2 hours ago, TauntaunScout said:

There are many other ways of going about it.

I’d rather have the issue of activation games than get screwed because I was unlucky enough to not get my tokens drawn from a shared pool. That sounds like a built in negative play experience.

8 hours ago, Derrault said:

I’d rather have the issue of activation games than get screwed because I was unlucky enough to not get my tokens drawn from a shared pool. That sounds like a built in negative play experience.

Dragon Rampant had a built-in negative play experience too. You issued commands by die roll and if you failed one your turn ended. In theory it meant you had tough choices to make. In reality, you could bomb out consistently and lose through dumb luck over and over and never get to use your toys. A lot of people houseruled the activation system (by giving very general a special ability for activation rolls, instead of randomly getting your special ability) and then it worked fine.

Muskets & Tomahawks activation works great. It's sort of like a cross between Battle Cry and Battlemasters. You could take "activation spam" with that game using lots of cheap light infantry. But when there would be reasonable disadvantages to doing so.

In W:40k if you take too man weak units, you'll get activation advantages, but I'll potentially get loads of victory points when I destroy them.

Some systems I've played require you to have as close to equal activation rounds as possible. So if I have 4 units and you have 8, then I activate one, you activate two, until all units have moved.

What I really think would have helped SW:L would have been simultaneous casualties. You mark wounds, but they don't actually take effect until the end of the turn. Battletech and SWMB used that.

1 hour ago, TauntaunScout said:

What I really think would have helped SW:L would have been simultaneous casualties. You mark wounds, but they don't actually take effect until the end of the turn. Battletech and SWMB used that.

I like this from X-Wing and also from the Frostgrave system that uses a simultaneous battle - you both roll dice and you take damage both ways and the defensive unit still has it's activation. I am still pretty happy with the Legion activation.

4 hours ago, TauntaunScout said:

Dragon Rampant had a built-in negative play experience too. You issued commands by die roll and if you failed one your turn ended. In theory it meant you had tough choices to make. In reality, you could bomb out consistently and lose through dumb luck over and over and never get to use your toys. A lot of people houseruled the activation system (by giving very general a special ability for activation rolls, instead of randomly getting your special ability) and then it worked fine.

Muskets & Tomahawks activation works great. It's sort of like a cross between Battle Cry and Battlemasters. You could take "activation spam" with that game using lots of cheap light infantry. But when there would be reasonable disadvantages to doing so.

In W:40k if you take too man weak units, you'll get activation advantages, but I'll potentially get loads of victory points when I destroy them.

Some systems I've played require you to have as close to equal activation rounds as possible. So if I have 4 units and you have 8, then I activate one, you activate two, until all units have moved.

What I really think would have helped SW:L would have been simultaneous casualties. You mark wounds, but they don't actually take effect until the end of the turn. Battletech and SWMB used that.

2 hours ago, Cusm said:

I like this from X-Wing and also from the Frostgrave system that uses a simultaneous battle - you both roll dice and you take damage both ways and the defensive unit still has it's activation. I am still pretty happy with the Legion activation.

This also requires similtaneous movement though, and there’s some nuance lost in that; as it can lead to substantial overcommitment of forces to a single target, and effectively gives all units a reaction, by allowing them to move out of range of some enemies who had to enact their move first.

The only thing that, kind of, prevents this in X-wing is that there are maneuver dials, and most ships are locked into that exact movement before they know where enemies are moving. Legion has no similar system.

Besides, most of the “cheap” units that constitute additional activations have 2 or 4 wounds, with white surge defense dice.

Most units output more than 3 damage on average, before aim tokens. At which point the activation advantage is removed. If they’re stuck in the backfield doing nothing, then it’s like an 800 point army fighting a 686 point army... probably should be able to win that.

51 minutes ago, Derrault said:

Most units output more than 3 damage on average, before aim tokens. At which point the activation advantage is removed. If they’re stuck in the backfield doing nothing, then it’s like an 800 point army fighting a 686 point army... probably should be able to win that.

I suspect people don't use enough scenery, and thus the snipers, with infinite range, aren't stuck doing nothing.

14 hours ago, KommanderKeldoth said:

Make strike teams unique. Problem solved

this here is a decent idea force only 1 strike team in a army and then force people to spend 60+ on commando squad that could help more then other suggestions.

32 minutes ago, TauntaunScout said:

I suspect people don't use enough scenery, and thus the snipers, with infinite range, aren't stuck doing nothing.

Or at the very least aren't using enough line of sight blocking terrain, or putting the tall buildings into the deployment zones, allowing snipers to set up on the building without having to climb.

