11 minutes ago, KarlVonCarstein said:

I like these suggestions. My personal requests would be:

1. Add critical 2 to the main gun.

2. Gain a outmanouver and a dodge for moving, including compulsory moves. Seriously if it's ok for tauntauns to get two dodge tokens for moving twice, its fine for the t-47, and a guaranteed dodge token each turn with outmanouver would help its survivability quite a bit.

I'd also think about making a new upgrade for it:

Advanced targeting array

T-47 only weapon upgrade

This unit gains barrage. 0 points.

The cost is because you are giving up the units arsenal 2.

If you're changing the unit card anyway and the upgrade is free, why not just add Barrage to the card?

6 minutes ago, arnoldrew said:

If you're changing the unit card anyway and the upgrade is free, why not just add Barrage to the card?

I'm trying to avoid a major points increase to cover the cost of barrage. But if the designers want to just add barrage to the unit card I'd be ok with that as well.

2 minutes ago, KarlVonCarstein said:

I'm trying to avoid a major points increase to cover the cost of barrage. But if the designers want to just add barrage to the unit card I'd be ok with that as well.

What's the difference between putting it on the unit card or on an upgrade card for free? You're already saying ti should be free....

36 minutes ago, arnoldrew said:

What's the difference between putting it on the unit card or on an upgrade card for free? You're already saying ti should be free....

If it is on an upgrade card, it can occupy an upgrade slot. So there is a cost, just not in points. X-wing V1 used a similar design, having upgrades that occupied the missile slot but subtracted points from the ship as it did not add missiles. In this case, I'd make it a Hardpoint upgrade, preventing you from using Barrage on either the Power Harpoon or the Ground Buzzer.

30 minutes ago, arnoldrew said:

What's the difference between putting it on the unit card or on an upgrade card for free? You're already saying ti should be free....

You're right, I guess I was thinking that with that many (very badly needed) buffs there would have to be a points increase. And having a card that explicitly got rid of arsenal 2, by removingthe secondaryweapon, would mitigate that.

1 minute ago, Caimheul1313 said:

If it is on an upgrade card, it can occupy an upgrade slot. So there is a cost, just not in points. X-wing V1 used a similar design, having upgrades that occupied the missile slot but subtracted points from the ship as it did not add missiles. In this case, I'd make it a Hardpoint upgrade, preventing you from having using Barrage on either the Power Harpoon or the Ground Buzzer.

You explained my thinking better than I did 😆 .

The problem with adding barrage to the main gun is that it defeats the purpose of the airspeeder having rear guns. I personally think the tow cable is an iconic part of the airspeeder and the tow cable should be one of the defining aspects of the airspeeder. The fact the tow cable is neither good nor fun to use makes me sad. If a vehicle gets hit by a tow cable it should get really screwed up for at least a turn, it should get pivoted around and immobilized. similar to getting hit by ion. it would make sense if the tow cable had the scatter keyword too because a unit getting hit with a tow cable would get scattered.

I think its better to just buff the main gun and buff the rear guns and have it keep arsenal 2.

Its main gun and rear guns need to not suck. And it needs to be able to survive long enough to get into position to use both guns.

Maybe something like "rear gunner" that would allow you to take an action between your use of arsenal 2. Compulsory move - fire front guns - move - fire rear gun.

44 minutes ago, Khobai said:

The problem with adding barrage to the main gun is that it defeats the purpose of the airspeeder having rear guns. I personally think the tow cable is an iconic part of the airspeeder and the tow cable should be one of the defining aspects of the airspeeder. The fact the tow cable is neither good nor fun to use makes me sad. If a vehicle gets hit by a tow cable it should get really screwed up for at least a turn, it should get pivoted around and immobilized. similar to getting hit by ion. it would make sense if the tow cable had the scatter keyword too because a unit getting hit with a tow cable would get scattered.

I think its better to just buff the main gun and buff the rear guns and have it keep arsenal 2.

Its main gun and rear guns need to not suck. And it needs to be able to survive long enough to get into position to use both guns.

The main problem with the front and rear guns is that they cannot support each other at all, which is one of strengths of Arsenal.
Additionally, in order to use both guns, you either need your opponent to be spread out, or have your airspeeder basically in the middle of your opponent's army.

