I think that removing standby sharing from clones would be a sufficient "nerf" for GAR, then I'd like to see the other factions brought up to their level. Vehicles need a rework and it sounds like they are addressing that.

My thoughts, in no particular order:

I think droidekas need a point reduction, at least 10 to 20 points.

I'd like to see something like cycle on the HH-12 and remove cumbersome, then it might get more use.

Red defense dice for Han- think Adepticon promo Han 🤣 . But that would bring him up to Rex's level.

Buff Leia to Padme's level, maybe give her Exemplar and/or Authoritative.

Jyn and the Pathfinders could use some help, something to make them more survivable or at least up their damage so they can hit harder before a single squad of stormies blows them off the board.

The Empire has a lot of versatility, but most lists I see revolve around shoretroopers with little variety- maybe making dewbacks and speeder bikes more competitive would shake things up.

Perhaps a points increase to the T-21 to discourage shoretrooper spam.

Points reductions to all upgrade trooper weapons and perhaps extend that to the extra troopers in general. Getting more models on the board will help everyone's offense and give everyone a bit more health. This could encourage more GAR focus on fewer activations but higher damage and health.

Snowspeeder 2.0. Revamp the whole thing, or cut its points cost in half, either way it's worthless right now.

Anyhow this is based on my loc as l meta and experience playing Rebels and Republic.

14 minutes ago, Khobai said:

The problem is youre paying points for bounty. If you dont get the bounty those points are wasted.

Which is why Bossk and Boba Fett are both noticeably overcosted.

If bounty is going to cost that many points than it needs to be easier to achieve. Or if bounty is going to remain the same then the points premium for bounty needs to be reduced.

Its fine for casual games. But theres no reason to take an AT-ST into a competitive game at the moment. Its a huge liability.

As for the AT-ST being more durable than an equivalent cost in infantry I dont believe that true for a second. Ill take three units of red save stormtroopers in heavy cover over a white save AT-ST with armor any day. Vehicles like the Saber Tank with high impact can absolutely trash an AT-ST but will still struggle killing Stormtroopers in heavy cover.

If you weren’t paying for bounty, it wouldn’t have bounty, and then it wouldn’t have the threat power that a unit with bounty has.

AT-ST has armor, 11 wounds and white surge dice. Rolling average blocks gives effective health of 16.5; getting that many crit results to bypass armor without resorting to Impact/Critical results requires 132 dice on average.

132 white surge dice (3/8) nets 49.5 hit/crits, which against Stormtrooper level armor is an average of 24.75 wounds or 6.1875 units of 4 man troopers; worth approximately 272.25 points (ignoring for a moment that you can’t have more than 6 corps units, but you could fix that by assigning extra troopers.)

The AT-ST won’t do the damage of 6 units, but it can absorb more than its points cost in damage from non-anti armor specialists...like, for example, Rebels.

4 hours ago, Derrault said:

If you weren’t paying for bounty, it wouldn’t have bounty, and then it wouldn’t have the threat power that a unit with bounty has.

good. id rather not pay for bounty. remove bounty and lower the points cost please.

i dont care about your imaginary threat power. It doesnt mean anything in most games.

Quote

AT-ST has armor, 11 wounds and white surge dice. Rolling average blocks gives effective health of 16.5; getting that many crit results to bypass armor without resorting to Impact/Critical results requires 132 dice on average.

And if they have a saber tank your AT-ST dies in 2 turns.

Im not interested in how long an AT-ST survives in your contrived candy land scenario with no impact weapons or crits where everything is padded and all weapons fire nerf darts.

What I know for a fact is that the Saber Tank can completely and utterly devour an AT-ST then craps it out. Thats why taking the AT-ST is a liability.

The AT-ST needs some massive buffs to bring it upto the same level as the Saber Tank. Arsenal 3 and 12 wounds would be a good start.

1 hour ago, Alpharaider47 said:

I think that removing standby sharing from clones would be a sufficient "nerf" for GAR, then I'd like to see the other factions brought up to their level. Vehicles need a rework and it sounds like they are addressing that.

I'd really like to see the standby sharing go away combined with some sort of point cost reduction.

As a GAR player I don't like having to play the Clone ball this tight to take advantage of standbys, but I also don't like that I can't fit anything else into my list once I get my clones in there, and since there are no cheap filler options in the army, it really limits list creativity.