8 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Or at the very least aren't using enough line of sight blocking terrain, or putting the tall buildings into the deployment zones, allowing snipers to set up on the building without having to climb.

even if they put them just outside of the deployment zone (tall buildings) climbing hooks are cheap and it takes 1 action to go up height 1 on the building. maybe put in the rules no deploying above ground level unless you have no deployment area to deploy on. and since they haven't used the errata to increase points yet i doubt we will see grappling hooks raised in price.

18 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Or at the very least aren't using enough line of sight blocking terrain, or putting the tall buildings into the deployment zones, allowing snipers to set up on the building without having to climb.

This seems like it’s a bigger problem for some tournaments that don’t seem to have the players arrange the terrain.

2 hours ago, Derrault said:

Most units output more than 3 damage on average, before aim tokens.

Only on an open shot. Even with light cover the balances shifts to less than 3 damage on average for a for the majority of units.

This shows the units between launch and emplacements. Out of 27 combinations 18 of them average 3+ in an open shot and only 8 have that average when firing into light cover.

https://swlegionodds.com/2018/07/05/star-wars-legion-never-tell-me-the-odds/

I just did a rundown of all the Imperial Units added after emplacements (included bossk, did not include dewback or shore). This is every combination I could think of. Boba was harder to do because what weapons he is using is incredibly situational due to arsenal, range and command cards (and targets of a spray weapon). You can add whichever weapons together you want and remember to multiple the flamethrower damage by the number of targeted minis. Tank weapons were also given separate iterations due to arsenal and fixed front. Sorin, of course, assumes all 3 weapons on same target.

So without recent rebel releases available we have 46 out of 73 doing 3+ damage on average in an open shot and only 27 of 73 (less than 50%) doing 3+ damage to a target under light cover.

8 minutes ago, Zrob314 said:

Only on an open shot. Even with light cover the balances shifts to less than 3 damage on average for a for the majority of units.

This shows the units between launch and emplacements. Out of 27 combinations 19 of them average 3+ in an open shot and only 10 have that average when firing into light cover.

https://swlegionodds.com/2018/07/05/star-wars-legion-never-tell-me-the-odds/

I just did a rundown of all the Imperial Units added after emplacements (included bossk, did not include dewback or shore). This is every combination I could think of. Boba was harder to do because what weapons he is using is incredibly situational due to arsenal, range and command cards (and targets of a spray weapon). You can add whichever weapons together you want. Tank weapons were also given separate iterations due to arsenal and fixed front. Sorin, of course, assumes all 3 weapons on same target.

So without recent rebel releases available we have 47 out of 73 doing 3+ damage on average in an open shot and only 36 of 73 (less than 50%) doing 3+ damage to a target under light cover.

	No Cover	Light Cover
Palp	3.75	2.75
DT SE-14E	3	2
DT SE-14E DTF	4	3
DT SE-14E DLT	5.25	4.25
DT E-11D	2.5	1.5
DT E-11D DTF	3.5	2.5
DT E-11D DLT	4.625	3.625
DT GL	3.5	3.5
DT GL DTF	4.5	4.5
DT GL DLT	5.625	5.625
DT FF	2.5	1.5
DT FF DTF	3.5	2.5
DT FF DLT	4.625	4.625
DT Melee	3.5	3.5
DT +1 Melee	4.375	4.375
Krennic	1.875	1.875
IRG	3.75	3.75
IRG Ranged	3	2
IRG FP	4.75	4.75
IRG FP Ranged	4	3
Imp Officer	1	0
Boba Melee	1.75	1.75
Boba Carbine	1.25	1.25
Boba Wrist Rocket	1.25	1.25
Boba Flame Thrower	.875(x)	.875(x)
Boba Z-6 Rocket	2.625	1.625
Bossk Melee	2.5	1.5
Bossk Ranged	2.375	1.375
Tank Quad + DLT	4	3
Tank Quad RT97	4	3
Tank Quad + MK2	3.75	2.75
Tank Sorin DLT	5.25	4.25
Tank Sorin RT97	5.25	4.25
H Quad + DLT	4.75	3.75
H Quad RT97	5	4
H Quad + MK2	4.5	3.5
H MK2 + DLT	3.25	2.25
H MK2 + RT97	3.5	3.5
DLT	1.5	1.5
RT97	1.5	1.5
H DLT	1.75	1.75
H RT97	2	2
Tank Quad	2.5	1.5
Tank MK2	1.25	0.25
H Tank Quad	3	2
H Tank MK2	1.5	0.5
	18/46	27/46

no cover possible
sharpshooter 1
avg < 3

Ah I stand corrected; some? Many?

Although for units like Boba, he doesn’t need to average more than 2 against snipers: with the sharpshooter 2 and Pierce 1 (since to shrug off the average 2 hits and have only one mini die only happens ~1/10 times; the other ~90 percent, both sniper minis die).

