So the ARC Troopers come with 2 different height clear bits to show them in-flight. Does this height have any affect on the game? Is the model considered at that height for drawing Line of Sight, or is this purely for aesthetics, and you treat them as on the ground where their base sits?

38 minutes ago, oreet said:

So the ARC Troopers come with 2 different height clear bits to show them in-flight. Does this height have any affect on the game? Is the model considered at that height for drawing Line of Sight, or is this purely for aesthetics, and you treat them as on the ground where their base sits?

It really depends on whether you play by the tournament rules or not. Check out the tournament rules for LOS questions:
https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/filer_public/41/fa/41fab1a1-076e-4111-8028-f3db426e76d7/swl_tournamentregulations_v20.pdf

Technically it does not matter. There's a standard trooper mini silhouette that you use regardless of modeling

13 minutes ago, Xclbr1 said:

Technically it does not matter. There's a standard trooper mini silhouette that you use regardless of modeling

Unless you're not using tournament rules, in which case they matter very much.

The LoS "system" in this game is an absolute nightmare. The worst I've ever come across.

There are basically 2-4 different LoS systems in play at once depending on units included and format you're playing:

-The silhouette for troopers (only if using tournament regs)
-The LoS system in the rulebook for everything else (and also including troopers if NOT using the tournament regs)
-An ever-expanding list of unit specific exceptions (usually tanks) because they don't function with the rules they wrote.
-House ruling things that haven't made the ever expanding list yet but definitely should (rules as written: the AAT can raise and lower its view point by angling the cannon up and down).

11 minutes ago, Xclbr1 said:

Technically it does not matter. There's a standard trooper mini silhouette that you use regardless of modeling

Only for tournament play though. Silhouettes are not used in "casual" play. The RRG makes no mention of the silhouette at all. So the different height could impact LoS to/from the model if you are not using the silhouette rules for whatever reason.

18 hours ago, Sekac said:

Unless you're not using tournament rules, in which case they matter very much.

The LoS "system" in this game is an absolute nightmare. The worst I've ever come across.

There are basically 2-4 different LoS systems in play at once depending on units included and format you're playing:

-The silhouette for troopers (only if using tournament regs)
-The LoS system in the rulebook for everything else (and also including troopers if NOT using the tournament regs)
-An ever-expanding list of unit specific exceptions (usually tanks) because they don't function with the rules they wrote.
-House ruling things that haven't made the ever expanding list yet but definitely should (rules as written: the AAT can raise and lower its view point by angling the cannon up and down).

Its not that hard. If you're not playing tournament rules its just true LoS from the top of the head (or the highest point over the center for vehicles.

If you're not playing in a high level tournament then a few cm flex based on the tank pose doesnt really matter.

I like the trooper sihouettes personally, even for casual play. It eliminates the penalties for cool poses with lots of stuff sticking out over the base of the model.

16 hours ago, KommanderKeldoth said:

Its not that hard. If you're not playing tournament rules its just true LoS from the top of the head (or the highest point over the center for vehicles.

If you're not playing in a high level tournament then a few cm flex based on the tank pose doesnt really matter.

I like the trooper sihouettes personally, even for casual play. It eliminates the penalties for cool poses with lots of stuff sticking out over the base of the model.

The highest point over the center of the model is not a fixed position in all cases, though.

The AAT turret is set behind the center. So if it's turned away from directly forward, the highest point drops down to the top of the hull.

If I rotate the turret forward, the highest point jumps up to the tank barrel.

If I then angle the gun up, I can raise the vantage point by about 4" (10cm) . So if I want to possibly deny cover or see units I otherwise couldn't, I can point the gun 60° in the air, and shoot a laser from the tip of the turret, down onto the unsuspecting unit.

I didn't say it was a "hard" system, just a bad one. Very poorly thought out in the first place, and it just keeps getting more complicated as they discover issues they never considered, like someone holding a lightsaber, or using a jetpack, or piloting a tank.

2 hours ago, Sekac said:

The highest point over the center of the model is not a fixed position in all cases, though.

The AAT turret is set behind the center. So if it's turned away from directly forward, the highest point drops down to the top of the hull.

If I rotate the turret forward, the highest point jumps up to the tank barrel.

If I then angle the gun up, I can raise the vantage point by about 4" (10cm) . So if I want to possibly deny cover or see units I otherwise couldn't, I can point the gun 60° in the air, and shoot a laser from the tip of the turret, down onto the unsuspecting unit.

I didn't say it was a "hard" system, just a bad one. Very poorly thought out in the first place, and it just keeps getting more complicated as they discover issues they never considered, like someone holding a lightsaber, or using a jetpack, or piloting a tank.