The divide between Phase Is and Phase IIs also needs to be addressed, but an increased point cost on Phase IIs would (especially combined with standy sharing removal) would completely neuter the faction.

47 minutes ago, OneLastMidnight said:

I'd really like to see the standby sharing go away combined with some sort of point cost reduction.

As a GAR player I don't like having to play the Clone ball this tight to take advantage of standbys, but I also don't like that I can't fit anything else into my list once I get my clones in there, and since there are no cheap filler options in the army, it really limits list creativity.

The divide between Phase Is and Phase IIs also needs to be addressed, but an increased point cost on Phase IIs would (especially combined with standy sharing removal) would completely neuter the faction.

Umm you have Rex,Padme,R2D2 and strike teams

why should clonetroopers get a point cost reduction for losing standby token sharing when their units are already undercosted?

since theyre already undercosted, losing standby token sharing would actually make them closer to being the correct cost.

and I agree the disparity between clone MK1s and clone MK2s needs to be addressed. clone MK2s should go up in cost by 1 point per model. since getting reliable 1 and an extra point of courage is clearly worth more than the 8 point difference between the two units.

and no increasing the cost of MK2s by 1 point per model would not "neuter the faction". they would still be the best corps unit in the game. they would just cost closer to what they should cost instead of being undercosted.

Yeah how varied to have to use that every time because order count is the key to any list.

It's a losing battle to even talk about. GAR is so easy to call nerf on.

Hopefully the devs have a more even hand than what players would like.

11 hours ago, Khobai said:

good. id rather not pay for bounty. remove bounty and lower the points cost please.

i dont care about your imaginary threat power. It doesnt mean anything in most games.

And if they have a saber tank your AT-ST dies in 2 turns.

Im not interested in how long an AT-ST survives in your contrived candy land scenario with no impact weapons or crits where everything is padded and all weapons fire nerf darts.

What I know for a fact is that the Saber Tank can completely and utterly devour an AT-ST then craps it out. Thats why taking the AT-ST is a liability.

The AT-ST needs some massive buffs to bring it upto the same level as the Saber Tank. Arsenal 3 and 12 wounds would be a good start.

It’s called a fork, where you force your opponent into a situation with two options, neither desirable.

If you don’t want bounty, just choose a unit that doesn’t have that value, why complain about having a variety of units?

A Sabre tank not using tank-buster shells is strictly worse than the AT-ST in one on one combat, having impact II and crit 1, it’d take them approximately 6 rounds to kill one, at best. (And even with the tank buster shells, you’re looking at 3 rounds of fire in which the Sabre must use an action to ready, rather than wait for the cycling). Meanwhile the AT-ST would punch the Sabre into the floor in 4 rounds.

21 hours ago, buckero0 said:

really, I didn't know that.

I really wonder if the FFG designers listen to or ignore certain feedback then. I find the whole process interesting yet, at times, baffling.

Having talked to several playtesters, it really sounds like they ignore a lot of the feedback they are given. Some units have been caught that wer allowed to be released in a "broken" state because production was too fast. There's also a disconnect when new concepts are introduced, and the "official" rulings aren't passed down to play testers, greatly impacting how things appear. Cad Bane's tokens timing, for one, or Anakin's permanent cards were not always play tested with the negative effect sticking around. Granted, there are likely enough playtesters that these small anecdotes don't always mean the designers are asleep at the wheel, but they do start to make sense of some of the more obvious problems.

On track with the thread, my wish is for more frequent points adjustments.

Sure it's a physical tabletop game, but FFG tends not to adjust points on recent releases, so if, say, Clan Wren is underperforming severely, with the timing of the upcoming adjustments, they will remain sub-par for a whole year.

If they over adjust anything, they will remain over-adjusted for a whole year.

That's not much fun.

6 hours ago, Derrault said:

It’s called a fork, where you force your opponent into a situation with two options, neither desirable.

If you don’t want bounty, just choose a unit that doesn’t have that value, why complain about having a variety of units?

A Sabre tank not using tank-buster shells is strictly worse than the AT-ST in one on one combat, having impact II and crit 1, it’d take them approximately 6 rounds to kill one, at best. (And even with the tank buster shells, you’re looking at 3 rounds of fire in which the Sabre must use an action to ready, rather than wait for the cycling). Meanwhile the AT-ST would punch the Sabre into the floor in 4 rounds.

