3 hours ago, lologrelol said:

Each of those rules should cost 8pts on their own?!

Give me some of what you're smoking!

Do you honestly believe that Phase 2 are costed adequately?

Actually FFG already published an upgrade for Phase 1 that makes them very similar to Phase 2: The clone captain.

Training Upgrade for both, exhaustible suppression ignoring Vs courage 2, extra trooper Vs reliable 1.

The captain costs 17 points, 9 points more than just picking Phase 2s (7 if you factor in the more expensive Z-6).

If you price Phase 2s matching those points I bet people would still use them extensively, but probably can't spam them any more. And there would even be an alternative that is completely useless otherwise.

So maybe not 8 points per rule, but easily 5.

I also believe that if the training upgrade wasn't so easily accessible for clones that you can fit it on 3-6 units, standby sharing would be much less of an issue.

Remember that the cost of the captain also includes the cost of a basic trooper.

clones are definitely not costed consistently with other units in the game.

for example compare shoretroopers to clone trooper mk1s.

shoretroopers are 13 points each with a black attack die and a red defense save. with the ability to only sometimes get an aim token after the recent nerf.

clone mk1s are also 13 points each with a black attack die and red defense save. but they also get broken standby token sharing AND firesupport EVERY TURN.

how is a unit sometimes getting an aim token equal to token sharing and firesupport every turn? do clones even pay considerably extra for those abilities? because it doesnt seem like they really do.

And clone mk2s get +1 courage, a training slot, and reliable 1 for only 8 more points. they are absolutely getting those abilities at a discount compared to what the imperial officer/stormtrooper captain/specialist cost. Even after you subtract out the 11 points for the basic stormtrooper from the cost of the officer/captain/specialist.

Im not saying clones should cost more. But please stop complaining about how disadvantaged your clonetroopers are and how many points they cost. lol. If anyone should be complaing its Imperial players who pay the same points as clonetroopers for their shoretroopers and its a worse unit. GAR is essentially a better version of Imperials in practically every way. Imperials do almost nothing special or unique anymore.

@SailorMeni After accounting for the cost of the extra model, the rules on the Captain come out to 4 points.

The Phase 2s with the same number of models (so same number of wounds and attack dice) are 75 points vs the Phase 1 with captain's 69 points, so 6 points more expensive than the similar Phase 1s.

10 hours ago, Memorare said:

11 activations is getting possible with R2 but that's a different issue. The woes of a cheap unit with secret mission!

10 hours ago, syrath said:

Id argue that R2 is too cheap for what he brings to the tablr.

In one game my R2 finished off Grievous and completed his Secret Mission. Please don't change him. 🙂

This upcoming point changes will be super interesting and decide the game for a whole year..................................... Sort of scary when with FFG recent history (but rebellions are built on hope!). Funny enough I think GAR is the only faction that really needs a nurf, which I am not sure is a statement about how strong/annoying GAR is, how weak the other factions are, or how close the game is to being balanced?????????

Think they really need to address these two issues(?) with the game. Or least give us a clear understanding on their views. Anything is better then silence.

• ARCs (or strike teams in general). Are they working like FFG want them to work? I don't like them padding EVERY SINGLE list, but if FFG says they like it I would accept that. They nurfed them once so hopefully they do it again, especially since ARCs seemed to have broken the meta bad
• Clones token sharing. It could use some adjustments since it seems to really hurt the play experience for a lot of people. Limit the number of token shared or just remove standby seem to be the better options. Or once again FFG says they like how everything is working and they just do a large point increase on P2s, R2, and Rex.

13 hours ago, lologrelol said:

The thing is, clones just don't have access to a lot of the token efficiency other factions have access to.

They don't have the Veers/shores aim token spam that imperials have.

They don't have the fast combat or self sufficient units rebels have.

They don't have the immune suppression/activation control of the droids.

All clone troopers are more expensive than their counterparts. We don't get tokens for free, we have to syphon them from other units.

Also, all other units being compared to clones, except shoretroopers, have surge to something. Some even surge on both offense and defense. Our clones need to token share or else they are always rolling unmodified dice.

3 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

@SailorMeni After accounting for the cost of the extra model, the rules on the Captain come out to 4 points.

The Phase 2s with the same number of models (so same number of wounds and attack dice) are 75 points vs the Phase 1 with captain's 69 points, so 6 points more expensive than the similar Phase 1s.

