1 hour ago, lologrelol said:

People keep thinking clones are going to be brought down in power.

Alex was quite clear that the other factions were going to be raised up.

He said he didn't want to cut off the tall poppy.

31:15 Alex sais "Clones need a little bit of trimming. A little bit of nerfing" then he quickly changes topic to Barc being to weak. But we can certainly expect some sort of nerfs to GAR and not only pushing other factions. We'll see.

Personally, I'll be sadmad if the clones receive anything more devastating than minor trimming to the main faction (although I would love Barcs to get a buff, those things are cool). I'm not a republic player, and only play them pretty infrequently, but I enjoy matches either facing them or playing as with their existing mechanic. I know that seems unfathomable for a lot of people out there who hate on that, but I do see it as fun to play against, so praying they don't do anything that will change the way they play too much. Some tweaks needed yes, but don't change the flavor.

Deffo agree that rebels and Imps need some boons from somewhere though, and excited for Wookie reveal

13 hours ago, KommanderKeldoth said:

I actually like that all of the rockets feel different with their own weaknesses. I just think the HH-12 needs to be dirt cheap with all of its flaws.

We actually see Baze run, jump into a crater, aim and shoot an HH12 in one swift motion. It’s a shoulder fired rocket. Shouldn’t have cumbersome. Exhaust makes sense with reloading it. Plus, you can pay the points and handle exhaust with a Stormtrooper Specialist.

3 hours ago, Haslamm1 said:

Personally, I'll be sadmad if the clones receive anything more devastating than minor trimming to the main faction (although I would love Barcs to get a buff, those things are cool). I'm not a republic player, and only play them pretty infrequently, but I enjoy matches either facing them or playing as with their existing mechanic. I know that seems unfathomable for a lot of people out there who hate on that, but I do see it as fun to play against, so praying they don't do anything that will change the way they play too much. Some tweaks needed yes, but don't change the flavor.

My money is on slight point increases that would force player to take one less unjt and maybe get rid of sharing standby?

It would fit with what they wanted to do with changes and get rid of the fortress build without changing the identity of the faction. He said GAR was elite small army several times and was really pushing changes to the BARC/Saber tank.

2 hours ago, RyantheFett said:

My money is on slight point increases that would force player to take one less unjt and maybe get rid of sharing standby?

It would fit with what they wanted to do with changes and get rid of the fortress build without changing the identity of the faction. He said GAR was elite small army several times and was really pushing changes to the BARC/Saber tank.

Or maybe a limit to how many tokens a Clone can share in a round. So it could be you can use 1 token from another unit per unit per round, so you have to be picky about what you use. We'll have to see, but I got the sense it wasn't the mechanic he disliked, it was how players were using it, he wants the Clone to play more aggressive instead of castling up every game.

If they hit the clones too hard all they are going to do is make all the top players switch over to CIS anyway.

3 minutes ago, Nithorian said:

Or maybe a limit to how many tokens a Clone can share in a round. So it could be you can use 1 token from another unit per unit per round, so you have to be picky about what you use. We'll have to see, but I got the sense it wasn't the mechanic he disliked, it was how players were using it, he wants the Clone to play more aggressive instead of castling up every game.

If they hit the clones too hard all they are going to do is make all the top players switch over to CIS anyway.

Something that sounds kinda crazy but may work is allowing token sharing to range 2. The main reason to castle with clones is the R1 restriction on token sharing since troopers have no native surges. It may even help bring out the hidden units since LoS is still required and now opponents have more opportunity to remove standby tokens.

56 minutes ago, codytx2 said:

Something that sounds kinda crazy but may work is allowing token sharing to range 2. The main reason to castle with clones is the R1 restriction on token sharing since troopers have no native surges. It may even help bring out the hidden units since LoS is still required and now opponents have more opportunity to remove standby tokens.

The last thing clones need is making it even easier to share tokens.

6 minutes ago, costi said:

The last thing clones need is making it even easier to share tokens.

Agreed in some instances that would be an unintended consequence but LoS should mostly be a larger factor not only for if they can share but also if all units are in some way more exposed than they currently are. As good as sharing is it is also restrictive on how the units can be used and there is currently little incentive to be aggressive.

1 hour ago, codytx2 said:

Something that sounds kinda crazy but may work is allowing token sharing to range 2. The main reason to castle with clones is the R1 restriction on token sharing since troopers have no native surges. It may even help bring out the hidden units since LoS is still required and now opponents have more opportunity to remove standby tokens.

