I would love to see army wide themes for Rebels and Imperials. I would also like some love for Vader, Dewbacks, and Ewebs.

3 minutes ago, Bigbboyd said:

I would love to see army wide themes for Rebels and Imperials. I would also like some love for Vader, Dewbacks, and Ewebs.

Vader riding a dewback with an eweb

53 minutes ago, Derrault said:

Problem: Mathematically it’s already superior to all other Stormtrooper weapons vs any unit with Armor. You might not like it, but it’s still better.

So, why errata instead of changing the points for tournaments to cajole players to use it? Errata is an extreme thing to do for something that is ultimately just not being used due to player preference, not because it’s not good.

And the AT-ST has weak point rear, while the Saber has weak point rear and sides, no? And the AAT has weak point 2 rear, a pretty massive disadvantage.

Weak point rear, for a range 4 artillery piece is meaningless. The AAT might as well have Weak point Rear 1000. As for the Saber, Weak Sides can be an issue, but it takes 3 attacks from the side of a Saber for it to have the same expected health an ATST has. Usually, these vehicles are sitting far away and shooting at Range 4 (which the ATST can't really do. It needs to get to be range 3) so the weak points aren't really an issue. Regardless, it has Outmaneuver natively, and has many opportunities to get free Dodges to use it (Padme, Vet Clone Pilot, Plo Kloon). Combine that with Aggressive Tactics for the occasional Surge token, and the Saber is waaay more survivable than the ATST.

3 hours ago, Khobai said:

fleet troopers are fine though. And they do get used in specific lists.

they are a glass cannon unit. glass cannon units are supposed to die quickly. thats the glass part. the cannon part is the fact they do way more damage than any other corps unit.

you seem to think fleet troopers should do more damage than anything else but shouldnt give up anything in return. thats not how it works. they trade defense and range for more offense; and tradeoffs are what keep the game balanced. fleet troopers are very close to where they need to be.

the problem with scout troopers is they die even faster than fleet troopers do because they only get a 4-man unit size and the heavy weapon is too expensive to be worth it. if the cost of the heavy weapon was reduced for scout troopers and they could reasonably run a 5 man unit their survivability would be noticeably better.

scout troopers definitely should not have a red save though. because theyre a glass cannon unit in the same vein as fleet troopers. scout troopers trade away their red save in exchange for doing way better damage. working as intended. the 4-man unit size and the fact the heavy weapon isnt worth taking is the problem with scout troopers and thats what needs to be fixed.

but one thing glass cannon units do share in common is that theyre all highly dependent on terrain. but thats more a problem with board setup than anything else. so yeah the board setup rules could definitely be tweaked a bit to be more accommodating towards units like fleet troopers and scout troopers.

I also think a keyword like stealth should be added to the game. units with stealth could reduce the range weapons can fire at them. So a unit with stealth 1 could only be shot at by range 4 weapons if theyre at range 3. And range 3 weapons could only shoot at them if theyre at range 2. Stealth is a keyword rebel units like pathfinders could desperately use. And it might fit on scouttroopers too.

The occupier tank is the long range vehicle for Imperials. And the occupier tank certainly needs a buff to make it better in that role. Would like to see the occupier tank get an ordnance slot or an artillery style weapon option. Or even just the option to carry a stormtrooper with an HH-12 since everybody has extra HH-12s they can glue on their occupier tank.

The AT-ST should be more in-your-face though like it is in return of the jedi. The AT-ST should have high offensive output and high survivability but limited range. I think arsenal 3 but limited to the 1-2 range band is perfect for the AT-ST.

I also would like to see the AT-ST go upto 12 health to be more on par with the Saber Tank. But thats probably asking too much.

