9 hours ago, RyantheFett said:

Their prefereed method now seems to be

1. Lower points
2. Change how the abilities work. Like danger sense working in melee
3. Adding keywords. They are reluctant to make the cards less useful.

I would say the X-34 could work with a point decrease and see how it works for a year. They have 4 weapon options and several can go down in points a lot. More so if they are pushing for more heavies/rockets in the meta. The games I played with the landspeeder I always felt that it worked out well and did a lot, but was just far too expensive at what it did.

As for the airspeeder, yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa that one is going to have a rework somewhere

Yeah, the X-34 is almost a meme vehicle ("Rebel scum steal a farmer's car and weaponise it") so i expect something in a Ork's war buggy style: dirty cheap, full offense, zero defense.

About the T-47, i think Davy said something about wanting it to be a tank hunter, so i suppose some tweaks are needed to make it a real threat to AAT, Saber and the rest. No one can think about the current airspeeder as a counter to the current tanks.

9 hours ago, RyantheFett said:

As for the airspeeder, yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa that one is going to have a rework somewhere

Either give it red defence dice without surge and keep it at 140 pts, or drop it to 100. Atm tauntauns do the same job but better and cheaper.

7 hours ago, Darth evil said:

why should it have barrage?, The keyword was created for a battle tank that is an artillery piece which sits an wait for it sends out Barrages of fire, the airspeeder is just a retrofitted civilian vehicle, the Rebel alliance had problems with them on Hoth and look how ineffective they where. Bring it down to 110 points and call it a day. It's not supposed to be on the level of the AAT because it's not a main line tank, it's a freakin flying Volkswagen golf with cannons.

Its the only vehicle that pays for the arsenal keyword but has to equip an extra upgrade to get a second weapon, and the weapons fire in opposite arcs from each other.

Giving it barrage would ameliorate both of those issues. You could run it without a weapon and still get use out of Arsenal (via barrage) and it would allow you to double tap on the rounds when you have no ground buzzer shots.

37 minutes ago, Vector Strike said:

No Barrage for the Airspeeder, pls. The thing already has Impact 3 on its main guns...

I don't think that would be much of an issue in today's meta. It does not have offensive surge conversion or any way to get sharpshooter.

It would be really strong against AT-RT's but most heavies can one shot them (or at least critically damage them) on a lucky roll.

Will be interesting to see what they do with the new change. However with all these point changes and erratas, there isn't much point to keep this focus on upgrade cards and unit cards. If alot of information is gonna be incorrect on them, why not just go with army books and have free room to change units keywords, dice and points. It

Some units will be fine with just point reduction and small erratas, but if they keep inventing new keywords and push powercreep with new expansions, the core problem will remain.

2 hours ago, KommanderKeldoth said:

Its the only vehicle that pays for the arsenal keyword but has to equip an extra upgrade to get a second weapon,

Clone Saber tank.

3 hours ago, Vector Strike said:

No Barrage for the Airspeeder, pls. The thing already has Impact 3 on its main guns...

Its current offense is pathetic. It will average less than 2 dead stormtroopers per turn (that's IF they are totally in the open). That's atrocious.

Impact 3 doesn't even have much effect on the Armor you're most likely to see these days since they have red defense.

Impact 3 does absolutely nothing for the airspeeder. If an airspeeder shoots a Saber Tank its lucky if it even does 1 damage.

Im not saying the airspeeder should get barrage though. Im just saying impact 3 is absolutely terrible on the airspeeder.

At bare minimum the airspeeder needs 4 things:

1) the airspeeder needs native surge to crit.

2) the airspeeder's front and rear weapons both need considerable buffs. The front guns need blast or some other way to help it circumvent cover. As for the rear weapons: the harpoon needs pierce and immobilize 2 (make it exhaust but give it cycle so it cant immobilize every turn). the ground buzzer needs suppressive.

3) the airspeeder needs outmaneuver and some way of getting a free dodge token each turn (defend, agile, etc...)

4) the airspeeder needs a useful pilot card. It has 3 totally useless pilots now. a pilot that could be exhausted to give it barrage for one turn would be fine because you couldnt use that every turn.

Thats the bare minimum just to make it usable. It still wouldnt be good because of the dumb compulsory move rules that force it to kamikaze. But at least it would be on the lower spectrum of playable.

