it is a gear slot, maybe it should be usable on weapons only to prevent force card shenanigans? It would also be cool if it worked on reconfigure cards as well. I think if it was super cheap and applied to exhaustible weapons only that might fix the problem, though no matter how cheap it was it would still be more points on an already expensive upgrade.

If that were ever a thing, only Luke could exploit it.

I would add a clause to the Exhaust rule (p.31) with wording like:

Cards with weapon stats unexhaust at the beginning of an activation following a full activitation where they have been exhausted.

Needs to safeguard against Shenanigans with Standby; and leave the recover action functional.

11 hours ago, Derrault said:

No feelings required: they are already balanced for what they do, so yes it would obviously be imbalanced to reduce their cost by an astounding 10 points.

Most people consider them significantly worse than the non-exhaustible options. You can disagree, but don't act like it's some logical law of the universe that they are perfectly balanced.

3 hours ago, arnoldrew said:

Most people consider them significantly worse than the non-exhaustible options. You can disagree, but don't act like it's some logical law of the universe that they are perfectly balanced.

In a perfectly balanced game, you'd take anything you wanted, plug in the condition cards etc, and a vastly complex algorithm would compare the two forces and the result of the game, and determine who achieved the most given what they were or were not up against. The value of any given ion gun or missile launcher is directly proportional to the number of vehicles on the other side. The value of flamethrowers is directly proportional to the number and size of troop squads on the other side. No points-buy system can ever be more than an approximation of balance. Still... exhaustible weapons could approximate balance a lot more closely than they currently do!

17 hours ago, TauntaunScout said:

Maybe but I'm not good enough at math to stat all that out and compare them to everything else. How do you reduce them anyways without re-issuing the boxed game?

I think slightly changing the nature of exhaust and/or recover is a better bet.

Or, maybe just maybe, scarily-statted units are already planned, whose achilles heels will be exploited best by at least 51% of the then-current exhaustible weapons. But I doubt that scenario will come to pass.

My biggest problem with exhaust/recover is that it makes. no. sense. We imagine the squad leader shouting: "Jones is reloading, nobody do ANYTHING." because that's what effectively occurs. Why does private Jones need to wait until morale has gone so far to h**l that it's worth using an action to clear suppression markers, to reload their gun? The whole thing needs to really be looked at. The longer they wait to fix it, the more ripple effects though.

You could fix it by letting those weapons recharge for free under certain circumstances (cover, took no move actions this turn, have no suppression markers, whatever) and maybe that would work.

Any change would need a lot of playtesting.

or maybe well after shoot that model cant shot the next round well he reloads so the reload time is that that model only contributes dice after he sit out an range attack faze well he reloads

Since the game is a limited set of turns and the goal is to have a steady momentum I would say only a few at best, thermal detonator, force goose or rabid porg.

4 hours ago, arnoldrew said:

Most people consider them significantly worse than the non-exhaustible options. You can disagree, but don't act like it's some logical law of the universe that they are perfectly balanced.

or could raze the other heavy weapon cost Dl19 I rebel player

12 hours ago, flipperoverlord said:

Hmm... I think I could see it being fine either way balance-wise. What's your main reason for not wanting it to auto recover after a double move?

Really any order other than recover or shoot actually benefit the model with the exhaustible weapon when the weapon is exhausted. However, shooting doesn't benefit that model at all, so I think he should unexhausts then and on a recover.

In other words, a move, aim, or dodge order require the model to do something and benefit the full unit. A shoot order while exhausted gives that model nothing to do. Therefore he should unexhausts.

3 minutes ago, ryanabt said:

Really any order other than recover or shoot actually benefit the model with the exhaustible weapon when the weapon is exhausted. However, shooting doesn't benefit that model at all, so I think he should unexhausts then and on a recover.

In other words, a move, aim, or dodge order require the model to do something and benefit the full unit. A shoot order while exhausted gives that model nothing to do. Therefore he should unexhausts.

That model can fire the normal weapon that everyone in the squad has. I'm thinking you don't know that all Heavy Weapon and Personnel models come with the weapons on the base card.

3 minutes ago, arnoldrew said:

That model can fire the normal weapon that everyone in the squad has. I'm thinking you don't know that all Heavy Weapon and Personnel models come with the weapons on the base card.

Lol...yeah forgot that. Add to mine that a fire order and the exhausted weapon guy doesn't fire.

5 hours ago, arnoldrew said:

Most people consider them significantly worse than the non-exhaustible options. You can disagree, but don't act like it's some logical law of the universe that they are perfectly balanced.

Most people are bad at math. Their wrong opinions don’t change math.

Since it apparently isn’t obvious, to you, the heavy weapons are entirely enemy force composition dependent as to how well they shine; if the meta is all troopers, with nobody bringing vehicles or armor, impact and ion heavies won’t be as useful, because they are costed around that.

Ion in particular is absurdly powerful in that it can remove actions from 200+ point cost units. Reducing the cost purely to increase the use of those units, regardless of enemy force composition is short sighted.

10 hours ago, Derrault said:

If that were ever a thing, only Luke could exploit it.

I realize that is the case currently, but there will likely be a plethora of force users incoming with Clone Wars, so it is entirely possible that we will see more of that in the future. Also, even on Luke alone it would create some shenanigans that FFG was apparently trying to avoid when they decided not to give him master of the force in the first place.

1 hour ago, Derrault said:

Most people are bad at math. Their wrong opinions don’t change math.

Since it apparently isn’t obvious, to you, the heavy weapons are entirely enemy force composition dependent as to how well they shine; if the meta is all troopers, with nobody bringing vehicles or armor, impact and ion heavies won’t be as useful, because they are costed around that.

Ion in particular is absurdly powerful in that it can remove actions from 200+ point cost units. Reducing the cost purely to increase the use of those units, regardless of enemy force composition is short sighted.

It is definitely true that until we see a vehicle meta emerge it is difficult to evaluate weapons like the ion effectively so much of our speculation may be premature. That said, I think the overall effectiveness of the Z-6 and DLT will long make the impact weapons a hard sell, even with vehicles around.

As a side note, let's all try to keep it civil. We are disagreeing about how best to play with our plastic toys, so we don't need to be overly personal, even if we think the other guys painted his toys an ugly color or that he isn't bringing the "right" toys to the table. 😊