One change that I would like to see is for the rebels to be able to take Bistan and Pao in standard corps units.

14 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

The main problem with the front and rear guns is that they cannot support each other at all, which is one of strengths of Arsenal.
Additionally, in order to use both guns, you either need your opponent to be spread out, or have your airspeeder basically in the middle of your opponent's army.

Which is why its guns should be significantly buffed to make up for the fact they cant fire in the same arc. But I also think positioning the airspeeder so you can make good use of the rear guns should be an integral part of how the airspeeder should be played. Because its what we see in empire strikes back.

And its why the airspeeder's survivability needs to be increased so it can survive longer in the middle of your opponents army. Thats why I suggested giving it outmaneuver and a free dodge token when it performs a move action.

But again you need to think about how the airspeeder should be played thematically. And thematically the tow cable should be one of the defining aspects of the airspeeder. So if the tow cable isnt extremely useful and fun then you arnt really doing justice to the airspeeder. I would like to see the rear guns on the airspeeder made much stronger so positioning airspeeders to get shots with the rear arc is both rewarding and thematic.

Airspeeders should be somewhat awkward to use but rewarding when used correctly. I think arsenal is the correct keyword. Its guns just need to be better.

@Khobai the tow cable is the defining aspect of the craft only against the AT-AT, which isn't (and probably will never be) in the game. "Improving" the front weapon and the rear guns still means most turns Arsenal 2 is a waste. One of the main strengths of literally every other unit with Arsenal is the ability to target a single unit with a large dice pool with multiple keywords, increasing the likelihood of triggering Impact or reducing the effectiveness of Cover and Dodge. An optional upgrade to remove the rear gun and allow the gunner to focus solely on the front guns (Barrage) could be helpful, but even there I still feel the points cost for Arsenal should be built into the upgrades, not the basic unit.

While I'm thinking of it, do we ever see an airspeeder fire the main guns at the same time as the rear gun? A case could be made to entirely remove Arsenal...

15 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

@Khobai the tow cable is the defining aspect of the craft only against the AT-AT, which isn't (and probably will never be) in the game. "Improving" the front weapon and the rear guns still means most turns Arsenal 2 is a waste. One of the main strengths of literally every other unit with Arsenal is the ability to target a single unit with a large dice pool with multiple keywords, increasing the likelihood of triggering Impact or reducing the effectiveness of Cover and Dodge. An optional upgrade to remove the rear gun and allow the gunner to focus solely on the front guns (Barrage) could be helpful, but even there I still feel the points cost for Arsenal should be built into the upgrades, not the basic unit.

While I'm thinking of it, do we ever see an airspeeder fire the main guns at the same time as the rear gun? A case could be made to entirely remove Arsenal...

But the airspeeder doesnt get arsenal 2 so it can target a single unit with multiple weapons. The airspeeder gets arsenal 2 so it can fire its front and rear weapons in the same turn. The airspeeder doesnt fill the same role as an AT-ST, it seems like you want it to be a flying AT-ST, but thats not what it is.

Not every vehicle is going to make optimal use of every keyword. Part of the fun of having different units is that they arnt all perfect and you have to embrace their flaws as much as their strengths. The airspeeders flaws are what make it interesting to play; its just the risk vs reward factor currently isnt where it needs to be.

Besides I wouldnt want the airspeeder to be more like the AT-ST anyway. If I want to play a brute force vehicle that can attack with all its weapons in one arc ill just play the AT-ST. The airspeeder should provide a completely different play experience altogether. The airspeeder should not be about brute force it should be more of a finesse vehicle that you need to flank with and use its superior maneuverability to gain an advantage on the enemy. It just needs a few buffs to help it do that.

There are other ways of increasing the airspeeders effectiveness vs cover and dodge. Like giving it the critical X keyword or just giving it surge to crit. The Airspeeder shouldnt have to give up its rear gun to make the front gun more effective. Both its front and rear guns should be effective. And it should have enough survivability that its able to use its rear gun at least twice during the course of a game.

