Generic Generals

[Caimheul1313 2,990]

8 minutes ago, jcmonson said:

Because the Star Wars universe is more than just what is seen in current media.  I mean Hera mentions that there are other rebel cells, but as of yet there are no named commanders of them so if you wanted to play as one of them you are out of luck.  This debate seems to boil down to two sides, people who want to experience the iconic characters from Star Wars, and those who want to play in the wider star wars universe.  The thing that I don't get personally is why people are so against releasing Generic commanders?  It's not like the popular ones from the movies/books/games aren't going to get released.  Cheep commanders would have to be balanced just like every other commander.

That being said Alex Davy seems firmly in the only playing as Iconic Characters camp so that is probably what we are going to get.

Arguably we see lots of those leaders during the meeting scene in Rogue One. However, other groups that were in active rebellion against the Empire are unlikely to be using the exact same equipment as far as uniform and blasters for their troopers, or necessarily have Fleet troopers, so I'd say the models used for Corps units is much more limiting than the Commander, especially when FFG have only revealed the first two Commanders for each side. 

There's a difference between giving stats and everything to a character that is only mentioned by name in passing in a book and "Here's a Rebel commander model where you pick the weapon and the special rules" which seems to be what most people mean by "Generic commander" and is much more difficult to balance. Plus, if you want to represent some other Rebel cell being led by a female commander, just repaint your Leia model or modify it in some way (following any OP guidelines in that regard if you care about "legality" for tourneys and the like). Just because the cards have certain names on them do not mean they can't be someone else in your head canon.

The goal of a wargame is not to tell stories, that's the scope of an RPG. The "scope" of Legion is more limited by the scale and size of the forces than any choice about named characters. Personally, I don't care one way or another, but it makes the most sense financially for them to stick with named Commanders and to release the best known characters from the original trilogy first. Which is more likely to get a person to pick up the core game, seeing Vader choke a rebel soldier, or a random Imperial officer shooting a Rebel? And If they were going to release Vader in the core box, then they almost had to include Luke, just so both sides would have their most recognizable Force using commander released simultaneously.

[Squark 2,555]

It occurs to me I've been dancing around my main objections to gen3ric commanders without actually saying them. So, here are the three issues I have with generic commanders;

1) Legion's release schedule is finite. In the short term I'd much rather see Han, Jyn Erso, Saw Guerrara, Chewbacca, Krennic, Palpatine, The Grand Inquisitor, Hera, Kanan, etc. than a generic commander, and that's more than enough commanders to get us into next year.

2) Legion isn't well suited to customizing units like I said before, so we'd either get a pair of really bland commanders, or need a ton of them to cover all the different commanders people would want.

3) The Phantom II. The Palp-mobile. Flotillas in Armada (especially the bomber command variety). Manaroo. Alex Davies games have a rather spotty track reccord with cheap support units, and going any cheaper than Veers would likely yield either something near ubiquitous, or something worthless.

 

Ultimately, I think the people who want generic commanders for flavor reasons are better off converting or scratch building their own commander and using the stats for existing characters.

Edited March 18, 2018 by Squark

[jcmonson 302]

1 hour ago, Caimheul1313 said:

There's a difference between giving stats and everything to a character that is only mentioned by name in passing in a book and "Here's a Rebel commander model where you pick the weapon and the special rules" which seems to be what most people mean by "Generic commander" and is much more difficult to balance.

I havent seen that most people who want "generic" commanders want fully customizable commanders.  I agree that it would be a lot of work.

What I see mostly is that people want "Imperial Captain" or "Rebel Leader" or such. Give them a standard blaster, 2 health, 2 or 3 courage, some basic command cards and cost it from there.

The customizable commander wouldn't work and shouldn't be done.  The "nameless" low cost week commander could be done in an interesting way.

