14 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

It's not just that no-one has won with the T-47, it seems to be next to impossible to find any tournament lists that include the it, despite (as you said) it being available since the very beginning of the game. I think I've even seen the occasional list with Speeder bikes or AT-ST, at least towards the beginning of the game...

@SoonerTed Especially after the next terrain/combat condition card release since I think at that point it should be possible to make an objective deck with 4 objectives vehicles can contribute to.

Indeed. Though that list in the current meta coukd create enough chaos to allow the troopers to stay back and grab an objective or two. The new trooper packs mean impact should be less frequent from Imperials.

I thought of this list as a direct response to imperial gunlines. I don't own a T47 though, so it's hard to playtest.

4 hours ago, RyantheFett said:

Sure in a casual game it can get stuff done, but doesn't the airspeeder deserve better then just good? The Clone Wars heavies look like they could change the whole meta, so I think it is a fair question to ask why the T-47 should not have its time to shine?

Because it’s not new like they are. They’ve already sold us our t47s.

Sorry, not trying to take it out on you, but a bit salty about how the GCW heavies versus the CW ones are, and how it feels like blatant power creep.

11 minutes ago, ScummyRebel said:

Because it’s not new like they are. They’ve already sold us our t47s.

Sorry, not trying to take it out on you, but a bit salty about how the GCW heavies versus the CW ones are, and how it feels like blatant power creep.

It's hard to pin down exactly how much of it is intentional power creep, and how much is just building upon the keywords that already exist. Not to mention the early heavies didn't have the advantage of the game being played nearly as much, so it's harder to get a feel for what might be too complicated or unbalanced, nor being playtested by "high ranking" players like all the CW stuff has. The playtesters in the credit include quite a few players who competed at last year's worlds if i recall correctly.

4 minutes ago, SoonerTed said:

Indeed. Though that list in the current meta coukd create enough chaos to allow the troopers to stay back and grab an objective or two. The new trooper packs mean impact should be less frequent than Imperials.

I thought of this list as a direct response to imperial gunlines. I don't own a T47 though, so it's hard to playtest.

The problem I have with that list is this: Why take T-47s when you could take Landspeeders and accomplish the same goal, but hit harder? Between permanent heavy cover and armor 3 you're really only taking hits from crits and impact so the defense is basically the same, and dropping from speed 3 to speed 2 isn't a big deal when you have compulsory moves anyway.

18 minutes ago, thepopemobile100 said:

The problem I have with that list is this: Why take T-47s when you could take Landspeeders and accomplish the same goal, but hit harder? Between permanent heavy cover and armor 3 you're really only taking hits from crits and impact so the defense is basically the same, and dropping from speed 3 to speed 2 isn't a big deal when you have compulsory moves anyway.

Melee is the difference. Wookies will wreck landspeeder/bikes. So will anything melee. Armor 2 only cancels 2 hits and Cover isn't applicable in melee.

22 minutes ago, ScummyRebel said:

Because it’s not new like they are. They’ve already sold us our t47s.

Sorry, not trying to take it out on you, but a bit salty about how the GCW heavies versus the CW ones are, and how it feels like blatant power creep.

Its all good. I agree with that (main reason why I push buffing the older stuff to fix their past mistakes), but throw a little befit of the doubt their way since GCW showed them all their problems.

18 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

It's hard to pin down exactly how much of it is intentional power creep, and how much is just building upon the keywords that already exist. Not to mention the early heavies didn't have the advantage of the game being played nearly as much, so it's harder to get a feel for what might be too complicated or unbalanced, nor being playtested by "high ranking" players like all the CW stuff has. The playtesters in the credit include quite a few players who competed at last years worlds if i recall correctly.

Pretty much all this here.

36 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

1 hour ago, Lochlan said:

It is surely pure coincidence that nobody has ever won a major tournament with a list including a unit that has been available for the entire lifetime of the game.

It's not just that no-one has won with the T-47, it seems to be next to impossible to find any tournament lists that include the it, despite (as you said) it being available since the very beginning of the game. I think I've even seen the occasional list with Speeder bikes or AT-ST, at least towards the beginning of the game...

Can't be bad if it never lost once in any tournament. If the T-47 stays at the same power level then it will continue to go undefeated!

16 minutes ago, SoonerTed said:

Melee is the difference. Wookies will wreck landspeeder/bikes. So will anything melee. Armor 2 only cancels 2 hits and Cover isn't applicable in melee.

I'm going to assume you mean Tauntauns and not Wookies. It's also Armor 3.

