1 hour ago, Khobai said:

To be fair Padme can support any unit in the army. So I dont think you can really count her against the tank's cost.

Padme gives out tokens wherever theyre needed. If the tank doesnt need them she'll give the tokens to a different unit instead. Padme isnt dependent on the tank to earn her points back so linking her points cost to the cost of the tank isnt exactly genuine.

Conversely, the Saber Tank is perfectly capable of taking an aim or dodge action on its own. Padme can just provide it with extra aim or dodge tokens if it needs them. And if it doesnt need them she gives them to another unit instead. There could be entire games where she doesnt even give the tank a single token.

Also the tank doesnt even need Padme to have a high probability of destroying the AT-ST. All it needs are tank buster rockets. Padme does of course increase that probability by providing extra aim tokens. But shes not necessarily required.

Lastly the main issue I have with the AT-ST is the same issue I have with the T-47. It lacks a clearly defined role that its good at that no other unit in the army can do better. The AAT and Saber Tank both have very clearly defined roles in their respective armies. That is the clear difference between the newer heavies and the older heavies: the lack of a focused purpose. The AT-ST is all-over-the-place and isnt sure what it wants to do and ends up not being good at any one thing. And the T-47 is just plain bad at everything.

Saber Tanks wouldnt do any better against Ewoks. You cant really fault the AT-ST for not being able to deal with the most elite fighting force in the galaxy.

The way Ewoks are presented in RoTJ there is literally no army in the starwars universe that could defeat them. Not even Gungans.

I personally don't think the T 47 or ATST has to have a designed or clear role as long as they aren't a drag on the army. For instance lowering the points on the ATST gives you a solid all around tank that is customizable to be cohesive for how you want your army to be designed. It doesn't matter as much is the AAT or Saber is better depending on build because you may now get to take a second full quality unit to make up for that. So in theory you could have an AAT and a weaker unit facing a ATST and a stronger unit or an extra activation. That seems like a decent trade off.

Another idea: Add Permanent to General Veer‘s 2-pip command.

3 minutes ago, KaLeu said:

Another idea: Add Permanent to General Veer‘s 2-pip command.

So effectively add an additional tax of taking Veers and his 2 pip to make the AT-ST better? That doesn't seem like it fixes anything.

So this may sound weird, and maybe I'm giving my secret away, but I went 4-0 at a RPQ with an ATST list about a year ago, and used the ATST as an anti-Infantry slaughter machine (with the grenade launcher), and when supported properly, it wrecks face and will insta-kill most infantry squads in one shot. It is the most efficient damage dealer vs. Infantry of all the heavies in the game.

Having said that, I wouldn't bring the ATST right now until there's a real boost in power. As many have said, the ATST has some problems. First, the white defense is a real liability. When playing with an ATST you are going to take Veers and AT, and boy do you wish those defense dice where red. Being able to spend a surge essentially as a free dodge token goes a long way. Also, the lack of free Critical hurts badly too. I actually really like the Aim-Move pilot on the ATST (since I use it as a close assault tank and am constantly moving) but you have to take the darn surge-hit pilot to make it functional. If they gave the ATST Critical 1 on the main gun (and maybe to rolled back the Impact from 3 to 2) and gave the ATST Red defense dice (and reworked it's HP and Resilience to be in line with the new heavies) I'd be dancing in the streets! Also, every unit with Armor Infinite needs Outmaneuver. If I could throw Dodges on my ATST with Veers and Portable Scanner, I would also be a very happy man. I love the ATST and am waiting with baited breath to see what they do, but she needs some help to compete with new tanks.

Also, one other note. I will say the Imperial army has 1 advantage on the Saber Tank duel: the Imperials have alot of Critical that the Clones don't have, but that's about it. If the ATST got a good boost, I could see the duel going the Imps way because of that critical.

3 hours ago, Uetur said:

I personally don't think the T 47 or ATST has to have a designed or clear role as long as they aren't a drag on the army. For instance lowering the points on the ATST gives you a solid all around tank that is customizable to be cohesive for how you want your army to be designed.

The problem is Imperials already have the Occupier Tank. Turning the AT-ST into another Occupier Tank doesnt fix either vehicle. It just gives Imperials two depressingly mediocre vehicles that dont excel at anything.

Lowering points cost only works if the only thing wrong is the points cost being too high. Lowering points cost is not a panacea for every balance problem.