Armchair strategizing is great but in reality it doesnt work like that. Bounty is not a good ability. Bounty does not force the opponent to change how they play because a good opponent will always play conservatively and try keep their commanders alive regardless of whether you have bounty or not. Again id rather not pay extra for the crappy bounty ability in its current form; its a waste of points. If bounty is going to cost a points premium it needs to be way better than it currently is. Both Boosk and Boba Fett are underperformers and need buffs. Conversely R2D2 overperforms and needs a nerf. bounty is bad. secret mission good (arguably too good on R2D2).

And Legion is not comprised solely of 1v1 combats. You think the rest of the GAR army is politely going to ignore your AT-ST and let the Saber Tank and AT-ST honorably duel it out? Thats not how it works. The entire GAR army is going to be set to terrible purpose of destroying your AT-ST. And they will succeed because the AT-ST cant take very much punishment compared to the Saber Tank. Meanwhile the Saber Tank's easy access to dodges via exemplar and plokoon makes it entirely impractical to destroy given the empire's sad lack of effective anti-armor weapons.

Quote

(And even with the tank buster shells, you’re looking at 3 rounds of fire in which the Sabre must use an action to ready, rather than wait for the cycling)

Dice rolls arnt always average though as much as you seem to want them to be. Its entirely possible for the Saber Tank to spike on hits and when that happens its devastating because it has impact 5, critical 1. Ive seen Saber Tanks do 6-7 damage to an AT-ST in one turn. Its entirely within the Saber Tank's ability to kill an AT-ST in 2 turns (especially if other GAR units help out). You cannot exclude the possibility of the Saber Tank rolling well and that possibility existing makes it not worth the risk to take the AT-ST. As an imperial played youre far better off taking 2-3 trooper units instead.

You have some very bizarre notions of how the game is played. Taking an AT-ST is purely a liability in the current state of the game. Imperial players seeking to win games do not bring AT-STs for good reason. The AT-ST needs some pretty massive buffs before its ready to take on a Saber Tank and have a reasonable chance of winning. The Saber Tank is on a completely different level entirely than the AT-ST.

When I saw the article on Maul and the Juyo mastery keyword, it got me thinking if maybe with the upcoming RRG they could add this keyword to commander Vader. With Implacable dealing him a wound it would just make sense and make him so much better, especially if they also give him a much needed training slot to take Offensive stance. I think this'd be an amazing fix to Vader

40 minutes ago, bllaw said:

When I saw the article on Maul and the Juyo mastery keyword, it got me thinking if maybe with the upcoming RRG they could add this keyword to commander Vader. With Implacable dealing him a wound it would just make sense and make him so much better, especially if they also give him a much needed training slot to take Offensive stance. I think this'd be an amazing fix to Vader

Vader can already double move and attack with relentless.

Juyo wouldnt fix Vader because Vader's whole problem is being speed 1 and how susceptible it makes him to being shot.

And theyre not going to give him Juyo and Relentless. That just wont happen.

Besides juyo isnt even a lightsaber style he uses. Giving him a style like shien would make more sense.

I think the best way to fix Vader is to give him defensive surge and deflect turned on all the time. He needs to be tanky enough to overcome being speed 1. They could give him the Shien lightsaber style which is one he actually uses, and it could let him have defensive surge and deflect turned on all the time. Then Vader's crippling weakness against shooting becomes less crippling of a weakness.

A training slot would definitely help commander vader as well though. At the very least he can take tenacity and regain his mantle of being the hardest hitting jedi. off/def stance would also be a possibility although its usefulness is limited on vader because of his need to constantly make double moves where other jedi only have to make single moves.

32 minutes ago, Khobai said:

Juyo wouldnt fix Vader because Vader's whole problem is being speed 1 and how susceptible it makes him to being shot.

Thats just the thing though Juyo would give Vader an extra action to dodge (two dodges with defensive stance) that would allow him to be not as susceptible to being shot.

32 minutes ago, Khobai said:

I think the best way to fix Vader is to give him defensive surge and deflect turned on all the time. He needs to be tanky enough to overcome being speed 1. They could give him the Shien lightsaber style which is one he actually uses, and it could let him have defensive surge and deflect turned on all the time. Then Vader's crippling weakness against shooting becomes less crippling of a weakness.

No please no. 8 health with the best defense in the game is just so scary it would not only make Vader useable but way way way overpowered and just about impossible to kill

7 minutes ago, bllaw said:

Thats just the thing though Juyo would give Vader an extra action to dodge (two dodges with defensive stance) that would allow him to be not as susceptible to being shot.

