6 minutes ago, RaevenKS said:

I run 3 AT-RT flamer on regular basis too. They are not "too much overcosted".

And I even have an AT-ST Empire list with 10 activations which works really well against "the Meta".

Moreover, the main problem, imo, of sniper, is the fact they are neither "Cumbersome" (I mean, it's a sniper. It takes time to aim properly from what I know) or its range is 1-X. Imo, a 2-X or 3-X would allow a lot of plays around them.

I was referring to AT-STs and the T-47. I haven't really come across an AT-ST since release due to it's extreme cost.

1 minute ago, R3dReVenge said:

I was referring to AT-STs and the T-47. I haven't really come across an AT-ST since release due to it's extreme cost.

Local metas vary. I've played against a couple of AT-ST lists at my FLGS. But the problem isn't just the cost of the AT-ST, it's the fact that for most of the objectives, it can only interact by attacking your opponent's Troopers.

1 hour ago, Gridloc said:

The problem I have with pass mechanic is when Player A brings an elite team, they have better stats. vs player B. Now if you give player A the passes, he not only is getting the activations that B paid for but also his stronger attack and defense dice. That seems like a double dip.

I'd be all for seeing a command upgrade card both sides could take for points that is exhaustible but gives a pass like ability. This would mean not paying for a full unit but gaining a bit of the pass benefits for armies.

Generally speaking, pass mechanics are added in these situations when the advantage of taking a small elite force doesn't make up for the loss of activations. Adding a pass mechanic is a band-aid fix that corrects for this imbalance without requiring you to change a bunch of units all at once (Which could have a ripple effect on balance). So less "double dipping" and more like giving one group some extra stuff since they got the short end of the stick.

Still, I'm not sure what a good pass mechanic would look like for Legion, especially since I don't feel Armada's solution was ideal.

This is a good discussion.

In general, I think some kind of kill point setup would just exacerbate the problem being discussed here. Significant advantage already accrues to whoever eliminates the first activation, and that’s with points destroyed being a tiebreaker, not actual victory points.

Secondly, I think we need to give the game some time before calling the meta “stale.” Currently we have really only two corps units to choose from for each faction; a range 3 all purpose mainline infantry unit (Z-6s and DLTs), and a close assault unit (Snows and Fleets). Are we really saying the meta is stale because mainline infantry units are being “spammed?” I like that your corps in Legion forms your core, and that the decisions about which elite units to bring are made at the margins. I really don’t want to see lists with four deathtroopers be viable. We already have two more corps choices on the horizon; let’s see what happens.

I also want to note that I do believe the top eight lists had variety. They featured lots of corps and snipers, for sure. But they also featured fleets, snows, every character except Jyn and Vader, pathfinders, medics, officers, comms techs, and saboteurs. I had fleets and pathfinders in my list (and only two snipers!) and I did just fine.

I think this is going to continue to get better as the game matures without imposing any artificial solutions.

I also think the top tier “competitive” meta is not relevant to most people in practical terms; tournament players at the level of high command are always going to be looking for even the smallest marginal advantage, but Legion is a game where a good player can win with just about anything on a given day and most units are at least viable (if not optimal). There are tons of anecdotes in this thread of people winning their local scenes with “off-meta” units, and I think that’s both repeatable and great.

On 4/17/2019 at 3:25 AM, Angry Ewok said:

I am continually annoyed by the boring, spreadsheet efficient, tactically passive, list composition in most top competitive legion lists. There are some stand outs that break out of the mold and I admire them and hope they will continue to find success. We need ppl like them to break up the current snooze fest.

Sadly and unimaginatively, the general formula for high level tournament success is really pretty simple if you look at the reports though. You must take your faction's best (aka most long range) troop option, and not just a few, you had better spam them hard. Most lists feature 5-6, Z-6 Troopers or DLT Troopers, then to further pad your activation advantage you have built by spamming efficient troop choices, you then spam your faction's sniper teams. So now that you have filled out your obligatory 8-9 units, you then actually consider what units you like to use, or think have tactical wrinkles worth considering.