The occupier tank and AT-ST need to have functionally different roles in the army. They cant be fixed by changing point costs.

The Occupier tank should get an ordnance slot. If it needs visual representation, let people glue an HH12 stormtrooper on it (since everyone has TONs of spare HH12s, Its called the HH12 because you have 12 of the things and never use them).

The AT-ST should get Arsenal 3. And the mortar's range should be changed to 3-4. Maybe change the grenade launcher to 1-3 as well.

General Weiss should be changed to give Arsenal 1 passively. So if you take him the AT-ST can fire all four weapons each turn (you give up taking the surge to hit pilot so its fine).

The biggest problem with the AT-ST is that it can carry tons of weapons but cant actually use them all. At one time it might have been unbalanced but now that we have vehicles like the AAT that can barrage out two four red dice attacks at range 4 it would be absolutely fine to give the AT-ST arsenal 3 (or 4 with Weiss).

3 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

So effectively add an additional tax of taking Veers and his 2 pip to make the AT-ST better? That doesn't seem like it fixes anything.

No. Veers' 2-pip is so bad it should be fixed independently of the AT-ST.

A lot of the older commanders have command cards that are awful and could use updated versions.

FFG should really consider printing a card pack with updated command cards for the older commanders as well as alternative command cards for each commander.

23 minutes ago, SirCormac said:

So this may sound weird, and maybe I'm giving my secret away, but I went 4-0 at a RPQ with an ATST list about a year ago, and used the ATST as an anti-Infantry slaughter machine (with the grenade launcher), and when supported properly, it wrecks face and will insta-kill most infantry squads in one shot. It is the most efficient damage dealer vs. Infantry of all the heavies in the game.

Having said that, I wouldn't bring the ATST right now until there's a real boost in power. As many have said, the ATST has some problems. First, the white defense is a real liability. When playing with an ATST you are going to take Veers and AT, and boy do you wish those defense dice where red. Being able to spend a surge essentially as a free dodge token goes a long way. Also, the lack of free Critical hurts badly too. I actually really like the Aim-Move pilot on the ATST (since I use it as a close assault tank and am constantly moving) but you have to take the darn surge-hit pilot to make it functional. If they gave the ATST Critical 1 on the main gun (and maybe to rolled back the Impact from 3 to 2) and gave the ATST Red defense dice (and reworked it's HP and Resilience to be in line with the new heavies) I'd be dancing in the streets! Also, every unit with Armor Infinite needs Outmaneuver. If I could throw Dodges on my ATST with Veers and Portable Scanner, I would also be a very happy man. I love the ATST and am waiting with baited breath to see what they do, but she needs some help to compete with new tanks.

Also, one other note. I will say the Imperial army has 1 advantage on the Saber Tank duel: the Imperials have alot of Critical that the Clones don't have, but that's about it. If the ATST got a good boost, I could see the duel going the Imps way because of that critical.

There is a big difference between the lists of yesteryear and those of today.

57 minutes ago, Mokoshkana said:

There is a big difference between the lists of yesteryear and those of today.

Indeed!

15 hours ago, Darth evil said:

The AT-ST has so many things going against it but it's 11 wounds and resilience 8 is acually not that bad. However i find it moves so slow for how much distance those legs could cover, it gets affected by terrain which slows it down, it's upgrades are overcosted, it should have had surge to hit natively and it needs a slight cost reduction like 10 points

Perhaps the AS-ST should get a rule that lets it ignore terrain smaller than itself, as long as it can move completely past it? That would really sell the "all-terrain" aspect of the model and make it really nimble. (Speaking of, would it be too OP if it got Agile and Outmaneuver? Given it's nimble and spindly frame I think those both make sense for it)

15 hours ago, Khobai said:

Youd think the AT-ST would be better armored than the AT-RT too. But nope. AT-RT somehow gets a red save, armor, and no weakpoints despite the driver being fully exposed on three sides and partially exposed from the front

both AT-RTs have white saves, one has surge one does not, maybe you should read the cards for the units that you are comparing, you don't seem to have actually read them.

15 hours ago, Khobai said:

Imperials need a stronger AT-ST. Something that can reasonably go toe to toe with a Saber Tank.

