36 minutes ago, OneLastMidnight said:

FFG really prefers to address problems through the rules document if they can avoid touching cards (which is a huge problem but that's another discussion).

Why is that a problem? Changing a card creates inconsistencies between printed products and actual rules. If they change an entry in the RRG, there is no inconsistency as there is no official printed RRG.

The problem (in my opinion) is creating a new competitive wargame in mid-2018 using rules printed on cards.

The fact that there can be inconsistencies between the up to date rules and the cards surely show how much of an issue this is, and that game balance cannot solely be established through the RRG or even point cost changes.

Come to think of it, even better than a QR code would be an augmented reality approach. The card doesn't have any printed rules on it, but looking through your phone's screen would display the current revision on the card.

The problem with a card based system is as things change, the cards themselves only become placeholders. Reminders of what rules you might need to look up online. Rather than that being a bug of this design, allow it to be a feature. Embrace that cards are the same as the tokens on the board--arbitrary symbols that have their rules contained in an updated document.

2 minutes ago, Sekac said:

Come to think of it, even better than a QR code would be an augmented reality approach. The card doesn't have any printed rules on it, but looking through your phone's screen would display the current revision on the card.

The problem with a card based system is as things change, the cards themselves only become placeholders. Reminders of what rules you might need to look up online. Rather than that being a bug of this design, allow it to be a feature. Embrace that cards are the same as the tokens on the board--arbitrary symbols that have their rules contained in an updated document.

the problem with doing this is that in a lot of tournament halls there is either no signal or very poor signal for phones. they would have some players be unable to check the current points or rules so it would have to be printed out just like it is now

3 minutes ago, 5particus said:

the problem with doing this is that in a lot of tournament halls there is either no signal or very poor signal for phones. they would have some players be unable to check the current points or rules so it would have to be printed out just like it is now

Definitely. Just speculating on what an idealized version of their system would be.

There's exactly as much adaptability and sophistication as stone tablets, it's just lighter.

2 hours ago, OneLastMidnight said:

The problem (in my opinion) is creating a new competitive wargame in mid-2018 using rules printed on cards.

The fact that there can be inconsistencies between the up to date rules and the cards surely show how much of an issue this is, and that game balance cannot solely be established through the RRG or even point cost changes.

Ah, OK. I thought you were saying the problem was that they were changing rules rather than changing cards, and not that the cards themselves were the issue.

7 hours ago, Lochlan said:

Why is that a problem? Changing a card creates inconsistencies between printed products and actual rules. If they change an entry in the RRG, there is no inconsistency as there is no official printed RRG.

because it often leads to nerfing things that dont need to be nerfed just to nerf the things that do need to be nerfed.

for example if they nerf standby to nerf overpowered clones it ends up nerfing standby for every other faction that isnt overpowered clones.

that kindve coarse balancing doesnt always work. sometimes you need to finely balance specific units.

its all because FFG is too cheap to print updated packs of cards... which is what they need to do. every year they need to print a pack of cards that were affected by rule changes and point cost changes and sell them to us. instead FFG uses the excuse that dont want to print new cards up because were too stupid to be able to sort out our cards and use the most recent card packs. having multiple versions of cards is NOT a problem as long as they print the version number on the cards so people know which card is the most recent.

Quote

The problem with a card based system is as things change, the cards themselves only become placeholders. Reminders of what rules you might need to look up online. Rather than that being a bug of this design, allow it to be a feature. Embrace that cards are the same as the tokens on the board--arbitrary symbols that have their rules contained in an updated document.

that is literally only a problem if the company refuses to print updated cards every year and sell them as packs. like FFG refuses to do. in other words its a problem FFG could easily solve but wont probably for ridiculous cost saving reasons.

15 hours ago, Lemmiwinks86 said:

I don't think that they will limit because of casual players. The first line in the rules before specifying the points change says that those are meant for tournament play. Of course I think that most casual players use them, but it's not mandatory.

I know that's the argument. But I'm not buying it. The actual card changes for example are errata and therefore "mandatory". I Cannot think of any player who sais: "Cool, my Airspeeder is now immune to grenades. But I still want to play it at 170 Points because taking the reduced price would be too competitive for me." I'd say 99,9% either use the full RRG or play by basic rules and reminder text only, ignoring all errata (super casuals).

