I've always felt the AtSt was about 20pts overpriced but otherwise fine as is (check my old posts) and to me the cost of the new tanks verifies this. Anyone else see this or feel this way ? The new imperial drivers released with the occupier tank have fixed whatever offensive shortcomings the AtSt had. But with the cost of the upgrades its still a little too much to get your investment back. The new Droid tank and Sabre tank are almost identical in value to the AtSt but are both priced at 170. A 175pt AtSt would be just right to rotate into lists imo.

Whatcha think?

Tank:
pros: 25 points cheaper then at-st
same weapon as at-st
red defense die
same speed as at-st
has armored as at-st
main gun has crit 1 and impact 2
lower profile then at-st
has unknown upgrade type that is equal to a weapon upgrade slot (non-hardpoint)
Outmaneuver which can cancel 1 crit

Cons:

bigger base
2 weak points on huge arcs
9 health vs 11 health
no surge to defense
1 hard point
no secondary weapon with out upgrades

AT-ST
Pros:
taller and can see over cover easier (making units harder to be obscured)
2 weapons on base with out upgrades
Impact 3 vs the 2 on tank
surge to defense
11 health
Can go over terrain easier
3 hard points for different weapon upgrades

Cons:
white defense
harder to get cover with the height
25 points more over the tank


while the point cost might make the tank appear better the at-st is strong in its own way

I think the AtSt is better as a single weapon platform if you want a pure damagedealer. More dice and higher burst damage, better range, better field of fire justify a few extra points. It will usually survive anyway, so the white defence dice don't matter as much.

The red dice of the tank are mitigated by the resiliance threshold, the poor range of the twin cannons and the placement of the weakspot. It wants to advance to deal damage, but also wants to stay behind to benefit from its defensive stats and keywords.

The tank only becomes better if you can fit in another important asset due to the points you saved (for example a second tank). Those lists might have problems vs light sabers though.

11 hours ago, buckero0 said:

I've always felt the AtSt was about 20pts overpriced but otherwise fine as is (check my old posts) and to me the cost of the new tanks verifies this. Anyone else see this or feel this way ? The new imperial drivers released with the occupier tank have fixed whatever offensive shortcomings the AtSt had. But with the cost of the upgrades its still a little too much to get your investment back. The new Droid tank and Sabre tank are almost identical in value to the AtSt but are both priced at 170. A 175pt AtSt would be just right to rotate into lists imo.

Whatcha think?

It's hard to know if they are identical in value to the AT-ST given that we don't know half the rules on their card and upgrades.

3 minutes ago, arnoldrew said:

It's hard to know if they are identical in value to the AT-ST given that we don't know half the rules on their card and upgrades.

hmm, I think we know more than half of the rules. The new rulebook has pretty much all of them already. Is there one in particular that you can't read?

1 hour ago, buckero0 said:

hmm, I think we know more than half of the rules. The new rulebook has pretty much all of them already. Is there one in particular that you can't read?

We don't know how Hovering works, we don't have the full rules for Outmaneuver or Barrage (though they are probably pretty simple) and we pretty much don't know anything about the upgrade cards including the new upgrade type.

19 minutes ago, arnoldrew said:

We don't know how Hovering works, we don't have the full rules for Outmaneuver or Barrage (though they are probably pretty simple) and we pretty much don't know anything about the upgrade cards including the new upgrade type.

Outmaneuver which can cancel 1 crit with a dodge token.
hover: treat as a ground vehicle by other units (like a at-st) for moving around it or for cover. you can reverse, strafe (move side to side while facing same general direction)

47 minutes ago, azeronbloodmoone said:

Outmaneuver which can cancel 1 crit with a dodge token.
hover: treat as a ground vehicle by other units (like a at-st) for moving around it or for cover. you can reverse, strafe (move side to side while facing same general direction)

I...I know all of that stuff. I can read. That is rules reminder text and far from a full explanation as to how that stuff works.

All these new tanks have proved how well priced the T-47 is.

11 hours ago, lologrelol said:

All these new tanks have proved how well priced the T-47 is.

It still needs a point drop (15) or surge to hit (or Critical) to be as effective imo.