Similarly the rebels dont need a cheaper T-47 they need a stronger T-47. One that can actually fulfill the anti-heavy role.

the AT-ST is a SCOUT walker that is designed for combat aganist light vehicles and infantry, that is its role and what it is best at. You shouldn't be comparing it against dedicated ANTI-VEHICLE platforms (the Saber and AAT) at killing other tanks.

pretty much all of the Empires vehicles were multi-role meaning that they are never going to be the best at something but being second or third best at multiple things is often desirable when you have limited space (cargo capacity in a star destroyer)

the AT-ST should not be as good at killing other tanks as the saber or AAT but is should be better at killing infantry than both of those things, as both of them are not designed to kill infantry.

The AT-STs weapons should come down in price and the platform itself could use a price drop but i'm not sure how much.

stop trying to compare apples to oranges when they are so obviously not doing the same thing

(a goldfish will always be considered useless compared to other creatures if you only judge them on their ability to climb trees)

3 hours ago, 5particus said:

the AT-ST is a SCOUT walker that is designed for combat aganist light vehicles and infantry, that is its role and what it is best at.

you know what else is good for combat against light vehicles and infantry? literally everything else in the imperial army...

so if the AT-ST was supposed to be worse at the same role as every other unit in the imperial army, objective achieved, they nailed it.

again the problem with the AT-ST is that it has no clearly defined role and other units in the imperial army do the same thing it does better. Ill take deathtroopers and another unit over an AT-ST anyday. They can actually capture objectives while being just as capable of killing troopers and light vehicles and it gives me 2 activations instead of 1.

Quote

the AT-ST should not be as good at killing other tanks as the saber or AAT but is should be better at killing infantry than both of those things, as both of them are not designed to kill infantry.

yes it should be. or there is no reason to use it.

because other units in the imperial army are better at killing infantry and also able to capture objectives. there is absolutely no reason to use the AT-ST for that role.

I guess thats why nobody uses it.

Quote

The AT-STs weapons should come down in price and the platform itself could use a price drop but i'm not sure how much.

Even if it cost less the AT-ST would still not get used. Again lowering points cannot fix every issue in the game.

It wouldnt fix the Occupier Tank either. You cant fix whats wrong with those units just by making them cost less.

Nobody wants mediocre units that cost less. They want stronger units and are willing to pay more for them.

Quote

both AT-RTs have white saves, one has surge one does not, maybe you should read the cards for the units that you are comparing, you don't seem to have actually read them.

youre right. but ultimately doesnt change what I said at all. its armor is still better than the AT-STs since it has no weakpoints despite being opentopped and exposed on all sides. there is still something very wrong with that.

Quote

a goldfish will always be considered useless compared to other creatures if you only judge them on their ability to climb trees)

but thats not what im doing. your analogy doesnt apply. im not comparing the AT-ST to wookiees.

im comparing the AT-STs role to other units in the imperial army that have the same role, like deathtroopers.

because the AT-ST is worse than other units in the imperial army at the same role, it obviously needs a different role.

And the one thing imperials struggle at currently is killing heavy vehicles. So thats an obvious role for the AT-ST to fill.

3 hours ago, 5particus said:

a goldfish will always be considered useless compared to other creatures if you only judge them on their ability to climb trees

Man, don't ever come down to my neck of the woods, we've got flying carp of every color that weigh 50lbs. They'll swoop down and pick up a small child if you're not watching.

At-St has worked splendidly when I've used it. Especially with the surge to hit driver.. Its specialty is being highly convertible. It can be an anti tank platform, anti infantry, it can be a suppressive tool. It can dlush out sniper nests or deliver crippling salvos on characters, as it can often overlook walls and has LOS where most models dont.

It's weapons are very pricey (as are all the 1st couple of waves) if they are going to reduce all the ion and impact weapons with the rrg, then it should get a reduction in points as well

15 hours ago, Khobai said:

The problem is Imperials already have the Occupier Tank. Turning the AT-ST into another Occupier Tank doesnt fix either vehicle. It just gives Imperials two depressingly mediocre vehicles that dont excel at anything.

Lowering points cost only works if the only thing wrong is the points cost being too high. Lowering points cost is not a panacea for every balance problem.

The occupier tank and AT-ST need to have functionally different roles in the army. They cant be fixed by changing point costs.

The Occupier tank should get an ordnance slot. If it needs visual representation, let people glue an HH12 stormtrooper on it (since everyone has TONs of spare HH12s, Its called the HH12 because you have 12 of the things and never use them).

