Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Garhelm

sand Skiff terrain

Recommended Posts

Hi guys i design MDF terrain and as I am totally hooked on legion all i have been making recently is stuff for legion .I designed these sand skiffs as static terrain but when it came to the perspex base it made sense to put a movement notch in it. I thought it would be cool to open it up to you guys as to what kind of in game rules or profiles they should have .  

san1.jpg.2946a302d7d0189c92bd16a88ca2e419.jpgsan4.jpg.efe580367b819492f689508f9a24992b.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love it! Is the kit for sale or is this just for kicks and giggles? 

I'm not sure how I would Stat it for play. I'm curious about what some people think as I've been wanting to introduce vehicles like this onto play, myself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll start on stats.  

Move 3, without compulsory as these things are very happy hovering.  

Has Armor, but a white defense die and probably no surge.  They feel about as flimsy as AT-RTs.  Maybe seven wounds for the extra bulk.  I don't think they get Speeder X.

Weapons depend on what you put on it.  Would be fun to start with he AT-RT weapon options.  Probably different cost though.  Flamer on a Speed 3 vehicle could be brutal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are for sale but I am more interested what stats you guys think would suite it  . If i am aloud to share the link to my website on these forums i will but if not its still good to get feed back from other legion enthusiasts. 

Edited by Garhelm
spelling mistake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Brightguy said:

I'll start on stats.  

Move 3, without compulsory as these things are very happy hovering.  

Has Armor, but a white defense die and probably no surge.  They feel about as flimsy as AT-RTs.  Maybe seven wounds for the extra bulk.  I don't think they get Speeder X.

Weapons depend on what you put on it.  Would be fun to start with he AT-RT weapon options.  Probably different cost though.  Flamer on a Speed 3 vehicle could be brutal.

i would give it 1 hardpoint with a heavy repeating blaster similar to the E-Web.  No native attack.

transport 1: This unit can transport 1 corps unit.  This corps unit can attack using their weapons, but take damage from non crit hit results rolled against this unit.  Any unit being transported by this unit is destroyed when this unit is destroyed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I'd make them less of a unit and more of a special terrain one, possibly even used as an objective.

Empty ones are stationary, when stationary it can be freely boarded by standard movement.

Control is determined by which side has the most on board it. Having it move with only a portion of the automatic moves normally there with Speeder vehicles, perhaps having the required move if it was used for a move action the prior round. It would probably work best with the medium movement tool. Needing to climb (or force jump) onto it while it's in control of a side would work.

Those onboard are treated as having the benefits of the speeder type cover from those not also inside it.

Once per round, the player who has control of it, may spend a move from a unit onboard to move it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, jcmonson said:

transport 1: This unit can transport 1 corps unit.  This corps unit can attack using their weapons, but take damage from non crit hit results rolled against this unit.  Any unit being transported by this unit is destroyed when this unit is destroyed.

I'd probably go with:

"Open Transport" as the keyword, which stipulates that the embarked models may attack and be targeted (claiming light cover) . 

Make the number be the quantity of small base models that may embark - partly to future-proof against core units that may have lots more models, and to also allow a single character to join a unit on board. 

Hence, Open Transport 6

Rather than competely destroy embarked models with the vehicle, perhaps you could roll a red attack dice for each remaining wound the unit has (perhaps even surge to hit) and cause 1 wound for each hit or crit result. If the unit leader survives place them in base contact with the vehicle, remove the destroyed vehicle, place any further survivors in coherency with the left, discard all that unit's tokens then assign them 2 suppression. 

I'd assume that embarked models with cumbersome weapons may still attack even if the transport moved, so long as their host unit did not move. 

I agree not granting Speeder keyword, and I'd seriously be tempted to make it only Speed 2. That way, the benefit to infantry units is ignoring terrain that repulsors ignore, and being able to move without using a move action (but not giving them super-manoeuvrability). 

 

Edited by ABXY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd also give the Skiff it's own order token (rather than be an extension of the passengers) - that way you don't improve the activation efficiency of the embarked unit. 

---

@Garhelm - what size is the base, the same as AT-ST?

I would probably make the pegs 50% taller (to make it easier accessing the notch with a movement template), and put the pegs in a triangle configuration (1 front, 2 rear) for lateral stability (rather than in-line). 

 

Edited by ABXY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, ABXY said:

I'd probably go with:

"Open Transport" as the keyword, which stipulates that the embarked models may attack and be targeted (claiming light cover) . 

