Jump to content

Qark

Members
  • Content Count

    200
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Qark

  1. Above links updated with a few changes. Max damage now at 25 to account for Fire Support Surge tokens included Critical keyword included Shield tokens included Changed layout slightly Links above should still work but here is the .exe link again just in case: https://github.com/andrew-s-hart/SW-Legion-Probability-Calculator/raw/master/LegionCalculator.exe If I have missed any new keywords or you find a bug let me know!
  2. I am very surprised to hear games aren't finishing. Even at a rally point level where I am playing if time is called and a game is still going they are always already on turn 6.
  3. I don't think the HQ uplinks are needed, that should give you enough points for some astromechs?
  4. Ill probably have another aneurysm but here we go anyway. It isn't a comparison between a T-47 and a unit of speeder bikes. It is a comparison between a T-47 and 2 units of speeder bikes. A unit of bikes is only 90 points compared to the 175 of the T-47 Objectives: Moisture Vaporators: Neither can contribute. Recover Supplies: Neither can contribute. Key Positions: Unit leaders can contribute not just troopers. Both can contribute. 2 units of bikes do this 2 times more effectively than 1 T-47. Transmissions: Neither can contribute. Breakthrough: Unit leaders can contribute not just troopers. Both can contribute. 2 units of bikes do this 2 times more effectively than 1 T-47. So right away the bikes are going to help you actually win more often than the T-47 but lets also consider damage output. Both have speeder, which if you are using correctly probably means you get to aim before you shoot. Not going to consider defense dice because neither unit has pierce so it is irrelevant to the comparison. (Double check my numbers, I have a habit of clicking the wrong button on my calculator which you can find here: Damage Results: 1 Bike Unit - Average: 4.69 Median: 5 Mode: 5 T-47 - Average: 4.77 Median: 5 Mode: 5 Neither one surges to crit, there is no advantage either way if target has cover. The damage output is the same for a single unit. But there are TWO bike units. I know which is better here. Damage Against Armour: 1 Bike Unit - Average: 2.9 Median: 3 Mode: 3 T-47 - Average: 3.79 Median: 4 Mode: 4 A single T-47 does outperform a single bike unit here but, again, there are two bike units. I know which is better here. An additional point about the bikes is that because there are two of them they are more versatile. With the T-47 if you need 2 damage to kill an AT-RT you can't then use the left over damage somewhere else. With the bikes the first unit can kill the AT-RT while the second can damage something else, and that isn't even considering the advantages an extra activation brings to the overall game. So lets consider survivability against some common units. Ill assume the attacker is aiming. Against the DLT both units have cover 1 so both expect to take 1 damage. That's a draw. You can give the T-47 cover 2 but if you also consider the regular troopers shooting then that extra cover makes no difference. In the case with the whole squad shooting the bikes expect to take 2 damage. That is 7 shots to kill the T-47, 6 shots to kill the 2 units of bikes. Slight advantage to the T-47 but I wouldn't consider that significant. Snow Troopers with impact grenades and a flamethrower (not counted for T-47 obviously): T-47 expects to take 2 damage. Bikes expect to take 3 damage. In both cases it is 4 attacks to kill the unit(s). That's a draw. Rebel Troopers with Z6: T-47 expects to take 1 damage. Bikes expect to take 2 damage 7 shots to kill the T-47, 6 shots to kill 2 units of bikes. Slight win to T-47. The thing the T-47 is 'meant' to kill - Occupier Tank with Hammers Pilot and RT-97C Pintle: T-47 expects to take 2 damage. Bikes expect to take 3 damage. In both cases it is 4 attacks to kill the unit(s). That's a draw and I give it the weapon which favors the T-47. Snipers (ill use rebel but the numbers are similar for both). T-47 expects to take 0 damage. Bikes expect to take 1 damage. This is the only situation where the T-47 is significantly better than bikes. That said if I am an imperial player with 3 sniper teams and 2 bikes and your 3 snipers are shooting at my bikes while my snipers shoot at your snipers I think I am happy. Its unlikely that you'll manage to finish off the bikes before I finish off your snipers, at which point I have 3 snipers and some bikes left while your snipers are gone. I also think that it is quite a bad choice to send your speeder units in to kill enemy snipers. They have to push too far forward to do so letting the opponent focus them down while the rest of your army plays catch up. I really don't see how that makes up for the above.
  5. For me the difference is really obvious. Playing for fun: don't include any strike teams. Playing competitively: include 3 strike teams before thinking about the rest of the list.
  6. It's too late. Send help.
  7. Been following this thread for comedic value since the start. I need to stop before I have an aneurysm. Wasn't this obvious 8 pages ago?
