I’ve been seeing a lot of people going on about what they would want to see changed in a second edition of legion, and it kinda baffles me on this. Do people think that legion is due for a complete overhaul already? The game has only been out for 2 years, X-wing was out for 6 before they released 2.0 and armada has been out for 5 and they still haven’t talked about a 2.0 for it.

Does this community really feel this game is so broken that it needs this already?

I don't really have a lot of experience with X-wing, but it seems to me like it was strictly a X-wing problem. Legion seems to be pretty well future proofed, if you compare it's living rules reference to Armada's rules reference.

If anything Armada needs a 2.0, but I still don't think it's nessesary, cause nithing needs majorly overhauled about it or Legion. In Armada's case they are adding some new iconography to new cards to standardize effects but that's about all it needs.

TL:DR, Legion isn't broken, the living RRG and standardization of keywords and such will keep it from needing "2.0-iffied"

No, people just like to complain.

The game is barely 2 years old. This is not 40k to get changed every 2-3 years

If they dont do Legion 2.0 then they need to start doing a living rules thing with multiple updates a year.

Because having to wait 2 entire years for them to maybe fix the Airspeeder is complete BS. And they still probably wont fix it this year.

And at the very least the game needs an major update to give rebels and imperials their own macro game mechanics like CIS and GAR have. Maybe more like a 1.5 than a 2.0

As a long-term X-wing player the only thing I'd love FFG to "2.0" in Legion is digitalising the costs and slots. This proves to be a major saviour of the X-wing meta. Devs are eager to do these minor, 1-2 point updates (out of 200 points available to spend on your squadron, so roughly 4-8 points here in Legion) every half a year to balance the scales. For really under-performing ships we already seen them throw in extra slots on it's pilots to let it surface in the meta-game.

It's also extremely easy for the devs to set up cards like ARC jetpacks and Situational Awareness i.e. with variable costs depending on a condition. X-wing point lists have multiple upgrades differentiate their costs based of multiple available stats of a ship. For legion, imagine a defensive surge upgrade which is reasonably priced for white defence rollers to bring up their survivability a notch, but comes at a steep price for red rollers not to put their resilience out of control.

3 hours ago, Shadowhawk252 said:

Does this community really feel this game is so broken that it needs this already?

No, it's a vocal minority that is shouting on the top of their lungs. If FFG does a "reboot" now that will kill the game. GW is flexing its miniature wargaming muscles and if FFG flinches now (and any other smaller miniatures games company) they'll get hammered.

No needs for SWL 2.0, especially if you play casual. Last addition to the game (strong ruled for line of sight, silhouette, points changing) was made for high level competitive play.

Airspeeder with outer rim speeder jokey as it is.

it's just stockhome syndrome from the recoving or dual 40k players talking.

There are elements that could be done better, but a 2.0 is absolutely NOT the way forward right now if the game wants to grow. At most they just need to get innovative with the next wave of unit specialists.

a few new innovative units isnt going to fix all of the useless older units or the fact rebels and imperials are at a disadvantage to CIS and GAR.

the game is definitely in need of a MAJOR update.

There's no reason for a 2.0. Power creep has hit the first year's units fairly hard, but that can be adjusted for the yearly erratas and quarterly rules changes in the RRG. I personally see no plus side of an X-Wing 2.0 digital app, as it encourages active meddling in the meta and game play for no other reason than they can.

Things that should be changed:

1. Remove Refresh.
Most people only use refresh abilities on a small number of units at the competitive end. Just make abilities that would normally be refresh based more expensive points wise, as losing a whole action in this game is really rough.

2. Give Imps and Rebels some sort of faction wide ability that gives them some form of flavor. I feel like the original 2 factions feel too similar, and it would be nice to have something that further differentiates the OT factions, giving them their own play styles.

3. Make vehicles more relevant.

4. Rebalance some of the older units.

5. Give units native non-order based buffs. E.g. shore troopers with Target 1. Instead of requiring an order, just let them get an aim for free at the start of each round. E.g. Give rebel vets a free dodge etc. Give rebel troopers a free dodge as well or a surge, or something etc.
This way people aren't forced to farm out their orders to certain units, and can pick and choose more freely what starts with an order token. It would also make units more efficient, and not push the game into a combo-synergy based system like a card game. The tactics should be about how you play the field, not whether x+y=z.

6. Take away upgrade costs. Give units fewer upgrade slots. This way its less about points and more about picking and choosing an upgrade to fill a slot. This will promote more upgrades. Maybe just make some upgrades cost points etc.

That's just what I would do if there were a 2.0.

But I am happy with the game right now, save a few balancing issues.

Some of it is also that sweeping changes to any of the older units might be more likely in a second edition than continuing to update the existing rules.

With the purely digital RRG, "Legion V2" could just consist of a rewrite of the rulebook as a whole, instead of just changing individual sections which has led to some inconsistent wording between interacting sections.

Honestly, people are playing rebs and imps the way they were played pre-CIS and GAR. Popel who are complaining havent adapted their teams enough, otherwise they would see what is more effective vs CIS and GAR. Imps stopped playing Boba who is VERY good with the new Vital Assets. Iden is really strong with VA and the inferno squads are strong with almost any objective. With the new vital assets dropping, imp gun lines are way too slow. I think rebs had the strongest advantage with VA. They are equipped to focus on objectives more than any other faction except maybe GAR (but only because of both R2 and Padme), but they can out range GAR easily to get around the stanby nonsense, Imps can too. Competitive GAR teams all have Rex, who dies way too easy imo. There are significant weaknesses to both CIS and GAR teams that people are not exploring and that is why the whiners start whining.