And the tow cable should absolutely be a defining weapon of the airspeeder. Just because we only see tow cables used against AT-ATs in the movie doesnt mean it cant be used on other things. There just needs to be way more of an incentive to use the tow cable because pivoting an enemy vehicle is pretty worthless. At the very least the tow cable should be able to scatter units and immobilize vehicles and do bonus damage to walker vehicles. The harpoon should also get pierce 1.

1 hour ago, Khobai said:

But the airspeeder doesnt get arsenal 2 so it can target a single unit with multiple weapons. The airspeeder gets arsenal 2 so it can fire its front and rear weapons in the same turn. The airspeeder doesnt fill the same role as an AT-ST, it seems like you want it to be a flying AT-ST, but thats not what it is.

Not every vehicle is going to make optimal use of every keyword. Part of the fun of having different units is that they arnt all perfect and you have to embrace their flaws as much as their strengths. The airspeeders flaws are what make it interesting to play; its just the risk vs reward factor currently isnt where it needs to be.

Besides I wouldnt want the airspeeder to be more like the AT-ST anyway. If I want to play a brute force vehicle that can attack with all its weapons in one arc ill just play the AT-ST. The airspeeder should provide a completely different play experience altogether. The airspeeder should not be about brute force it should be more of a finesse vehicle that you need to flank with and use its superior maneuverability to gain an advantage on the enemy. It just needs a few buffs to help it do that.

There are other ways of increasing the airspeeders effectiveness vs cover and dodge. Like giving it the critical X keyword or just giving it surge to crit. The Airspeeder shouldnt have to give up its rear gun to make the front gun more effective. Both its front and rear guns should be effective. And it should have enough survivability that its able to use its rear gun at least twice during the course of a game.

And the tow cable should absolutely be a defining weapon of the airspeeder. Just because we only see tow cables used against AT-ATs in the movie doesnt mean it cant be used on other things. There just needs to be way more of an incentive to use the tow cable because pivoting an enemy vehicle is pretty worthless. At the very least the tow cable should be able to scatter units and immobilize vehicles and do bonus damage to walker vehicles. The harpoon should also get pierce 1.

Again, when do we see the airspeeder firing both weapons at the same time? The gunner in the back controls both weapons systems (at least in old canon, not sure about current).

I'm not saying the Airspeeder SHOUlD be able to hit a unit with both weapons systems, I'm saying that Arsenal 2 is not worth the full price, nor should that price be on the unit by default. Since the Airspeeder doesn't have two weapons systems innately, then the cost of Arsenal shouldn't be on the Airspeeder itself, but rather included in the Hardpoint upgrades. Paying for a keyword that can't be used on the base unit makes it more expensive without increasing effectiveness. And perhaps that's where the 35 point discount came from, FFG hasn't released any sort of vehicle building guidelines for points. But the Airspeeder still feel too expensive for what it does, and that's one way to reduce the base unit price.

Also, it is a MAGNETIC harpoon. The fact that it does damage at all is odd to me, but they probably are using that just to give the targeted vehicle a chance to avoid being pivoted. Scatter (a keyword that as far as I know is only on Force powers) makes zero sense, the harpoon is only hitting a single trooper, it's not a net, yanking all the troopers in the unit around. Also, how does a tow cable immobilize a treaded or repulsor vehicle? The immobilization we see is because it is targeting a walker, and even there it takes the equivalent of multiple turns of movement in order to trip the walker.

12 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Again, when do we see the airspeeder firing both weapons at the same time? The gunner in the back controls both weapons systems (at least in old canon, not sure about current).

I'm not saying the Airspeeder SHOUlD be able to hit a unit with both weapons systems, I'm saying that Arsenal 2 is not worth the full price, nor should that price be on the unit by default. Since the Airspeeder doesn't have two weapons systems innately, then the cost of Arsenal shouldn't be on the Airspeeder itself, but rather included in the Hardpoint upgrades. Paying for a keyword that can't be used on the base unit makes it more expensive without increasing effectiveness. And perhaps that's where the 35 point discount came from, FFG hasn't released any sort of vehicle building guidelines for points. But the Airspeeder still feel too expensive for what it does, and that's one way to reduce the base unit price.