The casuals I'm referring to are those with limited collections, who have their army lists packed up and bring them to a local group every other month or so. If their fixed army changes every other time they play (and worst case aren't even legal any more), that can be a turnoff.

As for the digital only approach, I don't like it a single bit. Maybe I'm oldschool, but I don't want to spend my gaming nights staring at monitors (I do this at work enough ...). It slows down play segnifically if you don't know your units by heart. Granted that cluttering the table with countless unit and upgrade cards is also not the best solution. I like that many list generators have the ability to print out your army with all (updated) cards and attached upgrades. I guess a mix would be good: A great app (FFG is not great at apps ...) with a good list generator and all cards easily accessible as well as the option for printing it out for guys like me would be the best solution. It would also avoid that you need to buy some extra expansions for specific unit/upgrad cards (if you converted a regular Scout to a sniper for extra strike teams for example).

A fix for clone token sharing, that won't bone or break them:

Clone units that have already activated that round, cannot use another clone's standby token.
(A clone unit that has activated, may still share IT'S standby token with an un-activated friendly clone unit.)

clones shouldnt be able to share tokens. its a fundamentally unbalanced game mechanic created by designers that dont understand the action economy of their own game.

19 minutes ago, SailorMeni said:

I know that's the argument. But I'm not buying it. The actual card changes for example are errata and therefore "mandatory". I Cannot think of any player who sais: "Cool, my Airspeeder is now immune to grenades. But I still want to play it at 170 Points because taking the reduced price would be too competitive for me." I'd say 99,9% either use the full RRG or play by basic rules and reminder text only, ignoring all errata (super casuals).

The casuals I'm referring to are those with limited collections, who have their army lists packed up and bring them to a local group every other month or so. If their fixed army changes every other time they play (and worst case aren't even legal any more), that can be a turnoff.

As for the digital only approach, I don't like it a single bit. Maybe I'm oldschool, but I don't want to spend my gaming nights staring at monitors (I do this at work enough ...). It slows down play segnifically if you don't know your units by heart. Granted that cluttering the table with countless unit and upgrade cards is also not the best solution. I like that many list generators have the ability to print out your army with all (updated) cards and attached upgrades. I guess a mix would be good: A great app (FFG is not great at apps ...) with a good list generator and all cards easily accessible as well as the option for printing it out for guys like me would be the best solution. It would also avoid that you need to buy some extra expansions for specific unit/upgrad cards (if you converted a regular Scout to a sniper for extra strike teams for example).

That's the idea, essentially almost all wargames involve building your list on some sort of app or website. Do people really still write lists by hand?

In my playgroup we don't even use cards. We print out a detailed list from tabletop admiral and then use tokens to track what's exhausted. It saves a lot of time rummaging for cards during setup.

Infinity, for example, works with a completely free and completely digital model and it works wonderfully. It's really easy for them to release rules for new models way ahead of the physical model's release (which means you can proxy it right away and that supply issues are not a big deal), they can make sweeping changes to models and all players are instantly aware of those changes (they recently buffed all "mechas" in the game by giving them some new keywords and it was instantly reflected in their app). You can either use an app to track your models and tokens during the game, or you can simply print out a list and use that.

16 hours ago, Khobai said:

are you joking? hes one of the worst commanders in the game. speed 1 makes him absolutely abysmal.

he absolutely needs a buff not a nerf

palpatine is even worse. the combination of short range, high points cost, and speed 1 is so crippling for both of those characters.

because theyre both huge points investments that cant really even have an effect on the game until mid to late game. they both need their points costs significantly reduced. and even lower points cost may not fix them because speed 1 is so nonfunctional in this game.

the air speeder needs either blast or critical 2 on its main attack to help its dicepool against cover. 6 dice sucks when heavy cover is reducing it by 2. and the main weapon doesnt need impact 3. just make it impact 2 + critical 2 or impact 2 + blast. critical 2 or blast would give it surges to help it get past cover or let it ignore cover entirely.

as for the rear weapons on the airspeeder theyre both goofy and awkward. paying points for a rear weapon you may never even get to use just feels bad.

the rear weapons on the airspeeder should both cost 0 points. with the harpoon getting some buffs to make it a more balanced choice. giving the harpoon pierce 1 and either sharpshoopter 1 or critical 1 would help. it only rolls 1 dice so that 1 dice should at least be able to ignore cover/surge and ignore defense saves.

lastly I think the airspeeder should get outmaneuver and a free dodge token if you perform a movement action with it. theres way too many things that ignore cover and thats part of the reason the airspeeder is so bad. especially since armor means it cant fully make use of the cover keyword anyway and its only useful against impact attacks. it should should have outmaneuver and a free dodge if it moves to help it survive crits and sharpshooter attacks.

why can the clone tank do barrel rolls with dodge tokens and avoid crits but the airspeeder cant? it makes no sense. the airspeeder is way more maneuverable than a clone tank.

