How does his first line of text work exactly? Does his AAT always lose AI: Attack, OR does it lose AI: Attack the turn it exhausts, and for the rest of the game after that point?

Thanks!

It always loses that special rule.

Edit: The reason for the extra text is that generally, cards have no effect while exhausted.

49 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

It always loses that special rule.

Edit: The reason for the extra text is that generally, cards have no effect while exhausted.

Are we sure? The RRG states that exhaustible cards can only have their abilities when they exhaust, so because the card is exhaustible, it wouldn't be active while ready (so it wouldn't lose AI: Attack while ready).... Unless I'm misunderstanding something.

You would maybe be right here if it didnt have the word "even" in there. it says "you lose AI: Attack, EVEN while this card is exhausted" meaning that you lost AI attack when its ready, and exhausted.

1 minute ago, bllaw said:

You would maybe be right here if it didnt have the word "even" in there. it says "you lose AI: Attack, EVEN while this card is exhausted" meaning that you lost AI attack when its ready, and exhausted.

Good point. That definitely seems like the intent of that card too, so I'm glad that it works this way. Thanks!

The card has two parts, one, you lose AI Attack because of the commander, period. The second part is the action, which is exhaustible. Most exhaustible cards only have the one part, hence the reminder text.

My only issue is, how can yo have a nominated commander with no courage value. Certainly he doesn't work like vador.

6 minutes ago, Mep said:

The card has two parts, one, you lose AI Attack because of the commander, period. The second part is the action, which is exhaustible. Most exhaustible cards only have the one part, hence the reminder text.

My only issue is, how can yo have a nominated commander with no courage value. Certainly he doesn't work like vador.

The nominated commanders are just for selecting units to receive orders from generic order cards, not courage values.

10 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

The nominated commanders are just for selecting units to receive orders from generic order cards, not courage values.

Yeah, I figured that was the case. Clunky rules as always.

Just now, Mep said:

Yeah, I figured that was the case. Clunky rules as always.

Why? This is actually simpler than making a vehicle a full blown commander in my opinion.

6 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Why? This is actually simpler than making a vehicle a full blown commander in my opinion.

It's like the card, everything has to have multiply parts. Part A, subsection C, line 4 only applies in this situation.

2 minutes ago, Mep said:

It's like the card, everything has to have multiply parts. Part A, subsection C, line 4 only applies in this situation.

Reading is fundamental. This is clear and concise.

1 hour ago, Mep said:

Yeah, I figured that was the case. Clunky rules as always.

Every time someone mentions that Legion is "complicated" or "clunky" I literally vocalize my laughter.

2 hours ago, Mep said:

It's like the card, everything has to have multiply parts. Part A, subsection C, line 4 only applies in this situation.

I take it you never played Magic the Gathering then.

For Legion it's literally check the rules for the relevant action and keywords in an alphabetized rule book that has an index. I compare this to Bolt Action, where some of the relevant rules are hidden in side bars in later chapters.

36 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

I take it you never played Magic the Gathering then.

For Legion it's literally check the rules for the relevant action and keywords in an alphabetized rule book that has an index. I compare this to Bolt Action, where some of the relevant rules are hidden in side bars in later chapters.

Or 40k where it might be spread across several printed books (some of which aren't army specific to know they are in there), or their white dwarf magazine

2 hours ago, arnoldrew said:

I literally vocalize my laughter.

Isn't that just "lol" with more letters?

43 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

I take it you never played Magic the Gathering then.

For Legion it's literally check the rules for the relevant action and keywords in an alphabetized rule book that has an index. I compare this to Bolt Action, where some of the relevant rules are hidden in side bars in later chapters.

Yeah, that is the problem, always checking the rule book. Yeah, there are some games far far worse than Legion, doesn't mean it isn't a clunky game.

More annoyed that we only get the option for the Oom droid sticking out of the top hatch, but that's a minor complaint.

3 hours ago, Mep said:

Yeah, that is the problem, always checking the rule book. Yeah, there are some games far far worse than Legion, doesn't mean it isn't a clunky game.