What you don't see much of are units that exceed the 70 point range, anything above that is hard to justify when you factor in the loss of activations it represents, such a unit must offer something amazing to warrant its inclusion. People say vehicles are bad in legion, why is that? Because not only do they not score in every mission, but they also fall short of this 70 point or less bench mark of inclusion, and can not normally be justified as one of your above 70 point splurge units...

The end result is a bunch of lists that look basically the same, and fight basically the same, and typically not in a very dynamic or tactically deep/challenging way. They all excel in attrition fights because as enemy units attempt to close, they must spend actions to move instead of taking other beneficial actions like Aim, Dodge, etc. All other things being equal, the army that gets to take aim or dodge actions instead of moving will out perform an army that does. An army with equal range and more activations will end up getting more shots on their opponent as they wait the other side out and hit them once they have moved into range. This issue only gets worse when you factor in suppression. An army with more units can create more suppression ( thus incentivizing activations even more). We all also see the massive advantage of having more units/activations when setting up a Last/First attack or covering objectives once the enemy no longer can react due to being out activated.

The cover system is admittedly designed to encourage larger dice pools, but when crits get around this limitation and ALL missions are objective based, it is nowhere near enough to limit whole sale spreadsheet efficiency spam across both factions.

As with basically any alternate activation game, having more activations is advantageous. That is why we have the meta we currently do, a never ending parade of blah armies running the same 4-5 units over and over.

Legion needs missions that award points for killing units. 40k is a simplistic, shadow of the tactical depth legion has to offer but they do get one thing right, to counter the overwhelming strength of MSU style lists in objective based games, kill point missions are also included in tournament packets. This introduces risk to MSU players for spamming units.

Imagine the list design space that opens up if players could include a mission in their battle deck that awards 1 VP for each enemy unit killed? Or even better, if in addition to the VP's earned from holding objectives, you earned 1 VP for every 3 units destroyed. We would see people reconsidering the ubiquitous sniper teams for sure. Also there would be less pressure on each unit in your list to conform to the 70 or under template. Tough, hard hitting units become less of a liability and more of a factor in list design.

As it stands I am just not impressed or interested in going to large events and playing against people who seek to create a stand off situation and create just enough of an edge to force the other side to push forward, thereby exposing themselves to the attrition mismatch I outlined above. The game is not 3 months old any more, all lists should not look the exact same... Put down your calculators and actually play the game, don't just tie the mission and win my killing 1 unit and hiding all game.

The solution is to employ your army with a plan in mind.

How do you plan to deal with an opponent who brings more numerous, but less sturdy, units? This is just going to be more pronounced once the CIS and Republic launch, as the CIS has already established an even cheaper less sturdy corps unit with more wounds, while the Republics baseline unit is the epitome of quality over quantity at 52 points(!) for only 4 Troopers (albeit with the offense of Rebel troopers and the defense of Imperials).

If you really want to stymie enemy sniper teams, invest in a fast hunter-killer unit or units that can outmaneuver and force both minis into the kill zone to clip their wings. A Speeder Bike has the speed to zip across the field to sniper positions, and with only 90 cost it only has to eliminate two strike teams to basically justify its cost.

14 hours ago, KrisWall said:

Any pass mechanic we might eventually see would likely be similar to the pass "mechanic" in Armada. In Armada, there is an upgrade card called Strategic Advisor. It's an Officer upgrade that can only be attached to a large based ship. The text is "When it is your turn to activate, you may exhaust this card to pass your turn (your opponent activates a ship instead)." Armada has no Recover equivalent, so this is a once per game thing and requires a large ship, which is something not all fleets have. In other words, it's a limited option.

It is to help large ships. Most people have 4-6 activations, but large ships are more expensive so they need a pass. OUR META DOES NOT NEED A PASS. Lemme explain. There is no unit in this game that is too expensive for 800 points. In armada, an imperial star destroyer will be up to half of your list. Meaning you NEED added activations and activation padding. Vader as one of the most expensive units, will only be up to a bit more than 1/4 of your list. The only way we could implement a pass would be a dark side force upgrade that gave a pass for Vader and palp. We do not need this because again, we have a diverse meta and many different ideas on how to run certain lists. If you don’t like 4-5 core, don't play 4-5 core. Use special forces and supports to work with your minimum core. This game is a large scale battle game, which means that the majority of the units used should be core. FFG, if you read this, please do not make this game about specialized units, and keep it a large scale combat game.

