Breakdown of the lists at the tournament. The very last page of this document has all of the lists (thanks Tabletop Admiral)

https://lookaside.fbsbx.com/file/GameStorm RPQ 2019.pdf?token=AWzvaNqJKWxZbnJDbfNDo8p7A2rAblH7lFT2FLooBvpe2GYCl23CzjkEX5kXVodZwO93I4s-ot4kZpCYU4mRc34cWClpfZwVXFzU9e2_0B4DwjTHMvl3nEzKJ6_FlsIVUmwHoF7lVer67NNvsaOXSoYCRw98CbnCFtLxsZHiOa_qyg

Interesting points:

#1 0 GAR players.

#2 2 CIS players.

#3 Rebels won the tournament.

#4 Vehicles were still absent.

#5 Activation spam + Strike teams seem to still dominate, YET the winning list did not have a single strike team.

Below is the player records.

https://tabletop.to/gamestorms-star-wars-legion-rallypoint-qualifier?fbclid=IwAR26tqSeU_j9zTKo9MnaNF7N5i84P-ZAOUjqSfZf8d1kIxJWyh9F8Eyg5MQ

Below is the winning list:

https://tabletopadmiral.com/legion/rebel/p0bu2cuEMuEMp06uEMu0cuEMuEMp06uEMu0cuEMuEMp06uEMuEMuEMuEMp0du2fuEMuEMuEMuEMp18u33uEMuEMuEMuEMp18uEMuEMuEMuEMuEMp01uEMu04p23u36u29p23u36u29c07c0dc03c12c09c13c08o01o05o02o03z05z04z02z01t01t03t04t05

Interesting points about the winning list:

#1 No strike teams?!

#2 Basic Corps (No heavy weapons). 3 Units.

#3 2 Tauntauns.

#4 Very dynamic list. Plenty of options and it seems that he decided to focus more on quantity rather than quality.

#5 No oppressive T-47s (can you feel the sarcasm?)

The first of many tournaments since the arrival of the CW. Many more to come...

Cheers!

Poor vehicles I wonder what they would have to do to make them top tier. Wonder if the new CIS tank can make any difference since a lot of people seem to think its really good.

Also interesting that they go with activation over better units. Makes me wonder if that strike team nurf showed it was the activation that was strong, not the unit themselves??? And if that is the case poor GAR/CIS players, FFG release order will cripple them for a very long time. Or maybe I have no idea what I am talking about.

8 minutes ago, RyantheFett said:

Poor vehicles I wonder what they would have to do to make them top tier. Wonder if the new CIS tank can make any difference since a lot of people seem to think its really good.

Also interesting that they go with activation over better units. Makes me wonder if that strike team nurf showed it was the activation that was strong, not the unit themselves??? And if that is the case poor GAR/CIS players, FFG release order will cripple them for a very long time. Or maybe I have no idea what I am talking about.

I am pretty surprised by the lists aswell. Note, that it is one tournament (and a small one aswell).

I'm not surprised by the low turnout of GAR players. I have about 20 games down my belt with GAR and they are a blast to play, but their playstyle is very.... predictable. You create a clone blob and you try to set up fire support. Obi takes the hits for the blob and acts as a Melee deterant. Sniper prevalence makes high costed models a liability (another clone deterrent).

I have high hopes for the AAT. It really looks good on paper and the CIS can easily fit one into a list while still bringing 10 activation lists.

But yea, I don't expect the new factions to make any noise until marchish (once clones get their version of snipers and once the CIS gets ahold of more point sinks).

42 minutes ago, R3dReVenge said:

I have high hopes for the AAT. It really looks good on paper and the CIS can easily fit one into a list while still bringing 10 activation lists.

Easily? With literally no upgrades, the cheapest 10 activations they can take is 761 points (naked Grievous, 6x naked B1s, 2x naked Droidekas, naked AAT). That leaves room for 2 heavy weapons for the B1s and literally nothing else. I wouldn't call that a very functional list.

Now, 9 activations is very doable. But until CIS gets a non-Corps option that costs fewer than 100 points, I don't really see anyone fielding 10 activations with the AAT.

But yeah, the AAT definitely looks awesome, and is honestly the main reason I picked up CIS.

Vehicle focused objectives might change this.

41 minutes ago, lologrelol said:

Vehicle focused objectives might change this.

Right, but couldn't players just X out vehicle focused objectives if they brought no vehicles?

I know this was discussed in a previous thread, but I wonder how giving the player with less activation a free skip would play out.

#1 For instance, at the start of each round, each player counts their activations.

#2 The player with fewer units gains a skip activation that can be used for that round only.

#3 The process repeats each round.

You could add some variation to this. Maybe a player is unable to skip in two consecutive rounds? Or maybe players are limited to a maximum of 3 skips per game? Maybe you give more skips depending on the difference in activations. Player 1 has 4 activations. Player 2 has 10. Player 1 gets 10-4 = 6 skips (though this seems extreme).

Lots of options. I hope FFG addresses this issue after the new factions get fleshed out.

It's also one tournament so I wouldn't be too concerned about the lack of vehicles just yet. I think the skip activation is just going to make things too difficult for people to remember.The fact the winning list had no snipers and a variety of units is a step in the right direction and that alone should be encouraging.

3 hours ago, TheHoosh said:

It's also one tournament so I wouldn't be too concerned about the lack of vehicles just yet. I think the skip activation is just going to make things too difficult for people to remember.The fact the winning list had no snipers and a variety of units is a step in the right direction and that alone should be encouraging.