The phase 1 captain doesnt give +1 courage or reliable 1 though.

So for the absurdly low cost of only 6 points over phase1+captain the phase 2s get both +1 courage and reliable 1? thats meni's point. that they get those abilities on the super cheap.

phase 2s arnt properly costed either.

17 minutes ago, codytx2 said:

Also, all other units being compared to clones, except shoretroopers, have surge to something. Some even surge on both offense and defense. Our clones need to token share or else they are always rolling unmodified dice.

But thats why shoretroopers were picked as the basis of comparison. Because they are the most similar unit in a different faction. When you compare shoretroopers to clonetroopers it becomes blatantly apparent how much better clonetroopers are. And it proves that clonetroopers are not paying substantially extra for token sharing or fire support like some people are falsely trying to claim.

17 minutes ago, RyantheFett said:

• ARCs (or strike teams in general). Are they working like FFG want them to work? I don't like them padding EVERY SINGLE list, but if FFG says they like it I would accept that. They nurfed them once so hopefully they do it again, especially since ARCs seemed to have broken the meta bad

Theyre fully aware that strike teams are a problem.

What they should do is make strike teams detachments so in order to take a strike team you also need to take the corresponding parent unit. And they should increase the special forces limit to 4 so you can take two units and two strike teams.

They need to crack down on all cheap activations in the game that arnt corps units.

8 minutes ago, codytx2 said:

Also, all other units being compared to clones, except shoretroopers, have surge to something. Some even surge on both offense and defense. Our clones need to token share or else they are always rolling unmodified dice.

Except that isn't true at all. A lot of stuff completely lacks surges. Both Vaders, B1 and B2 droids, Greivous, AAT, and IRG all lack any kind of surge (probably more, that's off the top of my head). The only faction that has surge on everything is the Rebels and they aren't exactly a pillar of power

4 minutes ago, Khobai said:

But thats why shoretroopers were picked as the basis of comparison. Because they are the most similar unit in a different faction. When you compare shoretroopers to clonetroopers it becomes blatantly apparent how much better clonetroopers are.

Shores get a free aim from an order and can then pass an order to an emplacement. We probably all agree activation control is a huge part of the game and clones do not have access to any activation shenanigans. Clone token sharing is also limited to range 1. Not trying to prove one is better than the other only that they operate different, should probably be played different, and having units with a unique feel for each faction is not necessarily a bad thing.

3 minutes ago, thepopemobile100 said:

Except that isn't true at all. A lot of stuff completely lacks surges. Both Vaders, B1 and B2 droids, Greivous, AAT, and IRG all lack any kind of surge (probably more, that's off the top of my head). The only faction that has surge on everything is the Rebels and they aren't exactly a pillar of power

I did miss the droids but for the others I was trying to stick with trooper units. They all have their strengths and weaknesses.

having surge isnt always better anyway so its a flawed argument

a white dice with a surge isnt better than a black die without surge

a white save with surge isnt better than a red save without surge

17 minutes ago, codytx2 said:

Shores get a free aim from an order and can then pass an order to an emplacement. We probably all agree activation control is a huge part of the game and clones do not have access to any activation shenanigans.

Whats better: A free aim some of the time? Or token sharing and fire support ALL OF THE TIME? I know which I would choose and its not the free aim some of the time. The two things are not equal. Clonetroopers are outright better than Shoretroopers.

WHAT?! Standby token sharing is arguably the ultimate activation shenanigan in the game right now. You get to lock the opponent out of doing anything on their turn because you have piles of standby tokens on units that are hiding behind terrain and cant be shot to remove the standby tokens.

You also need to bear in mind that shoretroopers were recently nerfed by the mortar not being able to use comms relay. So shoretroopers lost their ability to perform crazy activation shenanigans. Maybe your definition of shenanigans differs from mine but coordinating to one other unit is not "shenanigans". Shenanigans is what shoretroopers used to be able to by coordinating in a chain to multiple units, but they cant do that anymore.

As for shores being able to coordinate onto mortars, im sure GAR will eventually get a unit that does the same thing. Because every faction gets a unit like that. That isnt a faction disadvantage specific to GAR. Its simply a temporary disadvantage because theyre behind in releases compared to Imperials.