Maybe in your local meta Fleets appear, but I've never seen them taken seriously in competitive play from the day they released. Most competitive Rebel players take naked Troopers, or take the DLT. The problem with the Fleets is NOT that they don't hit hard enough. In fact, I believe they still hit the hardest out of any unit in the entire game for their price. They hit HARD, but they die too quickly for it to matter. Also, their courage 1 is completely debilitating, as 1 measly suppresion can essentially render the unit worthless as it usually needs to shoot and move. Both Fleets and Scout Troopers were meant to fill this role, and have not been taken seriously since the day they released (in competitive play, not casual play). It seems to me that FFG finally cracked the code with B2s. B2s are extremely similarly to Fleets, but their differences make all the, well, difference. Their courage of 2 combined with Droid trooper makes them almost impossible to suppress and their health of 2 Hits per model, combined with Aggressive Tactics and Armor 1 makes them waaaay more survivable than Fleets or Scouts. The only thing is their attack is not as devestating as the Fleets. So the B2s trade a little bit of offense to be far more tanky and effective. Both Scouts and Fleets hit super, super hard, but they die instantly and so aren't functional at the competitive level. Units need a good mix of offense and defense. Also, FFG thought Low Profile and Ready would be much better keywords than they actually are. Both Fleets and Scouts need help. If they made Scouts more expensive for the Red die, I'd be fine with it, but making them and/or Fleets cheaper doesn't really solve their problems. They are both all offense and no defense, so they just disintegrate, and if you rolled poorly on the one attack you get with them, you just wasted 67-88 points. Now Fleets have the added problem that their courage is only 1, which for that unit alone makes them unusable, and at least the Scouts have Courage 2. If Scouts had red dice and cost 100 (withe the Sniper), I think that'd be fair. So I'm fine with that adjustment if they made it, but as is, both Scouts and Fleets just die way too easily to be usable in competitive play.

i also want to add that I love all the lightsaber forms they added to the game. I just wish the would give Vader Djem so or Luke Ataru. Personally I would have made Djem so mastery more about overpowering the opponent versus how they currently designed it. Maybe anakin gets a free aim when he swings? Or the defender can’t spend surge tokens. It’s too defensive the way it is now.

5 minutes ago, Zeph01 said:

i also want to add that I love all the lightsaber forms they added to the game. I just wish the would give Vader Djem so or Luke Ataru. Personally I would have made Djem so mastery more about overpowering the opponent versus how they currently designed it. Maybe anakin gets a free aim when he swings? Or the defender can’t spend surge tokens. It’s too defensive the way it is now.

Agreed. It kinda feels like better Soresu. I would have preferred it allowing you to reroll a die when attacking for free as an example.

1 hour ago, Khobai said:

Any upside to the HH12 is outweighed by the downsides of it having exhaust and cumbersome. It is bad.

Furthermore, despite the fact the HH12 is "mathematically superior" than other weapons vs armor, the fact remains its absolutely terrible vs armor. Its not good at all in an anti-armor role.

Ever try firing an HH12 against a saber tank? You do like 1 damage. Its pathetic. Players dont use it because its bad at anti-armor. It is a bad weapon. period.

You are literally better off sticking impact grenades on your troops than using an HH-12. And when impact grenades are a better option you know theres something wrong.

You neglected to mention the saber tank has outmaneuver and can pull dodge tokens off friendly models as well as use Plo Koon to get 2 dodge tokens.

The AT-ST is way less survivable than the Saber Tank. That is a fact.

And weak point 2 rear is not a massive disadvantage unless youre driving backwards at the enemy. How else is the enemy going to get behind your range 4 tank? It doesnt happen unless you do something incredibly stupid.

Literally the only conceivable situation where rear weak point 2 is a disadvantage is if an airspeeder gets ignored then gets incredibly lucky and somehow manages to pivot the AAT with a harpoon. And if you cant beat someone using Airspeeders with CIS youve got bigger problems than your AAT having weak rear armor.

As I said, you might not like cumbersome stylistically, but the weapon itself is significantly more effective thanks to the extra Impact (and more dice means you have a higher maximum damage as well).

And, frankly, you’re just wrong about it not having an effect. The HH-12 itself adds 1.5 average hits; so you’re looking at 3-4 hits. That’s not bad, but if you’re looking for a single trooper unit to cap a tank, you’re being delusional.