The turret on the AAT cant be rotated in game without special modification like magnetization. Its designed to be glued in place. So its really a non-issue. Most people (myself included) cannot rotate the turret at all to change the LoS.

Out of curiosity, what simpler system would you devise to handle LoS in Legion?

4 hours ago, KommanderKeldoth said:

The turret on the AAT cant be rotated in game without special modification like magnetization. Its designed to be glued in place. So its really a non-issue. Most people (myself included) cannot rotate the turret at all to change the LoS.

I haven't magnetized mine. The turret has a friction fit and can easily rotate without modification. Same with the hinge allowing the cannon to make the tank 4" taller as needed.

4 hours ago, KommanderKeldoth said:

Out of curiosity, what simpler system would you devise to handle LoS in Legion?

I would have preferred they pick 1, rather than 3.

If you want silhouettes, do silhouettes. If you want true LoS, do true LoS, if you want a specified measure point for each model, do that.

17 hours ago, Sekac said:

If you want silhouettes, do silhouettes. If you want true LoS, do true LoS, if you want a specified measure point for each model, do that.

Couldn't agree more.

Honestly, they should just flush out all 3 and give the players the option to choose for casual games and specific the one they like best for tournaments.

25 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Honestly, they should just flush out all 3 and give the players the option to choose for casual games and specific the one they like best for tournaments.

CHAOS!

no I would have preferred they pick a method and then design the models and game to work around that system to its betterment. NOT keep changing or adding extra and confusing rules for the fanbase to have to argue about. They honestly have found the most difficult and off-putting way to go about things. Quit changing the rules, it kills the game. This game struggles enough to form a community and then you give the players more things to haggle over before they ever play the game (not to mention the token, set-up and ever-changing point costs) No wonder literally no-one plays this game around me, it's too much hassle and work.

19 minutes ago, buckero0 said:

CHAOS!

no I would have preferred they pick a method and then design the models and game to work around that system to its betterment. NOT keep changing or adding extra and confusing rules for the fanbase to have to argue about. They honestly have found the most difficult and off-putting way to go about things. Quit changing the rules, it kills the game. This game struggles enough to form a community and then you give the players more things to haggle over before they ever play the game (not to mention the token, set-up and ever-changing point costs) No wonder literally no-one plays this game around me, it's too much hassle and work.

What?

Like, their LoS rules are a little janky, and some of the keyword interactions can be a little more complicated than they need to be, but ultimately, in terms of TTWGs, the whole game is pretty simplified.


I can't imagine this game being too much for people. Even now, mid pandemic, our local group is getting 1-3 games in over the weekends.

6 hours ago, buckero0 said:

Quit changing the rules, it kills the game. This game struggles enough to form a community and then you give the players more things to haggle over before they ever play the game (not to mention the token, set-up and ever-changing point costs) No wonder literally no-one plays this game around me, it's too much hassle and work.

Is this your actual experience? Ive never had to "haggle and argue" before a game of Legion. If no one plays around you what play experience are you basing this observation on?

In my opinion the biggest threat to the game is Asmodee's bad distribution practices, not FFG's very solid rule set. I also play A Song of Ice and Fire minis and its the same story. Great game. Great minis. Great setting. But Asmodee is screwing up the distribution and making things hard to come by.

21 hours ago, buckero0 said:

CHAOS!

no I would have preferred they pick a method and then design the models and game to work around that system to its betterment. NOT keep changing or adding extra and confusing rules for the fanbase to have to argue about. They honestly have found the most difficult and off-putting way to go about things. Quit changing the rules, it kills the game. This game struggles enough to form a community and then you give the players more things to haggle over before they ever play the game (not to mention the token, set-up and ever-changing point costs) No wonder literally no-one plays this game around me, it's too much hassle and work.

Could the rules be cleaner and easier? yeah, but overall it's still mostly straight-forward. In our area we've had some 40K converts who cite the cleaner rules as one thing that pulled them into Legion. If you want a game with constantly shifting point costs and rule sets, you should get into A Song of Ice and Fire, which is a close second for why that game is struggling.

21 hours ago, KommanderKeldoth said:

Is this your actual experience? Ive never had to "haggle and argue" before a game of Legion. If no one plays around you what play experience are you basing this observation on?

I don't haggle and argue, but my group has pretty much tossed out the LoS rules and use our own. We use true LoS but ignore "extraneous bits" like guns, antennas, backpacks, etc. There's obviously some built-in subjectivity, but that's not really an issue if either you're playing casually or if there is a TO present.