EDIT: By "specialized units" i mean like ALL hero lists or lists that run 3/4 of it as heroes. I want there to be 8-12 units on the battlefield, not 7 as 4 heroes and 3 core because you need a minimum core count.

13 minutes ago, Orkimedes said:

This is a good discussion.

In general, I think some kind of kill point setup would just exacerbate the problem being discussed here. Significant advantage already accrues to whoever eliminates the first activation, and that’s with points destroyed being a tiebreaker, not actual victory points.

Secondly, I think we need to give the game some time before calling the meta “stale.” Currently we have really only two corps units to choose from for each faction; a range 3 all purpose mainline infantry unit (Z-6s and DLTs), and a close assault unit (Snows and Fleets). Are we really saying the meta is stale because mainline infantry units are being “spammed?” I like that your corps in Legion forms your core, and that the decisions about which elite units to bring are made at the margins. I really don’t want to see lists with four deathtroopers be viable. We already have two more corps choices on the horizon; let’s see what happens.

I also want to note that I do believe the top eight lists had variety. They featured lots of corps and snipers, for sure. But they also featured fleets, snows, every character except Jyn and Vader, pathfinders, medics, officers, comms techs, and saboteurs. I had fleets and pathfinders in my list (and only two snipers!) and I did just fine.

I think this is going to continue to get better as the game matures without imposing any artificial solutions.

I also think the top tier “competitive” meta is not relevant to most people in practical terms; tournament players at the level of high command are always going to be looking for even the smallest marginal advantage, but Legion is a game where a good player can win with just about anything on a given day and most units are at least viable (if not optimal). There are tons of anecdotes in this thread of people winning their local scenes with “off-meta” units, and I think that’s both repeatable and great.

Couldn't agree more

43 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Local metas vary. I've played against a couple of AT-ST lists at my FLGS. But the problem isn't just the cost of the AT-ST, it's the fact that for most of the objectives, it can only interact by attacking your opponent's Troopers.

The biggest risk is that you have all those wounds being unused; this can be mitigated by thrusting it right into the enemy, so they have few or no initial target choices except the hard target.

12 minutes ago, Cleto0 said:

It is to help large ships. Most people have 4-6 activations, but large ships are more expensive so they need a pass. OUR META DOES NOT NEED A PASS. Lemme explain. There is no unit in this game that is too expensive for 800 points. In armada, an imperial star destroyer will be up to half of your list. Meaning you NEED added activations and activation padding. Vader as one of the most expensive units, will only be up to a bit more than 1/4 of your list. The only way we could implement a pass would be a dark side force upgrade that gave a pass for Vader and palp. We do not need this because again, we have a diverse meta and many different ideas on how to run certain lists. If you don’t like 4-5 core STOP PLAYING THIS GAME. This game is a large scale battle game, which means that the majority of the units used should be core. FFG, if you read this, please do not make this game about specialized units, and keep it a large scale combat game.

I'm well aware of how Armada works and why the pass upgrade was implemented. I made no value judgments on the need for a pass mechanic in Legion. I do, however, think that a pass mechanic would be valuable in Legion for the same reason that it's valuable in Armada. A "standard" Vader build uses up around 30% of your points. Palpatine is the same way. Losing out on activations really hurts when your opponent can just wait you out. Being able to delay even one activation would make some builds more viable and would have no real impact on others.

1 hour ago, RaevenKS said:

Would strike team should have the same keyword as mortar or heavy gun from the Shore and Veteran ?

I mean, if you can't take a strike team without taking a regular commando/scout squad, this would nerf the overall spam a lot.

Even me could be a bit sadden by it (as I am playing 2-3 saboters on regular basis). But this could lead to a "less sniper", and more diverse (and perhaps sane) "meta" ? (gosh I hate this word, 'cause my list work really well against the meta if the opponent is not a freaking lucky dice roller )

I like this a lot!

I bet that's why they thought of the keyword when releasing those units, so an upgraded card makes sense...

