12 hours ago, KommanderKeldoth said:

I am so here for you and your house rule set that you are developing live before our eyes, but maybe you should start a new thread for it? This one is supposed to be about the Alex Davy interview and point change speculation. 🤓

7 hours ago, SubOctavian said:

But...but how am I supposed to be a couch game designer then? 🤔

Really can't win on these forums. The thread discussion turned to the idea printing books for rebalances. Someone commented about how bad people want to turn Legion to 40k. I reply to that saying I understand why and that I'd like a deeper version of Legion too. I'm asked to extrapolate on what deeper means in terms of the mechanics. I do extrapolate on what that could be aaaaand then get told this isn't the place for the discussion and laughed at as a "couch designer. Some people just get off on being rude I guess.

Fine. Consider my explanation over. Back to the thread subject.


Oh boy who's excited for that there clone nerf, eh? Oh oh oh and existing armor unit's getting buffed? Neat stuff.

2 hours ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Really can't win on these forums. The thread discussion turned to the idea printing books for rebalances. Someone commented about how bad people want to turn Legion to 40k. I reply to that saying I understand why and that I'd like a deeper version of Legion too. I'm asked to extrapolate on what deeper means in terms of the mechanics. I do extrapolate on what that could be aaaaand then get told this isn't the place for the discussion and laughed at as a "couch designer. Some people just get off on being rude I guess.

Fine. Consider my explanation over. Back to the thread subject.


Oh boy who's excited for that there clone nerf, eh? Oh oh oh and existing armor unit's getting buffed? Neat stuff.

This tantrum is unbecoming. The first person literally said "I love what you're doing, why don't you make a whole thread devoted to it?" and the second person made a joke that you took much greater offense to than is reasonable. Go make your thread about a version of Legion that ticks all your boxes and have fun doing what you like. You're not a ******* persecuted martyr.

28 minutes ago, arnoldrew said:

This tantrum is unbecoming. The first person literally said "I love what you're doing, why don't you make a whole thread devoted to it?" and the second person made a joke that you took much greater offense to than is reasonable. Go make your thread about a version of Legion that ticks all your boxes and have fun doing what you like. You're not a ******* persecuted martyr.

Explaining the thread of comments that lead to the subject I was on to one person, then calling the other rude for being sarcastic about the discussion in general before agreeing to the terms asked of me and redirecting the conversation to the thread theme qualifies as a tantrum? I literally did what they asked.

Text doesn't come with tone, so whatever, interpret as you will, but there's no tantrum mate.


Again, seriously, how bout them clone nerfs?

1 hour ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Again, seriously, how bout them clone nerfs?

Fingers crossed it is not too severe. We do not have other corp units to switch to at the moment.

25 minutes ago, codytx2 said:

Fingers crossed it is not too severe. We do not have other corp units to switch to at the moment.

Agreed, but I'm not too worried. FFG has a long history of using a gentle touch. I'm excited to see how it plays out. I spoke to the FLGS owner about the exclusive Luke. We're using one of them as a prize kit at the next tournament we're able to run. I'm hoping that will incentivize a large pool of players and let us get a good look at post-nerf clones.

6 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Agreed, but I'm not too worried. FFG has a long history of using a gentle touch. I'm excited to see how it plays out. I spoke to the FLGS owner about the exclusive Luke. We're using one of them as a prize kit at the next tournament we're able to run. I'm hoping that will incentivize a large pool of players and let us get a good look at post-nerf clones.

I am too if there will be more vehicles. More unit upgrades being taken. More diversity all around for everyone. Since supports seem to all be going down too I'd really like their cap to be raised to 4.

5 minutes ago, codytx2 said:

I'd really like their cap to be raised to 4.

That could create a neat powershift. Though, I'm not sure how I feel about Tuan +ATRT lists with a cap of 4. lol

7 minutes ago, codytx2 said:

I am too if there will be more vehicles. More unit upgrades being taken. More diversity all around for everyone. Since supports seem to all be going down too I'd really like their cap to be raised to 4.

Quadruple bikes!

8 minutes ago, KommanderKeldoth said:

Quadruple bikes!