1 hour ago, buckero0 said:

It still needs a point drop (15) or surge to hit (or Critical) to be as effective imo.

Surge to Crit would help, but I STILL don't know if I could justify playing it.

14 hours ago, lologrelol said:

All these new tanks have proved how well priced the T-47 is.

the t47 with the space jockey pilot is dangerous cover 2 and then armored oh and its immune to blast and melee. this is a defensive unit before the dice are even thrown. yes it has white defense but it surges on defense, i never could understand why people dislike it so much when you compare it to the at-st or other heavies such as the new hover tank. also it gets a free movement so on turn 1 it can be in enemy lines doing displacement on turn 2 with no weak points.

14 hours ago, azeronbloodmoone said:

the t47 with the space jockey pilot is dangerous cover 2 and then armored oh and its immune to blast and melee. this is a defensive unit before the dice are even thrown. yes it has white defense but it surges on defense, i never could understand why people dislike it so much when you compare it to the at-st or other heavies such as the new hover tank. also it gets a free movement so on turn 1 it can be in enemy lines doing displacement on turn 2 with no weak points.

Cool story bro.

On 8/8/2019 at 1:16 AM, arnoldrew said:

we don't have the full rules for Outmaneuver or Barrage (though they are probably pretty simple) and we pretty much don't know anything about the upgrade cards including the new upgrade type.

the rules for those 2 are quite visible on the cards, outmanoeuvre lets you spend dodges vs crits and barrage lets you forgo arsenal to make a second attack action which lets you fire 1 weapon twice separately for 2 actions (main cannon comes to mind vs deflect/nimble or vehicles with the high velocity and critical/impact values respectively)

the main rule we really need to know is what cycle does since its wasnt in the new rules and seems to be on several ordinance upgrade cards and on the b2 unit grenade launcher

15 hours ago, azeronbloodmoone said:

the t47 with the space jockey pilot is dangerous cover 2 and then armored oh and its immune to blast and melee. this is a defensive unit before the dice are even thrown. yes it has white defense but it surges on defense, i never could understand why people dislike it so much when you compare it to the at-st or other heavies such as the new hover tank. also it gets a free movement so on turn 1 it can be in enemy lines doing displacement on turn 2 with no weak points.

I’m guessing you haven’t played the T-47, or played against it? The T-47 is one of those things that’s good on paper, but in practice, it’s garbage. If the AT-ST is 10-20 points overcosted (yeah it does need a slight points reduction), then the T-47 needs to be reduced by a minimum of 30-40. It’s biggest problem is that the cost of the Arsenal keyword was placed too high when they created the game, and having it so the T-47’s two weapons we’re facing opposite directions was thematic, but not useful. The AT-ST suffered from the overcost of Arsenal too, but since all its weapons face the same direction it makes it far more effective, so a slight points adjustment would make it equal to most other tanks in its own way. Since the beginning of the game point costs have been reducing on keywords and most people think it’s power creep, but it’s mainly because the designers have noticed that certain things are unplayable mainly because they’re priced too high and that price was driven by certain keywords. Reducing the cost on the keywords reduces overall cost and now a new unit is playable, but with old units, FFG doesn’t like to add errata unless there is no choice, and so you see a lot of new cards that aid the older stuff and rules changes (like the vehicle’s broken weapon), unfortunately there’s nothing more elegant a solution than dealing directly with the problem. They really have to reduce the points through errata. The designers are still trying to adjust things so that heavy vehicles are attractive to play and unfortunately they’re using roundabout methods. I just hope they don’t overdo their efforts and add too much benefit to vehicles and then they dominate, or not enough and no one includes them. If heavy vehicles become popular it would change the meta, then pieces that have been ignored will suddenly be useful, like rocket launchers and ion weapons. It would make the game more full and afford more options during list creation which would be fun, but the way the designers are approaching this problem makes it a difficult and delicate balance. Just my opinion.

I've always thought the AT-ST should have front\left\right arcs. I mean the whole point of that paradigm would be so that you can shoot at what you're looking at, and we see that plenty in return of the jedi.

that plus a points break for arsenal would i think bring it up to speed.