19 minutes ago, Khobai said:

having surge isnt always better anyway so its a flawed argument

a white dice with a surge isnt better than a black die without surge

a white save with surge isnt better than a red save without surge

Shores get a free aim from an order and can then pass an order to an emplacement. We probably all agree activation control is a huge part of the game and clones do not have access to any activation shenanigans. Clone token sharing is also limited to range 1. Not trying to prove one is better than the other only that they operate different, should probably be played different, and having units with a unique feel for each faction is not necessarily a bad thing.

Whats better: A free aim some of the time? Or token sharing and fire support ALL OF THE TIME? I know which I would choose and its not the free aim some of the time. They two things are not equal. Clonetroopers are outright better than Shoretroopers.

WHAT?! Standby token sharing is arguably the ultimate activation shenanigan in the game right now.

In order to fire support the other unit has to have a face up order token. It's not like you can use it on any unit whenever you want. You are also using 2 units for one activation. Basically the same if you want a unit to standby. It cannot attack so it acts like a non-combat support unit. That is not activation control. Droids giving a face up order token to every unit every round is activation control. Clones also have to be sequenced in their activation to really get the most out of their abilities.

I also clearly said I was not trying to prove one better than the other only that they are different units and should be treated as such. For what it is worth I would not be surprised to see standby removed from token sharing as a lot of players seem to negatively react to it.

having the option to fire support is still better than not having the option to fire support.

that is what youre forgetting.

31 minutes ago, codytx2 said:

You are also using 2 units for one activation.

You dont seem to understand how fire support is used.

The purpose of fire support is to erase an enemy unit completely off the board before it gets to activate.

If you spend 2 activations and wipe out 1 of the opponents activations before it gets to activate, youre still only down 1 net activation. Because you have completely denied the opponent one of their activations.

Fire support is not an ability you always use but having the option to use it when you need it is better than not having it at all.

Quote

That is not activation control.

Standby token sharing is a form of activation control though. Its just a different type of activation control than what droids get. Token sharing allows units to share parts of their activations with other units. If that isnt a form of activation control I dont know what is.

Youre also severely underestimating the effect that having a pile of standby tokens has on the opponent. It completely changes how they have to play the game. Because if they move one unit wrong that unit gets obliterated.

2 minutes ago, Khobai said:

having the option to fire support is still better than not having the option to fire support.

that is what youre forgetting.

I nave not once disagreed with that but what you are forgetting is a shoretrooper unit naked is 52 points and 1 slot. Fire supporting phase 1 clones are 104 points naked and 2 slots because you have to have another unit to support. Or fire support phase 1 clones and Rex for 142 points and 2 slots. Fire support phase 2 and an ARC for 132 points. Fire support phase 1 and tank for only 222 points. If you could somehow fire support every unit with the keyword your activations each round would be cut in half. Again, not better, not worse, they are just different.

10 minutes ago, codytx2 said:

I nave not once disagreed with that but what you are forgetting is a shoretrooper unit naked is 52 points and 1 slot. Fire supporting phase 1 clones are 104 points naked and 2 slots because you have to have another unit to support. Or fire support phase 1 clones and Rex for 142 points and 2 slots. Fire support phase 2 and an ARC for 132 points. Fire support phase 1 and tank for only 222 points. If you could somehow fire support every unit with the keyword your activations each round would be cut in half. Again, not better, not worse, they are just different.

But imperials dont take naked shoretrooper units. The whole reason they take shoretroopers is for the range 4 heavy weapon and the range 4 mortar. Because without range 4 weapons you cant stay outside the range 3 of GAR's standby or even hope to shoot off standby tokens in the rare cases you actually can. So by the time you take the heavy weapon and mortar the shoretrooper unit is a way bigger points investment than any clonetrooper unit.

Also most GAR players take naked mark I units and use them as token factories. They arnt taking maxed out units of mkIs like youre claiming.

The units they max out are the mark IIs and those are the units that get passed the standby tokens and get fire supported.

Again im not saying fire support is something you use all the time. Theres a time and a place to use it. But having the option to fire support with your corp units whenever you want is still better not having the option at all.

18 minutes ago, Khobai said:

Fire support is not an ability you always use but having the option to use it when you need it is better than not having it at all.

It takes planning. It's not a keyword you can just activate on a whim. Have you seen clone command cards? You're not giving face up order tokens to every unit on the field every round. It is also incredibly transparent what you are planning with them.