You're right, it does sound kinda crazy.

I’m not really sure I agree that Saber tanks need love. I find them to be incredible due to their maneuverability. AAT is slower, but can punch a bit harder (at least against dodgers)

11 minutes ago, Mokoshkana said:

I’m not really sure I agree that Saber tanks need love. I find them to be incredible due to their maneuverability. AAT is slower, but can punch a bit harder (at least against dodgers)

haven't had an experience to see it in action in person since my seppy friend didnt by one since my republic friend cant get a saber tank, but i'd probably say the AAT is slightly better thanks to the more reliable damage output and cheaper fully effective kit. AAT with Lok Durd and high energy shells is 187 points, and if you want to be fully prepared for armor 197 for the armor piercing shells as well, but even if you go base AAT the barrage keyword is nutty enough to make naked AATs terrifying

If you want a saber tank to be equally as potent on a battlefield as an AAT you'd need Plo Koon, although veteran clone pilot could work better if you want a more passive clone supporting play style or 5 for Ayala if you really like action economy. From here imo you have two options.

One being a pure beam cannon loadout, which lets you have a guaranteed arsenal 2 usage every round of combat. This is definitely where the saber tank could shine over the AAT. getting in range of a group of baddies and chucking 4 reds, 2 blacks, and 2 whites into one unit and then chucking 2 reds each into two others is terrifying. if you're in danger of being blasted in this spot you can proc Plo Koon and have 2 dodges and essentially guarantee being here the next turn, disrupting the enemy army. Of course for 209 points if you bring Plo Koon, this better be the case.

Two would be a more missile centric loadout, with Plo Koon for more aggressive or either of the others for more supportive. You'd take the Twin laser turret since it'd only be firing when you're cycling your missiles anyway, so the points saved there would go into either armor piercing shells or bunker buster shells. High energy seems like a waste since you'd either take them for just the dice or not use your main weapon to proc high velocity. Bunker buster would be good against entrenched, while armor piercing for a "screw armor" loadout. Either way you'd be dropping 203-205 points, assuming you're bringing Plo Koon.

I think it's certainly fine as is since the saber tank is certainly paying a little bit for not having AI:Attack base and having speed 2, but the AAT doesn't quite need speed 2 either. I also prefer the AAT's rear arc weakpoint over the saber's less severe rear and side weakpoints, which seems like it should be the reverse case since the saber is more likely to get sideshot. Still the saber is a great piece of your army, and I think it is in a fine spot for sure. We can certainly wait to see if this would change after the T-47 and AT-ST get some much needed love.

The problem is not the Saber itself; get R2 close for repairs and Padme for a shared Standby every turn, and Saber can overperform any current vehicle.

29 minutes ago, Dalae said:

The problem is not the Saber itself; get R2 close for repairs and Padme for a shared Standby every turn, and Saber can overperform any current vehicle.

I've never seen the Standby actually pulled off. You basically need the enemy to move into range 2 like a buffoon, since if you fly forward to get into range 2 then usually Padme will be way behind.

2 hours ago, Lightning Dust said:

haven't had an experience to see it in action in person since my seppy friend didnt by one since my republic friend cant get a saber tank, but i'd probably say the AAT is slightly better thanks to the more reliable damage output and cheaper fully effective kit. AAT with Lok Durd and high energy shells is 187 points, and if you want to be fully prepared for armor 197 for the armor piercing shells as well, but even if you go base AAT the barrage keyword is nutty enough to make naked AATs terrifying

If you want a saber tank to be equally as potent on a battlefield as an AAT you'd need Plo Koon, although veteran clone pilot could work better if you want a more passive clone supporting play style or 5 for Ayala if you really like action economy. From here imo you have two options.

One being a pure beam cannon loadout, which lets you have a guaranteed arsenal 2 usage every round of combat. This is definitely where the saber tank could shine over the AAT. getting in range of a group of baddies and chucking 4 reds, 2 blacks, and 2 whites into one unit and then chucking 2 reds each into two others is terrifying. if you're in danger of being blasted in this spot you can proc Plo Koon and have 2 dodges and essentially guarantee being here the next turn, disrupting the enemy army. Of course for 209 points if you bring Plo Koon, this better be the case.