  8. I wonder if they are going the 2.0 route like x-wing did. A new clone wars starter set with conversion kits and a list building app that lets them modify points on the fly?
  9. Well at my local rally point I did run a 13 activation list for exactly this reason but the issue, as others have stated, is that the unit(s) you save till the end need to be able to do something meaningful when they do activate. Even better when the early activating units can contribute as well. That is why snipers are the best delaying unit, not only are they a very cheap delay but they can contribute to the fight from relative safety while they delay. Even without killing something a single suppression token at the right time can swing a game.
  10. This is exactly it. Going last on those turns where you are starting out of range to really powerful. A quote from where I posted in a different thread: "When two teams set up across from one another the person with less activations is forced to move forward into firing range of the person with more activations. Lets say person A has 2 activations and person B has 1 and its the start of game. All units have range 3 weapons. They deploy range 5 from each other. Let's say B goes first. At range 5 a single move won't let B shoot so they have a choice; move and get shot by both of A's units or don't move so they don't get killed. Not moving isn't a viable option because this is an objective game. So B moves towards the objective; if they move once they are in range 4 and if they move twice they are in range 3. Now A has two activations that can move and shoot at B's unit or aim and shoot at B's unit depending on how far B moved." And it isn't just about shooting. If you can delay moving your key units until your opponent has moved all of theirs then you can place your units with much better knowledge of the enemy's plans. That knowledge is super helpful in an objective game and helps you pick your match-ups. If you have some units with impact and some with blast and spray delaying until you see where your opponent puts their vehicles and where they put their troopers will allow you to move your army in such a way that allows you fight exactly what you want with the unit best suited to kill it.
  11. The T-47 is obviously rubbish. That said I have really enjoyed flying them (more the moving around part rather than the losing the game part). Now that they have access to cover 2 what is the best list that they can be run in? Thinking as a pair with HQ uplink but that is a lot of points.
  12. Ah! I was wondering why we hadn't had a new "sniper/activation is killing the game" thread for a week. Looks like we are hijacking other threads now. : P In all seriousness bigger dice pools push more damage over cover than the same amount of dice in smaller pools. If that helps take units off the table quick enough it might just make a difference.
  13. Anyone put the T-47 on the table with cover 2 yet?
  14. My local meta hasn't change for a few waves. A few upgrades change here and there and maybe a unit swaps around after a release but otherwise game have felt the same for months. That is the definition of stale. Yes, new factions will change things but they aren't out yet, wont be out for a few months, and things are stale now. Furthermore I would go as far as to say the new factions will not be competitive initially because they don't have access to strike teams right off the bat. People will still use the new factions because they are new and exciting but Ill be very surprised if we see them at top tables. I don't think anyone wants hero armies. All I want is to not have to choose between running 3 sniper teams or not having a chance of placing in a tournament. Counter-counter point: The good players run 3 sniper teams because it makes their list good and they are looking to win. Not true really. If you have a large enough sample size you can draw conclusions without controlling every variable such as the person behind the list. I don't know if we have enough data for that though, I haven't looked at it, so I can only comment on my local meta; those who were winning before snipers release are still winning after sniper release, and those who win run 3 snipers. When you talk to these people about not running 3 snipers they say things along the lines of "why would I do that? I want a chance at winning." Snipers have been around for a while I so far I haven't found anything to effectively deal with them that doesn't involve 3 snipers of your own. That's the issue. Yes chewie works well but unless you have snipers of your own you'll just hemorrhage wounds. You need something that can counterattack and that something is snipers.
  15. I dont think some of you quite understand what I mean by a pass mechanic. It's not a set number of passes. It's not each player gets 3 per turn for example. You can only pass if you have less activations remaining than your opponent and once you start activating you can no longer pass. Let's say player A has 5 units and player B has 3 units. A has more activations than B so A can't pass. A activates a unit so they have 4 remaining. B has less units than A so they can choose to pass, they do. A still has more than B so they activate again, leaving each player with three unactivated units. Now B can't pass and must activate. From there you alternate like normal. If A had 10 activations and B had 6, B could pass until A only had 6 left. Then they alternate. The problem passing is trying to solve is that when two teams set up across from one another the person with less activations is forced to move forward into firing range of the person with more activations. Lets say A has 2 activations and B has 1 and its the start of game. All units have range 3 weapons. They deploy range 5 from each other. Let's say B goes first. At range 5 a single move won't let B shoot so they have a choise; move and get shot by both of A's units or don't move so they don't get killed. Not moving isn't a viable option because this is an objective game. So B moves towards the objective if they move once they are in range 4 and if they move twice they are in range 3. Now A has two activations that can move and shoot at B's unit or aim and shoot at B's unit depending on how far B moved. Lets look at the same case as above but this time with a pass. B goes first, A has more activations than B, B passes. A must activate one unit as they can't pass. A moves forward because it's an objective based game. The unit A moved isn't in range to shoot or is in range but doesn't have enough actions left. B must activate now that the activation count is equal, they can move and shoot at the unit A just activated. Then A activates their last unit who can move and shoot at B. Really as long as you can't pass and both players are skilled at the game the person with fewer units is going to be taking multiple shots from the person with more without being able to return fire. You might say "hide behind terrain" sure. I guess, if you want to give the opponent control over where you can and can't go. I am playing with 25% of the table covered in terrain and about half - three quarters of that being Los blocking. From my experience you need significantly more Los blocking terrain than that before the opponent with more activations is no longer controlling where you can and can't go.