Automatic Cover 2 (with pilot), Armor, free dodges (with compulsory move) and Outmaneuver - isn't this a bit too much?

These are the units that spring to mind as needing a boost or a nerf. Either via a points adjustment or a change to their unit card. I’ve included the kind of adjustments to points I think would be needed (assuming a purely points based approach to fixing things is adopted).

Commander Vader -20 points* (maybe even -25 points. Speed one, whilst thematic, is crippling on the tabletop and having no ranged attack on his unit card means he often has to use up a valuable force upgrade slot to equip saber throw)

Dewback -10 points (and -5 points to its weapons)

Han Solo -15 points

Tauntaun Riders +5 / +10 points

All Strike Teams +5 points**

General Grievous -10 points

Droidekas -20 points

B2s -2 points per model

AAT +5 points

Captain Rex +5 points

R2-D2 +5 points

*Vader could use some kind of boost beyond a points reduction. I think giving him surge to defence would be fitting and provide a welcome buff to his general durability.

**It may be better to limit the numbers of Strike Teams that can be taken rather than adjusting their points.

Clones sharing Standby tokens needs to be looked at and possibly even disallowed.

4 minutes ago, Alpha17 said:

the main reason that standby tokens were not used before was the prevalence of sniper teams. standby got a slight buff when the snipers went from infinite range to range 5 but now that clones can hide behind LOS blocking cover and still give their standby to another unit means that the main hard counter to it is gone.

There is the question of power creep, or perhaps just that newer stuff is just better designed than older stuff. Han and Rex are great examples, Rex does a lot more for the faction he is in than Han does, to the point he is THE commander for that faction, and I doubt the release of Anakin will change it all that much, because Rex just functions so well within the design space of the Republic.

While Han on the other hand, was designed so early into the game we didn't know what the Rebels were going to become, or which units would fall hard off a cliff. That so many of the Rebel Commanders are range 2 or less on their weapons doesn't help when the faction relies so much on those heavy pieces, in a game where the range of engagement has only gotten further away.

Which brings up an interesting point, should a character's points cost be based around their keywords/courage/health/damage output alone, or how well they do within their faction, and what their role is in that faction. Look at Leia and Padme, they are costed the exact same thing, but as a pure unit on the table, Padme is way stronger than Leia, more courage, more/better keywords, and she works well at sharing with the clones. But Leia is still the most solid all round Commander the Rebels have and she works to the strengths of the rebellion, even if she is a weaker piece than her mother.

@Alpha17 It is a shame your meme has not gotten the love it deserves. If I could like it more than once, I would!

40 minutes ago, Nithorian said:

There is the question of power creep, or perhaps just that newer stuff is just better designed than older stuff. Han and Rex are great examples, Rex does a lot more for the faction he is in than Han does, to the point he is THE commander for that faction, and I doubt the release of Anakin will change it all that much, because Rex just functions so well within the design space of the Republic.

While Han on the other hand, was designed so early into the game we didn't know what the Rebels were going to become, or which units would fall hard off a cliff. That so many of the Rebel Commanders are range 2 or less on their weapons doesn't help when the faction relies so much on those heavy pieces, in a game where the range of engagement has only gotten further away.

Which brings up an interesting point, should a character's points cost be based around their keywords/courage/health/damage output alone, or how well they do within their faction, and what their role is in that faction. Look at Leia and Padme, they are costed the exact same thing, but as a pure unit on the table, Padme is way stronger than Leia, more courage, more/better keywords, and she works well at sharing with the clones. But Leia is still the most solid all round Commander the Rebels have and she works to the strengths of the rebellion, even if she is a weaker piece than her mother.

the main reason that i personally take Rex is because he is the cheapest commander available at the moment, I need the points to put into other units. 100 points for the clones is a fully loaded squad and most of a heavy weapon for another, often worth it . I will probably take the generic commander quite a lot when it comes out. i would not be surprised if a lot more people do the same.