I find I check the rulebook significantly less often with Legion than pretty much any other miniatures game I've played, but more than I would have to if they stopped updating it (which is a by-product of releasing new units and keywords with new interactions EDIT: To be clear, I am perfectly okay with them releasing new units). Most miniatures games are by definition "clunky" since they have to handle a wide variety of different interactions. Legion at least didn't dump every possible keyword on us at the start, so those of us who started at the beginning had the benefit of a smaller rulebook to learn, and most of those rules haven't fundamentally changed.

2 hours ago, joewrightgm said:

More annoyed that we only get the option for the Oom droid sticking out of the top hatch, but that's a minor complaint.

I wonder if that might be a product of the design for B1 style battle droids already being approved, so it was quicker for LFG approval by limiting the tank commander to just one option. It would be interesting if a Command droid tank commander is included in the eventual Specialists box (besides through conversion I mean).

I think the Sabre only has a Clone gunner as well, so if that's the case, at least it isn't JUST the droids getting limited.

Personally, I prefer for my tank commanders to be inside the protective metal hull rather than sticking out baiting snipers.

11 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Personally, I prefer for my tank commanders to be inside the protective metal hull rather than sticking out baiting snipers.

There’s IRL good reasons to be hatch open in a tank; mostly visibility. While tanks have periscopes and vision blocks etc, being ‘hatch down’ limits a commanders situational awareness.

most tanks have an option for what’s called ‘open protected’, where you have your head out, while the hatch is partway closed over their head to protect from shell splinters.

that’s why I like the Occupier; it looks like a feasible case-mate assault gun design, with a reasonable hatch arrangement.

then there’s the Sabre and AAT; where the turret gunner is totally exposed, unless there’s some sort of internal position that allows the gunner to fire the weapon from inside the hull (not out of the question) and the AAT which is like “crew ergonomics? Lol what’s that?”

2 hours ago, joewrightgm said:

More annoyed that we only get the option for the Oom droid sticking out of the top hatch, but that's a minor complaint.

There are 3rd party 3D print option I am sure. I have already seen a Tactical droid on thingverse.

@joewrightgm I do understand all of the first part of your post, and much of that is mostly relevant for tank vs tank combat, in relatively open ground. Generally in situations that are roughly analogous to the game (close in fighting against infantry) unless you REALLY need the turret HMG (and it isn't radio controlled!) for some reason, it's better to keep your head down and the hatch shut tight. Especially since an open hatch gives the enemy an easier way to get through the armour.

What defense does U.S. Army doctrine suggest against lightsaber attacks

The crew of the AAT can sit entirely internally, just the commander sits his skeletal butt in the top and maybe can have main gun control also, if he's not doing commander things. Yes, much like the Aayla Secura card - despite being called "Pilot" the guys in the AAT cards are sitting in the "Commander" seat. The top turret on the Saber is technically optional so the poor gunner has to turn out of the top hatch. The cabin is apparently full of pilot, copilot and commander already, don't ask me how.

3 hours ago, UnitOmega said:

The crew of the AAT can sit entirely internally, just the commander sits his skeletal butt in the top and maybe can have main gun control also, if he's not doing commander things. Yes, much like the Aayla Secura card - despite being called "Pilot" the guys in the AAT cards are sitting in the "Commander" seat. The top turret on the Saber is technically optional so the poor gunner has to turn out of the top hatch. The cabin is apparently full of pilot, copilot and commander already, don't ask me how.

B1s are pretty skinny and the tank itself is thick. I'm sure there's plenty of space inside.

4 hours ago, Bobmc said:

What defense does U.S. Army doctrine suggest against lightsaber attacks

Preemptive drone strikes?

Given that the AAT hatches apparently DON'T HAVE locks (Onderon rebel training, Clone Wars cartoon), the established method for infantry to destroy the tank is open the driver hatch and top hatch, toss in two ion grenades. Personally, I'd prefer to force the infantry to get up close to put the Droid popper in the commander's hatch :-P.