The AT-ST should get Arsenal 3. And the mortar's range should be changed to 3-4. Maybe change the grenade launcher to 1-3 as well.

General Weiss should be changed to give Arsenal 1 passively. So if you take him the AT-ST can fire all four weapons each turn (you give up taking the surge to hit pilot so its fine).

The biggest problem with the AT-ST is that it can carry tons of weapons but cant actually use them all. At one time it might have been unbalanced but now that we have vehicles like the AAT that can barrage out two four red dice attacks at range 4 it would be absolutely fine to give the AT-ST arsenal 3 (or 4 with Weiss).

No. Veers' 2-pip is so bad it should be fixed independently of the AT-ST.

A lot of the older commanders have command cards that are awful and could use updated versions.

FFG should really consider printing a card pack with updated command cards for the older commanders as well as alternative command cards for each commander.

I disagree, calling the ATST depressing is really about the emotion of wanting it to be awesome and not mediocre. I dont think we should base a game purely on emotion. I am ok with it being mediocre if it's points reflect that. The occupier has a similar problem in that it is merely ok and it needs a point decrease as well. A faction can have an identity of having cheaper all arounders and either getting more quality units in a list or more activations. That is what the empire is missing in this meta IMO. Because of standby token sharing and R2 the clones are effectively taking the same activations as the imperials can and are getting to take more actions with their quality units.

Wouldn’t it be interesting if the point changes cause some trooper units to excel as anti-armor units to the point that the AT-ST suddenly becomes defined as the Empire’s anti-personnel big dog.

On 10/29/2020 at 2:37 PM, Khobai said:

The AT-ST needs Arsenal 3 and 12 health.

That puts its firepower and health more on par with the Saber Tank. Arsenal 3 is necessary because the AT-ST can have upto 4 weapons but can only use 2 of them. Arsenal 3 makes a lot of sense on the AT-ST so it can make better use of the weapons it can carry. And it gives it a much needed offensive bump.

Increasing it from 11 to 12 health would give it the same effective health as the Saber Tank. 1 health isnt a lot but it does help make up a little for the white armor save.

Even with those changes the Saber Tank would still edge out as being slightly better. But it would lessen the disparity greatly.

Youd think the AT-ST would be better armored than the AT-RT too. But nope. AT-RT somehow gets a red save, armor, and no weakpoints despite the driver being fully exposed on three sides and partially exposed from the front.

um what? you dont need the token sharing driver at all. you do realize padme (as well as anakin) can share tokens with the tank right?

exemplar.

there is no rube goldberg machine. Simply units GAR takes anyway.

you also dont seem to understand how padme works. if she doesnt give the dodge tokens to the saber tank she can always give the dodge tokens to another unit instead. her points cost is not commited solely to the defense of the saber tank and her tokens can be handed out to whatever units happen to need dodges at the time. which is what you dont seem to get; that token sharing is extremely flexible.

Sharing tokens is how GAR is designed to play. So your insinuation of it being a rube goldberg machine for GAR doing what its designed to do is ridiculous. Youre not taking any units you wouldnt take anyway as GAR.

Imperials dont need a cheaper AT-ST. We already have the Occupier Tank for a cheaper heavy.

Imperials need a stronger AT-ST. Something that can reasonably go toe to toe with a Saber Tank.

Similarly the rebels dont need a cheaper T-47 they need a stronger T-47. One that can actually fulfill the anti-heavy role.

Weiss already exists, they’d have to revise two cards.

Card errata is a cumbersome process, and frankly a bad idea.

The ATST suffers not from Impact weapons, but from a barrage of small arms fire. Clone troopers wreck it just from the volume of dice. Z6s are effective against armor with aims (as 1 in 6 crits without re-rolls).

I love running the ATST, but it cannot reliably wipe non-rebel units.

The ATST is a lot like Snowtroopers with a flametrower. Great against units with white saves, lousy against red saves.

1 hour ago, SoonerTed said:

The ATST suffers not from Impact weapons, but from a barrage of small arms fire. Clone troopers wreck it just from the volume of dice. Z6s are effective against armor with aims (as 1 in 6 crits without re-rolls).

I love running the ATST, but it cannot reliably wipe non-rebel units.

The ATST is a lot like Snowtroopers with a flametrower. Great against units with white saves, lousy against red saves.