Best of all, it allows the models to function as they would in-universe. R2-D2 is smaller than a wookiee. An AAT should be able to turn its turret to angle around a building while the front 3/4 of it is benefitting from heavy cover. Guys in the sky should have a better view of the battlefield but be easier to see too.

FFG seems to want to write a system to cut judge's discretion out of the process and have ended up with a complicated flow chart of different systems that isn't intuitive and robs units of their unique physical characteristics.

I can absolutely see that being a turn off to new players. Just look at the discussion being had here because the OP asked what would (in any other game system) be a directly answerable question.

If someone asks "If I put my models on their flight stands, will that impact LoS?" And the best answer we can give until they tell us their current and future aspirations for this game is "maybe", that indicates a problem with the system.

2, 3, 4 years from now, how many units will be on the "if you are this specific unit, ignore the usual rules, and do this intead" list? What, other than memorizing that list, should players do to make sure they or their opponent are following one of what will be many exceptions? There is absolutely no indication anywhere else of what units have exceptions. So it's either memorize it, or consult it the first time every non-trooper shoots (and then as needed after).

Man you really hate the los rules for legion and I don’t under stand why. For the OP if your playing with tournament rules, no the flight stand does not affect los, if your playing casual rules, yes it will change los for that model.
This game only has 2 los rule variations and a total of 3 exceptions. Tourney rules; small base units, use silhouettes. All other instances, center of the base and top of the model. The 3 expections are the rebel laser canon, the empire e-web, and the empire occupier tank. The rules reference specifically states where to draw los from these 3 models.

Am I missing some complicated step in this process?

1 hour ago, Shadowhawk252 said:

Man you really hate the los rules for legion and I don’t under stand why. For the OP if your playing with tournament rules, no the flight stand does not affect los, if your playing casual rules, yes it will change los for that model.
This game only has 2 los rule variations and a total of 3 exceptions. Tourney rules; small base units, use silhouettes. All other instances, center of the base and top of the model. The 3 expections are the rebel laser canon, the empire e-web, and the empire occupier tank. The rules reference specifically states where to draw los from these 3 models.

Am I missing some complicated step in this process?

I would suggest reading the thread.

The game currently has 3 LoS standards, not 2, and a 4th is necessary to keep it from being absurd.

1) LoS as described in the book

2) Silhouettes for troopers

3) The list of exceptions (it is currently only 3 but MUST continue to grow)

4) House rules to decide on viewpoints for units that should be on the exceptions list, but aren't because FFG hasn't gotten around to it, like the AAT.

I have never played a game that has juggled this many systems and has executed on all of them so poorly.

They started with one, and it didn't function as intended on day 1 of this game. That's objectively bad game design.

"Oh, we forgot that Luke Skywalker owns a lightsaber when we wrote the rules. Now that we have played a single game of Legion, we realize the lightsaber makes him easier to shoot than we intended."

Truly awful rules writing.

After playing Legion, I went to Bolt Action and was amazed at the elegance of it's LOS rules:

1. True LOS.

2. Be reasonable. We're all adults and here to have fun. If you can only see a tiny part of a mini, like a hand or a tip of a gun, you probably don't have LOS. Don't be a jerk.

For ARCs, True LOS makes sense. If they are hoping around on their jet packs, they would be easier to see, but harder to hit. I would give them cover 1 like a speeder.

Just my thoughts.

42 minutes ago, Anaxander said:

After playing Legion, I went to Bolt Action and was amazed at the elegance of it's LOS rules:

1. True LOS.

2. Be reasonable. We're all adults and here to have fun. If you can only see a tiny part of a mini, like a hand or a tip of a gun, you probably don't have LOS. Don't be a jerk.

For ARCs, True LOS makes sense. If they are hoping around on their jet packs, they would be easier to see, but harder to hit. I would give them cover 1 like a speeder.

Just my thoughts.

I've been playing Bolt Action for years prior to Legion's release.
You are leaving out how Bolt Action doesn't have nearly the competitive community that Legion does, instead primarily being a historical game, which means many of the players strive for historical accuracy rather than competitive gameplay.
Also frequently players still fudge the "true LOS" for Bolt Action to prevent prone miniatures from being modeled for advantage. There are quite a few "up to your judgement" rules, including some poorly written theatre books allowing for some very overpowered, and completely unintentional rules interactions. "Maori Gurkhas" are the most notable offenders.

Bolt Action is also a WYSIWYG ruleset, so the models are equipped exactly as modeled. That is not the case in Legion, so just because the ARC models have jetpacks on them does not mean the unit actually has the jetpack upgrade. Even with that upgrade, the unit is not always flying, they are only able to make relatively short hops.