Jump to content
Lyynark

New vehicles!

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, buckero0 said:

Crew could also add a wound to the vehicle, which would make it much more appealing to take.  Really we'll have to wait and see.  Exhaust on the crew makes sense in my head as a way the developers would balance things without the cost being 40pts or whatever.  If it's 23 then you'll add it, if its more expensive we'll see.

If it has no exhaust, then you'll definately take it with your ion gun to get the maximum effect of Arsenal 3 and Impact 3 +ion.  It does have 360 which the other mounted hardpoint does not have.

 

Fair enough on the exhaust, but we'll see. It would make since thematically since loading a rocket launcher on a moving landspeeder shouldn't be much easier than loading a grenade launcher. 

I doubt crew would add a wound, because that would probably be marked on the card as reminder text, and I don't see anything like that when I zoom in. Again, it's possible, but probably unlikely.

Share this post


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

This is only the current fashion in licensed/protected IP miniature wargames. It wasn't always the case for IP-heavy games, isn't presently in all wargames, and won't necessarily always be for these IP-heavy types. Fashion is ever changing.

Very true.  And assymetrical objectives can make unit countering a moot point.  Having played some stargrunt 2 back in the day, we played lots of missions where one side was vastly outnumbered by the other side but had an objective that didn't require all out combat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, devin.pike.1989 said:

And assymetrical objectives can make unit countering a moot point. 

Oldhammer was just zaniness that can't be pinned down. Middlehammer was very much driven like Legion is now, to its detriment, and the scoring system blatantly favored things that shouldn't have been better or worse from a simulation standpoint. In Newhammer, they got the objective system done with such finesse that I've tied or won games where I was virtually killed to a man with my collection-driven lists vs minmaxed lists. The new (well, not that new anymore) asymetrical objectives in W40k are pretty much what saved that game from itself IMO.

Edited by TauntaunScout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, TauntaunScout said:

Oldhammer was just zaniness that can't be pinned down. Middlehammer was very much driven like Legion is now, to its detriment, and the scoring system blatantly favored things that shouldn't have been better or worse from a simulation standpoint. In Newhammer, they got the objective system done with such finesse that I've tied or won games where I was virtually killed to a man with my collection-driven lists vs minmaxed lists. The new (well, not that new anymore) asymetrical objectives in W40k are pretty much what saved that game from itself IMO.

the tactical objectives? never played warhams but it looks pretty fun to have a bunch of objective cards and get dealt random objective through the game and to score victory points like that.

seems like something that should be adapted to Legion.

Share this post


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

the tactical objectives? never played warhams but it looks pretty fun to have a bunch of objective cards and get dealt random objective through the game and to score victory points like that.

seems like something that should be adapted to Legion.

I think the "TacO"s are horrible, at least the last time I played with them.

You could get stuck with objectives you could not physically achieve and no way to change them out while you opponent could rack up victory points if they got a lucky draw on theirs.

I much prefer Legion's Objective system. Still random-ish and you can influence which game you are playing every time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't able to research through the entire posting archive, but I believe we have broken the record for most replies to a star wars legion post.

🤗

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, thepopemobile100 said:

Firstly the T-47 is pretty bad and almost no one here will dispute that from a gameplay perspective.

Ahem, you must think Luke is really terrible then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Derrault said:

Ahem, you must think Luke is really terrible then?

You're going to have to explain what you mean there. Luke and the T-47 are very different models. They're trying to fill the same role, but they do it very differently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Derrault said:

Ahem, you must think Luke is really terrible then?

How so? I never mentioned Luke in that post and I'm not getting how me stating that the T-47 is lackluster is comparable to me not liking luke

Share this post


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


You could get stuck with objectives you could not physically achieve and no way to change them out while you opponent could rack up victory points if they got a lucky draw on theirs.

Last time I knew, ones that were impossible to achieve get automatically switched out. But there's more editions of 40k than I have brain cells these days so who knows. I've only played the latest edition a few times.

The very nature of the core combat mechanics of 40k have always mathematically favored hard elite little armies. But the nature of the random, ever changing, strewn around objectives, favors big sprawling armies.  So it balances out well.

Share this post


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

You're going to have to explain what you mean there. Luke and the T-47 are very different models. They're trying to fill the same role, but they do it very differently.