10 hours ago, Darth evil said:

why should it have barrage?, The keyword was created for a battle tank that is an artillery piece which sits an wait for it sends out Barrages of fire, the airspeeder is just a retrofitted civilian vehicle, the Rebel alliance had problems with them on Hoth and look how ineffective they where. Bring it down to 110 points and call it a day. It's not supposed to be on the level of the AAT because it's not a main line tank, it's a freakin flying Volkswagen golf with cannons.

I definitely want to thank you for this imagery I now cannot forget. lol

I think they're going to have a tough time justifying the T47 in game without giving it abilities outside the canon representation. The fact is, it doesn't have a roll in the game that can't be done better or cheaper by other units. If they want to see it used, even a point reduction to 110 won't boost it enough. (Not with a 75 point AT RT being so similar in stats, or tuans at 90).

9 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

For casual games my playgroup often just proxies cards we would like to have but don't. Especially since we often need to use printed errata for a number of cards anyway.

I'll probably end up doing that until it comes back into stock. When it was first released I guess I didn't read the whole article and assumed it was more of a scenario based one like the crashed at-st lol.

5 hours ago, KommanderKeldoth said:

Its the only vehicle that pays for the arsenal keyword but has to equip an extra upgrade to get a second weapon

Clone repusulor tank, the at-st, and rebels x-34 all have Arsenal but only have 1 weapon printed on the card.

4 hours ago, jocke01 said:

If alot of information is gonna be incorrect on them, why not just go with army books and have free room to change units keywords, dice and points.

Problem with that is they are constantly releasing new units so after just 1 wave the books would be useless because they wouldnt have the stats of the most recent units

1 hour ago, lunitic501 said:

Problem with that is they are constantly releasing new units so after just 1 wave the books would be useless because they wouldnt have the stats of the most recent units

People are absolutely desperate to turn Legion into 40k.

2 hours ago, lunitic501 said:

Clone repusulor tank, the at-st, and rebels x-34 all have Arsenal but only have 1 weapon printed on the card.

AT-ST has both a ranged and melee attack, but yes I stand corrected. Didn't fact check before I posted. Oops!

If not barrage then the airspeeder front gun needs to at least be range 4, and maybe gain critical 1 or 2.

2 hours ago, arnoldrew said:

People are absolutely desperate to turn Legion into 40k.

I've never played 40k, but as someone who only recently offloaded all of their old Warmachine books: no books, please.

4 hours ago, lunitic501 said:

Clone repusulor tank, the at-st, and rebels x-34 all have Arsenal but only have 1 weapon printed on the card.

Problem with that is they are constantly releasing new units so after just 1 wave the books would be useless because they wouldnt have the stats of the most recent units

Not if the book is online ^^

3 hours ago, arnoldrew said:

People are absolutely desperate to turn Legion into 40k.

To be fair, I completely understand why.


Legion is very accessible, and that's good, also FFG has come a long way to embrace the hobby side, which is also very good, but the simplicity/accessibility of the rules and the proprietary dice system make a lot of people groan. (Honestly, does one of the CEOs at FFG have major stock in a dice company? EVERY game they make has different, proprietary, dice! lol) I love Legion for what it is , but I see the potential of what it could be if they released deeper, more complicated 40K-esque rules. ( Not to say I think they should change the game, at all, from what it is now. I think for the health of the game, the simplicity, ease of access to both the casual and the competitive play, as well as the hobby side they should maintain it exactly as it is. But IF they ever released a hardcore alternate version via codex, which mirrored GW's systems, charts, and depth, I'd buy the **** out of them. I like number crunchy games.)

I don't see how a book gives more free room to change things than just releasing a PDF errata or selling us updated card packs.... Especially if the card size change Armada is undergoing is also coming to Legion...

14 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

I don't see how a book gives more free room to change things than just releasing a PDF errata or selling us updated card packs.... Especially if the card size change Armada is undergoing is also coming to Legion...

Depends on what's in the book, how it's implemented with the current system, and how much change they're trying to create. A full blown conversion to 40k style game could eliminate cards altogether.

Not that I think it'll happen, but I could see how it would work.

47 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

I don't see how a book gives more free room to change things than just releasing a PDF errata or selling us updated card packs.... Especially if the card size change Armada is undergoing is also coming to Legion...

Printed book no, digital book yes. Granted you can use a pdf of all the erratas but there will be so much to keep track on eventually and you can't do much with the printed weapons and such on the cards. I have already faced people that didn't know the point changes or range changes for snipers in tournaments. When half the units/upgrades have some point change and or errata why even have cards when they will mostly display wrong information.