Just now, CaptainRocket said:

I like this a lot!

I bet that's why they thought of the keyword when releasing those units, so an upgraded card makes sense...

There is a lot of thing that, imo, are making sense in the recent keywords.

The one i'm talking about.

Critical X, so they won't put Critical Surge anymore on anything (let's be honest, critical surge is just insanely stupidely powerful and allow even regular units to take down heavies with ease) -> Luke, Jyn, Boba and all of the "critical surge" stuff should get an upgrade that get ride of the critical surge and put a Critical X on their weapons. And put some Critical X on Vader also.

And we are not seeing the end of it.

22 minutes ago, Cleto0 said:

If you don’t like 4-5 core STOP PLAYING THIS GAME. This game is a large scale battle game, which means that the majority of the units used should be core. FFG, if you read this, please do not make this game about specialized units, and keep it a large scale combat game.

Roger roger! Let's start a petition! FFG please cancel the Republic faction!

Also, players who might be thinking of picking up Republic, or who hope for other styles of play... we don't serve your kind here! Go wait outside with the droids...

15 minutes ago, CaptainRocket said:

Roger roger! Let's start a petition! FFG please cancel the Republic faction!

Also, players who might be thinking of picking up Republic, or who hope for other styles of play... we don't serve your kind here! Go wait outside with the droids...

I dunno, I think Republic is still going to want 4+ corps units.

That said, their corps units look really interesting...

Also, it is VERY premature to call the meta stale in my opinion when two of the announced factions haven't even been released. We don't know how the new units that constitute those factions will change the meta, not to mention how new units in the existing factions will change things.

If FFG were mostly "done" releasing units, only releasing one or two for each faction a year, then I think the meta may truely start to become stale. Now if the new corps and new factions don't really change anything, then that might be an issue, but it's way to early to tell, the game is still developing.

On 4/17/2019 at 6:48 AM, Alpha17 said:

Amen. Most tournaments I've seen just barely squeak in in terms of the "25%" rule. I think that should be the bare minimum, with 33% the norm.

Yeah, I think they map out the 25 block, but it has a lot of holes in it. This is what a 25% terrain should look like:

25 minutes ago, Orkimedes said:

I dunno, I think Republic is still going to want 4+ corps units.

Maybe! (And I'm okay with that)

I just don't like the attitude which is dismissive of other folk's desires... it's a perfectly reasonable thing to want a non-core elite army. It may not be where we go anytime soon, but we should still welcome the possibility and welcome players which may want that.

4 minutes ago, CaptainRocket said:

Maybe! (And I'm okay with that)

I just don't like the attitude which is dismissive of other folk's desires... it's a perfectly reasonable thing to want a non-core elite army. It may not be where we go anytime soon, but we should still welcome the possibility and welcome players which may want that.

100% this. I was going to reply to his ignorant comment about exiling / dismissing players who want to run elite armies from the game, but decided it just wasn't worth it.

25 minutes ago, CaptainRocket said:

Maybe! (And I'm okay with that)

I just don't like the attitude which is dismissive of other folk's desires... it's a perfectly reasonable thing to want a non-core elite army. It may not be where we go anytime soon, but we should still welcome the possibility and welcome players which may want that.

Haha. if you want an elite army that is all heros play imperial assault. I am fine with large units of elite troops, not hero armies

1 hour ago, KrisWall said:

I'm well aware of how Armada works and why the pass upgrade was implemented. I made no value judgments on the need for a pass mechanic in Legion. I do, however, think that a pass mechanic would be valuable in Legion for the same reason that it's valuable in Armada. A "standard" Vader build uses up around 30% of your points. Palpatine is the same way. Losing out on activations really hurts when your opponent can just wait you out. Being able to delay even one activation would make some builds more viable and would have no real impact on others.

Part of vader and palps cost IS the loss of activation numbers.

13 minutes ago, Cleto0 said:

Haha. if you want an elite army that is all heros play imperial assault. I am fine with large units of elite troops, not hero armies

I think they are referring to elite units in general, including higher cost corps. Not a 'heroes only' army

20 hours ago, CaptainRocket said:

Maybe! (And I'm okay with that)

I just don't like the attitude which is dismissive of other folk's desires... it's a perfectly reasonable thing to want a non-core elite army. It may not be where we go anytime soon, but we should still welcome the possibility and welcome players which may want that.