Well, starting with just the obvious: Luke’s much slower, has worse dice (at melee vs range 3 no less), and worse defense.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Derrault said:

Well, starting with just the obvious: Luke’s much slower, has worse dice (at melee vs range 3 no less), and worse defense.

 

Luke may be slower but he has better support play with his cards, his dice roll themselves actually produce the same rate of damage with his lightsaber which said weapon also has better keywords (pierce), he can actually hide behind most pieces of terrain, he can actually use dodges effectively and is cheaper. Just for starters.

With how common impact is on most units for the empire, the aircraft that has a shorter range than the things shooting at it which punch through armor has a hard time not dying if the opponent wants it dead. Luke actually succeeds at doing almost everything the T-47 can, with the exception of flanking which the T-47 can do but usually ends up dying after getting one or two shots off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, thepopemobile100 said:

Luke may be slower but he has better support play with his cards, his dice roll themselves actually produce the same rate of damage with his lightsaber which said weapon also has better keywords (pierce), he can actually hide behind most pieces of terrain, he can actually use dodges effectively and is cheaper. Just for starters.

With how common impact is on most units for the empire, the aircraft that has a shorter range than the things shooting at it which punch through armor has a hard time not dying if the opponent wants it dead. Luke actually succeeds at doing almost everything the T-47 can, with the exception of flanking which the T-47 can do but usually ends up dying after getting one or two shots off.

Cards are irrelevant; you could just take Leia or Han for better cards if that’s what is interesting.

As I said, Luke’s lightsaber is fine and all, but it’s also melee, not Range 3. Pierce is irrelevant if you can’t use it for one or more activations because you couldn’t get into melee.

Dodge only negates regular hits, which the always active cover 1 already does and armor already negates any additional regular hits. Luke can’t exactly dodge more frequently, he doesn’t have master of the force so it’s going to cost him an action to recover if he’s relying on force reflexes.

That just feeds into the action advantage for the T-47, it can always dodge, move and fire, Luke not so much. Better still, with it’s ability to go through terrain it can (and should) interpose height 2 terrain between it and enemies constituting a serious threat (measily DLT-19s need not apply; 1 maybe wound on an airspeeder that negates 2+ other hits without blinking thanks to cover, dodge, armor, is vastly preferable to those same hits actually landing on a unit).

Luke is less survivable than the T-47 purely because he has to save against the regular hits. If you use them both the same way, Luke dies first, on average.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Derrault said:

Cards are irrelevant; you could just take Leia or Han for better cards if that’s what is interesting.

As I said, Luke’s lightsaber is fine and all, but it’s also melee, not Range 3. Pierce is irrelevant if you can’t use it for one or more activations because you couldn’t get into melee.

Dodge only negates regular hits, which the always active cover 1 already does and armor already negates any additional regular hits. Luke can’t exactly dodge more frequently, he doesn’t have master of the force so it’s going to cost him an action to recover if he’s relying on force reflexes.

That just feeds into the action advantage for the T-47, it can always dodge, move and fire, Luke not so much. Better still, with it’s ability to go through terrain it can (and should) interpose height 2 terrain between it and enemies constituting a serious threat (measily DLT-19s need not apply; 1 maybe wound on an airspeeder that negates 2+ other hits without blinking thanks to cover, dodge, armor, is vastly preferable to those same hits actually landing on a unit).

Luke is less survivable than the T-47 purely because he has to save against the regular hits. If you use them both the same way, Luke dies first, on average.

Since I guess we're doing this now, I'll oblige

Cards are completely relevant. You can't ignore a part of a unit for the benefit of trying to make something else look better.

Luke's lightsaber isn't his only weapon. His pistol does just fine as is with the two guaranteed damage against a unit in the open. The airspeeder's damage average on a unit of stormtroopers in the open without a dodge is almost identical to the pistol damage from Luke. The difference from range 3 to 2 isn't drastic and any rebel player who has used fleets extensively can attest to that; it sucks but not by much.