21 minutes ago, SirCormac said:

Weak point rear, for a range 4 artillery piece is meaningless. The AAT might as well have Weak point Rear 1000. As for the Saber, Weak Sides can be an issue, but it takes 3 attacks from the side of a Saber for it to have the same expected health an ATST has. Usually, these vehicles are sitting far away and shooting at Range 4 (which the ATST can't really do. It needs to get to be range 3) so the weak points aren't really an issue. Regardless, it has Outmaneuver natively, and has many opportunities to get free Dodges to use it (Padme, Vet Clone Pilot, Plo Kloon). Combine that with Aggressive Tactics for the occasional Surge token, and the Saber is waaay more survivable than the ATST.

Cavalry, anything fast or with infiltrate is on point to give them a bad day.

1 hour ago, Derrault said:

As I said, you might not like cumbersome stylistically, but the weapon itself is significantly more effective thanks to the extra Impact (and more dice means you have a higher maximum damage as well).

It doesnt matter if the HH12 has higher impact. It is still bad at killing tanks.

And you absolutely do NOT get 3-4 hits against a saber tank with an HH12.

Here is the math for 5 stormtroopers+ HH12 vs 1 saber tank (red save with armor).

# Hits Probability (%)
0 12.9334
1 32.5438
2 33.1722
3 16.5379
4 4.1796
5 0.5884
6 0.0425
7 0.0021
8 0.0001

Average: 1.684328
Median: 2
Mode: 2
Standard Deviation: 1.06583544153211

Look 1.68 hits on average lol. And if the saber tank uses a dodge token that goes down to 0.68 hits on average.

The HH12 is bad. Its bad because its cumbersome. Its bad because its an exhaust weapon. Its bad because it sucks at the anti-armor role.

Its not about not liking it "stylistically". It is just plain bad at anti-armor.

For 5 points I can put impact grenades on stormtroopers and do more damage than the HH12. Its funny because its true.

Quote

And, frankly, you’re just wrong about it not having an effect. The HH-12 itself adds 1.5 average hits; so you’re looking at 3-4 hits. That’s not bad, but if you’re looking for a single trooper unit to cap a tank, you’re being delusional.

I am not wrong. I showed you the math.

Youre also completely forgetting about the Saber Tank's dodges as well. If you want to have any chance of taking down a Saber Tank then you have to be able to get through at least 1 dodge per turn if not more. The HH12 is not equipped to do that either.

I do not expect a single trooper unit to cap a tank. But even three trooper units couldnt cap a tank if they all had the flaming garbage launcher that is the HH12. And giving cumbersome to multiple units is a great way to fail at the bigger picture of capturing objectives.

The HH12 is the absolute worst stormtrooper weapon. And its almost certainly going to see a buff in the upcoming rules update because of how worthless it is.

Quote

Cavalry, anything fast or with infiltrate is on point to give them a bad day.

no it wont. because they still wont get behind the AAT.

infiltrate is 18" distance. you cannot get behind an AAT with infiltrate. unless your opponent ignores your infiltrators for 2 whole turnsa and lets them walk behind their AAT. Who DOES that?! nobody is going to do that.

and what cavalry? you mean like speeder bikes? you think speeder bikes will survive long enough to fly deep into the enemy deployment zone and to shoot an AAT in the rear? it will never happen. speeder bikes are among the easiest things to kill in the game and nobody is going to ignore the chance to kill them if you try to beeline for their AAT.

rear weakpoint 2 might sound bad on paper but in reality its a non-concern.

28 minutes ago, Khobai said:

It doesnt matter if the HH12 has higher impact. It is still bad at killing tanks.

And you absolutely do NOT get 3-4 hits against a saber tank with an HH12.

Here is the math for 5 stormtroopers+ HH12 vs 1 saber tank (red save with armor).

# Hits Probability (%)
0 12.9334
1 32.5438
2 33.1722
3 16.5379
4 4.1796
5 0.5884
6 0.0425
7 0.0021
8 0.0001

Average: 1.684328
Median: 2
Mode: 2
Standard Deviation: 1.06583544153211

Look 1.68 hits on average lol. And if the saber tank uses a dodge token that goes down to 0.68 hits on average.