1 minute ago, Khobai said:

But imperials dont take naked shoretrooper units. The whole reason they take shoretroopers is for range 4 weapons and the range 4 mortar. Because without range 4 weapons you cant shoot off standby tokens with overwatch at range 3.

Also most GAR players take naked mark I units and use them as token factories. They arnt taking maxed out units like youre claiming.

I haven't said anything about running maxed out units. Those point totals are naked units added together because fire support takes 2 units and it can work with any 2 units as long as one has the keyword.

Token factories? Each activation a unit can make 2. Since 1 is clearly a standby then you get an aim? Now you have 3 units, 156 points and half your corp slots, dedicated to 1 attack each round if unit A is attacking, unit B is fire supporting, and unit C is cranking out tokens. Not to mention "perfect activation" except you have to give unit B an order token, activate C first to get tokens, then A to actually start the first attack. That's assuming that 3 turns into a round your opponent is just hanging a unit out in the open in front of you and doesn't see what is going on.Then someone triggers standby so unit A gets a second attack. 3 units, 156 points, half your corps, for 2 attacks a round........

1 minute ago, codytx2 said:

It takes planning. It's not a keyword you can just activate on a whim. Have you seen clone command cards? You're not giving face up order tokens to every unit on the field every round. It is also incredibly transparent what you are planning with them.

Of course it takes planning! What exactly is your argument here? That because your faction requires planning it should be way better than every other faction?

It doesnt matter how much planning token sharing requires. If the end result is broken, and it IS broken, it still needs to be nerfed.

4 minutes ago, Khobai said:

Of course it takes planning! What exactly is your argument here? That because your faction requires planning it should be way better than every other faction?

It doesnt matter how much planning token sharing requires. If the end result is broken, and it IS broken, it still needs to be nerfed.

No you make it sound like you can magically pull these standby tokens out of thin air, every unit is fire supporting every single attack, clones have perfect just different activation control, units are being shot off the board every round, and using clones is easy mode. In practice I'm not seeing any of this. My overall point is the faction still takes strategy to use and it has it's limitations just like every other faction. There are some good strengths in the faction and good synergy but there are drawbacks to using them.

GAR can magically pull them out of thin air... using token sharing. You hide your units behind terrain and have them generate standby tokens. And then the units that need standby tokens magically pull them off the units that generated them.

That is the exact reason GAR is going to get nerfed. Standby token sharing will likely be removed altogether. And GAR's ability to take tons of naked clone token factories and get to 11 activations will also likely be nerfed. You need to accept the fact that nerfs are incoming for GAR. No amount of denial on your part is going to change that. And you seem to be heavily in the denial stage to the point where arguing with you is a waste of time.

Also, Fire support can be used to circumvent panicking and Poison tokens.

17 hours ago, Khobai said:

Theyll do crap where they hide like 4 naked mk I clonetroopers behind terrain where you cant see them. Theyll all h ve standby tokens. And then the MK2s will have overwatch and pull off the standby tokens from the MK1s and shoot you a bunch of times. And theres nothing you can do about it because you cant shoot the units with standby tokens.

Thats why standby token sharing is broken. Because the rules that normally balance standby are non-existent for clones.

so why are you not shooting at the Phase II clones, if your opponent has done that then they are going to need at least 4 activations before they can get to that point. if you are unable to get any shots on to the Phase II's in 4 activations then i would seriously take a look at your list. in that situation they have spent 4 activations not shooting at you, you would be a moron not to shoot at the units that are the lynchpin of this strategy. once you have killed those 2 Phase II units then they are down to 4 naked phase I's and while they can be good at feeding tokens to other units they are not very good on their own without a heavy weapon.

please show me this list that people keep taking that i have never seen anyone take because you just sound like an idiot that can't think strategically. Also i would love to see the lists that you play with as it sounds like you only take range 2 units or something, any unit with a range 4 or above weapon is able to disrupt the clone ball and is very useful at other jobs as well.

16 minutes ago, costi said:

Also, Fire support can be used to circumvent panicking and Poison tokens.

the poison tokens will stay on the unit until it has activated so at most all it does is delay it. fire support can be used to prevent panicking true but they still need to have the face up order token to do that. what about vader, he has infinite courage so can prevent any unit with range 3 of him from fleeing, are you saying that should be removed as well?