[Caimheul1313 2,990]

26 minutes ago, jcmonson said:

What I see mostly is that people want "Imperial Captain" or "Rebel Leader" or such. Give them a standard blaster, 2 health, 2 or 3 courage, some basic command cards and cost it from there.

It has come up a few times in previous threads, typically asking for customization of the model to change weapons and such. Your description of "Rebel Leader" sounds like it would be taking a design space that General Madine or Saw Gerrera could fill. "Imperial Captain" sounds somewhat like a design space for Governor Pryce or Director Krennic. The Commanders give the armies flavour between the command cards and any special rules they have. Besides, characters are going to sell better just on the name and model, even when people don't know the rules before hand, so why use up design time and space on a generic? 

[Lord Cedric 141]

Exactly, @jcmonson. At least for me, anyways. I'm not necessarily looking for a lot of customization with commanders in general.. whether it's generic or named. But I'd like to be able to incorporate my own commanding characters and fit them into lists for more diversity in armies, invent new narratives and stories for my forces, and to see a broader array of armies brought to the table to play with and against. 

I also disagree with others who seem to think that war games are not narrative. If anything.. they are ALL narrative. Two armies are here to battle.. why here? What armies? What are the individual goals? Heck.. even the actual game rules provides us with narrative! The objectives. The environment. The sides. etc. 

[jcmonson 302]

8 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

It has come up a few times in previous threads, typically asking for customization of the model to change weapons and such. Your description of "Rebel Leader" sounds like it would be taking a design space that General Madine or Saw Gerrera could fill. "Imperial Captain" sounds somewhat like a design space for Governor Pryce or Director Krennic. The Commanders give the armies flavour between the command cards and any special rules they have. Besides, characters are going to sell better just on the name and model, even when people don't know the rules before hand, so why use up design time and space on a generic? 

I guess I see those characters in the same design space as Leia and Veers.

[Col. Dash 48]

As someone who in most games that generally doesn't like HQ characters beyond what should be present, I am all in favor of generic Captains and LTs. Vader and General veers are not showing up to take a hands on approach at every little skirmish nor can they be everywhere. Generics allow us to run our own little section of the Star Wars universe without the movies. If I want Captain Vrill TK975, a Storm Trooper Officer, commanding the Alpha Company of 97th Sand Trooper Regiment who is not just a counts as model then I should be able to do so.

Edited March 19, 2018 by Col. Dash

[VAYASAN 850]

2 minutes ago, Col. Dash said:

As someone who in most games that generally doesn't like HQ characters beyond what should be present, I am all in favor of generic Captains and LTs. Vader and General veers are not showing up to take a hands on approach at every little skirmish nor can they be everywhere. Generics allow us to run our own little section of the Star Wars universe without the movies. If I want Captain Vrill TK975, a Storm Trooper Officer, commanding the Alpha Company of 97th Sand Trooper Regiment who is not just a counts as model then I should be able to do so.

Agreed 100%.

 

Its brilliant to have heroes available....but just like in Star Wars roleplaying, we dont always want to be one of the big heroes...we want to make our own stories.

[LunarSol 1,369]

It's probably worth remember that Veers IS a generic commander.  He's only got anything resembling a backstory because this is Star Wars and we need to write epic tales about the guy running through Bespin with an ice cream maker.  In any other universe we he would totally just be titled "tank commander" which is more or less the same as 40k's Space Marine Captains.

[Dark Don 91]

Holding out for a "You Rebel Scum!" card here! 

[Caimheul1313 2,990]

22 hours ago, Lord Cedric said:

Exactly, @jcmonson. At least for me, anyways. I'm not necessarily looking for a lot of customization with commanders in general.. whether it's generic or named. But I'd like to be able to incorporate my own commanding characters and fit them into lists for more diversity in armies, invent new narratives and stories for my forces, and to see a broader array of armies brought to the table to play with and against. 

I also disagree with others who seem to think that war games are not narrative. If anything.. they are ALL narrative. Two armies are here to battle.. why here? What armies? What are the individual goals? Heck.. even the actual game rules provides us with narrative! The objectives. The environment. The sides. etc. 

