I will always question why they did not use any online resource for the game. I mean I get why, but it feels like really bad foresight. Made more noticable now that they admited two factions are not up to snuff. And I love the points changes, but man they should not have had points on the cards or something. Like an official card/point database maybe? Even thought in some artwork on the cards. Sort of like how League of Legends has a site just on lore/artwork https://universe.leagueoflegends.com/en_US/.

This debate always reminds me of this event in reverse. FFG we have phones stop printing even thing on the cards!:

@Caimheul1313

I agree somewhat on the only competitive players. However I have heard that in both x wing and armada. Both games in my local area/country made the games harder for new players since most established groups is/was tournament focused so the learning curve and buy in both in learning the game, meta and erratas + buying expansions for fix cards was high. So if you only play at home it's no problem, but in organised groups is usually standard with the tournament rules. I just don't want legion to go through the same cycles as x-wing 1.0, but it's probably to late to change it. I still enjoy the game though. Maybe their new bombshell errata/point changes will convince me otherwise.

1 hour ago, lologrelol said:

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.

I disagree on the first part. The IP makes this game good. Had they released this system for something less mainstream, it wouldn’t generate the attention it does. Which leads me to the second point. It wouldn’t because the rules are closer to a board game than TTWGs. Proprietary dice, cardboard tokens, printed reference cards. All of these things are fine, but to say Warhammers rules aren’t deeper than Legion’s is a little ridiculous. Even just in the attack sequence we see a larger berth of thought. Not to say it’s tactically viable, but Legion really isn’t either.

They do have variety, I’ll agree there.

All I’m saying is this, I don’t care if it’s a mirror of 40k, or something that’s as number crunchy as Shadowrun, I’d be very interested in the refined version of Legion. Something deeper than, “ha ha white dice go blanks”.

legion is good, but if they took the time to release a more advanced rule set, I’d buy in.

32 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

legion is good, but if they took the time to release a more advanced rule set, I’d buy in.

1. I wasn't saying that free rules alone make the game good.

2. Whether a game is more towards a 'board game' isn't really an issue. The tokens are just necessary components for tracking effects and alternately activated units. Cards are just an alternate way of keeping track of stats, rather than a printed army roster or book. There is no real inherent reason why these things are worse. Maybe they clutter the table a little, but it doesn't make it any less a war-game.

3. Just because you have additional steps in the attack sequence doesn't make 40k deeper. 40k essentially boils down to moving and attacking, placement to secure objectives. With a limited number of turns to achieve those things. The first player also still has a large advantage, as players activate whole armies. The more you kill, the more you put your opponent on the back foot, as they will have less of their army to respond in the subsequent go. The ranges are also longer, so most things are in striking range at the beginning.

Conversely, legion requires you to move a lot in the first few turns to set up advantageous range bands. It also offers more choice when a unit is activated, you can also aim, dodge, standby, refresh. Because some abilities are exhaust, you have to be picky when you use some abilities. Alternate activation also means you can't get annihilated by alpha strikes, or at least they are mitigated somewhat.

I don't think legion is vastly more superior to 40k. Both suffer from the large amount of randomness built into their dice roll sequences. Swingy dice can destroy even the best commanders. But legion is still a valid tabletop war-game, with a lot of good traits.

4. What do you mean by a more advanced rule set? What would be in that that makes the game deeper?

7 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

@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.

no you dont. you can use apps like battlescribe to build your army and print out your army list and all it stats and rules. just like how people use tabletop admiral for legion.

I dont use cards when I play legion (except for the command cards). because cards are a complete waste of both time and take up precious tablespace. Honestly I wouldnt be opposed to FFG eliminating cards from the game entirely and instead creating a proper cellphone app for legion instead. Then they could convert everything to a living rulebook and update the game whenever they wanted.

The problem is FFG doesnt want to do whats best for its players. They want people to have to keep buying unit boxes to get cards. Its a really despicable marketing practice IMO. Thats why they dont release faction card packs or an official app for the game.

34 minutes ago, Khobai said:

no you dont. you can use apps like battlescribe to build your army and print out your army list and all it stats and rules. just like how people use tabletop admiral for legion.

I dont use cards when I play legion (except for the command cards). because cards are a complete waste of both time and take up precious tablespace. Honestly I wouldnt be opposed to FFG eliminating cards from the game entirely and instead creating a proper cellphone app for legion instead. Then they could convert everything to a living rulebook and update the game whenever they wanted.