Also, it is a MAGNETIC harpoon. The fact that it does damage at all is odd to me, but they probably are using that just to give the targeted vehicle a chance to avoid being pivoted. Scatter (a keyword that as far as I know is only on Force powers) makes zero sense, the harpoon is only hitting a single trooper, it's not a net, yanking all the troopers in the unit around. Also, how does a tow cable immobilize a treaded or repulsor vehicle? The immobilization we see is because it is targeting a walker, and even there it takes the equivalent of multiple turns of movement in order to trip the walker.

He's talking about how to make it a viable choice, not how to make it perfect simulation of reality/canon. Some abstraction is okay.

16 minutes ago, arnoldrew said:

He's talking about how to make it a viable choice, not how to make it perfect simulation of reality/canon. Some abstraction is okay.

Scatter still doesn't make sense, nor does immobilize as even an abstraction. Immobilize is also a very limited keyword, as far as I know only placed on Command cards for a once per game effect. The pivot effect is already an abstraction of the tow cable.

Either of these changes should lead to a substantial increase in points for the Harpoon, which still wouldn't change the viability of the Airspeeder. One of the main issues with the Airspeeder is that it is (rightfully) designed primarily to be an antivehicle unit in a game where vehicles are not commonly taken (primarily due to their relative inability to interact with objectives). So it doesn't fit well into an "all comers" list, and even in the anti-tank role, 2 AT-RTs with laser cannons arguable do the job better for 10 points more, almost twice as many hit points, the inability to destroy all anti-tank assets with a single lucky attack, and an extra activation.

Adding Barrage to the Airspeeder so the basic unit with no upgrades has a use for Arsenal 2 (even as a Hardpoint upgrade, or in such a way that the Hardpoint can't benefit) could maybe help the viability, since it is now able to output two 6 dice shots a turn, relying on the compulsory move to line up the attacks. Also, it's a change to the unit itself, not a single weapon option.

51 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Scatter still doesn't make sense, nor does immobilize as even an abstraction. Immobilize is also a very limited keyword, as far as I know only placed on Command cards for a once per game effect. The pivot effect is already an abstraction of the tow cable.

Except that they do make sense. Since you didn't explain why you think they don't make sense (I would think it has something to do with implications and connotations that you think those effects have given your previous comments about Scatter) I won't explain why I think they make at least enough sense. The Immobilize weapon keyword is only one one weapon right now (Cad Bane's gauntlet), although there are several command cards that give out Immobilize tokens.

51 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Either of these changes should lead to a substantial increase in points for the Harpoon, which still wouldn't change the viability of the Airspeeder. One of the main issues with the Airspeeder is that it is (rightfully) designed primarily to be an antivehicle unit in a game where vehicles are not commonly taken (primarily due to their relative inability to interact with objectives). So it doesn't fit well into an "all comers" list, and even in the anti-tank role, 2 AT-RTs with laser cannons arguable do the job better for 10 points more, almost twice as many hit points, the inability to destroy all anti-tank assets with a single lucky attack, and an extra activation.

I don't think anyone is advocating making the Airspeeder (or any of its upgrades) more expensive to fix it, since that wouldn't really make sense. Your comments on the Airspeeder's issues are pretty much on point, though.

51 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Adding Barrage to the Airspeeder so the basic unit with no upgrades has a use for Arsenal 2 (even as a Hardpoint upgrade, or in such a way that the Hardpoint can't benefit) could maybe help the viability, since it is now able to output two 6 dice shots a turn, relying on the compulsory move to line up the attacks. Also, it's a change to the unit itself, not a single weapon option.

I think that Barrage should be added to the Airspeeder AND the secondary weapons should be buffed so that sometimes using Arsenal 2 will be an actual viable option, like it is with the AAT. The harpoon should gain Pierce 1 (to make it more likely to actually trigger the pivot) and probably Immobilize 1. It still might not be worth taking or using even then. The Ground Buzzer needs at least Suppressive, possibly Critical 1.

Oh yeah, because what the Rebels really need right now is another unit with Pierce.

30 minutes ago, arnoldrew said:

Except that they do make sense. Since you didn't explain why you think they don't make sense (I would think it has something to do with implications and connotations that you think those effects have given your previous comments about Scatter) I won't explain why I think they make at least enough sense. The Immobilize weapon keyword is only one one weapon right now (Cad Bane's gauntlet), although there are several command cards that give out Immobilize tokens.