Regardless. Against conventional rebel lists, most of their offense is placed on their Tauntauns. Without the volume of gunfire generated from old rebel lists, they're going to have a problem stopping the 3 Flamer RTs from butchering their squishy infantry. Even if all the Tauntauns go after one landspeeder, they're not likely going to kill it in one round. Heck it's better than them going after your commander. Let the 270-300 points of supports focus on killing your 160ish cost landspeeder. They aren't engaged with it so what troopers you have can focus fire on killing them.

Why not Wookies? Also, Landspeeders aren't immune to blast or grenades.

The Landspeeder is a glass cannon. To use Arsenal 3 you have to either overspend on upgrades or get it at range 2, risking melee attacks.

6 minutes ago, thepopemobile100 said:

I'm going to assume you mean Tauntauns and not Wookies. It's also Armor 3.

Regardless. Against conventional rebel lists, most of their offense is placed on their Tauntauns. Without the volume of gunfire generated from old rebel lists, they're going to have a problem stopping the 3 Flamer RTs from butchering their squishy infantry. Even if all the Tauntauns go after one landspeeder, they're not likely going to kill it in one round. Heck it's better than them going after your commander. Let the 270-300 points of supports focus on killing your 160ish cost landspeeder. They aren't engaged with it so what troopers you have can focus fire on killing them.

9 minutes ago, SoonerTed said:

Why not Wookies? Also, Landspeeders aren't immune to blast or grenades.

The Landspeeder is a glass cannon. To use Arsenal 3 you have to either overspend on upgrades or get it at range 2, risking melee attacks.

Then go make the Tauntauns Wookies. They do less damage to a landspeeder than Tauntauns while being easier to take down. They also can't keep up with the landspeeder. It's better to be fighting Wookies since then you don't need to worry about snipers killing off your commander/troopers. Grenades, outside of frags on Snowtroopers, don't see use and blast is a rare keyword to have on an attack.

The Landspeeder is absolutely a glass cannon, but it's cheaper than the T-47s you had in your list. You can get both crew, the MK II and the heavy cover pilot for 164 points. HQ Uplink is nice, but matters less on a unit that won't benefit from Aggressive Tactics.

20 minutes ago, thepopemobile100 said:

Then go make the Tauntauns Wookies. They do less damage to a landspeeder than Tauntauns while being easier to take down. They also can't keep up with the landspeeder. It's better to be fighting Wookies since then you don't need to worry about snipers killing off your commander/troopers. Grenades, outside of frags on Snowtroopers, don't see use and blast is a rare keyword to have on an attack.

The Landspeeder is absolutely a glass cannon, but it's cheaper than the T-47s you had in your list. You can get both crew, the MK II and the heavy cover pilot for 164 points. HQ Uplink is nice, but matters less on a unit that won't benefit from Aggressive Tactics.

Death Troopers have blast on the grenade launcher, concussion grenades, and mines.

Not super common, but not super rare either. I'm using a lot more blast in my lists due to better designed maps.

1 minute ago, SoonerTed said:

Death Troopers have blast on the grenade launcher, concussion grenades, and mines.

Not super common, but not super rare either. I'm using a lot more blast in my lists due to better designed maps.

That grenade launcher is a range 2 exhaust that Death Troopers don't really want to be using. You'll get at least 1 attack in with the landspeeder. Better yet, focus your landspeeders on a different target, like a mortar team or commander, rather than a Death Trooper squad. Have one or two of your Flamer RTs focus them down

Concussion grenades are even shorter ranged and don't help with the Armor side of things. Again, if you're worried about blast on a unit with your list, use your flamer RTs to kill that unit.

The only mine you need to worry about is the Rebel's. If your opponent is aggressively placing mines outside of their deployment zone, then the saboteurs are going to be vunerable to your landspeeders due to their high speed and power.

1 hour ago, thepopemobile100 said:

Then go make the Tauntauns Wookies. They do less damage to a landspeeder than Tauntauns while being easier to take down. They also can't keep up with the landspeeder. It's better to be fighting Wookies since then you don't need to worry about snipers killing off your commander/troopers. Grenades, outside of frags on Snowtroopers, don't see use and blast is a rare keyword to have on an attack.

The Landspeeder is absolutely a glass cannon, but it's cheaper than the T-47s you had in your list. You can get both crew, the MK II and the heavy cover pilot for 164 points. HQ Uplink is nice, but matters less on a unit that won't benefit from Aggressive Tactics.

I like the X-34, but at 164 it’s 14 points more expensive than the better armored, higher health, faster, and harder hitting (5.75 total from Arsenal 2) and immune to melee and range 1 weapons, T-47.