The problem is FFG doesnt want to do whats best for its players. They want people to have to keep buying unit boxes to get cards. Its a really despicable marketing practice IMO. Thats why they dont release faction card packs or an official app for the game.

So you saying remove all the cards, and make playing the game entirely dependent on being able to connect to the internet to use an app will make the game better?

The cards are necessary to identify which units have what upgrades. 40k has very strict rules that a model has to have attachment on it to have the upgrade. Legion does not. Ffg also has not released a faction card pack, because it has no use. They did release the upgrade pack but beyond that, what unit in this game has been changed so drastically that the originally card is unusable? Snipers have range 5 instead of infinite? Eweb got rid of plodding? Small point changes? What purpose would a faction card pack have other than players trying to avoid having to buy a unit to play it?

1 hour ago, Khobai said:

no you dont. you can use apps like battlescribe to build your army and print out your army list and all it stats and rules. just like how people use tabletop admiral for legion.

I dont use cards when I play legion (except for the command cards). because cards are a complete waste of both time and take up precious tablespace. Honestly I wouldnt be opposed to FFG eliminating cards from the game entirely and instead creating a proper cellphone app for legion instead. Then they could convert everything to a living rulebook and update the game whenever they wanted.

The problem is FFG doesnt want to do whats best for its players. They want people to have to keep buying unit boxes to get cards. Its a really despicable marketing practice IMO. Thats why they dont release faction card packs or an official app for the game.

Why dont you quit then?

58 minutes ago, Khobai said:

The problem is FFG doesnt want to do whats best for its players. They want people to have to keep buying unit boxes to get cards. Its a really despicable marketing practice IMO. Thats why they dont release faction card packs or an official app for the game.

They publish all cards on their website. Nothing prevents you from printing them out and playing without the original physical copy (unless you play on a tournament). Also every single usable card of each faction is accessible in their unit boxes (or the card box). so you don't need to buy other faction expansions. That is/was NOT the case in other games (Armada, X-Wing). There are free online list builders that contain all cards so you can easily build and print full lists with all cards. FFG is not only not pursuing them legally, they even reach out to the community with interviews and community articles.

I'd call that quite customer friendly.

Please, FFG, NEVER make army books.

27 minutes ago, Vector Strike said:

Please, FFG, NEVER make army books.

I concur; I really like the card-based format of Legion. It harkens back to my early wargaming days with 40k 2nd edition when the battlefield was a covered in cards and tokens. It’s not just a nostalgia thing, either. I think having all the information in front of you is very helpful & much quicker than looking up in a book. It makes it easier to share with opponents too, since they don’t need my army book to look up what the special rules are. The primary draw in the 40k codices has always been the background for me, and Legion has that in the form of movies, books, comics, etc, anyway,

12 hours ago, jocke01 said:

@Caimheul1313

I agree somewhat on the only competitive players. However I have heard that in both x wing and armada. Both games in my local area/country made the games harder for new players since most established groups is/was tournament focused so the learning curve and buy in both in learning the game, meta and erratas + buying expansions for fix cards was high. So if you only play at home it's no problem, but in organised groups is usually standard with the tournament rules. I just don't want legion to go through the same cycles as x-wing 1.0, but it's probably to late to change it. I still enjoy the game though. Maybe their new bombshell errata/point changes will convince me otherwise.

You've described how my local GW game meta works. The local group is focused on playing tournament style games, so it is harder to join in because you need to have a tournament ready army that matches the current netlist meta. Showing up with the models you like without having studied every released book and errata/FAQ is a good way to get tabled on turn 1/2. So the army book system doesn't alleviate this issue you mention with X-wing and Armada, that's more a problem of the local group being more focused on the tournament meta than having a good time playing a game with the minis you like. Which can happen to any game with a competitive scene, I've also seen it happen with Magic the Gathering, you either study all the cards and spend a bunch of money on the latest deck list or be okay with losing even "casual" events at the store.

If FFG ever makes Army books, and I really hope they don't, I hope they do just that, print ARMY books. One for each faction that not only includes errataed cards, but various thematic lists, and detailed lore on those lists. For the Republic, do a 212th List with Obi, or 501st list with Anakin/Rex. Maybe a couple more with the generic lists, and talk about where in canon/Legends these lists were drawn from. Possibly even include a painting guide to on how to paint units in the "official" canon color schemes (using the Army Paint.... I mean, FFG Legion paint sets of course!)