I'm just imagining The Double AAT Quad STAP list now mmmmmmmmmmmmm

18 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

That could create a neat powershift. Though, I'm not sure how I feel about Tuan +ATRT lists with a cap of 4. lol

As much as I think the units would cap themselves because of objectives someone has already thought about 6 Tauns or

8 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

I'm just imagining The Double AAT Quad STAP list now mmmmmmmmmmmmm

how crazy CIS could be lol.

2 minutes ago, codytx2 said:

As much as I think the units would cap themselves because of objectives someone has already thought about 6 Tauns or

how crazy CIS could be lol.

I mean, even the legal version of the T-series commander 2x AAT 3x STAP lists are scary by numbers alone. lol

8 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

I mean, even the legal version of the T-series commander 2x AAT 3x STAP lists are scary by numbers alone. lol

I was just on table top admiral looking at that. 6 activations and only 614 points.

For rebels you could do 1x rebel officer, 3x rebel troopers, & 7x tauntauns all naked exactly 800 points. Pick whatever objective you want you'll be shredded anyway lol.

3 minutes ago, codytx2 said:

I was just on table top admiral looking at that. 6 activations and only 614 points.

For rebels you could do 1x rebel officer, 3x rebel troopers, & 7x tauntauns all naked exactly 800 points. Pick whatever objective you want you'll be shredded anyway lol.

Right? I had played with the idea of getting a second AAT when they launched, but I had presumed when they were available it wouldn't be so viable. Now, I'm considering it again, but our LGS is sold out.

6 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Right? I had played with the idea of getting a second AAT when they launched, but I had presumed when they were available it wouldn't be so viable. Now, I'm considering it again, but our LGS is sold out.

I haven't played against one but the base weapons look pretty powerful and useful against any unit type. They seem like one of the better options if you wanted to run 2.

Rather than raising the cap on STAPs, I think id rather see speeders like STAPs be able to capture objectives.

Theres no good reason why a guy on a speeder bike cant stop, get off his speederbike, and capture an objective. Since the entire point of a speeder bike is to be a personal transport vehicle.

Speederbikes are supposed to transport an individual from point A to point B. theyre not supposed to keep fly around at full speed unable to stop. compulsory move has never made sense.

3 minutes ago, Khobai said:

Rather than raising the cap on STAPs, I think id rather see speeders like STAPs be able to capture objectives.

Theres no good reason why a guy on a speeder bike cant stop, get off his speederbike, and capture an objective. Since the entire point of a speeder bike is to be a personal transport vehicle.

Speederbikes are supposed to transport an individual from point A to point B. theyre not supposed to keep fly around at full speed unable to stop. compulsory move has never made sense.

Yeah I've always thought there should have been a keyword for stopping and starting speeders. I don't hate how wheel mode on Dekkas work. Maybe some derivative of that?

8 minutes ago, Khobai said:

Rather than raising the cap on STAPs, I think id rather see speeders like STAPs be able to capture objectives.

Theres no good reason why a guy on a speeder bike cant stop, get off his speederbike, and capture an objective. Since the entire point of a speeder bike is to be a personal transport vehicle.

Speederbikes are supposed to transport an individual from point A to point B. theyre not supposed to keep fly around at full speed unable to stop. compulsory move has never made sense.

I've always thought so too but as more neutral sets come out with more objective cards and CW gets more unit types in the long run this may end up being more of a feature than a bug.

10 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Yeah I've always thought there should have been a keyword for stopping and starting speeders. I don't hate how wheel mode on Dekkas work. Maybe some derivative of that?

I think just make compulsory move optional for speeders.

If you choose to go into speeder mode you have to take a free max speed move but cant capture objectives that turn.

If you choose not to go into speeder mode you dont get the free max speed move but can capture objectives that turn.

Droidekas could work similarly with wheel mode (they can only capture objectives if they didnt use wheel mode that turn).

I also think all speeders should automatically get the outmaneuver keyword as well as agile/defend so they get a free dodge token each turn. speeders could definitely use a slight defensive bump.

2 minutes ago, Khobai said:

I think just make compulsory move optional for speeders.

If you choose to go into speeder mode you still get a free move but cant capture objectives that turn.

If you choose not to go into speeder you dont get a free move but can capture objectives.

