Lotta people looking to fix problems in the game. Been reading a lot of posts on how to do so. Some good ideas, some bad.

One of the best ones I've seen to fix vehicles is that they may come out with more pilot cards to add other keywords. For example...

A Luke Pilot card (if you dont use Luke on your team) could add sharpshooter and pierce.

Lando, Han, Chewie, "insert x" pilot makes your vehicles better. So they can make a pilot/vehicle expansion kit.

Dont like your corps units...well they did do a specialists expansion, so they can make a heavy weapons expansion. Like a rocket , ion, demo, flamethrower, machine gunner, mortor, etc etc... so many ways to do this.

I think FFG is on the right track if they do things like this rather than errata or changing the rulebook too much. Not that what they have done so far was bad, but I think cards and more keywords are the better route.

one thing i would like to see are Commanders who change the force organisation ex: a Scout commander who makes scouts corp choices.

Having to remove Luke to make your Airspeeder good is a hefty price.

That said, I've been mulling over recently what FFG could do to make upgrades where say, vehicles become commanders (I/E the Luke card in the T-47 makes it your commander, same with Veers for AT-ST) but still able to issue their command cards and such - or just make commander rank units which are vehicles. No rule says they have to be troopers (and if there is, they can rewrite it, like Emplacements).

4 hours ago, UnitOmega said:

Having to remove Luke to make your Airspeeder good is a hefty price.

That said, I've been mulling over recently what FFG could do to make upgrades where say, vehicles become commanders (I/E the Luke card in the T-47 makes it your commander, same with Veers for AT-ST) but still able to issue their command cards and such - or just make commander rank units which are vehicles. No rule says they have to be troopers (and if there is, they can rewrite it, like Emplacements).

I like that too!!!

I would like to see an expansion pack that adds in pilots. I mean as miniatures.

Basically, a cheap crew upgrade that allows a defeated heavy to replace the heavy model with a new trooper model. A couple of pilots for the t-47, a couple of AT-ST pilots.

Could be interesting.

Dak : t47 is 100 pts cheaper, gains surge to hit. At the beginning of turn 3, when you activate your t47, make a compulsory move and then you are defeated.

32 minutes ago, buckero0 said:

Dak : t47 is 100 pts cheaper, gains surge to hit. At the beginning of turn 3, when you activate your t47, make a compulsory move and then you are defeated.

Nah, Dak has the "Got This" keyword, where he takes on the whole Empire himself, until he dies.

18 hours ago, UnitOmega said:

Having to remove Luke to make your Airspeeder good is a hefty price.

That said, I've been mulling over recently what FFG could do to make upgrades where say, vehicles become commanders (I/E the Luke card in the T-47 makes it your commander, same with Veers for AT-ST) but still able to issue their command cards and such - or just make commander rank units which are vehicles. No rule says they have to be troopers (and if there is, they can rewrite it, like Emplacements).

Two rules actually require the commander to be a trooper: The Commander Rules on Page 23 and the Panic Rules on Page 47.

Commander rules aren't too much of an issue, just remove the reference to trooper, but that causes a cascading effect on the rules.

Vehicles have no Courage value and therefore a new rule would have to be written to deal with checking for panic when in range 1-3 of a commander. If the vehicle commanders are given a courage value, then they become able to be suppressed, or need yet another new rule to deal with that. If every vehicle is counted as Courage "-", then it is no longer possible for units in range of the vehicle commander to panic.

Additionally, if vehicles as a whole can be commanders, then EVERY vehicle either needs a Courage value (and therefore can be suppressed/panicked without ANOTHER new rule be written), or is effectively Courage "-" So killing Veers out of an AT-ST list just means that the AT-ST is now going to be the commander. If certain upgrades cause vehicles to be commanders, then those upgrades also have to somehow interact with the Panic rules as they stand.

26 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Two rules actually require the commander to be a trooper: The Commander Rules on Page 23 and the Panic Rules on Page 47.

Commander rules aren't too much of an issue, just remove the reference to trooper, but that causes a cascading effect on the rules.

Vehicles have no Courage value and therefore a new rule would have to be written to deal with checking for panic when in range 1-3 of a commander. If the vehicle commanders are given a courage value, then they become able to be suppressed, or need yet another new rule to deal with that. If every vehicle is counted as Courage "-", then it is no longer possible for units in range of the vehicle commander to panic.

Additionally, if vehicles as a whole can be commanders, then EVERY vehicle either needs a Courage value (and therefore can be suppressed/panicked without ANOTHER new rule be written), or is effectively Courage "-" So killing Veers out of an AT-ST list just means that the AT-ST is now going to be the commander. If certain upgrades cause vehicles to be commanders, then those upgrades also have to somehow interact with the Panic rules as they stand.

it wouldnt be to hard to do with a pilot upgrade card. They would add a keyword called Courage X: Friendly troopers within range 3 use X when checking for panic.

13 minutes ago, jcmonson said:

it wouldnt be to hard to do with a pilot upgrade card. They would add a keyword called Courage X: Friendly troopers within range 3 use X when checking for panic.

That pilot card would also need some other keyword to bypass the current restriction on troopers being commanders. I didn't say it was impossible, just that there are more than one or two changes that would need to be made, and that could have a ripple effect.

Personally, I think pilots should be more concerned with driving their vehicle than commanding ground forces.

2 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

That pilot card would also need some other keyword to bypass the current restriction on troopers being commanders. I didn't say it was impossible, just that there are more than one or two changes that would need to be made, and that could have a ripple effect.

Personally, I think pilots should be more concerned with driving their vehicle than commanding ground forces.

as you mentioned that would just require a change in the RRG. That being said i agree with you that pilots shouldn't be commanders in this game. If it was more vehicle focused then maybe, but that would take a pretty big overhaul almost to the point of releasing a new vehicle focused core with more vehicles, new vehicle focused objectives, a change in the force org, etc.

2 minutes ago, jcmonson said:

as you mentioned that would just require a change in the RRG. That being said i agree with you that pilots shouldn't be commanders in this game. If it was more vehicle focused then maybe, but that would take a pretty big overhaul almost to the point of releasing a new vehicle focused core with more vehicles, new vehicle focused objectives, a change in the force org, etc.

Except if JUST the line about troopers being commanders is changed in the RRG, then you run into the other problems I mentioned, where you can nominate a vehicle with no courage value to be the commander once all your commander models are removed from play. So you'd still need some special way of indicating which vehicles can and cannot be commanders, be-it a keyword or something else.