It is not that wargames are not narrative, rather the narration is not a fundamental core aspect of the game's design. All of your questions are questions only for the players to answer if they care. Answers are not required for the game to be played. The fact that the game gives you a seed of narrative to start your head canon is great, but it is not a core goal of the game. For instance, you could end up with "sabotage the moisture evaporators" on a board with a river flowing through it. The game doesn't care about narrative, only the players might. Especially in a tournament setting.

2 hours ago, LunarSol said:

It's probably worth remember that Veers IS a generic commander.  He's only got anything resembling a backstory because this is Star Wars and we need to write epic tales about the guy running through Bespin with an ice cream maker.  In any other universe we he would totally just be titled "tank commander" which is more or less the same as 40k's Space Marine Captains.

This. I believe there was an interview with the lead designer where he indicated all Commanders would be named. That doesn't mean we will only have Commanders that are well known characters from the canon media or EU, but that any Commanders FFG releases will have a name and not be just "Rebel/Imperial Commander." They could even use Kayn Somos, General Octavion Sorin, Agent Blaise, or any other named character FFG created for IA as Empire Commanders. Alternately, we may eventually see new FFG original commanders, but for now I expect it is mostly going to be movie characters as I think those will overall sell better, and attract more new players to Legion.

Edited March 19, 2018 by Caimheul1313

[Portage 21]

If we ever see a generic commander I would like to see them without specials.

But they would have 3 commander’s upgrade spots, 1 gear upgrade, 1 grenade upgrade, and 1 comms upgrade.

Edited March 19, 2018 by Portage

[Squark 2,555]

Like I've said before, I'm fine with generic commanders from a thematic point (Although there a bunch of named commanders I personally would prefer to see first).

Mechanically, though, cheap commanders are tricky to balance. As a mandatory purchase that isn't very good at doing objective stuff unless you pump a ton of points into them, a dirt cheap commander is very attractive from a competitive standpoint. While FFG might manage to balance them right this time (They can only screw up so many times before they get it right), the easiest way to do that is to keep the generic commanders really bland, with as few moving parts as possible. Even then, such commanders would probably end up being ubiquitous unless they were deliberately overpriced.

The better solution for those who desire to create their own commanders is to convert/kitbash new models and use the stats for Leia/Veers and future commanders of similar status.

[boogle22 22]

Hello no. Dude, there's dozens upon dozens of character commanders to go through for each side before having to make a generic commander.. the only way I would even think about a generic commander is if he or she came with tons of unique abilities you could choose form to make that commander completely unique (not just three upgrade cards but 20 different upgrades).

[Caimheul1313 2,990]

@Squark I agree 100%. Not to mention a cheap secondary commander whose whole job is just to provide a radius of improved morale and for issuing orders to flanking troopers would be an auto-include in just about every list. Converting is the best option, and may be the only option for a "custom" commander. The other issue being a generic Commander would be harder to justify as to why they have to be unique, making them the first Command unit that could be duplicated. Additionally, they would probably have to include Command cards in the box as there are not enough of the generics to fill out a "deck." Any Command Card printed for a generic Commander is one that could not be used for a named character in future, as the Command cards seem to be a major part of differentiating the Commanders from each other.

[Big Easy 429]

6 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

@Squark I agree 100%. Not to mention a cheap secondary commander whose whole job is just to provide a radius of improved morale and for issuing orders to flanking troopers would be an auto-include in just about every list. Converting is the best option, and may be the only option for a "custom" commander. The other issue being a generic Commander would be harder to justify as to why they have to be unique, making them the first Command unit that could be duplicated. Additionally, they would probably have to include Command cards in the box as there are not enough of the generics to fill out a "deck." Any Command Card printed for a generic Commander is one that could not be used for a named character in future, as the Command cards seem to be a major part of differentiating the Commanders from each other.