3 hours ago, Khobai said:

GAR can magically pull them out of thin air... using token sharing. You hide your units behind terrain and have them generate standby tokens. And then the units that need standby tokens magically pull them off the units that generated them.

That is the exact reason GAR is going to get nerfed. Standby token sharing will likely be removed altogether. And GAR's ability to take tons of naked clone token factories and get to 11 activations will also likely be nerfed. You need to accept the fact that nerfs are incoming for GAR. No amount of denial on your part is going to change that. And you seem to be heavily in the denial stage to the point where arguing with you is a waste of time.

Have to agree with @5particus . Take 5 naked clones and 1 Z6, park those 5 naked clones behind terrain, ACTIVATE 5 UNITS FIRST to get a standby & aim, then the clones can go to work halfway through the round. If by that point you haven't figured out what is going on that is not an issue with the faction. Also, being an objective game, let your opponent's ENTIRE ARMY stay behind LoS blocking terrain in a range 1 cluster. Complete objectives and win. And while we are at it I, again, said standby tokens probably will be removed from token sharing. There is no denial as I AM EXPECTING THAT. YOUR biggest issue is you like to put words in other peoples' mouth and then attack them for it. Since you like making up your own arguments feel free to answer them yourself as well.

2 hours ago, codytx2 said:

Have to agree with @5particus . Take 5 naked clones and 1 Z6, park those 5 naked clones behind terrain, ACTIVATE 5 UNITS FIRST to get a standby & aim, then the clones can go to work halfway through the round. If by that point you haven't figured out what is going on that is not an issue with the faction. Also, being an objective game, let your opponent's ENTIRE ARMY stay behind LoS blocking terrain in a range 1 cluster. Complete objectives and win. And while we are at it I, again, said standby tokens probably will be removed from token sharing. There is no denial as I AM EXPECTING THAT. YOUR biggest issue is you like to put words in other peoples' mouth and then attack them for it. Since you like making up your own arguments feel free to answer them yourself as well.

The problem is though that cutrently the win rate of clones vs other factions is about 60% which is a signicant skew, currently the imperials are 40% so imperials are getting a significant downturn in playability in the current meta and GAR has a significant upturn. Rebels and CIS are at circa 50% so their loses vs GAR are being made up for by extra wins vs imps, while this is still an approximation when kt comes to interpreting the results .

The recent tournament I was at mysrlf I came up against two GAR players and won 1 and lost one, however to br fait the one I won was against a relatively green opponent who had republic ATRT with him and paid the card price for the ATRT weapon and I was half asleep when he clambered and rolled red dice (with me nodding yeah after he asked about the dice) and lost an entire phase 1 unif , it was only after the game I remembered him saying red dice), he rolled all blocks. So he went a unit down in turn 1 when he shoudlnt.

The second however was much mlre experienced, however when I saw the objectives come up, i realosed thst my only chance of winning was for me to be blue player, all three objectives were bad for me. hostages, payload and I cant remember the last , however all 3 had a big advantage for being bunched up, ehich hurts me and benefits him(as a rebek player), so im nos looking at 20 pt bids for my current meta to ensure I dont get thag again. That being said tactics constantly evolve and maybe its my playing that was wrong.

Everyone called for a tauns nerf and we got one , and still we here them calling for a tauns nerf and the reason given was action economy because they get so much packed into their actions and still do. Rebels arent "overwinning" at this point so I see no evidence of unbalance in fact more people seem to be bringing atrt (prob because Tauns dont synergise with Cassian)

If action economy was a reason to nerf units then there are other units that also get similar. GAR tank can get extra dodges from movement.Speederbikes can get cover 1(equivalent of a free dodge) an extra movment, a free aim (targetting array) etc and a pretty reasonable dice pool thst can also take out vehicles abovr their weight , imperials arent winning with a good regukarity, unlike when order passing was a major thing for them and that got them a nerf also for them its too far the other way.

Im sure that FFG, while they cant acknolwedge TTS they will take a look af the stats drom the leagues to see id the stats show a skew of any kind and then try amd see what causes it, then come up with a solution, thing is , for all we know the next frw releases may make clone stars a hing of the past. Observstion tokens ah be an answer to them

I've seen this kind of thread only once before.

It didn't scare me enough then.

It does now.

[for the opinion of evo454 please reference the BARC Speeders thread, where this exact same conversation has been ongoing for about a week now]