Two would be a more missile centric loadout, with Plo Koon for more aggressive or either of the others for more supportive. You'd take the Twin laser turret since it'd only be firing when you're cycling your missiles anyway, so the points saved there would go into either armor piercing shells or bunker buster shells. High energy seems like a waste since you'd either take them for just the dice or not use your main weapon to proc high velocity. Bunker buster would be good against entrenched, while armor piercing for a "screw armor" loadout. Either way you'd be dropping 203-205 points, assuming you're bringing Plo Koon.

I think it's certainly fine as is since the saber tank is certainly paying a little bit for not having AI:Attack base and having speed 2, but the AAT doesn't quite need speed 2 either. I also prefer the AAT's rear arc weakpoint over the saber's less severe rear and side weakpoints, which seems like it should be the reverse case since the saber is more likely to get sideshot. Still the saber is a great piece of your army, and I think it is in a fine spot for sure. We can certainly wait to see if this would change after the T-47 and AT-ST get some much needed love.

The AAT gets the high energy shells staples to it, so it’s coming in at 178 base. Otherwise you can’t move and shoot (effectively as you’d only get 4R), but even with that, it cannot move and shoot every turn. Also, the AAT suffers from AI: attack which can bite you on specific turns if It is not issued an order. Finally, the AAT with Crit 2 (Crit 3 on the turn that high energy shells are fired) Impact one, doesn’t really pay off. On 4 dice, you’re going to average .5 surge and .875 surge on 7 dice. Will there be turns where you roll 3 surges and it pays off? Sure, but that’s not going to be the norm.

Counter that with the Saber which can throw 9 dice (2R 5B 2W with Crit 2, impact 2) when using the Laser Turret for 184 points. This vehicle can aim/shoot or move/shoot every turn without sacrificing firepower like the AAT and the Crit/impact spread is way better at 2/2. Missiles and pilots aren’t really necessary on the Saber. There are spots where they can excel, but they aren’t locks.

20 hours ago, SailorMeni said:

31:15 Alex sais "Clones need a little bit of trimming. A little bit of nerfing" then he quickly changes topic to Barc being to weak. But we can certainly expect some sort of nerfs to GAR and not only pushing other factions. We'll see.

Well if they want people to stop playing GAR, that's their prerogative.

On 10/15/2020 at 3:19 PM, KommanderKeldoth said:

I think the HH-12 needs to cost less than the DLT. Even if its only by 1 or 2 points. Its cumbersome and exhaust.

The reason the HH12 isnt used isnt because it costs too much. You could make it cost 20 points and it still wouldnt get used.

The reason the HH12 isnt used because its completely ineffective in an anti-armor role. Have you ever tried hurting a vehicle like a saber tank with an HH12? it does almost nothing. Youre lucky if you get 1 hit. Or 0 hits if it dodges LOLOL.

Youre literally better off equipping a DLT19 and impact grenades and running upto the tank and throwing grenades and shooting the DLT19. Because the HH12 is so awful at anti-armor. And you know a heavy weapon is bad when grenades perform its role better...

If the HH12 was like BBBB with impact 4 then it might not suck. But BBB with Impact 3 is absolutely terrible. Having both cumbersome and exhaust means the HH12 should be way stronger than it currently is.

2 hours ago, lologrelol said:

Well if they want people to stop playing GAR, that's their prerogative.

im fine with that.

Anyone who cant (or wont) admit GAR is overpowered is someone we can do without. Because those players arnt interested in a balanced game. Theyre only interested in GAR remaining overpowered.

I hope all the GAR deniers quit when their faction gets nerfed. The game will be way more fun once GAR is dealt with and rebels and imperials get some much needed buffs.

2 hours ago, Mokoshkana said:

Missiles and pilots aren’t really necessary on the Saber.

It depends what role you want your saber tank to fill. If you want the saber tank to keep other heavy vehicles in check then taking anti-armor rockets is an obvious choice.

3R/4B/2W Impact 5, Critical 1 is brutally effective at beating down other heavy vehicles. Ive seen a saber tank completely destroy an undamaged AT-ST in 2 turns by itself.

4 hours ago, arnoldrew said:

I've never seen the Standby actually pulled off. You basically need the enemy to move into range 2 like a buffoon, since if you fly forward to get into range 2 then usually Padme will be way behind.

the flexibility of token sharing allows them to share the standby token with any unit of their choosing. It doesnt have to be the saber tank.

its more effective to use the standby on units with overwatch. Standby is range 3 because of overwatch.

Range 3 can cover a good portion of the board including objectives. Good luck taking objectives without triggering it.