As much as I'd like to see generic commanders at the appropriate time (after the cool named ones are released), the fact that commanders are tied to command cards make me think this is less likely. I'm still not convinced a cheap commander is an auto-include, the point of balancing any unit is to avoid it from being an auto-include. I do trust FFG to know what they're doing there (insert all of your examples of times X-wing has been broken here).

[Caimheul1313 2,990]

Just now, Big Easy said:

As much as I'd like to see generic commanders at the appropriate time (after the cool named ones are released), the fact that commanders are tied to command cards make me think this is less likely. I'm still not convinced a cheap commander is an auto-include, the point of balancing any unit is to avoid it from being an auto-include. I do trust FFG to know what they're doing there (insert all of your examples of times X-wing has been broken here).

The thing is, a cheap Commander would make a large portion of your army better with the radius effects. Using Leia and Veers as a baseline at 90 points with 4 special rules, a barebones, no special rules Commander would probably be around MAYBE 50 points at most? Even if not a flat out auto-include, it would see play in just about every competitive list, as trading a single Corps unit to double the Suppression needed to Panic the remaining units would be quite powerful. 

Much like how just about every competitive fleet list I've seen for Armada contains at least one flotilla. 

[Big Easy 429]

6 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

The thing is, a cheap Commander would make a large portion of your army better with the radius effects. Using Leia and Veers as a baseline at 90 points with 4 special rules, a barebones, no special rules Commander would probably be around MAYBE 50 points at most? Even if not a flat out auto-include, it would see play in just about every competitive list, as trading a single Corps unit to double the Suppression needed to Panic the remaining units would be quite powerful. 

Much like how just about every competitive fleet list I've seen for Armada contains at least one flotilla. 

You may well be right, but it could be that the generic commander costs 70--considerably less than the cheaper named ones at 90. Including them would then give you at least 20 more points to play with in your squads, which can make the difference in some lists. The inclusion of at least one flotilla in Armada is a good thing in my eyes (not the fleets with 5 of them, necessarily) as it breaks up the "huge ships only" meta. My point is, point value isn't absolutely determined by the sum of individual abilities and it is theoretically possible to get it done in an interesting way. 

That said, I'm not holding my breath for generics and mostly I'm killing time arguing for them while waiting to get started painting.

Edited March 19, 2018 by Big Easy

[Caimheul1313 2,990]

Just now, Big Easy said:

You may well be right, but it could be that the generic commander costs 70--considerably less than the cheaper named ones at 90. Including them gives you at least 20 more points to play with in your squads, which can make the difference in some lists. The inclusion of at least one flotilla in Armada is a good thing in my eyes (not the fleets with 5 of them, necessarily) as it breaks up the "huge ships only" meta. My point is, point value isn't absolutely determined by the sum of individual abilities and it is theoretically possible to get it done in an interesting way. 

That said, I'm not holding my breath for generics and mostly I'm killing time arguing for them while waiting to get started painting.

In my experience, from a design standpoint there is typically a core cost for specific abilities, so it depends on how much the special abilities Veers and Leia has were pointed during the design phase, and what is considered the "basic cost" of a unit being a Commander. It's hard to tell at this point in the game, as we don't have enough units to compare in order to start peeking behind the curtain just yet . It's not that I mind seeing stuff like flotillas that fills a different slot in a list, just that they are obviously good value for the points so have become very widespread.

I wouldn't mind having a generic commander, but I think that design space will be filled by some lesser known or FFG original characters. And that's basically why I'm on here as well, closest thing I'm getting to an Legion fix until my FLGS starts fulfilling their pre-orders. 

[dboeren1 294]

They already have lots of "named" characters in X-Wing that the general public isn't going to recognize.  I expect they can do the same here, pick any minor officer mentioned in some obscure book and make them into the equivalent of a low-powered generic leader with comparatively weak abilities.