The only advantage that the X-34 has is range 4, and that only really works if you take the M-45 with the RPS-6. (4 total)

Good to see that nothing has changed, Derrault. I presume you still have no positive evidence (aside from faulty mathhammer and casting aspersions on the ability of all other T-47 users in the world) to provide yourself either? Won your local prime with double T-47s, perhaps? Or coached a local player to do so?

For me, the thing that feels bad when using the T-47 is taking damage from pot-shots with small arms. Some ability to cancel crits (or just a crit) with cover (perhaps as part of the speeder keyword) would help both the T-47 and the landspeeder.

Of course, a second gun without "fixed: rear" would be great too.

As to how many points the current version would need to be... Maybe 100/110?

6 hours ago, colki said:

For me, the thing that feels bad when using the T-47 is taking damage from pot-shots with small arms. Some ability to cancel crits (or just a crit) with cover (perhaps as part of the speeder keyword) would help both the T-47 and the landspeeder.

Of course, a second gun without "fixed: rear" would be great too.

As to how many points the current version would need to be... Maybe 100/110?

Outmaneuver would be a useful keyword to add to get the feel of an aircraft to the T-47 at least. Right now it seems that a hovertank is more maneuverable than the T-47...

I can understand why the secondary weapons are fixed rear, and I think either dropping whatever points are associated with Arsenal along with the keyword (do we ever see both being fired at the same time in canon I mean? Alternately, build the points for Arsenal into the secondary weapons rather than the T-47 itself), or giving the T-47 Barrage to make Arsenal not feel quite so "wasted" when there isn't a target in the rear arc.

I'm not sure if switching the turret guns to Side/Rear would "feel" right, but it might help the unit.

7 hours ago, colki said:

Good to see that nothing has changed, Derrault. I presume you still have no positive evidence (aside from faulty mathhammer and casting aspersions on the ability of all other T-47 users in the world) to provide yourself either? Won your local prime with double T-47s, perhaps? Or coached a local player to do so?

For me, the thing that feels bad when using the T-47 is taking damage from pot-shots with small arms. Some ability to cancel crits (or just a crit) with cover (perhaps as part of the speeder keyword) would help both the T-47 and the landspeeder.

Of course, a second gun without "fixed: rear" would be great too.

As to how many points the current version would need to be... Maybe 100/110?

So, the same as the Droidekas, you really think those are equivalent? Huh, that’s a very interesting opinion you have. 😂

8 hours ago, Derrault said:

5.75 total from Arsenal 2

I dont think u can accurately factor Arsenal into the 47s dmg output because the 2 attacks have to hit different targets each with there own cover (or lack there of). Honestly I think if u just dropped Arsenal from the 47 and gave it a different keyword the 47 would be fine. Not sure which keyword I would give it though.

54 minutes ago, lunitic501 said:

I dont think u can accurately factor Arsenal into the 47s dmg output because the 2 attacks have to hit different targets each with there own cover (or lack there of). Honestly I think if u just dropped Arsenal from the 47 and gave it a different keyword the 47 would be fine. Not sure which keyword I would give it though.

Spot on. A redo of the whole chassis does not seem feasible to get the vehicle to work. Instead just rid arsenal, make the back weapons even cheaper, and pick a keyword randomly. This forum has made it pretty clear they have a lot of really good options that FFG could pick from.

I still think critical X may be the safest option with Clone Wars tanks having red defense dice. Barrage may be too spicy, but if any unit deserved to be OP it is the T-47.

Alternatively, a Rebel pilot may be an easy fix. Make it cheap, make it do something stupid, and call it a day. Can help the landspeeder as well since most vehicles need all the help they can get. Two birds with one stone mentality.

Hopefully FFG takes a page from X-wing 2.0 and really tries to change things with the point changes. I know they wanted to be more hands off with Legion, but if they now do point changes and do the bare minimum then it may be the worse of both worlds. I still believe that all the units still collection dust will finally hit the table at some point.

2 hours ago, lunitic501 said:

I dont think u can accurately factor Arsenal into the 47s dmg output because the 2 attacks have to hit different targets each with there own cover (or lack there of). Honestly I think if u just dropped Arsenal from the 47 and gave it a different keyword the 47 would be fine. Not sure which keyword I would give it though.

You can't, but he'll do it anyway.

14 hours ago, Derrault said:

I like the X-34, but at 164 it’s 14 points more expensive than the better armored, higher health, faster, and harder hitting (5.75 total from Arsenal 2) and immune to melee and range 1 weapons, T-47.