Let's hope that continues.

Nice to see the Wookies getting some love.

6 hours ago, TheHoosh said:

It's also one tournament so I wouldn't be too concerned about the lack of vehicles just yet. I think the skip activation is just going to make things too difficult for people to remember.The fact the winning list had no snipers and a variety of units is a step in the right direction and that alone should be encouraging.

"ONE TOURNAMENT"

Almost every major tournie winner is light on vehicles.

Unless the designers are going to give big vehicles another points decrease (probs 10-20), and/or errata the troops only objectives to also allow vehicles, then I don't see serious tournament players choosing them.

5 minutes ago, lologrelol said:

"ONE TOURNAMENT"

Almost every major tournie winner is light on vehicles.

Unless the designers are going to give big vehicles another points decrease (probs 10-20), and/or errata the troops only objectives to also allow vehicles, then I don't see serious tournament players choosing them.

one tournament since CIS and GAR came out and since the errata to vehicles, I'm not saying vehicles are going to spike or anything, but saying its too soon to tell how the meta will change and that tournament already showed a change in the meta.

47 minutes ago, TheHoosh said:

one tournament since CIS and GAR came out and since the errata to vehicles, I'm not saying vehicles are going to spike or anything, but saying its too soon to tell how the meta will change and that tournament already showed a change in the meta.

Fair enough. But I still doubt the efficacy of big vehicles in tourney games.

They soak up activations, and can't get 2/5 objectives. The easiest way to fix that is to let them pick up supplies and affect moisture vaporators.

I have been keeping up with RPQs near me and the last 3 before this one had ATSTs in the final game and I think 2 of them won it. so, I wouldnt say they are still not seen.

42 minutes ago, lologrelol said:

Fair enough. But I still doubt the efficacy of big vehicles in tourney games.

They soak up activations, and can't get 2/5 objectives. The easiest way to fix that is to let them pick up supplies and affect moisture vaporators.

Then you should also allow Creature troopers to interact with those same objectives. Creature Troopers are still being taken despite "soaking activations" and being unable to interact with 2/5 of the objectives. I will point out vehicles actually can't interact with 3/5 of the objectives directly, only by killing troopers(Intercept the Transmissions, Sabotage, and Recover).

Ultimately it boils down to the value for the points. If that big vehicle can kill or suppress one or more trooper units a turn, then even without directly interacting with the objective, they can help win.

It's a bit early into the new paradigm to know fully how things will change, especially since the GAR and CIS are both super light on options still.

7 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Then you should also allow Creature troopers to interact with those same objectives. Creature Troopers are still being taken despite "soaking activations" and being unable to interact with 2/5 of the objectives. I will point out vehicles actually can't interact with 3/5 of the objectives directly, only by killing troopers(Intercept the Transmissions, Sabotage, and Recover).

Ultimately it boils down to the value for the points. If that big vehicle can kill or suppress one or more trooper units a turn, then even without directly interacting with the objective, they can help win.

It's a bit early into the new paradigm to know fully how things will change, especially since the GAR and CIS are both super light on options still.

Creature troopers don't cost 150+ pts. (They should also be able to get objectives, I agree on that point.)

Ion wrecks vehicles, and a smart player will bring repair droids - which is points/focus taken away from other areas of the army.

I've argued adnauseum on other threads about how **** high point vehicles are; due to the positive feedback mechanisms of activation control, points denial, and victory condition exclusion. These are mechanics baked into the rules of the game (except mission exclusion, which is auxiliary).

The lack of vehicles translates to the lack of ion... and my droids still march without losing actions 😁

3 hours ago, lologrelol said:

Creature troopers don't cost 150+ pts. (They should also be able to get objectives, I agree on that point.)

Ion wrecks vehicles, and a smart player will bring repair droids - which is points/focus taken away from other areas of the army.

I've argued adnauseum on other threads about how **** high point vehicles are; due to the positive feedback mechanisms of activation control, points denial, and victory condition exclusion. These are mechanics baked into the rules of the game (except mission exclusion, which is auxiliary).

You only bring Ion of you KNOW you're going to face vehicles otherwise it's not nearly as good. Since tournaments don't involve "Bring two lists and pick one for each game" for Legion, bringing Ion is a bit of a gamble, although if droids become more common that might change. But even then, since multiple uses of Ion require Recovering, both sides are loosing actions.

I've also had Ion whiff before since you have to do damage for the Ion token to be placed and at Impact one it's frequently just a single hit on an Armoured vehicle. At 150 points+, we've got the tank, which has red defense dice, the AT-ST, whose motto is a good offense is a good defense, and the T-47, which requires 2-3 hits before 1 impact goes through depending on if it has Speeder Jockey. Repulsor vehicles can also get by just fine with one activation since they have the free compulsory move. Ion isn't that devestating, since only the first shot allows for the unit to take an Aim/Dodge action action, so supporting units should be able to target them to remove the threat.

If the rules suddenly change to allow vehicles to interact with crates and moisture evaporators, we still won't see more of the big ones, we'd see more small vehicles. What we really need are at least 2 new objectives that make vehicles desirable, either something based on kill points, or a vehicle only objective before we start to see vehicles more regularly. Since vehicles can only interact with 2 of the objective cards, it's often easy to remove those ones right now.