The HH12 is bad. Its bad because its cumbersome. Its bad because its an exhaust weapon. Its bad because it sucks at the anti-armor role.

Its not about not liking it "stylistically". It is just plain bad.

For 5 points I can put impact grenades on the stormtroopers and do more damage than the HH12. Its funny because its true.

3 black dice average 1.875 (5/8 each), plus the 5 white dice that are 1.875 (3/8 each); with zero aim tokens you’re looking at 3.75. That’s between 3 and 4 hits.

edit: hits aren’t wounds, I think that might be where you’re confused.

huh? hits that dont wound dont mean anything.i dont care if you get 3-4 hits with your HH12. that means nothing.

all that matters is how many of those hits get past the dodge tokens and red armor saves of the saber tank.

and youre lucky if 1 hit gets through. youre not killing a saber tank if you can only do 1 wound a turn.

1 hour ago, SirCormac said:

Maybe in your local meta Fleets appear, but I've never seen them taken seriously in competitive play from the day they released. Most competitive Rebel players take naked Troopers, or take the DLT. The problem with the Fleets is NOT that they don't hit hard enough. In fact, I believe they still hit the hardest out of any unit in the entire game for their price. They hit HARD, but they die too quickly for it to matter. Also, their courage 1 is completely debilitating, as 1 measly suppresion can essentially render the unit worthless as it usually needs to shoot and move. Both Fleets and Scout Troopers were meant to fill this role, and have not been taken seriously since the day they released (in competitive play, not casual play). It seems to me that FFG finally cracked the code with B2s. B2s are extremely similarly to Fleets, but their differences make all the, well, difference. Their courage of 2 combined with Droid trooper makes them almost impossible to suppress and their health of 2 Hits per model, combined with Aggressive Tactics and Armor 1 makes them waaaay more survivable than Fleets or Scouts. The only thing is their attack is not as devestating as the Fleets. So the B2s trade a little bit of offense to be far more tanky and effective. Both Scouts and Fleets hit super, super hard, but they die instantly and so aren't functional at the competitive level. Units need a good mix of offense and defense. Also, FFG thought Low Profile and Ready would be much better keywords than they actually are. Both Fleets and Scouts need help. If they made Scouts more expensive for the Red die, I'd be fine with it, but making them and/or Fleets cheaper doesn't really solve their problems. They are both all offense and no defense, so they just disintegrate, and if you rolled poorly on the one attack you get with them, you just wasted 67-88 points. Now Fleets have the added problem that their courage is only 1, which for that unit alone makes them unusable, and at least the Scouts have Courage 2. If Scouts had red dice and cost 100 (withe the Sniper), I think that'd be fair. So I'm fine with that adjustment if they made it, but as is, both Scouts and Fleets just die way too easily to be usable in competitive play.

if they cheapen the rebel officer upgrade and cheapen fleets by perhaps 4 points I think it'd be a good mixture. A 1 per army CQC specialist corps unit could be fun to play with. not to mention a price reduction would make them less risky to bring before over a naked rebel trooper unit

Just now, Lightning Dust said:

if they cheapen the rebel officer upgrade and cheapen fleets by perhaps 4 points I think it'd be a good mixture. A 1 per army CQC specialist corps unit could be fun to play with. not to mention a price reduction would make them less risky to bring before over a naked rebel trooper unit

Back in the day I put the officer on Fleets and really enjoyed it. It gives them the courage they need and en extra HP, but for 87 points it is a steep price to pay. So I agree 100%, if this combo goes down in price, Fleets may have a place.

the problem with fleet troopers is that theyre terrain dependent. same with scout troopers. they only work if theres enough terrain to get them into range 2 without suffering casualties.

on boards with accommodating terrain they can be completely devastating.

so I dont think its entirely fair to blame the units. the terrain setup rules are just as much to blame IMO. both rebels and CIS are way more dependent on terrain than imperials or GAR because of their white armor saves. Terrain setup can absolutely make or break games. And I think thats a problem.

2 hours ago, Khobai said:

Vader riding a dewback with an eweb

Oh man, I’d paint this one red, white and blue. This screams ‘Murica to me.