Commander Vader doesn't have a training slot, therefore can't equip Defensive Stance. If he could, I do think Juyo would be pretty good on him, and it would certainly be good on Operative Vader (especially if they improve Spur). Being able to get three dodge tokens (with Force Reflexes), two moves, and a melee/Saber Throw would be pretty great.

However I don't think they would do that anyway. Maul gets Juyo (or rather, Juyo works the way it does) because he doesn't have Charge or Relentless. And while Vader used many different lightsaber forms (including Juyo), he's not really associated with a specific one like a lot of Jedi/Sith are.

48 minutes ago, bllaw said:

No please no. 8 health with the best defense in the game is just so scary it would not only make Vader useable but way way way overpowered and just about impossible to kill

Vader's so bad that a big buff like that wouldn't make him OP. His offense, until in melee, would still be terrible. His saber throw kills one guy in cover like 50% of the time. The other 50% does nothing but add a suppresion. Also, remember his 1-Pip, to be usable, he needs to take a wound. This means Vader, in reality, has 7 health, unless you want to admit his 1-pip is a worse version of Ambush (in that it only orders Vader and does nothing else). Don't forget, if Vader had Surge-Block, he'd still have 33% of his dice as blanks. Jedi live by NOT being shot. Vader is just terrible design. The game designers under estimated his health pool and the power of being shot at by an entire army for an entire round.

Personally, I'd love to see them fix Vader by reworking him entirely, but I'm guessing that they will just reduce his cost and he'll just suck and be cheaper. I would take Commander Luke over Commander Vader every day of the week, and Vader started at 40 points more expensive!!! He suffers from Big Name Syndrome. He must be good, cause he's Vader! But in reality he sucks. Really, really bad. Any major buff on Vader would only bring him up to snuff, not OP. You could always pump his points back up too, if he actually deserved it

20 hours ago, OneLastMidnight said:

I'd really like to see the standby sharing go away combined with some sort of point cost reduction.

As a GAR player I don't like having to play the Clone ball this tight to take advantage of standbys, but I also don't like that I can't fit anything else into my list once I get my clones in there, and since there are no cheap filler options in the army, it really limits list creativity.

The divide between Phase Is and Phase IIs also needs to be addressed, but an increased point cost on Phase IIs would (especially combined with standy sharing removal) would completely neuter the faction.

Agreed, I'd like to see Phase 2's drop in points but at the expense of losing standby sharing. Seems like a fair trade to me.

3 hours ago, bllaw said:

Thats just the thing though Juyo would give Vader an extra action to dodge (two dodges with defensive stance) that would allow him to be not as susceptible to being shot.

No please no. 8 health with the best defense in the game is just so scary it would not only make Vader useable but way way way overpowered and just about impossible to kill

Vader cant afford to take dodge actions when hes only speed 1. Thats just not how Vader works. He has to double move almost every turn.

No lol. He wouldnt be overpowered because hed still only be speed 1. Any unit in the game can literally run away from Vader and not have to fight him. Ever. Speed 1 is so laughably crippling for Vader.

Speed 1 means Vader absolutely needs to be tanky as ****. He should certainly be at least 7 health with defensive surge.

37 minutes ago, Alpharaider47 said:

Agreed, I'd like to see Phase 2's drop in points but at the expense of losing standby sharing. Seems like a fair trade to me.

Phase 2s need to go up in points and lose standby sharing. Theyre undercosted as is. 8 points for reliable 1 and courage 2 is ridiculous.

1 minute ago, Khobai said:

Vader cant afford to take dodge actions when hes only speed 1

He can when he has Juyo, which is the whole point of what he's talking about. Read before responding.

4 hours ago, Khobai said:

Armchair strategizing is great but in reality it doesnt work like that. Bounty is not a good ability. Bounty does not force the opponent to change how they play because a good opponent will always play conservatively and try keep their commanders alive regardless of whether you have bounty or not. Again id rather not pay extra for the crappy bounty ability in its current form; its a waste of points. If bounty is going to cost a points premium it needs to be way better than it currently is. Both Boosk and Boba Fett are underperformers and need buffs. Conversely R2D2 overperforms and needs a nerf. bounty is bad. secret mission good (arguably too good on R2D2).