It would be a blatant money grab, but it would feel like I was getting another Star Wars reference book, and not just concession to the Warhammer crowd.

6 hours ago, SailorMeni said:

8 hours ago, Khobai said:

The problem is FFG doesnt want to do whats best for its players. They want people to have to keep buying unit boxes to get cards. Its a really despicable marketing practice IMO. Thats why they dont release faction card packs or an official app for the game.

They publish all cards on their website. Nothing prevents you from printing them out and playing without the original physical copy (unless you play on a tournament). Also every single usable card of each faction is accessible in their unit boxes (or the card box). so you don't need to buy other faction expansions. That is/was NOT the case in other games (Armada, X-Wing). There are free online list builders that contain all cards so you can easily build and print full lists with all cards. FFG is not only not pursuing them legally, they even reach out to the community with interviews and community articles.

I'd call that quite customer friendly.

This right here! I come from a Warmachine background and let me tell you it was anything but customer friendly. They worked extra hard to take down anything that showed the stats of the cards which crippled any online community/homemade apps. When they switched to an online version of the game players how to buy their faction on the app. Not everything, just their own faction!!!! And the horror show of when they went to an open beta in the forums is beyond words.

Imagine if FFG told us in the forums to tell them what needs a buff. Everybody would say dewbacks, etc. FFG would then say no dewbacks are fine and start banning people who said otherwise. THEN when the patch comes out dewbacks have gotten a massive buff! Still angry about that lol!

FFG has some issues, but they are miles better then a lot of the competition.............. Would still like them to be more open about delays and whatnot.

48 minutes ago, RyantheFett said:

This right here! I come from a Warmachine background and let me tell you it was anything but customer friendly. They worked extra hard to take down anything that showed the stats of the cards which crippled any online community/homemade apps. When they switched to an online version of the game players how to buy their faction on the app. Not everything, just their own faction!!!! And the horror show of when they went to an open beta in the forums is beyond words.

Imagine if FFG told us in the forums to tell them what needs a buff. Everybody would say dewbacks, etc. FFG would then say no dewbacks are fine and start banning people who said otherwise. THEN when the patch comes out dewbacks have gotten a massive buff! Still angry about that lol!

FFG has some issues, but they are miles better then a lot of the competition.............. Would still like them to be more open about delays and whatnot.

I am still TO THIS DAY mad about when they did the test release for Mk II and made Cryx arc nodes the same price as everyone else's because they claimed Cryx was never supposed to be able to run more arc nodes than anyone else, and players had to actually show them the page from the original Prime rulebook where it said that tons of arc nodes were key to Cryx strategy. And yeah, they fixed it in the final release, but how can their own designers have been that oblivious...

Sometimes I miss Warmachine/Hordes, but most of the time I absolutely do not.

warmachine was really innovative when it first came out

but then they dumbed the game down with MK2 and MK3 which is what killed it IMO

On 10/20/2020 at 8:46 PM, lologrelol said:

What do you mean by a more advanced rule set? What would be in that that makes the game deeper

Essentially my biggest gripe is how abstract the mechanics are.

I've gone into this before in previous threads but the whole system is so streamlined it creates abstract and profoundly annoying swings. I don't like that the functions of attacking and defending aren't delineated. For instance, and to explain what I mean, what do the weapon dice actually represent? As best I can tell they are a combination of the unit skill with the weapon and the peak weapon output. Which is why we see weapons with the same name change attack dice on different units. The question then becomes, what do the defense dice actually represent? Based on there being actions for dodging, keywords for armor, upgrade slots for training & gear, and mechanics for wounds, stun, and suppression, what does the block or surge to block actually represent? In play I've seen an AT-ST hit a unit of fleet troopers at range 2 with no cover for 9 hits (In terms of what that represents, the AT-ST hit the target, and the weapon's damage was enough to kill the unit), the fleets with no cover then rolled block or surge to block against all 9 (Because defensive dice are so abstract we can now delineate that the attack hit, had sufficient power to kill, but without dodging, being in cover, or having armor, a unit of dudes in shirts and khakis somehow prevented the damage.)