Just now, Derrault said:

Ah I stand corrected; some? Many?

Although for units like Boba, he doesn’t need to average more than 2 against snipers: with the sharpshooter 2 and Pierce 1 (since to shrug off the average 2 hits and have only one mini die only happens ~1/10 times; the other ~90 percent, both sniper minis die).

That's cool. I wasn't trying to do figuring against any specific target (which is why I didn't account calculate a spray weapon beyond 1 mini).

I think this is good to do, and account for new units and combinations. Made me rethink my armament for my Occupier.

2 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Or at the very least aren't using enough line of sight blocking terrain, or putting the tall buildings into the deployment zones, allowing snipers to set up on the building without having to climb.

It used to be widely recommended that no tall buildings/cliffs be near deployment zones in 40k, and that any such things should be near the center of the board if plausible. To break up line of sight, and to keep it from turning into Little Roundtop with the deployment zones deciding the fight. Unless it was for a special scenario or something.

I haven't seen any such friendly advice in the Legion publications so far.

32 minutes ago, TauntaunScout said:

It used to be widely recommended that no tall buildings/cliffs be near deployment zones in 40k, and that any such things should be near the center of the board if plausible. To break up line of sight, and to keep it from turning into Little Roundtop with the deployment zones deciding the fight. Unless it was for a special scenario or something.

I haven't seen any such friendly advice in the Legion publications so far.

Sometimes I almost feel like FFG forgets that people like to use 3D terrain with 3D models. I expect if FFG produced a line of terrain buildings/landing pads/etc there might be more terrain advice. Also, the game is barely a year old, so such advice might be further down the pipeline. Wasn't it only relatively recently the RRG added something about 33% terrain?

1 hour ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Sometimes I almost feel like FFG forgets that people like to use 3D terrain with 3D models. I expect if FFG produced a line of terrain buildings/landing pads/etc there might be more terrain advice. Also, the game is barely a year old, so such advice might be further down the pipeline. Wasn't it only relatively recently the RRG added something about 33% terrain?

As far as I know it was there from the beginning, and it's 25%.

5 minutes ago, arnoldrew said:

As far as I know it was there from the beginning, and it's 25%.

And it's at least 25%. Not at most or exactly 25%.

Most 40k players don't actually use as much terrain as GW recommends either. Actually I'm unsure what they currently recommend but they used to say at least 50%, and if in doubt err on the side of more is better.

So I think it's a widespread problem of gamers not having/using enough stuff.

9 hours ago, arnoldrew said:

As far as I know it was there from the beginning, and it's 25%.

Lots of people's 25% is not a dense 25%.

I refer you to this website:

https://legiontournamentcircuit.com/terrain/

Helps show what 25% looks like before and after separating it out. There’s definitely more stuff we’d like to add, but it’s a start.

On 6/1/2019 at 1:25 AM, TalkPolite said:

I refer you to this website:

https://legiontournamentcircuit.com/terrain/

Helps show what 25% looks like before and after separating it out. There’s definitely more stuff we’d like to add, but it’s a start.

That snow map is still pretty light. In the 25% reference shot there's a lot of gaps between those pieces. it would need a lot of small scatter to fill those up, or try to get them a bit closer, you'd see that you have room for more in that.

This is what a dense 25% looks like

16 minutes ago, Zrob314 said:

That snow map is still pretty light. In the 25% reference shot there's a lot of gaps between those pieces. it would need a lot of small scatter to pill those up, or try to get them a bit closer, you'd see that you have room for me in that.

This is what a dense 25% looks like

That’s an important distinction - 25% light, regular, and dense! Topics we are adding to the website in the near future...

13 minutes ago, TalkPolite said:

That’s an important distinction - 25% light, regular, and dense! Topics we are adding to the website in the near future...

And the type of terrain matters. You need rough terrain which grants no cover, as I just mentioned in another thread. A few big patches of that taking up some of the 25% could be a game changer for snowspeeders.

that seems to be one of the larger issues right now with legion is terrain just overall isn't diverse enough i believe which is leading to alot of sniper spam too. people are using terrain that supports units being on multiple elevations more that can have legion minis on it.

1 hour ago, azeronbloodmoone said:

people are using terrain that supports units being on multiple elevations more that can have legion minis on it.

What?

On 6/3/2019 at 6:05 PM, CaptainRocket said:

What?

There’s a typo, where he wrote that instead of then.

He was saying there’s more legion terrain providing height (benefits snipers) than blocks line of sight (hinders snipers).

Edit: unless I’m misreading that

I like the idea of having strike teams as detachments, but with only 3 SF slots you could only ever have 1 detachment. They would have to add a slot, or have it so the detachments don't use up a slot to make it work.