I'd think if they went that route not being in speeder mode should also remove any cover X keyword and grant stationary. Considering how big these vehicles are, I couldn't see a unit walking their bikes/ATRTs/STAPs and so on around lol

yeah speeders could gain cover 1 only while in speeder mode and lose cover 1 when not in speeder mode. thatd be fine

I still think speeders need outmaneuver and a free dodge token though. speeder bikes die way too fast without armor and cover 1 just doesnt protect them enough. theres too many models with keywords that ignore cover right now.

Maybe they should also change the blast keyword so instead of ignoring all cover you have blast 1 and blast 2. Because blast weapons completely wreck speeders right now. At least sharpshooter has 1 and 2 so it doesnt always take away all of your cover.

12 hours ago, Khobai said:

yeah speeders could gain cover 1 only while in speeder mode and lose cover 1 when not in speeder mode. thatd be fine

I still think speeders need outmaneuver and a free dodge token though. speeder bikes die way too fast without armor and cover 1 just doesnt protect them enough. theres too many models with keywords that ignore cover right now.

Maybe they should also change the blast keyword so instead of ignoring all cover you have blast 1 and blast 2. Because blast weapons completely wreck speeders right now. At least sharpshooter has 1 and 2 so it doesnt always take away all of your cover.

I've always thought that the Speeder keyword should have the effect of canceling x number of hits (not unlike Armor X). Like its supposed to represent speed, so it should be separate from cover (obstruction). It would make speeders harder to damage and make it so sharpshooter or blast doesn't just obviate it.

Armor doesnt stack with cover though.

So why should speeders get a keyword that stacks with cover?

I definitely think its deliberate that there arnt defensive keywords that stack with cover. And thats exactly why speeders get cover X, specifically to avoid the super stacking of similar but different mitigation effects.

thats why I think giving speeders outmaneuver and a free dodge is a good compromise. since dodge and cover are already allowed to stack you avoid that issue entirely. I do think the speeders should probably get the free dodge token during the command phase though so maybe give them defend 1 or a new keyword that just flat out gives them a dodge token during the command phase.

I could also maybe see an argument for Cover 3 being added to the game to help combat the sheer amount of sharpshooter X going around. Cover 3 wouldnt be something normally granted by terrain but could be achieved by units with Cover 1 or low profile when theyre inside heavy terrain. That would certainly help units like Scout Troopers as well.

3 hours ago, Khobai said:

Armor doesnt stack with cover though.

It basically does if you have an Armor X value and not just Armor.

If I have my B2 droids (Armor 1) in heavy cover, three regular hits will be canceled over all. They'll be canceled during two different steps of the attack sequence but it still "stacks".

Your idea works too. The advantage of dodge tokens is that they get used up so that even with Outmaneuver you cant be untouchable for too long.

4 hours ago, Khobai said:

Armor doesnt stack with cover though.

So why should speeders get a keyword that stacks with cover?

I definitely think its deliberate that there arnt defensive keywords that stack with cover. And thats exactly why speeders get cover X, specifically to avoid the super stacking of similar but different mitigation effects.

thats why I think giving speeders outmaneuver and a free dodge is a good compromise. since dodge and cover are already allowed to stack you avoid that issue entirely. I do think the speeders should probably get the free dodge token during the command phase though so maybe give them defend 1 or a new keyword that just flat out gives them a dodge token during the command phase.

I could also maybe see an argument for Cover 3 being added to the game to help combat the sheer amount of sharpshooter X going around. Cover 3 wouldnt be something normally granted by terrain but could be achieved by units with Cover 1 or low profile when theyre inside heavy terrain. That would certainly help units like Scout Troopers as well.

Cover cuts the value of impact against armor, because you are now forced to get at least Cover +1 results to have any go through. And, the cover can reduce the number of hits that would have been converted to crits by impact.

Quote

If I have my B2 droids (Armor 1) in heavy cover, three regular hits will be canceled over all. They'll be canceled during two different steps of the attack sequence but it still "stacks".

I guess thats true if its Armor X. However youre still susceptible to Impact.

If speeders did get a new keyword that stacked with cover it would probably need a counter-keyword similar to impact that negated it as well. If there was a counter-keyword it would probably be fine. But I dont think speeders should be able to mitigate 3-4 damage before any goes through without any counterplay.

I think its simpler just to give them outmaneuver and a free dodge. Or increase the max allowable cover upto 3. Fix speeders by using the existing mechanics instead of creating new ones.