Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Kwatchi

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Riding on the back of a Wookiee is silly talk - they’d carry you around in baby bjorn slung at the front. 🤪
  2. Fun read! I’d suggest you write about support slots next. I was curious about your AT RT/speeder list you mentioned and hoping you’d expand on it. And if you can figure out an effective Wookiee x3 agro list, I’m all ears.
  3. I’m afraid I can’t really see bounty as a major balance issue to be addressed. Frankly, if I was asked to ‘fix’ inter-faction balance I would look at DLTs (remove Impact, replace with Crit-on-surge) before the bounty rule. I’m not pushing hard for this either btw.
  4. So... who won? I’m stuck up (waaay up) in the low arctic atm and can’t find a write up to help pass the time.
  5. Having just recently trying playing casual games at 500 pts using the the format from the Imperial Discipline blog, I think this is welcome news.
  6. I think the OP’s question is interesting but perhaps worded poorly. Rather than using the ‘competitive’ vs ‘casual’ comparison (which is a bit of a dog whistle statement leading to inevitable ‘I’m competitive but chill and friendly’ anecdotes), I would have gone “Strategist” vs “Cinematic” or similar. The difference is simply the selecting of units out of nostalgia (like me and my Wookie minor obsession) vs. selecting units to fit a strategy - which at the moment is predominately maximizing activations. The rules still work the same either way and the outcome is still a combination of skill and luck. So you can’t tell either player type apart on the tabletop at a distance, and it is only when you get close enough to see their little army men that you get an inkling. Nothing wrong with either play style as long as both players are in the same mind set. It’s just only when we get crossed views that issues ensue. Case in point: if I sat down to a friendly game and saw a netlisted 3 sniper, Boba & Veers list across from me, I’d ask if they want to actually bother playing it out against my 3 core unit gaggle of fur. It would not be much fun getting tabled by turn 3 on the off-chance their dice went ice cold so I could squeak out a win, so why waste my limited free time? tLDR: Put me down as a filthy casual
  7. Judging by their profile I don’t believe they’re a troll. They are just not a strong English speaker. I disagree with their opinion, but flagging them as a troll seems a bit harsh/lynch mob-like.
  8. My personal thought is that until the Strike Team nerf comes (most can agree that there is a need, but what form is a debate), 3 teams are an auto include for Rebel competitive lists for the sake of cheap activations. Fact of life unfortunately. One thing that has me curious after the Sabine reveal is the potential for saboteurs teams in combination with her bombs. It may end up being simply shot to pieces vs a range gun line, but it is at least a glimmer of an alternate play mode rather than range trading; at which Rebels are now at advantage thanks to Bossk & DTs. The good news is it is far easier to convert sabs than snipers, so you could stretch a Commando box into few teams and save some cash (assuming you photocopy the cards and no one objects). The bad news is that my stubborn attempts to play a Wookiee heavy hth list still leaves me with a lot of scorched fur and not much else. But someone has to come last. 😀
  9. I just spent a few minutes going over the Invader League Finals bracket lists. I’m simply going to post a quick & dirty parse (since I’m on my phone). # of lists: 32 # of lists with 3 snipers teams: 25 # of lists with 2 sniper teams: 5 # of lists with 3 saboteur teams: 1 # of lists with no sniper/saboteur teams: 1 (Yay Breadwinner!) When the commando/scout team nerf eventually comes, no one can be shocked. The competitive meta is stale with them as is, but at least some players are trying to push the needle a small bit. 1 list with IRG 1 list with Pathfinders 2 lists with the Oppressor tank 1 list with AT RT 1 list with a land speeder (no, not the snowspeeder ) 1 list with Speeder bikes Lots of 1-2 Deathtroopers as well as Bossk, with I take as a positive tbh.
  10. I’m bummed out. 😪
  11. Akbarscout taken yet? As to the OP’s question, I’m going approach the answer from another angle. My personal philosophy has always been buy what inspires me. Mostly because I am not a naturally avid painter and my group is keen on playing fully painted forces; not painted - not on the table without some penalty (e.g. Sing ‘I’m a little teacup’, buy the beer/snacks, etc.) This does means my force is a made up of some less efficient units that I was excited to finish (I’m big on Wookies, so I play 2 units and Chewie) but I always smile when I see my force lined up for a battle - before they get smooshed. In your case, decide what you want to paint next and go box to box. And if you can manage it, start a friendly competition with another player where you text each other pics of completed units. You’d be surprised how much you’ll get done to keep pace. My two credits.
  12. I must admit that this was my first impression as well. Regardless, the consensus is that the T-47 is the republic's "tank hunter" in a meta dominated by cheap troops. So it is designed for a role that is not needed atm. The solution would be to change its role, but rather than trying to shoehorn it into an efficient troop mulcher (which I truthfully don't think can be done at this point without errata), what about adding area denial tech instead? Something along the lines of a hard-point proton charge/mine dropper upgrade. Mines would eliminate the whole dichotomy of having arsenal 2 with weapons facing opposite directions (seriously... ?), and could help promote the use of saboteurs in the face of the over-saturation of sniper teams. Looking at Deathroopers, Krennic, and the oppressor tank, mass suppression seems to be a designed alternate Imperial game tactic - maybe proton bomb denial becomes the republic one. Would it make it worth the 175 + x points? Seems to me it could only improve its presently perceived non-value, if only a little.
  13. Actually, that is the exact problem stated by the OP. The tourney meta is horribly stale atm, with everyone just spamming min Z6/DLT and 3 sniper teams in order to max the number of activations. Yes there are some small wrinkles, but the core of each army play exactly the same. But as I said, there'd be a backlash. Too many have invested into this list mindset and their gained expertise & collection would be invalidated at a stroke; people are generally resistant to any change of the status quo to begin with...
  14. I think this can only be solved by individual tournament organizers stepping up and adding some competitive list building criteria on top of the existing rule set - and that would take some guts because there'd be a backlash. Something to force players out of their comfort zone and make them to use other pieces. The greater community would see that and eventually mimic ('cuz netlisting is a thing), even though regular "fun" play lists wouldn't be subject to the more stringent conditions. I'd envision something along the lines of : The Rule of Two: 1. Your 800pt tournament army list is only allowed to contain two of anything (unit, upgrade card, heavy weapon add-on, etc.), except for named characters where one remains the limit. 2. "Entourage" allows the taking of one additional unit above the stated limit of two. 3. Republic or CIS armies are exempt from this rule for corps and special forces units (until they get more options), but must split their selected units for any role slot if at all possible, and max number of corps units is 6. Verbiage would have to be tightened of course. This will obviously not really fix the corps unit spam for max. activation but will force players to comfortable with all available types rather than just plunk done carbon copy Z6/DLT squads as nauseum with three sniper teams. In fact I'd expect all lists will still contain all six corps (three sets of 2) for good while, but it would still be a step towards improving the diversity of the tourney meta and doesn't require FFG to re-write anything. In a few years the players will hopefully see there are other units worth playing and then the constraints can be removed. My 2 credits.
  15. A conscience? I kid That is a good rules wording catch. Getting this out in open now will spare FFG the need to create a Rearview Mirror upgrade card.
  • Create New...