I don't think anyone is advocating making the Airspeeder (or any of its upgrades) more expensive to fix it, since that wouldn't really make sense. Your comments on the Airspeeder's issues are pretty much on point, though.

I think that Barrage should be added to the Airspeeder AND the secondary weapons should be buffed so that sometimes using Arsenal 2 will be an actual viable option, like it is with the AAT. The harpoon should gain Pierce 1 (to make it more likely to actually trigger the pivot) and probably Immobilize 1. It still might not be worth taking or using even then. The Ground Buzzer needs at least Suppressive, possibly Critical 1.

Scatter doesn't make sense to me as a single harpoon shouldn't cause the entire unit (except the leader) to redeploy. For a non-Force weapon I could see it more fitting for an explosive "flushing the unit out of cover" but not a single magnetic harpoon.

Thank you for point out the electro gauntlets, I hadn't realized the keyword had been added to an actual weapon yet. There it is on an melee only weapon that exhausts. If the Harpoon exhausted, then I wouldn't be as opposed to giving it Immobilize (representing the vehicle being slowed by the cable that is wrapped around it, and the Airspeeder needing to load a new cable). But Immobilize should probably come at a loss of the distinctive Tow Cable rule, and probably makes the most sense if restricted to just vehicles (since as a magnetic cable it wouldn't stick to most organic targets). Having not played extensively with Immobilize, I mentally translated that as "the unit can't move" as opposed to "speed reduced for each token," so having re-read the rules I could see Immobilize making sense.

Giving the Harpoon Pierce to ensure that tow cable triggers is understandable (and should probably increase the points from 3 since that is a very powerful keyword), but alternately the Tow Cable keyword could be changed as follows to get a similar result: "If any hits are still in the dice pool after applying Dodge and Cover while targeting a vehicle, cancel all hits, then pivot the vehicle." It is no longer dependant upon a failed armour save, without guarenteing one damage against any unit that doesn't have a counter to Pierce. If the one damage is desired, then the keyword could just change to "pivot the target, and the target takes one wound."

As part of increasing the points of the upgrades, I am advocating for an equal reduction in cost of the Airspeeder itself. Let's say that Arsenal 2 "costs" 10 points. So the Airspeeder would be 130, while the Harpoon and Ground Buzzer would increase by 10 points. The cost of a Airspeeder with the Hardpoint upgrades is unchanged, but the naked unit is now cheaper.

I do agree with Suppressive or Critical on the Ground Buzzer though, and don't have much of an issue with both adding Barrage and improving the weapons, but that would likely cause FFG to increase the points for fear of making the unit "too good."

6 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Scatter (a keyword that as far as I know is only on Force powers)

It is also on "Bunker Buster" Shells.

21 minutes ago, Lochlan said:

It is also on "Bunker Buster" Shells.

Thanks, haven't played with those enough to have them memorized yet. So that fits the "high explosive causing the target to scatter" design I mentioned also making sense for Scatter.

9 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Scatter doesn't make sense to me as a single harpoon shouldn't cause the entire unit (except the leader) to redeploy. For a non-Force weapon I could see it more fitting for an explosive "flushing the unit out of cover" but not a single magnetic harpoon.

That's fair, but as I said I wouldn't be too upset if they did add the keyword.

9 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Thank you for point out the electro gauntlets, I hadn't realized the keyword had been added to an actual weapon yet. There it is on an melee only weapon that exhausts. If the Harpoon exhausted, then I wouldn't be as opposed to giving it Immobilize (representing the vehicle being slowed by the cable that is wrapped around it, and the Airspeeder needing to load a new cable). But Immobilize should probably come at a loss of the distinctive Tow Cable rule, and probably makes the most sense if restricted to just vehicles (since as a magnetic cable it wouldn't stick to most organic targets). Having not played extensively with Immobilize, I mentally translated that as "the unit can't move" as opposed to "speed reduced for each token," so having re-read the rules I could see Immobilize making sense.

Restricting effects to vehicles is okay theme-wise, but does nothing but double down on the Airspeeder as an Anti-Tank only choice. Soldiers have a lot of metal equipment, and it would at least knock down the guy it hit, so I think applying it to everything is perfectly fair.

