Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About lologrelol

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

76 profile views
  1. (I play rebels, and recently won a state tournament with triple AT-RT.) I agree that as a whole, rebels are slightly behind the imperials. But some of their units have abilities that can really be focused on to counter the direct effectiveness of imperials. The problem I have with rebels vs imps, is that the rebel's play style is not pushed ENOUGH towards a more maneuverable playstyle. Rebels mostly, just feel like slightly gimped imperials. Nimble + no surge to hit, as it stands, just isn't as good as storms. You nailed that. But there are a lot of other elements in the works. 3 Units that really embody the moveable close range style of the rebels are: Wookies - get around terrain easily, solid short range shooting and melee Pathfinders - infiltrate (get into a good spot and this can be a gold mine) Land Speeder - pretty quick, small target profile, and able to move in and out of full cover I think the designers need to make more units like these. Ones that really push the uniqueness of playing rebels. I think rebels really need some better options in corps and support, because we love to max out our elites.
  2. I hate bags. The ***** just look into the bag before fiddling around in it. And if they just have a glance at it before grabbing the bag, how do I know they haven't gotten to see one or two tokens before shuffling in there? I prefer the stack because if there's an issue. I just ask my opponent to let me shuffle/cut their stack.
  3. However. After looking at the 3D sculpts, I think the terribad paint job probably makes them look more blobby than they should be. Unless the 3D didn't translate well to casting.
  4. Wow. Those clone trooper sculpts look more blodgy and poorly proportioned than the storm troopers. I would have thought FFG would have learned their lesson after the death troopers (they look awesome). I really wanted to do clones... ffs.
  5. I wouldn't say Derrault's trolling is god-tier, but it's definitely up there. Pretty funny how he can string along 5 pages of thread likes this.
  6. I think mortars will help. One simple rules fix might be to chance the effect of a draw. (not really a FIX as such, but could help) So right now the person who annihilated the most points worth of units wins a draw, change that to total number of units destroyed perhaps? But that would make blue winning more often, and take out some granularity, so perhaps not ideal.
  7. But not flame throwers and grenades for some bizarre reason. lol
  8. Since the best armour (mandalorian) has been established as 3+, I don't see the need to add a new defence die. Attack wise the three dice, and their relative combos provide enough of a bonus.
  9. So much this. I'd even go as far as a 40 points drop. AT-ST is about 15 too much IMO.
  10. Cool, thanks. At the last tournament I went to cover was an issue rules wise. I'd like to see FFG make the next rules update make some of the issues stated in this thread more clear. Cheers
  11. Okay I think I get it now. In a nutshell: 1. Before the battle begins you determine what terrain can give cover, and to which unit types. 2. If a unit is shot it will gain that cover, if an imaginary line to the center of its base, crosses a terrain piece that grants its unit type (size etc) cover. ?
  12. Rules Ref. 1.3.0 Pg. 25 1. Determine number of obscured minis. 'If any part of a defending mini, including its base, is blocked by a piece of terrain, the player then traces an imaginary line from the center of the base of the defending mini. If the imaginary line crosses the piece of terrain that blocked line of sight, the defending mini is obscured.' Pg. 27 Declaring Terrain 'Once the level of cover that a piece of terrain will provide has been determined during setup, that piece of terrain provides that cover to the relevant units regardless of the degree to which minis in those units are blocked by that terrain.' 'Checking whether a piece of terrain is blocking half or more, or less than half, of a mini is only used during setup to determine whether or not that piece of terrain will provide cover during the game.' ... What am I missing? ... Also... Can we please get a definition of 'Obscured'. I can't find a reference to what obscured actually does, and what it means. We just have the rules saying things are or are not obscured. Yet we also have rules say units get cover, but it says nothing about obscured. In the rules ref we have Obscured as its own special entry, but no definition.
  13. Look man, we're all friends here. I'm sorry if my comment seemed overly harsh to you.
  14. I used OCD as a reductio ad absurdum, to show the extremeness of thought that is coming from those who require everything be 'exactly' to proportion, so they can enjoy their minis more. Is calling something 'murderous' making light of murder? No.
  15. Measure from the base. The infantry have been increasing in size as well. That's a walker, not a tank. Poor example matey. The transports just aren't large enough, and same goes with the battle tanks. Yeah, and one group's opinion will win out in the end because they aren't going to cater to both groups. Just because you value something doesn't make you right. I could be wrong. Maybe slightly downsizing some vehicles (which most won't notice), is not in line with what will make more money. I think FFG can't afford to ignore iconic units from the movies.
  • Create New...