  16. I dont think kill points will help because the types of lists you want to avoid are also the best at killing stuff for the most part. I agree something needs to change and soon because I am mighty bored with tournament play at the moment. I think the two things that'll help are making strike teams unique and adding a pass mechanic. Unique strike teams will still allow people to run three snipers if they want but they'll have to pay for the full commando teams for the second and third snipers drastically reducing activation spam. A pass mechanic will allow smaller armies more control so they aren't forced to move into range of the enemy on those early turns.
  17. There was a thread on this idea a while back. I think it would be really really good for the game. Brings sniper spam down a notch and helps heavy units that quite frankly need some help.
  18. You are correct about cover but I did include sharpshooter in the calculation. Originally I was going to do veers as well where it does matter but didn't get around to it. My calculations were assuming no aim token then each attack only has a 34% chance at killing both snipers. With an aim token you are looking at 43%. If you assume 2/3 attacks don't need the aim, which is a safe assumption, so 6 hits your number are correct. I don't know if you were disagreeing with my opinion on snipers or just adding some more information about my numbers but either way you then go and make my point for me "and if only one survives he is easy prey for other snipers". Exactly. Even with leia you still need snipers for anti-sniper forcing all playing to bring snipers and kill list diversity.
  19. I agree snipers don't do much against heavies but heavies aren't competitive and so if you bring a heavy you lose to the other units. Not saying its a bad plan, double air speeder is a super fun build that I enjoy and it'll kill the snipers very fast but you don't win tournaments with it. Maybe once the new upgrades come out? Leia has a 34% chance to kill both members on the team assuming they have cover. On average you kill 1 sniper team and wound the other two. Good but you still need a sniper team of your own to finish them off. Veers kills a sniper team reliably, and doesn't touch the other two. You still need snipers to finish them off. Anyone who has played snipers once or twice will keep one of the guys out of line of sight so they can't be killed by theses cards. Again, that comes down to terrain setup which is a whole different discussion I feel. At any given tournament you should play on tables with different terrain types and densities so you'll have games where snipers do well and others where they don't but I find that even if you are playing with lots of LOS blocking and they aren't killing guys then they are forcing them to hide and are still very relevant to the game. But it isn't just 2 wounds. Its 2 wounds anywhere because of their range. It kills the last guy in a squad running away with an objective. It suppress that unit that needs two moves to make it to the opponents deployment to win the game. The sniper team's power isn't from the ability it kill units. The sniper teams power is the ability to control the game; for them to put their shot where ever they want while staying out of harms way. Even if they don't do much shooting and just allow you to pad out when vital units activate they are worth the measly 44 points.
  20. You could also make snipers range 2-4 instead of any range. Gives other units a chance to do something about them.
  21. My local meta is 4-6 corps, 3 sniper, 3 emplacements and commanders / operatives to taste. There are two problems with snipers in this meta. Firstly, activations. You need sniper teams to not get completely out activated at the end of every turn. Secondly, there is no counter to snipers other than snipers because they can sit across the table out of range or non-sniper units. 3 sniper teams will do significant damage to an army if left unchecked so you need to bring your own snipers to deal with them. The result of this is that if you want to be competitive you bring snipers. That is super boring to me and I think something needs to change. My preference is to make the strike team unique. It makes sense thematically and would stop the spamming while still giving people the option to run three snipers if they really want to by shelling out the extra points for the full units.
  22. If I can stick a bunch of clones in a LAAT Ill be happy.
  23. I think the 5 Y-wing list (or 4 with extras) is a problem. Not as big of a problem as the 3 first order shuttles but still a problem. I think the best way to deal with VTG is variable points based on the ships other arcs. If you have a PRINTED firing arc (y-wing for example) the cost should be higher than if you don't (YT-1300). That way big ships can still use it at an effective price since they don't double tap the same target but ships that can use it for two attacks on the same target have to pay a little more.
×
×
  • Create New...