1 minute ago, 5particus said:

the main reason that i personally take Rex is because he is the cheapest commander available at the moment, I need the points to put into other units. 100 points for the clones is a fully loaded squad and most of a heavy weapon for another, often worth it . I will probably take the generic commander quite a lot when it comes out. i would not be surprised if a lot more people do the same.

This of course is another big factor into the points cost of a unit. They can't keep giving the Republic really expensive Commanders/Operatives, because they will be hard to put into Republic lists. So again the faction a unit is in, might also effect its point cost, so that Padme while she is stronger than Leia, can't be priced higher than Leia because then she'd be really hard to fit into the Republic faction if they kept costing consistent across all the factions.

20 minutes ago, 5particus said:

the main reason that i personally take Rex is because he is the cheapest commander available at the moment, I need the points to put into other units. 100 points for the clones is a fully loaded squad and most of a heavy weapon for another, often worth it . I will probably take the generic commander quite a lot when it comes out. i would not be surprised if a lot more people do the same.

16 minutes ago, Nithorian said:

This of course is another big factor into the points cost of a unit. They can't keep giving the Republic really expensive Commanders/Operatives, because they will be hard to put into Republic lists. So again the faction a unit is in, might also effect its point cost, so that Padme while she is stronger than Leia, can't be priced higher than Leia because then she'd be really hard to fit into the Republic faction if they kept costing consistent across all the factions.

Command cards are a reason to take Rex, he gets a lot of tokens from his cards. I think the generic commander will be used a lot (and probably can right now, we can guess what he'll have: 1 Gear, 1 Training , 1 Command slot) but the command cards is where he'll make a difference or Rex would get the edge right now.

100pts vs 65pts

4 minutes ago, buckero0 said:

Command cards are a reason to take Rex, he gets a lot of tokens from his cards. I think the generic commander will be used a lot (and probably can right now, we can guess what he'll have: 1 Gear, 1 Training , 1 Command slot) but the command cards is where he'll make a difference or Rex would get the edge right now.

100pts vs 65pts

i thought the new commanders were going to be 55 points not 65? either way i cannot wait until we have them, once we have them then the republic will be fully armed and operational.

18 minutes ago, 5particus said:

i thought the new commanders were going to be 55 points not 65? either way i cannot wait until we have them, once we have them then the republic will be fully armed and operational.

They are, I think he's including Aggressive Tactics in there? Because otherwise it would be 90 vs. 55.

1 minute ago, Lochlan said:

They are, I think he's including Aggressive Tactics in there? Because otherwise it would be 90 vs. 55.

ah yeah makes sense. it is kind of a auto add.

1 hour ago, Nithorian said:

This of course is another big factor into the points cost of a unit. They can't keep giving the Republic really expensive Commanders/Operatives, because they will be hard to put into Republic lists. So again the faction a unit is in, might also effect its point cost, so that Padme while she is stronger than Leia, can't be priced higher than Leia because then she'd be really hard to fit into the Republic faction if they kept costing consistent across all the factions.

Yeah, I really want them to release all of the Jedi options possible, including some generic, unnamed Jedi squads. Maybe something like a two-man strike team, master and apprentice style. The padawan can be a generic, and the heavy options could be different Jedi archetypes: Jedi Guardian, Jedi Consular, etc.

Unfortunately, if they are released they will likely not be taken, as they will not fit in with clone spam.

On the other hand, perhaps there will be some Jedi synergy or buffs coming in the future, who knows? One can always hope, I heard somewhere that rebellions are built on the stuff... 😉

1 hour ago, Jedhead said:

Yeah, I really want them to release all of the Jedi options possible, including some generic, unnamed Jedi squads. Maybe something like a two-man strike team, master and apprentice style. The padawan can be a generic, and the heavy options could be different Jedi archetypes: Jedi Guardian, Jedi Consular, etc.

Unfortunately, if they are released they will likely not be taken, as they will not fit in with clone spam.

On the other hand, perhaps there will be some Jedi synergy or buffs coming in the future, who knows? One can always hope, I heard somewhere that rebellions are built on the stuff... 😉

currently imagining an army of nothing but Jedi, maybe 6/7 Jedi in a single list, that would be nuts