And Legion is not comprised solely of 1v1 combats. You think the rest of the GAR army is politely going to ignore your AT-ST and let the Saber Tank and AT-ST honorably duel it out? Thats not how it works. The entire GAR army is going to be set to terrible purpose of destroying your AT-ST. And they will succeed because the AT-ST cant take very much punishment compared to the Saber Tank. Meanwhile the Saber Tank's easy access to dodges via exemplar and plokoon makes it entirely impractical to destroy given the empire's sad lack of effective anti-armor weapons.

Dice rolls arnt always average though as much as you seem to want them to be. Its entirely possible for the Saber Tank to spike on hits and when that happens its devastating because it has impact 5, critical 1. Ive seen Saber Tanks do 6-7 damage to an AT-ST in one turn. Its entirely within the Saber Tank's ability to kill an AT-ST in 2 turns (especially if other GAR units help out). You cannot exclude the possibility of the Saber Tank rolling well and that possibility existing makes it not worth the risk to take the AT-ST. As an imperial played youre far better off taking 2-3 trooper units instead.

You have some very bizarre notions of how the game is played. Taking an AT-ST is purely a liability in the current state of the game. Imperial players seeking to win games do not bring AT-STs for good reason. The AT-ST needs some pretty massive buffs before its ready to take on a Saber Tank and have a reasonable chance of winning. The Saber Tank is on a completely different level entirely than the AT-ST.

With respect, good players do whatever makes sense to win in the game, even if that means committing their commander.

And, yes, I know exactly what an average is. It’s also a possibility for the AT-ST to fire 9 dice and one shot the Tank. Likely? No, that’s why we describe average outcomes.

5 hours ago, arnoldrew said:

He can when he has Juyo, which is the whole point of what he's talking about. Read before responding.

Not unless he kept relentless

And I already explained he will never get both juyo and relentless

Read before responding

5 hours ago, Derrault said:

With respect, good players do whatever makes sense to win in the game, even if that means committing their commander.

And, yes, I know exactly what an average is. It’s also a possibility for the AT-ST to fire 9 dice and one shot the Tank. Likely? No, that’s why we describe average outcomes.

Actually its not possible because the tank can dodge. The tank being able to dodge to mitigate damage is what makes it so difficult to destroy. Every turn you shoot at it you have to deal with 1-2 dodge tokens. And thats being conservative. They can stack even more dodge tokens thanks to Padme.

The Saber Tank with tank busters has a much higher chance of hurting the AT-ST badly than the AT-ST has of hurting the Saber Tank badly. For two reasons: first, because it has a higher impact/crit value which flat out makes it more effective at anti-armor and 2) because it can mitigate incoming damage with dodges.

Saber Tank = 3 red, 4 black, 2 white with impact 5, critical 1 vs a white save with surge.

AT-ST = 3 red, 3 black, 3 white with impact 4 and surge to hit vs a red save with its damaged being further reduced by the tank's dodges.

I have played my AT-ST into Saber Tanks enough times to know how badly the AT-ST fares. Suffice to say I no longer take the AT-ST against GAR. ever. The AT-ST actually works best against rebels because what are they gonna do, bring an airspeeder? LOL. AT-STs get free reign vs Rebels because they cant do anything about it.

But yeah, the AT-ST is NOT a competitively viable heavy. Nobody uses it in competitive play. What Imperial players actually use are shoretroopers and lots of them. The AT-ST is way too much of a liability to ever take into a competitive game. Because Saber Tanks and AATs are actually competitively viable and do see use in competitive play and the AT-ST vs Saber Tank/AAT matchup does not bode well for the Imperials. So they avoid it altogether by not taking the AT-ST.

I would love for the AT-ST to get buffed but that remains to be seen. I think a lot of things arnt going to get buffed that need it. And I think people will be disappointed by that.

6 hours ago, Khobai said:

Not unless he kept relentless

And I already explained he will never get both juyo and relentless

You "explained" that, but he neither accepted it nor acknowledged it. You can act like your opinions are fact (and in fact you have, since the first day you came here), but the rest of us are under no obligation to pretend that that is the case. I don't think he's going to get Juyo at all, with or without Relentless, but I'm not going to pretend that it's fact and then insist everyone else act like it is.

Quote

Read before responding

You're an unrepentantly narcissistic ******. Please go away and make this this forum a better place with your absence.

So I guess we can all agree Vader should get speed 2 instead of Spur? >_>

now let's cool it a bit...

42 minutes ago, RejjeN said:

So I guess we can all agree Vader should get speed 2 instead of Spur? >_>

now let's cool it a bit...