It's hard for me to say exactly what I want, I'm not a game designer so I can't speak with authority, but I've played a few games that have features I really like. If it were up to me FFG would continue to release the game as it is, but also release an alternate ruleset for advanced play, this ruleset would change how the basics of the game work. I think if I had the choice units would have hardline stats and skills that determined offensive and defensive capability. (Body, Strength, Agility, Willpower, Reaction, Intuition, Charisma, Magic) Weapons and armor would have hardline stats too. (An E-11 would always have a set damage value, an accuracy cap, and a specific AP value. Laminate armor would always have a set armor value and resistance value. )

I think the best way I could describe it would be like a lighter version of SR5e Using their D6 system too).

As an example (and please consider this is super rough, it won't be perfect), this is what a stormtrooper and rebel trooper would look like:

Stormtrooper:
4 minis
Body: 1
Strength: 1
Agility: 1
Willpower: 1 (courage)
Reaction: 1
Intuition: 1
Charisma: 0
Magic: 0

Precise (remains the same)

Unarmed combat skill (STR): 1
Ranged weapon skill (AGL): 1

E-11 blaster rifle(ranged weapon):
Range: 1-3
DV: # of attacking minis + net hits +1
ACC: # of attacking minis +1
AP: 0
Unarmed:
Range: Melee
DV: # of attacking minis + STR per mini
ACC: # of minis
AP:0
Laminate Armor:
Armor Value: 1 per mini
Resistance: 0

Rebel Trooper:
4 minis
Body: 1
Strength: 1
Agility: 1
Willpower: 1 (courage)
Reaction: 2
Intuition: 1
Charisma: 0
Magic: 0

Nimble (remains the same)

Unarmed combat skill (STR): 1
Ranged weapon skill (AGL): 1

A-280 Blaster rifle:
Range 1-3
DV: # of attacking minis + net hits +1
Accuracy: # of attacking minis +2
AP: 0
Unarmed:
Range: Melee
DV: # of attacking minis + STR per mini
ACC: # of minis
AP:0
Combat clothing:
Armor Value: 0 per mini
Resistance: 0

Combat would now look like this:

• To perform an attack, a player resolves the following steps:

1. Declare Defender: The attacking player chooses one enemy unit to attack; this enemy unit is now the defender. Then, the attacking player measures the range from the attacker’s unit leader to the closest miniature of the defender to determine the attack’s range.

2. Form Attack Pool: The attack pool consists of all the dice the attacker will roll against this defender. When forming the attack pool, players follow these substeps in order:

a. Determine Eligible Minis: Each mini in the attacker is eligible to contribute to the attack pool if that mini has line of sight to any mini in the defender.
b. Choose Weapons: The attacker can choose one weapon from each eligible mini to contribute to the attack pool. To choose a weapon, the attacker must meet all requirements indicated by that weapon’s keywords, and that weapon’s range must include the range of the attack, as determined from the attacker’s unit leader to the closest mini of the defender.
c. Gather Dice: For each eligible mini that chose a weapon, the attacker gathers dice equal to weapon skill + governing attribute .

3. Declare Additional Defender: If there are any weapons remaining that have not been added to the attack pool, the player may repeat steps 1–2, forming a separate attack pool with the new weapons.
» Each eligible mini can contribute a weapon to only one attack pool, unless it has the arsenal x keyword and can use more than one weapon during an attack.
» An attack pool can consist of dice from different weapons, but all weapons with an identical name must contribute their dice to the same attack pool.
» The dice in each attack pool should be placed near the corresponding defender.

4. Roll Attack Dice: The attacker chooses an attack pool and resolves the following substeps in order:

a. Roll Dice: The attacker rolls the dice in the attack pool.
b. Reroll Dice: The attacker can resolve any abilities that allow the attacker to reroll attack dice.
c. Add results: dice results with 5 or 6 are considered hits, calculate the total number of hits.
d. Apply weapon accuracy: Each weapon has an ACC value, your total number of hits cannot exceed this number.


5. Apply Cover: If the defender is in cover, the defender may apply cover to cancel hit results.
» A unit can apply cover only against ranged attacks.

6. Modify Attack Dice: The attacker can resolve any card abilities that modify the attack dice. Then, the defender can resolve any card abilities that modify the attack dice.

7. Roll dodge: Resolve the following substeps in order:

a. Gather Dice: The defender gathers a dice pool of their Reaction + Intuition values.
b. Apply dodge modifiers: A dodge token may be spent to add +2 dice to the dodge pool.
c. Roll Dice: The defender rolls their dodge pool.
d. Total dodges: dice results with 5 or 6 are considered dodges, calculate the total number of dodges.