9 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Giving the Harpoon Pierce to ensure that tow cable triggers is understandable (and should probably increase the points from 3 since that is a very powerful keyword), but alternately the Tow Cable keyword could be changed as follows to get a similar result: "If any hits are still in the dice pool after applying Dodge and Cover while targeting a vehicle, cancel all hits, then pivot the vehicle." It is no longer dependant upon a failed armour save, without guarenteing one damage against any unit that doesn't have a counter to Pierce. If the one damage is desired, then the keyword could just change to "pivot the target, and the target takes one wound."

I'm fine with it not doing any damage and I think your way is preferable to giving it Pierce 1.

9 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

As part of increasing the points of the upgrades, I am advocating for an equal reduction in cost of the Airspeeder itself. Let's say that Arsenal 2 "costs" 10 points. So the Airspeeder would be 130, while the Harpoon and Ground Buzzer would increase by 10 points. The cost of a Airspeeder with the Hardpoint upgrades is unchanged, but the naked unit is now cheaper.

Making the secondary weapons more expensive is just making it so no one takes them. Whatever Arsenal 2 "costs" is probably less than or equal to the 25 points they've already knocked off the Airspeeder. It's already "free." Let's not disincentive taking the Hardpoints any more than we already are by the fact that they have a terrible arc and really are't that good.

9 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

I do agree with Suppressive or Critical on the Ground Buzzer though, and don't have much of an issue with both adding Barrage and improving the weapons, but that would likely cause FFG to increase the points for fear of making the unit "too good."

All that matters is that it's worth its points. Who gives a **** if it's 300 points as long as it feels like it's 300 points? Sure they might **** it up again, but they already mangled the poor thing so badly on day 1 it would be hard to be worse.

18 minutes ago, arnoldrew said:

That's fair, but as I said I wouldn't be too upset if they did add the keyword.

Restricting effects to vehicles is okay theme-wise, but does nothing but double down on the Airspeeder as an Anti-Tank only choice. Soldiers have a lot of metal equipment, and it would at least knock down the guy it hit, so I think applying it to everything is perfectly fair.

I'm fine with it not doing any damage and I think your way is preferable to giving it Pierce 1.

Making the secondary weapons more expensive is just making it so no one takes them. Whatever Arsenal 2 "costs" is probably less than or equal to the 25 points they've already knocked off the Airspeeder. It's already "free." Let's not disincentive taking the Hardpoints any more than we already are by the fact that they have a terrible arc and really are't that good.

All that matters is that it's worth its points. Who gives a **** if it's 300 points as long as it feels like it's 300 points? Sure they might **** it up again, but they already mangled the poor thing so badly on day 1 it would be hard to be worse.

Arsenal isn't the only "problem" with the Airspeeder though, so the 25 point discount also likely includes some other points adjustments, not solely the points for the one "taxed" Keyword.

Immobilise on everything I wouldn't complain strongly about, but I don't see it synergizing too well with the Tow Cable rule. You already are costing the vehicle an action by forcing them to pivot if they want to get their previous facing, after which many vehicles are going to be taking the Attack action anyway (likely to shoot at the Airpeeder) so Immobilize didn't really do anything. It also would make it harder to force a unit with Speeder X to move off the board, due to the maximum speed reduction. Honestly just making it so the pivot is guarenteed (after Dodge and Cover) would be fairly strong, especially against any vehicles with Weak Points.

That's fair about the points of the Hardpoints and the unit in general. Although it is hard to justify any of the expensive vehicles already due to their relatively poor action economy. I also generally do not like any design that had an additional tax in order to take advantage of a built in rule. If I want to field the vehicle without a Hardpoint, I shouldn't be penalized in points for a keyword that cannot be relevant.

Quote

Scatter doesn't make sense to me as a single harpoon shouldn't cause the entire unit (except the leader) to redeploy. For a non-Force weapon I could see it more fitting for an explosive "flushing the unit out of cover" but not a single magnetic harpoon.

Makes perfect sense to me. If you harpoon debris on the ground and drag it into an infantry unit theyre going to scatter.

