Via Facebook :

Hello Legion players!

As you know, the Dewback Rider Expansion Packs sold at Gen Con had the wrong size base included in the packaging. If you purchased one of these expansion packs, please contact our Customer Service team using the link below to request a replacement.

For the remainder of the Dewback Rider Expansion Packs, we are repacking the product so that it includes the correct base size—all copies of the Dewback Rider expansion sold at the wide release will have the c orrect base included in the box.

We anticipate that this repack will cause the Dewback Rider to be delayed by a few weeks, but the Imperial Shoretrooper Expansion Pack will release as originally planned.

Thank you for your patience!

Bummer that my beautiful Dewbacks will be delayed 😥 ... but at least they'll be correct when we get them! 😊

Dewback: it’s what’s for dinner.

1 hour ago, TauntaunScout said:

Dewback: it’s what’s for dinner.

In four more weeks =\

this is an expensive, but correct move by ffg. I applaud them

1 hour ago, Tirion said:

this is an expensive, but correct move by ffg. I applaud them

Not that I disagree that this is the right call, but wouldn't shipping all the individual replacements be even more expensive?

2 hours ago, Tirion said:

this is an expensive, but correct move by ffg. I applaud them

Dewback! Dewback! Dewback!

I made you out of clay!

And when you’re dry and ready,

I’ll have to start over and make you a new base. 🙁

This kind of sucks. I want to get one just because they look so dang nice.

9 hours ago, TauntaunScout said:

Dewback: it’s what’s for dinner.

You misspelled Tauntaun.

Now that I’m playing Republic, I don’t have a blurrg in this fight, but you have my sympathies. 😶

Curse, curse, curse, hate, hate, hate, hate. When are the jabba-loving shoretroopers coming out? Generic curses and maledictions on FFG. Anger leading to hatred. Get me my red light saber; it's time to kill some younglings.

I sense @TauntaunScout 's hand in this. He obviously sabotaged this expansion to get back at @DewbackScout

13 hours ago, DewbackScout said:

You misspelled Tauntaun.

Dewback: it’s what’s for Tauntaun?

13 minutes ago, GooeyChewie said:

Dewback: it’s what’s for Tauntaun?

Tauntaun: it's what's for Dewback.

You have to feed the Thunder Lizard.

16 minutes ago, DewbackScout said:

Tauntaun: it's what's for Dewback.

You have to feed the Thunder Lizard.

Dewtaun: it's what's Taunback.

Silly dewbacks, huge bases are for AT-ST’s.

Why ask why? Drink dew off your own backs, dry.

Dewback: built Ford tough.

Do the Dew!

On 8/17/2019 at 8:13 PM, Djaskim609 said:

Curse, curse, curse, hate, hate, hate, hate. When are the jabba-loving shoretroopers coming out? Generic curses and maledictions on FFG. Anger leading to hatred. Get me my red light saber; it's time to kill some younglings.

Their final preview article just came out. Word from distributors, it’s August 30th.

On 8/19/2019 at 4:17 AM, TalkPolite said:

Their final preview article just came out. Word from distributors, it’s August 30th.

I thought that was Shoretroopers only. Or did they get everything figured out already. That's not really a delay in FFG terms. Usually a delay means 6-8 months when we're talking about FFG.

I'm annoyed now that I've learned creatures and emplacements can't claim objectives. It's like we're being told there's only one right way to play. @DewbackScout we need to start a petition.

Either let us in on the game, or prevent Commanders, Operatives, and Strike Teams from scoring. Not allowing snipers to grab an objective near your deployment zone, nor allowing Luke to kill a squad and steal its token, would change the minmax overnight. If a mortar team can't fix a vaporator, why can a sniper team? If a Tauntaun rider can't strap a box of datacards (or whatever it is we're stealing in half the games) to his saddle and ride off with it, how can it be light enough for Han Solo to carry?

"It's not a simulation" is the source of much silliness and boredom.

27 minutes ago, TauntaunScout said:

I'm annoyed now that I've learned creatures and emplacements can't claim objectives. It's like we're being told there's only one right way to play. @DewbackScout we need to start a petition.

Either let us in on the game, or prevent Commanders, Operatives, and Strike Teams from scoring. Not allowing snipers to grab an objective near your deployment zone, nor allowing Luke to kill a squad and steal its token, would change the minmax overnight. If a mortar team can't fix a vaporator, why can a sniper team? If a Tauntaun rider can't strap a box of datacards (or whatever it is we're stealing in half the games) to his saddle and ride off with it, how can it be light enough for Han Solo to carry?

"It's not a simulation" is the source of much silliness and boredom.

It would change nothing when it comes to snipers or Luke. People don't take snipers to take objectives and they would still take Luke if he couldn't grab objectives. In fact, preventing Commanders and Operatives from scoring objectives would absolutely force every list to incorporate 6 Corps just to have a chance. It would restrict legitimate list building choices even more. Also, not letting Tauntauns scamper off to the corner with the crates in every Recover the Supplies game does the opposite of "causing boredom." They're kinda good enough without the ability to score.

You either take 6 corps or lose on VP’s, as it is. More stuff should be able to score. Or at least they should bring in contestation.

Every game plays the same, letting tauntauns run away with objectives would at least be different.

Though I think we need a solid 4 to 8 objective cards that aren’t any sort of variation of Troopers Steal The Counter. That’s at the root of the problem.

You could limit the speed of any unit carrying an objective to one or two without any additional movement allowed. This could be explained by it being bounced around too much at higher speeds causing damage to it or it to be dropped. GW did this with carried objectives and it worked out very well.

Natural selection would then play a part in what you used to carry it letting squads keep more to their "intended" purposes yet be able to step in as needed.

3 hours ago, EVIL INC said:

You could limit the speed of any unit carrying an objective to one or two without any additional movement allowed. This could be explained by it being bounced around too much at higher speeds causing damage to it or it to be dropped. GW did this with carried objectives and it worked out very well.

Natural selection would then play a part in what you used to carry it letting squads keep more to their "intended" purposes yet be able to step in as needed.

I like this idea.

8 hours ago, buckero0 said:

I thought that was Shoretroopers only. Or did they get everything figured out already. That's not really a delay in FFG terms. Usually a delay means 6-8 months when we're talking about FFG.

Yeah - that was before the delay announcement. Gonna be later, but should just be a couple weeks.

9 hours ago, TauntaunScout said:

I'm annoyed now that I've learned creatures and emplacements can't claim objectives. It's like we're being told there's only one right way to play. @DewbackScout we need to start a petition.

Absolutely. I want to see someone take away a crate of supplies after my Dewback camps on it.