If you want to do that in a non-competitive event and you have your opponent's approval, sure go ahead. Some of the Operations might also allow for non-standard list building, I'm not intimately familiar with them to be honest.

Otherwise, most miniature's games have some kind of requirements that need to be filled for list building, even if it's just a commander of some description. Sometimes it's for "lore" reasons (the units are the main core of the army, so widely fielded, Entourage allows for you to take more "elite" non-core units, meaning you can outnumber your corps selections. Future commanders might mess with the basic Force Org chart even more.

I wouldn't be surprised if either of the new faction ends up being significantly more "elite," bringing only the minimum corps requirements. Especially the CIS, where the B1s are cheap leaving lots of points for other, more expensive units. With no upgrades, 3 B1 units leave almost 700 points for Droidekas, B2s, or whatever else FFG releases. We don't yet have enough information since only the most basic of troops have been extensively revealed.

5 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

I wouldn't be surprised if either of the new faction ends up being significantly more "elite," bringing only the minimum corps requirements. Especially the CIS, where the B1s are cheap leaving lots of points for other, more expensive units. With no upgrades, 3 B1 units leave almost 700 points for Droidekas, B2s, or whatever else FFG releases. We don't yet have enough information since only the most basic of troops have been extensively revealed.

I doubt this as b1s work together really well with their coordinate and forced attack

1 hour ago, RaevenKS said:

There is a lot of thing that, imo, are making sense in the recent keywords.

The one i'm talking about.

Critical X, so they won't put Critical Surge anymore on anything (let's be honest, critical surge is just insanely stupidely powerful and allow even regular units to take down heavies with ease) -> Luke, Jyn, Boba and all of the "critical surge" stuff should get an upgrade that get ride of the critical surge and put a Critical X on their weapons. And put some Critical X on Vader also.

And we are not seeing the end of it.

I think critical surges are fine on hero characters and commanders, it lets them do really reliable damage since they are generally only throwing 2-4 dice per activation (except Luke, but I'm okay with him being special).

The only non-unique unit in the game with surge to critical is the AT-RT for some reason. They need it though, so I wont begrudge them.

Also when you math it out, on a small dice pool Critical 1 is basically the same as surge to critical. Critical X only has a meaningful difference when it comes to large dice pools (units fire supporting each other for instance, which is also when they came up with the keyword, to allow surges to be added to pools without surge to hit)

9 minutes ago, Cleto0 said:

I doubt this as b1s work together really well with their coordinate and forced attack

Coordinate works with any "Droid Trooper," so will likely work with MOST of the CIS's units. Unless the RRG with the full rules for Coordinate is updated to say otherwise, the wording is such on Coordinate that it only takes 1 order to a Corps/Trooper unit for three clustered B1 units to have face up order tokens, and pass one off to a unit of say B2s or Droidekas.

The OP was aimed at

1. pointing out the really cookie cutter meta that is being played, (max long range efficient cores, plus snipers) and challenge the community to do better than simply spamming this easy button in order to win, ( we all can crunch the numbers and see why its good (your not special and smarter than everyone else bc you bought 3 boxes of snipers)

2. to hopefully get people to consider a kill point oriented mission option or an alternate means of scoring that diminishes the overwhelming advantage MSU style lists have in a purely objective based mission. there need to be other missions in the deck that they must plan to counter, hopefully discouraging the mono build style we are seeing

3. point out that very few if any lists in the top 8 of LVO, LCQ, or Adepticon HC did not have at least 1, if not 2-3 Sniper teams regardless of faction, I chaff hard against a unit that is that ubiquitous across both factions, people should not feel like they have to play with at least 2 snipers or they are starting behind, but the results we are seeing bears that out repeatedly. We should not have to buy multiple copies of no-core units to be competitive. Hopefully the shore troopers have a range 4+ indirect fire weapon to counter this massively disproportionate use of a single non-core unit option.

#SniperTeamsAreTheFlotillasofLegion

PS we hate flotilla spam for the same reason