The only advantage that the X-34 has is range 4, and that only really works if you take the M-45 with the RPS-6. (4 total)

At what point do we have a post about how over-costed the Landspeeder is? T-47 has had many. I like the landspeeder but most of the rebel units feel wrong point-wise except for certain characters since the beginning. Imperial seem better off. GAR and CIS have some problems but not as many yet. All vehicles have been redone at least once. The new GAR and CIS tanks got serious deductions in cost in line with the reduced AT-ST, The Landspeeder never got a break, but the Occupier tank seems to have gotten semi balanced out of the gate>?

2 hours ago, buckero0 said:

At what point do we have a post about how over-costed the Landspeeder is? T-47 has had many. I like the landspeeder but most of the rebel units feel wrong point-wise except for certain characters since the beginning. Imperial seem better off. GAR and CIS have some problems but not as many yet. All vehicles have been redone at least once. The new GAR and CIS tanks got serious deductions in cost in line with the reduced AT-ST, The Landspeeder never got a break, but the Occupier tank seems to have gotten semi balanced out of the gate>?

I think the players complaining about them being overpriced are undervaluing the Speed component as compared to the developers, and overvaluing a single d6 side (the difference between white surge and red defense dice is literally only 1/6)

32 minutes ago, Derrault said:

I think the players complaining about them being overpriced are undervaluing the Speed component as compared to the developers, and overvaluing a single d6 side (the difference between white surge and red defense dice is literally only 1/6)

Well speed on units that can't claim objectives or enter into melee isn't very valuable. However on tauntauns or sabine + darksaber it's very valuable. Imagine or playtest wookie warriors with speed 3 or the tauntauns at speed 2. (Think we can solve wookies by giving them spur 😋 ).

On the other hand, do you think the landspeeder would really be played much different with speed 3? Would the at-st be unplayable at speed 1?

On to the defence

Yesit's only a difference of 1/6, but 16.33... is nothing to sneeze at.

5 wounds with red defence takes on average 10 hits to kill. 5 wounds with white + surge takes on average 7.5 hits. (Rounding the number yes)

That is 2-3 extra hits needed!

On individual basis it's not huge, but still a difference and in a dice game like legion, you want all the odds you can get.

21 minutes ago, jocke01 said:

Well speed on units that can't claim objectives or enter into melee isn't very valuable.

Yes it's only a difference of 1/6, but 16.33... is nothing to sneeze at.

5 wounds with red defence takes on average 10 hits to kill.

5 wounds with white + surge takes on average 7.5 hits. (Rounding the number yes)

That is 2-3 extra hits needed!

On individual basis it's not huge, but still a difference and in a dice game like legion, you want all the odds you can get.

I mean, if you’re playing breakthrough, all units can score, and arguably that’s the sole objective where speed is truly important.

The speed is important for the role of the T-47, flanking armor and eliminating small units (strike teams are easy prey).

edit:

@lunitic501
"I dont think u can accurately factor Arsenal into the 47s dmg output because the 2 attacks have to hit different targets each with there own cover (or lack there of). Honestly I think if u just dropped Arsenal from the 47 and gave it a different keyword the 47 would be fine. Not sure which keyword I would give it though."

I think there's two things in play here. One, I'm generally opposed to adding/removing or otherwise wildly redesigning an existing unit. It's impractical from the perspective of how to get cards in players hands for tournament play, and it's generally not a good strategy for game design. If a designer feels they must change a unit, altering the cost is the practical choice.

And, two, in the defense of the rear gun, I think the compulsory move places speeders into a unique position of being very likely to be able to exploit that arc of fire. Where other units would have to waste an action to advance, the speeders don't, and are more likely to do a fly-by of an enemy unit at some point as a result. (They could just peel off, but then they also are likely to have an enemy unit in their rear arc if they don't spend all their actions moving away).

As to cover, the height on the 47 tends to make cover a non-issue, in my experience. Yes, the rear-gun might only fire a few times, but you only need to fire once, on average, to recoup the point cost (expected hits of 2, expected wounds 1 against red armor, i.e. a stormtrooper, that cost the opponent 11 points to field vs the 10 of the rear gun).

Honestly I think the rear gun should have a 360 firing arc and that would be enough to make it a fun unit for me.

1 hour ago, TauntaunScout said:

Honestly I think the rear gun should have a 360 firing arc and that would be enough to make it a fun unit for me.

I had thought you were all about remaining thematic at all costs? What happened.

9 minutes ago, Derrault said:

I had thought you were all about remaining thematic at all costs? What happened.

To me, that thing looks like it would have a greater than 180 degree firing arc. May as well round up instead of down.