8. Modify Defense Dice: The defender can resolve any card abilities that modify the defense dice. Then, the attacker can resolve any card abilities that modify the defense dice.

9. Compare Results: The attacker counts the number of hits, and the defender counts the number of dodges. Then, the defender’s total is subtracted from the attacker’s total, and if the attacker’s total is greater, the remaining hits are net hits.
» If there are no net hits the attack has successfully been dodged and the attack steps end for this pool.

10.) Soak damage: Resolve the following substeps in order:

a.) Calculate modified DV: If the attacker has at least 1 net hit they must calculate the modified damage value by using the formula under the weapons DV.
b.) Determine modified Armor Value: Substract the attacker's AP value from the defender's Armor value, this is the modified armor value.
c.) Determine damage type: If the modified armor value is higher than the modified damage value then damage is suffered in suppression, if the modified damage value is higher then damage is suffered in wounds.
d.) Gather dice: The defender gathers dice equal to their body+ modified armor value
e.) Roll dice: The defender rolls their soak pool.
f.) Calculate total damage: for each 5 or 6 result subtract 1 from the modified damage value.
g.) Suffer damage: If any damage has not been soaked in step f.) that damage is applied to the defender in either suppression or wounds based on the results from step c.)

11. Choose Additional Attack Pool: Choose Additional Attack Pool: If the attacker has an attack pool that he has not rolled, the attacker repeats steps 4–10, choosing a new attack pool and rolling it against the defender it has been assigned to.

» After resolving each attack pool, if at any point the attack dice in the attack pool produced at least one hit, the attack was ranged, and the defender is a trooper, the defender gains a suppression token.
» When an attacking unit forms multiple attack pools, resolving each attack pool is treated as an attack for all gameplay effects and abilities, however the unit is still considered to have performed only one single attack or attack action.
» An enemy unit cannot spend a standby token until each attack pool has been fully resolved.
» A unit cannot use the detonate x keyword until each attack pool has been fully resolved.

In practice

The stormtrooper with 1 aim attacks the rebel troopers with 1 dodge.

The stormtrooper unit gathers a dice pool of 8 D6 based on 4 minis each adding 2 d6 for weapon skill in ranged weapons (+1) and the governing attribute of Agility (+1).

This results in 1 hit, the stormtrooper spends an aim and uses it's precise keyword to reroll 3 dice resulting in an additional 2 hits, totaling 3 hits.

There is no cover, so the defender gathers their dodge roll pool of 3 D6. They have a dodge token so they spend it to apply +2 D6 to the dodge roll, and with nimble they gain a new dodge token.

The defender rolls a total of 5 D6 with only a single dodge result.

After comparing results the stormtroopers has 2 net hits. Using the E-11 weapon DV they calculate the modified damage value as 3. The rebel troopers have no armor value so the modified damage is higher by default, meaning any damage not soaked is suffered in wounds.

The defender gathers their soak pool of 1 D6, and manages to lower the damage by 1 wound.

The defender then suffers 2 wounds and a suppression.

That's way too lengthy for a squad-based game.

1 hour ago, costi said:

That's way too lengthy for a squad-based game.

I don’t think so. This is literally just the Shadowrun combat rules meshed into Legion format. (I just copied the RRG attack steps and changed words. The only item I added was step 10... adding a single step really isn’t that huge a change.) I play shadowrun 5e weekly and combat flies by. Really the major difference here from Legion is it delineated the attack into tangible parts. Attacker’s accuracy vs defender’s dodge, armor/body vs damage. Easy peasy.

That said, even if it was slightly more complicated, that’s EXACTLY what I said I wanted from the start. A game that isn’t just “haha white dice go blank”.

I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with the streamlined style of Legion. It’s designed to host competitive events and be played in a timely manner. I don’t want that to change. The accessibility and the IP really make this game. I’m just saying I know people, myself included, who would love a deeper more methodical version.

14 hours ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Essentially my biggest gripe is how abstract the mechanics are.

The abstraction is only really applied to the attack and defense sequence.

But I don't think adding additional steps makes the game tactically deeper.

My biggest problem with legion isnt the abstraction of combat but rather the sheer randomness of saving throws.

I HATE random saving throws. I wouldve much preferred a system with flat damage reduction instead.

1 hour ago, Khobai said:

My biggest problem with legion isnt the abstraction of combat but rather the sheer randomness of saving throws.