Make the number be the quantity of small base models that may embark - partly to future-proof against core units that may have lots more models, and to also allow a single character to join a unit on board. 

Hence, Open Transport 6

Rather than competely destroy embarked models with the vehicle, perhaps you could roll a red attack dice for each remaining wound the unit has (perhaps even surge to hit) and cause 1 wound for each hit or crit result. If the unit leader survives place them in base contact with the vehicle, remove the destroyed vehicle, place any further survivors in coherency with the left, discard all that unit's tokens then assign them 2 suppression. 

I'd assume that embarked models with cumbersome weapons may still attack even if the transport moved, so long as their host unit did not move. 

I agree not granting Speeder keyword, and I'd seriously be tempted to make it only Speed 2. That way, the benefit to infantry units is ignoring terrain that repulsors ignore, and being able to move without using a move action (but not giving them super-manoeuvrability). 

 

I was going for something that was mechanically simple, though those ideas sure sound like fun.  I do wonder though if allowing commanders to board might make it a little overpowered as it would be a quick way to move around your command bubble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea of having it be a model limit, not a unit limit. After all, the only time we saw this thing in the movies had it host to a fight between Luke, Han, and Chewwie versus Boba Fett and a unit of Jabba's thugs. So having it allow different units--even opposed units--to board it and fight on it would seem nessicary. 

As far as flying it, I think it should be flown as an action by whatever unit has an unengaged figure in base contact with the vehicle's control panel. This would mean either side could take the controls and it would not have its own order token. Also, if your enemy is on the skiff with you but you have the controls, you can fly his forces to someplace he didn't plan for... which I think sounds like a super fun way to play. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Albertese said:

I like the idea of having it be a model limit, not a unit limit. After all, the only time we saw this thing in the movies had it host to a fight between Luke, Han, and Chewwie versus Boba Fett and a unit of Jabba's thugs. So having it allow different units--even opposed units--to board it and fight on it would seem nessicary. 

As far as flying it, I think it should be flown as an action by whatever unit has an unengaged figure in base contact with the vehicle's control panel. This would mean either side could take the controls and it would not have its own order token. Also, if your enemy is on the skiff with you but you have the controls, you can fly his forces to someplace he didn't plan for... which I think sounds like a super fun way to play. 

Along with that, it would add other major tactics to it. Having Leia or Veers parked on it could work well to allow you to transport things around more easily.

Also having it as an objective to keep control of a skiff could be a very interesting option. Perhaps a get the skiff to a location...or control so many of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not faster than two and maybe limit actions from troops being transported. Otherwise it give a unit too many actions (skiff move via order token, then dodge/aim, shoot) in an activation.  I good with a weapons option, but not sure on firing arc. I am okay either way for a single unit or a max number of models. 

However I might only buy it for terrain. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Bohemian73 said:

Not faster than two and maybe limit actions from troops being transported. Otherwise it give a unit too many actions (skiff move via order token, then dodge/aim, shoot) in an activation. .... 

Naw... Having it impart free movement to figures on board is kinda the point of a flyable troop transport in a game like this if you ask me.  I would say that moving the skiff is an action made by a figure (or unit containing the figure) at the steering wheel.  But other figures on board should have no such limitations.

Speed 2 makes sense to me, with no compulsory movement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/17/2018 at 3:12 AM, ABXY said:

what size is the base, the same as AT-ST?

Yes it is the same size as the AT-ST. The reason the supports run front to back is that the model is quite long it is not really apparent in the photos but the fins at the back touch the base making it very stable when assembled . Originally I just wanted to use one support but it tipped forwards too easy .  

 

On 7/16/2018 at 8:55 PM, Shadows of the Future said:

Personally, I'd make them less of a unit and more of a special terrain one, possibly even used as an objective.

Empty ones are stationary, when stationary it can be freely boarded by standard movement.

Control is determined by which side has the most on board it. Having it move with only a portion of the automatic moves normally there with Speeder vehicles, perhaps having the required move if it was used for a move action the prior round. It would probably work best with the medium movement tool. Needing to climb (or force jump) onto it while it's in control of a side would work.

Those onboard are treated as having the benefits of the speeder type cover from those not also inside it.

Once per round, the player who has control of it, may spend a move from a unit onboard to move it.

This is kinda what i had in mind but there is some really good suggestions I am tempted to cut some more and play a game with them each way .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...