As for the RRG, I’m so far removed from the meta I have no idea. Just give me the new rules and some clarification on other bits. Maybe give Vader a better price point.

3 hours ago, Khobai said:

Vader riding a dewback with an eweb

Sure, why not. If Mando can do it, surely Vader can go Carl Weathers with thE EWEB on the back of a Dewback.....

1 hour ago, Khobai said:

huh? hits that dont wound dont mean anything.i dont care if you get 3-4 hits with your HH12. that means nothing.

all that matters is how many of those hits get past the dodge tokens and red armor saves of the saber tank.

and youre lucky if 1 hit gets through. youre not killing a saber tank if you can only do 1 wound a turn.

Technically it’s about 2 wounds average, which is well above what you’re getting out of the other heavies, and again, this is off a dirt cheap infantry unit, so that’s pretty good

1 hour ago, ScummyRebel said:

Oh man, I’d paint this one red, white and blue. This screams ‘Murica to me.

Just needs a giant "Palpatine / Vader for Life" flag...

1 hour ago, Derrault said:

Technically it’s about 2 wounds average, which is well above what you’re getting out of the other heavies, and again, this is off a dirt cheap infantry unit, so that’s pretty good

its 1.68 wounds average. i already showed the results from legion dice roller. the saber tank will likely be able to pull off at least one dodge token from somewhere though. so that lowers it to 0.68 on average. thats garbage. you will not kill a saber tank doing 0.68 wounds a turn. there just arnt enough turns in the game. Even three stormtrooper units with HH12s are statistically unlikely to kill a Saber Tank before the game ends. Not when you consider that the stormtroopers will be suffering casualties in return and that at some point your stormtroopers are going to have to move which means you cant fire the HH12 on those turns.

its true that the HH12 does better damage than what other heavy weapons would do but its still not enough damage to reasonably kill a saber tank. I wouldnt shoot at a saber tank with other heavy weapons either. its a waste of time.

damaging a saber tank and not killing it doesnt help you win the game. especially when those attacks couldve otherwise killed off clonetroopers instead which actually does help you win since it reduces the number of opposing scoring units.

so even though the HH12 does more damage to armor than other heavy weapons, the fact remains the HH12 is still highly ineffective against armor and not worth using. youre better off just ignoring the tank entirely and focusing down clonetroopers and trying to kill rex.

The HH12 definitely needs an anti-armor buff (and exhaust needs to be removed). And based on what was hinted in the interview it sounds like its going to get buffed somehow. Even if they just get rid of exhaust it would be better than it is now. Although id really like to see the HH12 get pierce 1. Heavy weapons struggle greatly getting through the red armor save of the saber tank so pierce 1 would help with that.

Maybe even a new keyword that only gives pierce 1 against vehicles and doesnt work on non-vehicles. That way the HH12's anti-armor role stays focused.

Dooku. Unpopular opinion but as the 2nd most expensive character in the game he's kinda underwhelming.

Same goes with Cad Bane, and of course Chewie, Han, Leia and the rest of the Rebel B team.

And let's hope Iden and the clones get a smack down.

1 hour ago, Khobai said:

its 1.68 wounds average. i already showed the results from legion dice roller. the saber tank will likely be able to pull off at least one dodge token from somewhere though. so that lowers it to 0.68 on average. thats garbage. you will not kill a saber tank doing 0.68 wounds a turn. there just arnt enough turns in the game. Even three stormtrooper units with HH12s are statistically unlikely to kill a Saber Tank before the game ends. Not when you consider that the stormtroopers will be suffering casualties in return and that at some point your stormtroopers are going to have to move which means you cant fire the HH12 on those turns.

its true that the HH12 does better damage than what other heavy weapons would do but its still not enough damage to reasonably kill a saber tank. I wouldnt shoot at a saber tank with other heavy weapons either. its a waste of time.

damaging a saber tank and not killing it doesnt help you win the game. especially when those attacks couldve otherwise killed off clonetroopers instead which actually does help you win since it reduces the number of opposing scoring units.

so even though the HH12 does more damage to armor than other heavy weapons, the fact remains the HH12 is still highly ineffective against armor and not worth using. youre better off just ignoring the tank entirely and focusing down clonetroopers and trying to kill rex.