I HATE random saving throws. I wouldve much preferred a system with flat damage reduction instead.

Agreed.

2 hours ago, lologrelol said:

But I don't think adding additional steps makes the game tactically deeper.

Well, maybe not by itself, but using the stat opposed system I've posted in comparison to Legion's result opposed system, the game would have less abstract swing. For instance, lets use my earlier example of the AT-ST shooting at a group of fleets out in the open scoring 9 hits. A group of fleets who are defensively similar to rebel troopers would have to roll their dodge pool of Reaction+ Intuition stats (± a modifier for a dodge token) to try to avoid what they can of those hits, then using their Armor value + Body stats try to roll to soak the damage instead of suffering it. The point being, with 9 hits (likely close to the accuracy cap on an AT-ST weapon, in other words a perfect shot), the best the fleets with no cover no dodge can dodge is 3 and soak 1. Leaving 5 damage to wipe out the unit. Which, if an AT-ST makes an accurate shot like that, is what should happen 100% of the time.

Using a system where each unit has stats, each weapon has it's own damage value and accuracy(maximum number of hits), and the opposed tests use those stats instead of just opposing dice rolls, high power units can pose a real threat. Standard units can also have a real chance of weathering incoming attacks based on their ability to dodge or their armor. It changes the landscape of the game completely. Forces tactical decisions. Forces tactical usage of terrain. Punishes empty activations in list building.

2 hours ago, Khobai said:

My biggest problem with legion isnt the abstraction of combat but rather the sheer randomness of saving throws.

I HATE random saving throws. I wouldve much preferred a system with flat damage reduction instead.

43 minutes ago, lologrelol said:

Agreed.

To be fair, that's kinda exactly what I'm talking about. Saving throws, if anything should be based on the unit's inherent stats not what the enemy rolled. Even the rough system I've outlined above manages that very well.

@Darth Sanguis I think applying the armor stat over the entire unit regardless of unit size is a bad representation. Armor SHOULD be applied to each hit that doesn't get "dodged," that's literally the point of body armor, to absorb hits that would otherwise disable or kill. A failed save indicates the armor failed to do so, either because some unarmored body part was hit, or the armor wasn't sturdy enough. Stormtrooper armor doesn't fall off after the wearer has been hit a certain number of times, so should have a chance of preventing any hit from hurting the wearer. And if it DOES fall off, then it should no longer apply for the rest of the battle. Volume of fire shouldn't make every hit past a certain point guarenteed to inflict damage, just increase the odds of finding a weak point in the armor.

11 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

@Darth Sanguis I think applying the armor stat over the entire unit regardless of unit size is a bad representation. Armor SHOULD be applied to each hit that doesn't get "dodged," that's literally the point of body armor, to absorb hits that would otherwise disable or kill. A failed save indicates the armor failed to do so, either because some unarmored body part was hit, or the armor wasn't sturdy enough. Stormtrooper armor doesn't fall off after the wearer has been hit a certain number of times, so should have a chance of preventing any hit from hurting the wearer. And if it DOES fall off, then it should no longer apply for the rest of the battle. Volume of fire shouldn't make every hit past a certain point guarenteed to inflict damage, just increase the odds of finding a weak point in the armor.

I'm having flashbacks to injured Stormtrooper.

"I thought this suit was designed to make sure you were dead if you got hit..... why else would we wear em?"

35 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

@Darth Sanguis I think applying the armor stat over the entire unit regardless of unit size is a bad representation. Armor SHOULD be applied to each hit that doesn't get "dodged," that's literally the point of body armor, to absorb hits that would otherwise disable or kill. A failed save indicates the armor failed to do so, either because some unarmored body part was hit, or the armor wasn't sturdy enough. Stormtrooper armor doesn't fall off after the wearer has been hit a certain number of times, so should have a chance of preventing any hit from hurting the wearer. And if it DOES fall off, then it should no longer apply for the rest of the battle. Volume of fire shouldn't make every hit past a certain point guarenteed to inflict damage, just increase the odds of finding a weak point in the armor.

Ah this is an interesting point that I think should be clarified, the Armor and Armor X keywords would still exist. For units like stormtroopers and clones where the "armor rating" is more resistance than actual armor (laminate that we see fail to stop standard blaster bolts all the time) a chance to resist damage seems more pertinent than giving them a hard resistance. Especially given the keywords for this already exist.