We barely hust have full options for the new factions, there's no need for 2.0.

We do need a new scum mercenary faction, then everyone can start complaining

Nah 2.0 is how you kill the game. Living rules is a really good idea though.

Regarding giving original factions stuff to differentiate them more, how would people feel about Empire perhaps having an ability to take suppression in order to ignore being suppressed, while in range of a commander. (basically the commander pushing them too hard. very strong with Vader though, as it should be)

Meanwhile I feel Rebels should have a similar mechanic, but reflecting on their heroic nature... Perhaps make it so that units in range 1 of objectives can ignore suppression or panic, or maybe being able to pass suppression tokens to nearby units?

Just a thought.

You must really hate suppression. You seem to want to make every faction immune to suppression. Which doesnt really differentiate factions...

GAR has nothing that prevents suppression inherently, CIS are immune to being Suppressed but can still Panic. I don't really see how this makes them the same.

Either way, it was the first thing that came to mind that I feel would be thematic to the factions within the existing framework of mechanics. But feel free to suggest something instead of just complaining all the time

9 hours ago, RejjeN said:

Regarding giving original factions stuff to differentiate them more, how would people feel about Empire perhaps having an ability to take suppression in order to ignore being suppressed, while in range of a commander. (basically the commander pushing them too hard. very strong with Vader though, as it should be)

I do believe that's called the Compel keyword, at least in part. Changing it to a faction bonus would mean the keyword is useless, and "take a suppression to ignore being suppressed" is basically "suppression doesn't affect us" in any negative way (but they still get the benefits of it!) until reaching a commander's panic threshold. Suppression has already lost a great deal of it's power; be a shame to make it pointless for 3/4s of factions in the game.

exactly the game doesnt need more ways to ignore suppression.

what the empire needs are more keywords that interact with suppression

examples would be:

subjugate X (when this unit attacks, reroll X dice in your attack pool if the defender has at least X suppression)

motivated by fear (when this unit activates, after it rallies, it may gain both 1 suppression token and 1 aim token)

failed me for the last time (costs 1 action, vader gives 1 aim token and 1 dash token to a friendly trooper unit within range 1. if that friendly trooper unit fails to inflict wounds on an enemy unit before the turn ends they suffer 1 wound instead)

improved version of spur (when this unit activates it gains a dash token)

dash token = new type of token that can be spent any time during a unit's activation to gain 1 suppression token and make a free speed-1 move.

etc...

and then the empire's macro mechanic could be something like: during the command phase, both players may place 1 suppression token on one of their units. If the opponent doesnt put 1 suppression tokens on one their units then the empire player gets 2 surge tokens to distribute among their units. if the empire player puts 1 suppression token on one of their units they get 2 surge tokens to distribute among their units.

In theory Legion will never need 2.0 as long as they do a good job with their yearly points changes. They can keep crap unit in the meta and nurf any op units. The middle ground between their star wars games when it comes to changes.

• Xwing 1.0 did not have anyway to fix broken or garbage units and 2.0 saved the game. The app may suck, but having the points every six months online is really great. They slowly nurf/buff everything feels nice and refreshing.
• Armada is doing 1.5 with rule changes and point changes to 1/5 of their upgrades. I figure they will also change the points of the ships in a future card pack after they see where the meta goes. After that nothing.

Legion's online pdf feels like a rush job and no real online app means we all have to use fan made sites to build list (they should really thank those sites for doing their job). BUT I think the PDF was the right thing to do if they use them to fix any issues.

The Q4 point change has to do 3 things to really show that 2.0 ( or 1.5) will never be needed.

1. Change strike teams. Every freaking meta list having 2 to 3 of these is an issue and I can't wait to see what they do.
2. Dewback/airspeeder fix (any bad unit). If they can fix the worse units then there is no need for a new version.
3. Clones. They are really strong which is fine, but a lot of people don't have fun against their ball of death. Could really hurt the community if not changed a bit.

The game's in an overall fine spot. It's not too bloated and outside some errata creating confusion with printed materials, I think it's pretty good.

My main criticism is that the activation system doesn't really work as intended. Activation count is just far too important, which is why most alternating games these days have some sort of pass token system. It's also just too easy to manipulate the tokens themselves to have full activation control over your army often by forcing really homogeneous list composition. I think its hard to tell how balanced models really are, when the token system has so many ways of punishing diversity.

I think the fact that online games tend to be more cutthroat is exacerbating some of legion's underlying issues.

The macro-issues I personally see are;

-Keyword Bloat: New keywords ought to be rare. The rules reference is starting to look like 6th and 7th edition 40k's special rule chapter. THAT IS NOT A GOOD THING

-Related to the above: Old units are aging poorly because they don't get new keywords they arguably should have.

-FFG needs to embrace the living rules model for unit costs and slots. 2 adjustments a year, with the potential for emergency adjustments in the case of something unforseen (I.E. Triple Upsilon in X-wing). Leave the written points and slots as a legacy for the grognards who hate such things, but the current delivery is painfully slow.

-Activation Count needs to be examined.

Does this require an edition change? I don't think so, but tighter restrictions on new keyword creation are in order.

I haven't gotten a chance to play since lockdown, so I'm not sure of what micro changes are in order, though.