6 hours ago, KommanderKeldoth said:

When I started playing Legion I had hoped that points and upgrade slots would be ALL app based like X-Wing 2.0

Its honestly a much better business model for the consumer and the designers. Im glad Legion is starting to move in that direction.

I alwats use tabletop admiral to build my lists so the printed points on the card never really matter to me anyway.

I understand the need for point adjustments and thought it was a good idea to make it easier to do in X-Wing. What I don't like is the constant nerf/buff cycling you get in MMOs. I think we are getting a bit of that in X-Wing.

I'm hoping Legion hits the sweet spot. With printed values on the cards they are still incentivized to do the proper play testing and get the right value during the design.

36 minutes ago, nashjaee said:

Infinity is an example of a game that has a fantastic app which they update quite regularly. I don't think anyone uses PDFs or books. Actually I'm not even sure how up-to-date the PDFs are kept, as all the dates seem to be too old to be currently accurate.

The community has thoroughly embraced the app-based system.

Given the ia and xwing systems in place, I believe that was going to be the concept. Then cost got in the way, which is something they have indicated

2 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Except I haven't seen any significant move by 40k or really any other game to incorporate apps. 40k is just releasing more PDFs which still require you to buy whatever the most recent codex/rulebook in addition to regularly checking online to see if a new update has been released. And many of them that do have apps, require a second purchase in addition to the physical book, rather than providing some kind of discount code in a similar vein to some college textbooks.

Oh. I was just assuming based on your prior comment. I dont actually play 40k. My bad.

1 hour ago, NukeMaster said:

I understand the need for point adjustments and thought it was a good idea to make it easier to do in X-Wing. What I don't like is the constant nerf/buff cycling you get in MMOs. I think we are getting a bit of that in X-Wing.

I'm hoping Legion hits the sweet spot. With printed values on the cards they are still incentivized to do the proper play testing and get the right value during the design.

Yeah I guess its a matter of taste. In my view it is good to have an ever shifting meta. The community will quickly "solve" a static meta and establish best list building practices creating a tier 1 which will edge out most other builds. With X-Wing 2.0 they can tweak and adjust every few months to keep stirring the pot which means you get to put a wider variety of stuff on the table and have it be viable.

In 1.0 you had large swaths of your ships gathering dust if you mainly played in tournaments. The meta only shifted every few waves when a new OP card or combo was discovered which required more purchases. Or a fix card that required a purchase.

That being said I'm glad that they stated that they will only do one point change a year for Legion.

10 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

I'm not entirely convince app based is best, as I know many people who avoid buying FFG board games that require an app, and that avoided X-Wing 2.0 for the same reason. If the app goes away for some reason, then the game is unplayable.

Also I don't really see this as Legion "moving towards X-Wing" more as legion moving towards 40k.

As an aside, saying the change is "just for competitive" is silly, since competitive players like to practice lists casually, so invariably the casual scene tends to follow the competitive rules. Groups that don't have competitive players occasionally have house rules to improve the feel of the game to what they want anyway, regardless of any comments by the designers.

They release an updated PDF of the points before they even update the app, and superior 3rd party list-builders have existed since before they even made their app. No reasonable person should worry about the "the game (being) unplayable."

18 minutes ago, arnoldrew said:

No reasonable person should worry about the "the game (being) unplayable."

Right... I don't want my physical games to be dependent on ghosts in machines. Go try and use 15 year old internet support for something sometime. In any given year I play games aged 40 to 0 years old. I don't want my old game to crumble because I forgot to stash a bunch of data, nor do I want my new game to be unplayable in a house with lousy cell/internet service.

I think 2 scout walkers and 2 snowspeeders is going to be required for me to paint 1600 point lists in a timely fashion, no matter how good or bad they are, so they're going to be in my collection regardless. But I am glad to see them brought into line with the last year of play experiences. I think some things turned out to be weaker or stronger than the sum of their parts and needed an adjustment. My experience with other games (heaven forbid I go into detail) makes me leery of points adjustments, new editions, and so on. So I am glad this is a once a year thing and not going to be on the printed cards.

On 9/4/2019 at 7:55 AM, arnoldrew said:

Apparenlty they cahnged the CM at the last minute (removed Suppressive {?!}) and then either didn't playtest the change enough or forgot to update the cost. Not a good sign, but not the end of the world. It was pretty plain how terrible it was.

Yeah, I caught their explanation. It worrysome that they realized the problem, but released it anyway. That really reminds me of the old saying about LucasArts, and how they always worried about making the release dates rather than the game.

15 hours ago, KommanderKeldoth said:

When I started playing Legion I had hoped that points and upgrade slots would be ALL app based like X-Wing 2.0

Its honestly a much better business model for the consumer and the designers. Im glad Legion is starting to move in that direction.

I alwats use tabletop admiral to build my lists so the printed points on the card never really matter to me anyway.