Using digital tools like the x-wing app (a better one though) they have the option to change anything on the units. Speed, dice, add weapons, remove weapons. That would be the best IMO. However even if we don't go this way, legion is already doing what x-wing 1.0 did and I don't think people will like what comes next. Will have to see what happens though.

I think the newer design of having the erratas as a more visible extra download on the main page though makes it just as visible as a digital rulebook that requires checking on their site.

Now, if they "sold" the digital RRG for $0 like I have seen from other companies so the rules automatically updated, we'd have the same situation as a digital book, while still having the cards to facilitate out of the box play.

Even a digital book still requires players to check for fixes, same as the current card design.

Yes, but you wont have incorrect information printed on cards to confuse people. For competitive players the current system is fine, all though it's boring to have some iconic units rarely hit tables.

Point adjustments and potential fix cards are a halfway measure at best, but at the least the new expansions will keep being cool.

I think future wargames will have more fluid and digital rules and stats for a faster and easier way of doing balance. Will be interesting to see.

FFG should just release a yearly card pack for each faction with all the updated unit and upgrade cards for that faction

its really not that difficult.

2 hours ago, Darth Sanguis said:

To be fair, I completely understand why.


Legion is very accessible, and that's good, also FFG has come a long way to embrace the hobby side, which is also very good, but the simplicity/accessibility of the rules and the proprietary dice system make a lot of people groan. (Honestly, does one of the CEOs at FFG have major stock in a dice company? EVERY game they make has different, proprietary, dice! lol) I love Legion for what it is , but I see the potential of what it could be if they released deeper, more complicated 40K-esque rules. ( Not to say I think they should change the game, at all, from what it is now. I think for the health of the game, the simplicity, ease of access to both the casual and the competitive play, as well as the hobby side they should maintain it exactly as it is. But IF they ever released a hardcore alternate version via codex, which mirrored GW's systems, charts, and depth, I'd buy the **** out of them. I like number crunchy games.)

1. Free rules are what makes this game good. GW loves making morons buy new books every 2-3 years for a rules update. It's an atrocious business cycle.

2. 40k rules are not deep. Their game mechanics boil down to move and shoot/melee. It's essentially a combo dice simulator at this point. I've played 40k since 3rd ed, and it is not a tactically valuable game. Don't confuse volume of rules with depth.

3. The one thing 40k does have, is variety. There are lots of different factions, and lots of different unit types. Legion is limited to 4 factions, 3 of which are humans. So they kinda feel the same-ish.

the basic rules for 40k are free. nobody needs to buy the rulebook.

the only book you need to buy for 40k is an army codex. which is the same concept as FFG selling a yearly updated card pack for each faction.

where 40k rips people off is by making them buy space marines, then releasing better space marines, and making people buy space marines all over again because their old space marines are trash.

@jocke01 No, instead you have to reference multiple pages of a book to get the rules for the models. Having a book that doesn't notify or automatically update can cause as much if not more confusion if the rules are not well organized.

The physical cards still work fine for casual play, not everyone cares about the most recent errata or they would be checking the website for the updated RRG and see the updated cards.

I don't think wargames are going to change all that much. Selling physical books is the main/only way some companies make money off of their ruleset if they don't also produce miniatures. Updates do not make money for the game, only the initial sales of the rules. The game doesn't have to "update quickly" unless it is a competitive game. Casual games are often modified by individual playgroups for balance in their particular meta, and there balance isn't as important to many players as setting.

My guess based off of the interview and past comments/actions taken is that this will be Legions first and maybe last massive points change. Their big push to fix the older factions once and for all and level the playing field.

Sounds like FFG does not like to make any changes once the product ships, and only recently the company started to change their views. Also looks like they justify the changes by saying its only for pro play and casual players will never need to look at the PDFs. And if that is the price we have to pay for a new and improved airspeeder I'll take it.

1 hour ago, jocke01 said:

Using digital tools like the x-wing app (a better one though) they have the option to change anything on the units. Speed, dice, add weapons, remove weapons. That would be the best IMO. However even if we don't go this way, legion is already doing what x-wing 1.0 did and I don't think people will like what comes next. Will have to see what happens though.

Legion so far feels like they love to repeat the mistakes of both Armada and X-wing 1.0. This yearly points change can be their way of avoiding the worse those games had to offer. After the interview I am very excited with what he said since they seem to really be going for a reset this time around.