And you cant shoot off the standby tokens because the standby tokens are on units that are hiding out of LoS.

50 minutes ago, Khobai said:

Its range 3 because of overwatch.

The Saber tank can't take Overwatch. Look at the actual comment I was replying to instead of thinking "oh good it's time to argue about m,y favorite topics again!"

but other units can take overwatch

and the standby token has the flexibility of being sharable with any unit

you lose nothing by keeping the tank in range of padme as long as theres other units that are also in range of padme because one of them can use the standby token instead if the tank doesnt.

its almost like the sheer flexibility of token sharing combined with the ability to circumvent all the downsides of standby makes standby token sharing really overpowered or something...

standby token sharing is almost definitely going to vanish from the game. theyre just going to retcon standby tokens as not being green tokens.

8 minutes ago, Khobai said:

but other units can take overwatch

and the standby token has the flexibility of being sharable with any unit

so if the saber tank cant use the standby token another unit will use it instead

It doesn't matter what other units can or cannot do as it still has no effect on the Saber tank. The tank can still only use Padme's standby if something comes into R2 of it regardless if another unit has Overwatch, Overwatch 2, Overwatch 45, or Overwatch 756. The entire exchange was the saber using Padme's standby and exactly zero other units FFS.

23 minutes ago, codytx2 said:

It doesn't matter what other units can or cannot do as it still has no effect on the Saber tank. The tank can still only use Padme's standby if something comes into R2 of it regardless if another unit has Overwatch, Overwatch 2, Overwatch 45, or Overwatch 756. The entire exchange was the saber using Padme's standby and exactly zero other units FFS.

He literally can't help but compulsively bring his favorite topics into every single facet of every single conversation.

2 hours ago, Khobai said:

im fine with that.

Anyone who cant (or wont) admit GAR is overpowered is someone we can do without. Because those players arnt interested in a balanced game. Theyre only interested in GAR remaining overpowered.

I hope all the GAR deniers quit when their faction gets nerfed. The game will be way more fun once GAR is dealt with and rebels and imperials get some much needed buffs.

No!

Clones must remain masters of the universe!

3 hours ago, lologrelol said:

Well if they want people to stop playing GAR, that's their prerogative.

I stopped playing Clones because of how they are now. I'm looking forward to picking them up again once they are balanced and fun again.

8 hours ago, arnoldrew said:

He literally can't help but compulsively bring his favorite topics into every single facet of every single conversation.

That's why it is best to ignore him. If you can't have a reasonable or intelligent conversation with him, what's the point of replying? Just like banging your head on a stone wall, the only thing you'll have to show for it is a headache.

EDIT: I'll be incredibly disappointed if they come after GAR with a nerf hammer as hard as our resident troll would like. While it probably wouldn't get me to stop playing the game, it would be very frustrating for FFG to screw over their own game that much. I switched over to Clones after the GenCon pre-release. I played the faction competitively when we had exactly three units to pick from. Saying I only want GAR to be over powered is as ridiculous as saying Rebels are in desperate need of help. Minor adjustments are needed, not a wholesale scraping of core faction mechanics.

On 10/15/2020 at 4:42 PM, Lukez said:

very pumped for wookies fix! Hoping the pathfinders discount includes an errata for pao and bistan to be able to be added to core units

On 10/15/2020 at 7:21 PM, Welshie13 said:

My guess is Pao and Bistan errata will give them 2 health at least to match with other named heavies in other factions. The option to add them to core units would be cool as it would also open up new options for extra range in both vets and fleets.

I'd be happy with either of these changes.

4 hours ago, Alpha17 said:

That's why it is best to ignore him. If you can't have a reasonable or intelligent conversation with him, what's the point of replying? Just like banging your head on a stone wall, the only thing you'll have to show for it is a headache.

EDIT: I'll be incredibly disappointed if they come after GAR with a nerf hammer as hard as our resident troll would like. While it probably wouldn't get me to stop playing the game, it would be very frustrating for FFG to screw over their own game that much. I switched over to Clones after the GenCon pre-release. I played the faction competitively when we had exactly three units to pick from. Saying I only want GAR to be over powered is as ridiculous as saying Rebels are in desperate need of help. Minor adjustments are needed, not a wholesale scraping of core faction mechanics.

I doubt they are going to nuke GAR. FFG tends to favor small adjustments over drastic ones. Just look at Tauntauns, the only thing thats changed is a tweak to the creature trooper disengage and clamber rules.