I have to 100% disagree with you there. I was all on board for X-Wing 2.0 when it was annouced, and I dove right into it. Within a few months, however, I rapidly realized what a total disaster it is. Nothing being on the cards means you have to wait for an offical app update/PDF release for values. This means you can't proxy anything in early, or if you get the official product before the update/release of the PDF, you can't actually use it. It also leave you totally dependent on the app being right for your builds, and its impossible to double check an opponent's list just looking at the cards. The tendency of X-Wing to "fix" its meta by adjusting points is also very problematic. Since 2.0 came out, they really stopped caring about proper play testing and tend to try and solve problems by raising prices ridiculously on various meta lists. Sometimes this works, other times, not so much. It also has a tendency to harm non-meta lists if they relied on one of the cards included in the meta list. That's a huge problem for me, and one reason why I lost all interest in going back into X-Wing. It also has driven at least one friend out of the game, and neither of us really played meta lists.

14 hours ago, Ralgon said:

If you're a vet of ffg games then you are well aware these changes are locked in months before a unit releases, and that for the most part the "playtesters" they have access too are near toxic for their games.... personally it's been a pleasant surprise how well they've done so far.......

That's probably the issue; this sounds more like X-Wing play testers than the normal experience has been with Legion. Legion has felt like they really have worked to ensure a balanced game. Until this summer, none of the units released felt overly powerful, or under tested. The biggest problem in the game was that the initial vehicles came off as under-performers (with the T-47 being pretty bad for the points) Recently, however, powercreep has gone into overdrive, with new units having practically every good keyword they could shove onto the card. Looking back to the CM and suppressive, it too almost fit into this category, and I, for one, am glad it didn't get the suppressive keyword. The fact that it happened so late that they didn't change the points cost goes to show how late in the game that was yanked off, and how narrowly a bullet was dodged.

14 hours ago, Tris87TJ said:

I think another reason that they had to tweak it is to make it more in line with all the new weapons costs from the discount. With the ion rifle being cheaper (I would also put my money on the fleet troopers grenade launcher) the upgrades and parameters it was originally designed against have changed (they usually start designing something a year before they announce it) hence the tweak. I'm happy they're being proactive about this and not leaving it for next time.

Eh, I'd be willing to bet that most of the points changes and new heavy weapons were designed before this was released. I'm also not complaining about the points change, per se. I'm annoyed that they recognized it as a problem, and released it anyway, just because they wanted to make the release date.

8 hours ago, KommanderKeldoth said:

Oh. I was just assuming based on your prior comment. I dont actually play 40k. My bad.

The referenced comment was attempting to indicate I felt that Legion wasn't moving in the direction of app based, but just PDF based updates, which then rely on third party products for ease of use.

10 hours ago, NukeMaster said:

I understand the need for point adjustments and thought it was a good idea to make it easier to do in X-Wing. What I don't like is the constant nerf/buff cycling you get in MMOs. I think we are getting a bit of that in X-Wing.

I'm hoping Legion hits the sweet spot. With printed values on the cards they are still incentivized to do the proper play testing and get the right value during the design.

What exactly is the incentive? If the CM-0/93 is getting a fix this soon, then obviously they didn't get the right value in design/playtesting.

FFG has now set the precedent of "fixing" points totals in separate PDFs that overrule the cards, so even if they get a unit wrong in development, if it's caught late enough in the process it's cheaper and easier to release it, let it be the wrong points for some number of months, then fix it in a later errata.

We're just now starting to see the power creep that is rampant in many other miniature games, with new units and keywords that are both more powerful and cheaper than pre-existing stuff. It will be interesting to see how well balanced the initial wave CW stuff is against the GCW, especially the stuff from the initial wave.

3 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

We're just now starting to see the power creep that is rampant in many other miniature games, with new units and keywords that are both more powerful and cheaper than pre-existing stuff. It will be interesting to see how well balanced the initial wave CW stuff is against the GCW, especially the stuff from the initial wave.

Well, I can say from first hand experience that the initial Clone Wars stuff matches up well against most current units, but I don't think anything is too overpowered. Individually, the units of the Republic are better, but its very difficult to spam them, and nobody has the mountain of keywords that make things like Tauntauns seem a little ridiculous. I've won more games than not with the Republic, but most of them have been pretty close.

Just now, Alpha17 said:

Well, I can say from first hand experience that the initial Clone Wars stuff matches up well against most current units, but I don't think anything is too overpowered. Individually, the units of the Republic are better, but its very difficult to spam them, and nobody has the mountain of keywords that make things like Tauntauns seem a little ridiculous. I've won more games than not with the Republic, but most of them have been pretty close.

Out of curiosity, is this against GCW armies that constitute a selection of all units currently released, or just the stuff from the initial starter?

Because I'm not sure a Rebel army consisting of just AT-RTs, Rebel Troopers, and Luke or an Imperial army of just Stormtroopers, Vader, and Speederbikes would do as well. But I could be mistaken.

5 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

What exactly is the incentive? If the CM-0/93 is getting a fix this soon, then obviously they didn't get the right value in design/playtesting.

They've said the CM-0/93 was a victim of a last minute design change (ditching suppressive). Those occasionally crop up in every game- Sometimes you spot something last minute and have to change something right before it ships, and you don't get to properly readjust everything else. The CM-0/93 was presumably even more expensive when it had suppressive, so whoever had to go in and change the specs last minute just had to guess at the new price.