[Squark 2,555]

49 minutes ago, Big Easy said:

I'm still not convinced a cheap commander is an auto-include, the point of balancing any unit is to avoid it from being an auto-include. I do trust FFG to know what they're doing there (insert all of your examples of times X-wing has been broken here).

Well, yes. But some things are a lot harder to balance than others. Cheap HQ/Commander/etc. units tend to push other commanders out competitively simply because short of deliberately making them bad or boring*, they tend to be very efficient at doing the one thing you need a commander to do, without spending points on things a non-mandatory unit will do better (e.g. Veers has significantly less firepower than 8 stormtroopers).

*As a thought exercise, I've been toying with how one would go about making a generic commander, and I think I did figure out a base template for one. The problem is that the units were quite frankly boring. But hefe they are, for reference;

Imperial Officer- 60 points

Speed 2/4 Health/2 Courage

White Defense Die, offensive surge to hit, defensive surge to block (That uniform is decidedly unarmored)

Keywords: Sharpshooter 1 (Otherwise cover renders his attacks completely useless)

Weapons: Close Combat Training (Melee, 2 black dice), Heavy Blaster Pistol (Range 1-3, 2 Black dice, pierce 1)

No upgrade slots (Non-command upgrades thus far are useless to this guy, and I do not want him taking esteemed leader)

Rebel Captain -65 points

Speed 2/Health 4/Courage 2

Red defense die, surge to hit (To differentiate them from the Imperial version. Also, I figure the cash strapped rebellion would prioritize better armor for key personnel)

Keywords: Sharpshooter 1 (See above)

Weapons: <insert word for close combat here> (2 black dice), Light Repeater (Range 1-3, 3 white dice, pierce 1)

No upgrades

Shared Command Cards (These are just worse versions of Luke and Vader's since they're open to everyone).

Priority 1: Lead from the front: 1 Commander

Priority 2: Infantry Charge: 2 Troopers

Priority 3: Full Mobilization: 1 Commander and 2 units

You could tweak these, of course, but as soon as you start to give them more options, they start to crowd out everybody else.

[LunarSol 1,369]

The other issue is just the matter of modeling.  You give people the option to make their own characters and they problem don't want them only differentiated by color palette.  There are certainly ways to give players ways to customize their models, but its not something you see a lot of outside of GW for a reason (and even GW is moving away from it) and something I'm not sure I've seen any of in the material FFG is working with.

[Caimheul1313 2,990]

@Squark Minor feedback, it seems that FFG has decided most pistols are range 1-2, and Rebel Commander probably shouldn't have armour in my opinion (particularly as Leia does not). Nimble wouldn't necessarily feel out of place on either though. Having both units identical would not necessarily be a bad thing, since they are filling the same role in both armies.

That being said, this sort of design could also work for some nobody we haven't heard of before, making it a unique unit to prevent doubling. 

[HadeusHawkyns 48]

I'm curious why "Generic" has to mean "Cheap." A lot of what I'm reading makes it sound like people want generic commanders because some of the major names in some scenarios might not make narrative sense. I don't see why there couldn't be an unnamed commander that costs 100+ points that represented your typical high-ranking Rebel/Imperial. With some of the "generic" commanders like Veers, you could probably just give him a different paintjob and be done with it- he's not as distinctive as Luke, Leia, or Vader.

[buckero0 1,956]

Don't have to be cheap, I think Luke and Vader will probably be the most expensive commanders outside of maybe Emperor Palpatine though.

Most of the Generic commanders will probably have a name, but I'm okay with them making up characters to "fill in" a need. Just like in Imp Assault, they've created figures like Kayn Somos, Agent Blaise, General Weiss, Terro etc.

I would hope to see a lot of of these figures have a role in Legion honestly plus a  lot more.

Kayn = super stormtrooper

Blaise, = spy sniper

Weiss = AtSt

Terro = Dewbacks

Edited March 19, 2018 by buckero0