Jump to content

shlominus

Members
  • Content Count

    208
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by shlominus

  1. exactly as described. i wanted to order a commando strike team with a saboteur to get closer to the enemy for a great bomb spot, but leia was out of range for the order. the move1 was just enough to get her in range, so i just issued the order without much thought about the matter. my opponent asked if i'm sure that's how it's done and i was not. so we checked, but couldn't find anything conclusive on the subject in the rules reference. i'm actually quite surprised this hasn't come up sooner.
  2. this came up in a game, but we couldn't find a definite answer for this. what's the exact timing for placing order tokens? are they issued one at a time or simultaneously? can i first issue one to leia and then use the move to get her into range of the second unit i want to issue an order to?
  3. that! op made a slight mistake. instead of awesome he wrote awful for some reason.
  4. so far everything but the t-47 is very much playable and has a place on the board. i don't see why ffg would stop designing their models so well balanced. they are doing great so far. will there be blunders? no doubt! han doesn't look lie one at all. i think the best thing about han (by far!) will be his command card "reckless diversion.
  5. i've played one game so far, with 4 players (edit: we played 1600 points, with the usual grand army roster). it ran pretty much the same as a normal battle. during setup we not only removed the deployment cards, but we decided on the mission as well. all missions except "intercept the transmission" seem silly on the big table. i think that's all we changed. about increasing the amount of units that get orders - i don't think that's needed at all. we didn't do it and everything worked well. a little more confusion maybe, but that's to be expected in a larger battle.
  6. how do you reach the conclusion that "the attacker and defender cannot be in melee" actually means "the attacker and defender cannot be in melee with each other"? i don't see why that would be the case. like i said, i thought it would be the case, but this quote says otherwise. why omit "with each other" if that's what it's supoosed to say? is it a language thing, cause the way i read it there's a difference? not really sure i can agree with your overall point though. i grant that after rereading it's not that straightforward anymore and your quotes seem to imply it's possible. i fear it's another case where we have to wait for an official answer.
  7. seems pretty straightforward to me. it's not possible to mix those 2 types of attacks in 1 attack action. incidentally, this also forbids an attacker to fire on a target that is in melee, but not engaged. until checking this issue i assumed only engagement protects from being fired upon.
  8. if you think it's such a great advantage build smaller armies and be the blue player.
  9. the blue player can only be certain to have this mission if it's in the rightmost (is that even a word?) position and they use both their choices on the objective cards. that means the red player has a lot of influence on the game with the other 2 choices, with deployment probably having the biggest impact. it evens out quite nicely, even though there is still some advantage for the blue player. if that mission is not in the rightmost position, the red player can always eliminate it.
  10. do your opponents regularly use an at-st? yes, definitely worth it! take 2. do your oppenents usually play without an at-st? not really worth it, though they can be, under the right circumstanes.
  11. is saber throw on luke really that useful, considering he also has a (pretty good) pistol? sure, he loses impact and a die, but gains better dice in return. i don't see myself ever taking saber throw for luke, to be honest. those 2 force slots are too valuable for stuff other than pure damage (on armored targets, the pistol kills troopers nicely), reflexes, mind trick and push have to battle for these spots as it is.
  12. no, he can't. jump is a card action which also counts as a move action (for "charge" mostly). "however, a unit cannot perform the same card action more than once during it's activation." swl rules reference, p.17 so while more than 1 move actions would be allowed, "jump" is no move action. it is a card action. the phrase"this is treated as a move action." might be misleading, but the rules are clear.
  13. thanks, i must have missed that somehow.
  14. no need to worry, he is VERY strong. this is just one of his many useful features.
  15. yes, that's exactly what it means.
  16. 1. the core set lasts for a few games, not more. if you use 2 central los blockers then those games can still be quite interesting though. get a second set quickly imo, the rebels will also need a bit more to get to 800 points. the value for money of the core set is great! 2. the core set heroes will have strong impact on any game they appear in, becasue they are very powerful. i don't think it's possible to put a cerain percentage on their input though, that depends on too many variables. the next 2 leaders will be much cheaper, primarily supporters and perform quite differently. i don't think any leaders outweigh basic troops though, they just have different uses. 3. tipps for smooth play? experience i guess? the game is very well designed and flows well as it is. you just need a bit of practice. 4. for the moment unpainted minis are no problem at all. most people are just getting into the game, no need to worry about that. 5. i play at a local gaming club and we have terrain for many different tabletop games. almost everything can be used with legion and works pretty well. follow the advice and fill about 25% of the board with terrain. 6. not much to add really. if you know tabletop-wargames you will get into it really quickly. the initiative/order-system and the missiondesign-minigame are especially welldesigned. enjoy the game! it's really good.
  17. defining the terrain doesn't really help in this case. the piece of terrain is defined. it's a wall higher than the troopers, so it is impassable to those troopers. it's also obvious that any soldier could easily scale it (you can climb up nearly twice as high). climbing up and then down again only works if you can actually be on top in between the moves. this is not possible with most "wall" terrain bits. it seems to be an oversight that there are no actual rules to climb over a 2m high wall.
  18. a unit has to make it's compulsary move. due to **** positioning (well played, shlomi! ) there is no legal way to make the move successfully. the only options are: 1) move off the board 2) perform a partial move and suffer damage does flying off the board have priority in this case?
  19. the rules to climb up/down something are simple enough. what if i want to climb over a wall that's too high to just walk over? i couldn't find anything on that topic. am i blind?
  20. this has been cause for debate in my gaming club as well. it appears that as written, if there is any terrain between shooter and target (determined by the "imaginary line"), there is also cover. this does not make sense, especially when the terrain rules on page 8 of the rules reference seem to imply true los.
  21. ohh, nice catch, i missed that as well!
  22. it checks with luke's value, which is 3. courage is never multiplied. 4 troopers have 1 courage, not 4.
  23. these games work very well. you just need to remember to use at least 2 large los-blockers (large enough to hide a whole trooper unit), then those games become highly tactical.
×
×
  • Create New...