3 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Out of curiosity, is this against GCW armies that constitute a selection of all units currently released, or just the stuff from the initial starter?

Because I'm not sure a Rebel army consisting of just AT-RTs, Rebel Troopers, and Luke or an Imperial army of just Stormtroopers, Vader, and Speederbikes would do as well. But I could be mistaken.

Mix of currently release units, though stuff like the AT-RT and Rebel Troopers were included. The lack of impact on Clones hurts helps the AT-RT (even with Critical), and Rebel troopers have just as much luck against Clones as they do stormtroopers. I've not played against Luke or Imperials yet with Clones, but I'd assume it wouldn't be all that different. Obi-Wan is a good counter to units like Sabine, but it really depends on his dice when I've fought Grievous, so it'll likely be the same story against Luke or Vader.

1 hour ago, Alpha17 said:

Yeah, I caught their explanation. It worrysome that they realized the problem, but released it anyway. That really reminds me of the old saying about LucasArts, and how they always worried about making the release dates rather than the game.

If they realized after the physical cards were produced, there only real option was to release it anyway, and I'm glad they did. This isn't like the Dewbacks with bases that they already make. They would have had to have new cards printed, shipped, repacked, etc. I would guess it would take 2-3 months, minimum, with boxes of stuff they aren't selling sitting in their warehouse and no one playing with cool toys. They made the right choice.

called it on the Pathfinders. so in love with the changes

21 minutes ago, Squark said:

They've said the CM-0/93 was a victim of a last minute design change (ditching suppressive). Those occasionally crop up in every game- Sometimes you spot something last minute and have to change something right before it ships, and you don't get to properly readjust everything else. The CM-0/93 was presumably even more expensive when it had suppressive, so whoever had to go in and change the specs last minute just had to guess at the new price.

I understood that, my point was more related to what is the actual incentive to get it right in the first place, rather than the (in my opinion) understandable mistake of a last minute change to keywords not also being reflected by a change in points.

However, if (BIG if here I know) the points change was known to be needed before release, then that particular points change should have announced/published/printed on a slip of paper put into the box outside of the "rebalancing" points changes.

15 minutes ago, Alpha17 said:

Mix of currently release units, though stuff like the AT-RT and Rebel Troopers were included. The lack of impact on Clones hurts helps the AT-RT (even with Critical), and Rebel troopers have just as much luck against Clones as they do stormtroopers. I've not played against Luke or Imperials yet with Clones, but I'd assume it wouldn't be all that different. Obi-Wan is a good counter to units like Sabine, but it really depends on his dice when I've fought Grievous, so it'll likely be the same story against Luke or Vader.

Good to know. Thank you for sharing actual experience, a bit better than just theorycrafting. I'm still not certain an army made from just the GCW core box (and any later upgrades) would do as well against the current meta, but given the prevalence of Stormtroopers and Rebel Troopers still in lists, it probably wouldn't be as bad as I fear.

The CW core units do also have the advantage of larger pool of upgrades at release over the initial GCW (which makes sense) and would make them stronger than an army limited to just what's in the GCW box.

Theory crafting is not theorizing about game ideas. It’s looking for hidden (possibly unintended) advantages within video game programming.

A surprise to be sure, but a welcome one.

Funny about how they said Friday, but they released it today?? Also feels like they should of just released the points on Tuesday since they covered most of everything on the stream.

Rebels needed the love since they felt way more limited compared to the Empire. Jyn/pathfinders should be interesting since they both went down (as well as duck and cover). And even another small buff to the air speeder, can't wait to see it in action

Vader/Luke feel like a big winner with three force powers going down, two versions to choose from, and having 6 command cards in the near future.

Very interested to see how the meta turns out with all these changes on both sides and with those op tauntauns.

49 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

I understood that, my point was more related to what is the actual incentive to get it right in the first place, rather than the (in my opinion) understandable mistake of a last minute change to keywords not also being reflected by a change in points.

Public perception, I guess. Consistently changing newly released points will reduce faith in the dev team's balancing abilities. I imagine such mistakes are also somewhat personally embarrassing; People do have pride in their work, after all.

51 minutes ago, TauntaunScout said:

Theory crafting is not theorizing about game ideas. It’s looking for hidden (possibly unintended) advantages within video game programming.

That's not the definition I'm familiar with: "Theorycraft (or theorycrafting) is the mathematical analysis of game mechanics, usually in video games, to discover optimal strategies and tactics." Usually is not the same as exclusively.

3 minutes ago, Squark said:

Public perception, I guess. Consistently changing newly released points will reduce faith in the dev team's balancing abilities. I imagine such mistakes are also somewhat personally embarrassing; People do have pride in their work, after all.

Some people have pride in their work, I've interacted with more than a few people who really don't care about the quality of their work. So I guess corporate/game reputation. With the Star Wars license though FFG would have to burn a LOT of good will to stop selling models...

I'd prefer if they didn't of course :-P.