It's 1 out of 8. You simply can't count on random crits to kill an AT-ST. It has 11 hit points, Armor, and white defense with surge. It takes roughly 136 dice on average to kill it without surge to crit or Impact.

As to the last statement, yes, a 50% save is better than a 33% save.

Anyone else hate how the tanks get whittled down by snipers, especially the new critical one Republic sniper. Now that's a rule that needs tinkering.

I don't think it would be good for the game in general as it would encourage skew lists but... What about adding a keyword to the big Armor units that let them re-roll saves if there is no Impact in the attack pool? >_>

Maybe just give it to the AT-ST and Air Speeder or something, I dunno..

10 hours ago, Memorare said:

Anyone else hate how the tanks get whittled down by snipers, especially the new critical one Republic sniper. Now that's a rule that needs tinkering.

I've not ran into the problem with the Republic Sniper, but I have with Cassian. Marksman/pierce is a terrible combo, especially against armor. If nothing else, pierce shouldn't work against Armor unless it is being used in conjunction with Impact (as with Lightsabers)

13 minutes ago, Alpha17 said:

I've not ran into the problem with the Republic Sniper, but I have with Cassian. Marksman/pierce is a terrible combo, especially against armor. If nothing else, pierce shouldn't work against Armor unless it is being used in conjunction with Impact (as with Lightsabers)

I could get behind that. Would need to work out if/how it applies to armor X as well though or else things like B2's would be even tougher.

On 10/30/2020 at 10:29 AM, Uetur said:

A faction can have an identity of having cheaper all arounders and either getting more quality units in a list or more activations. That is what the empire is missing in this meta IMO.

No thanks. That sounds incredibly boring. I dont want the Empire to be a cheaper worse version of GAR.

Making one faction a cheaper worse version of another faction isnt how you properly design factions. The proper way to design factions is to incorporate common themes/strengths among all units in the faction and often a common weakness as well. With the overall goal being to make each faction feel unique and different from eachother. Not just cheaper and worse versions of other factions.

The AT-ST should not only reinforce the themes and strengths of the empire (aim tokens, suppression, and long range) but it should also reinforce its own themes as a scout walker.

If the AT-ST is supposed to be a scout walker where are its scout abilities? If the AT-ST takes 2 or less weapons it should gain scout-1. The AT-ST should also gain Arsenal 3. But it it takes 3-4 weapons it would lose scout-1.

The AT-ST should also be more encouraged to take the pilot that gives it a free aim token when it moves. That would help make it feel more like a scout walker if its encouraged to move every turn. The surge to hit pilot is way too good on the AT-ST and that should be changed to be more in line with the other pilots. Maybe instead of giving surge to hit have him add impact 1 and critical 1 to the attack pool. Yeah its probably a nerf, but its a nerf for the right reasons, to help better balance all the pilots with eachother. One pilot to keep the AT-ST more mobile and better at infantry-hunting and another pilot to increase its anti-armor capability. Weiss should also be changed to just flat out give Arsenal +1 all the time passively.

Reinforcing the themes/strengths of the empire is simple enough. The combination of having access to arsenal 3 and the AT-STs mortar weapon almost gets us there. The weapon range bands just need to be changed to overlap better The grenade launcher should be range 1-3 and the mortar should be range 3-5.

Honestly, with the token sharing of GAR and the order control of CIS, I’d love to see comms relay back on emplacement troopers. Rebels vets could use the boost as they don’t even have nimble. Having order control over 3-4 units is hardly game breaking.

Please designers (or the people managing them), if you are reading this, don't apply a hammer to this game.

Apply a scalpel.

Don't pull good units/factions down.

Raise underwhelming units/factions up.

Thanks.

5 hours ago, lologrelol said:

Please designers (or the people managing them), if you are reading this, don't apply a hammer to this game.

Apply a scalpel.

Don't pull good units/factions down.

Raise underwhelming units/factions up.

Thanks.

Contrary to the craziness desired in this thread, I do believe that Alex and Eddy have their wits about them. All one has to do, is to look at the Tauntaun changes. They handled that in the subtlest of ways.

Vehicles still are generally a bad option. They can't take objectives. They don't have enough firepower to justify shooting at them. If you just shoot the infantry, the enemy firepower goes down with every trooper. So bringing antitank equipment is a bad option, too. There is so much of fake choice. Lots of options, but only a small fraction are viable. The problem with the AT-ST is not, that the sabre tank is better. Being a vehicle is the problem.