Quote

Immobilise on everything I wouldn't complain strongly about, but I don't see it synergizing too well with the Tow Cable rule. You already are costing the vehicle an action by forcing them to pivot if they want to get their previous facing

Pivoting a vehicle is absolute crap. So what if it costs the vehicle an action as long as the vehicle can pivot back and fire. The harpoon should both pivot and immobilize the vehicle so the vehicle cant pivot for a turn. then it would actually be useful.

If you can actually land a harpoon on an enemy vehicle you should get rewarded for it. otherwise the harpoon is pointless.

20 hours ago, Alpha17 said:

Oh yeah, because what the Rebels really need right now is another unit with Pierce.

yeah because the airspeeder with pierce on its harpoon would really be a credible threat lmao.

the purpose of adding pierce on the harpoon is so the ONE dice it rolls doesnt just bounce off a defense save.

I would not be opposed to increasing the damage on the harpoon to two dice either instead of giving it pierce. But either way the harpoon needs to be more reliable.

Quote

As part of increasing the points of the upgrades, I am advocating for an equal reduction in cost of the Airspeeder itself. Let's say that Arsenal 2 "costs" 10 points. So the Airspeeder would be 130, while the Harpoon and Ground Buzzer would increase by 10 points. The cost of a Airspeeder with the Hardpoint upgrades is unchanged, but the naked unit is now cheaper.

Then why would I ever take the Harpoon or Ground Buzzer? They already arnt worth 3 or 10 points respectively. Making them cost another 10 points ensures that I would never take either of them. I would just run the naked airspeeder.

A much better solution would be to buff the harpoon so its equal to the ground buzzer and then make both the harpoon and ground buzzer completely free. Then you would always take one or the other. And the airspeeder SHOULD always have one or the other because it has arsenal 2.

Upgrades do not always have to have a points cost. They simply have to evoke a meaningful choice. the harpoon and groundbuzzer can both cost 0 points as long as the two are roughly equal choices. Essentially the cost of taking one is the opportunity cost of not taking the other.

For example:

Ground Buzzer -> 0 points, 4 black die + suppressive

Harpoon -> 0 points, 1 red die (+1 additional red die vs walkers), impact 1, pierce 1, scatter, pivots vehicles it damages, and immobilizes vehicles it damages for one turn.

Those keywords make the harpoon significantly better against vehicles than the ground buzzer. So theres actually a choice to be made there. You cant definitively say one is better than the other. The scatter keyword is optional but I like it in case the harpoon doesnt have a vehicle to target it can still drag infantry out of cover.

That would fix the problem of the rear weapons. Then all you need to do is fix the front guns and the survivability issues. And then readjust the points cost accordingly. Giving it surge to crit or critical X on the main guns, outmaneuver, and the ability to gain a free dodge token would probably fix the thing enough to where its playable. It still wouldnt be amazing, but ive given up on that, I just want it to be playable.

1 hour ago, Khobai said:

Makes perfect sense to me. If you harpoon debris on the ground and drag it into an infantry unit theyre going to scatter.

Pivoting a vehicle is absolute crap. So what if it costs the vehicle an action as long as the vehicle can pivot back and fire. The harpoon should both pivot and immobilize the vehicle so the vehicle cant pivot for a turn. then it would actually be useful.

If you can actually land a harpoon on an enemy vehicle you should get rewarded for it. otherwise the harpoon is pointless.

yeah because the airspeeder with pierce on its harpoon would really be a credible threat lmao.

the purpose of adding pierce on the harpoon is so the ONE dice it rolls doesnt just bounce off a defense save.

Except you aren't targeting 'debris' unless every planet has magnetic rocks just lying around. It's a magnetic harpoon, using a strong magnet to attach itself, not a shaped point.

Immobilize tokens don't work that way, they reduce the unit's maximum movement by 1. Vehicles can still freely pivot with an Immobilize token.

Pivoting a vehicle with Weak Point means you expose the Weak Point to other parts of your army, giving those units Impact X. For the Occupier, you can potentially cause it to displace some of your opponent's infantry, giving them Suppression. Speeders you can pick the direction of their Compulsory move, potentially sending them off the board, which causes them to be removed from the game as if defeated.

Every keyword has a cost. Adding Pierce would likely increase the cost of the Harpoon since it is guarenteed damage. Removing the damage requirement would be the better way of making it more reliable in my opinion.