The HH12 definitely needs an anti-armor buff (and exhaust needs to be removed). And based on what was hinted in the interview it sounds like its going to get buffed somehow. Even if they just get rid of exhaust it would be better than it is now. Although id really like to see the HH12 get pierce 1. Heavy weapons struggle greatly getting through the red armor save of the saber tank so pierce 1 would help with that.

Maybe even a new keyword that only gives pierce 1 against vehicles and doesnt work on non-vehicles. That way the HH12's anti-armor role stays focused.

The Alex Davy interview? I rewatched, but he only said points changes for the infantry weapons and implied possible mechanics changes on the heavies.

3 hours ago, Khobai said:

the problem with fleet troopers is that theyre terrain dependent. same with scout troopers. they only work if theres enough terrain to get them into range 2 without suffering casualties.

on boards with accommodating terrain they can be completely devastating.

so I dont think its entirely fair to blame the units. the terrain setup rules are just as much to blame IMO. both rebels and CIS are way more dependent on terrain than imperials or GAR because of their white armor saves. Terrain setup can absolutely make or break games. And I think thats a problem.

completely agree. I'd love "tournament legal" templates of terrain placements on generic preset maps. I'm just kind of winging it with my friends when it comes to placing terrain. I'm doing ok, having generally some shooting lanes but covered areas that melee units can use to reach the middle with minimal fire, but also having a flank that's more open so you have a bit of both. Still, having a map I can look at and say "ok lets get it close to this" would work wonders.

2 hours ago, Derrault said:

The Alex Davy interview? I rewatched, but he only said points changes for the infantry weapons and implied possible mechanics changes on the heavies.

He mentioned the HH12 specifically as being ineffective and that they wanted to add more tools to armies to deal with vehicles.

Since lowering the cost of the HH12 would not make it more effective I have assume theyre doing something else to it. I wouldnt be surprised if they removed exhaust. FFG has to realize how miserable the exhaust requirement is on a lot of weapons.

If the HH12 lost exhaust you wouldnt have to use a recover action before firing it and could take an aim action instead. Using an aim token with the HH12 increases the amount of wounds it inflicts on a Saber Tank from 1.68 to 2.06 thanks to stormtroopers having precise 1. Thats a full 20% increase in effectiveness just for removing the stupid exhaust requirement.

Im expecting exhaust to be removed and im also expecting the points cost to go down. I dont have much hope for anything else. I would like to see it get a new keyword that gives it pierce 1 against vehicles only (but not troopers), but sadly I dont think that will happen, and the HH12 will likely still struggle to inflict wounds past the saber tank's red defense save.

I predict we will see some minor points reductions.

Maybe the removal of clone standby sharing.

I think FFG will be conservative. You can't just apply a hammer to a whole system and expect good results.

6 hours ago, Lightning Dust said:

completely agree. I'd love "tournament legal" templates of terrain placements on generic preset maps. I'm just kind of winging it with my friends when it comes to placing terrain. I'm doing ok, having generally some shooting lanes but covered areas that melee units can use to reach the middle with minimal fire, but also having a flank that's more open so you have a bit of both. Still, having a map I can look at and say "ok lets get it close to this" would work wonders.

There are terrain guidelines in the tournament regulations.

5 hours ago, Khobai said:

If the HH12 lost exhaust you wouldnt have to use a recover action before firing it and could take an aim action instead. Using an aim token with the HH12 increases the amount of wounds it inflicts on a Saber Tank from 1.68 to 2.06 thanks to stormtroopers having precise 1. Thats a full 20% increase in effectiveness just for removing the stupid exhaust requirement.

Earlier when you were going over how much damage the HH-12 does on average I almost posted something about how you weren't taking Aim tokens and Precise 1 into account, and then I remembered that the thing goshdang exhausts and if you want to shoot it regularly you're going to be using half your actions to Recover, not Aim. 😕