The dodge action is still less worthwhile on an armored unit than an unarmored one because it can't cancel critical hits (something I think should change personally) which cover 1 also can't defend against. A ground unit like Luke is more likely to benefit from the terrain for cover, and with the low average damage from all imperial corp against commanders it's unlike you'll take much damage once in heavy cover anyway without a crit going though. "Measily" DLT-19's only don't apply when you've taken a dodge AND you're at range 4 so the rest of the unit can't attack. You seem to be forgetting that the T-47 dropped in use almost exclusively because of DLTs as even with the dodge you would want to have, it's only good for the first attack. The other 3 DLTs in range of your T-47 won't have that problem and will be throwing on the damage quickly in one round. T-47s rarely make it past 2 rounds of fire from a max stormtrooper corp. If part of your argument is that it can soak up fire better than Luke, then the AT-RTs do a better job than the T-47 while also being cheaper.

The T-47 is less survivable than Luke purely because it is an easy target that is usually in range of several trooper units. If you use them both the same way, the T-47 dies first because it gets over exposed on most deployments by turn 2 and dies by the end of turn 3.

Oh and if the T-47 was really better than Luke, it would've replaced him in a wonder twins list and been the meta thing for rebels to use for most of the game's existence.

Edited by thepopemobile100

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, thepopemobile100 said:

Since I guess we're doing this now, I'll oblige

Cards are completely relevant. You can't ignore a part of a unit for the benefit of trying to make something else look better.

Luke's lightsaber isn't his only weapon. His pistol does just fine as is with the two guaranteed damage against a unit in the open. The airspeeder's damage average on a unit of stormtroopers in the open without a dodge is almost identical to the pistol damage from Luke. The difference from range 3 to 2 isn't drastic and any rebel player who has used fleets extensively can attest to that; it sucks but not by much.

The dodge action is still less worthwhile on an armored unit than an unarmored one because it can't cancel critical hits (something I think should change personally) which cover 1 also can't defend against. A ground unit like Luke is more likely to benefit from the terrain for cover, and with the low average damage from all imperial corp against commanders it's unlike you'll take much damage once in heavy cover anyway without a crit going though. "Measily" DLT-19's only don't apply when you've taken a dodge AND you're at range 4 so the rest of the unit can't attack. You seem to be forgetting that the T-47 dropped in use almost exclusively because of DLTs as even with the dodge you would want to have, it's only good for the first attack. The other 3 DLTs in range of your T-47 won't have that problem and will be throwing on the damage quickly in one round. T-47s rarely make it past 2 rounds of fire from a max stormtrooper corp. If part of your argument is that it can soak up fire better than Luke, then the AT-RTs do a better job than the T-47 while also being cheaper.

The T-47 is less survivable than Luke purely because it is an easy target that is usually in range of several trooper units. If you use them both the same way, the T-47 dies first because it gets over exposed on most deployments by turn 2 and dies by the end of turn 3.

Oh and if the T-47 was really better than Luke, it would've replaced him in a wonder twins list and been the meta thing for rebels to use for most of the game's existence.

The cards are irrelevant because you can get better cards using cheaper units. SEE: Leia Organa. 

Luke’s Range is simply inferior, that’s indisputable. His max damage at that inferior range is equally inferior. The Pierce is very much there to make him not completely terrible despite throwing only two dice; don’t mistake it for great. At best you’re dealing 12 wounds over the course of 6 rounds assuming he survives. T-47 is capable of dealing 3x as many wounds in the same time frame (heck, one volley with the tail gun added on is 10 dice).

The T-47 suffers .99 damage on average from a full Stormtrooper unit with a DLT, requiring an average of 7.7 attacks.

Luke suffers 1.8125 from the same, dying in an average of 3.3 attacks.

It’s literally twice as survivable to direct fire. The AT-RT is not similarly protected, as it, like Luke, is vulnerable to melee, blast, lacks innate cover, and doesn’t have both speed 3 and a free speed 3 movement (not to mention the t-47 being able to fly past height 2 terrain to break line of sight).

 

Your argument against the T-47 boils down to: If you fly badly it doesn’t last one.

Yeah no kidding, that’s user error, not a fault of the unit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, TauntaunScout said:

Naboo is his home planet? O.F.F.S. Of COURSE it is. 🙄

 

He was the Senator from Naboo before he became chancellor.  That's why Padme' went to see him in TPM.  This is mentioned clearly and ostentatiously in the script/on the screen.

He set it all up on his planet so he could control the variables and the outcome.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Zrob314 said:

 This is mentioned clearly and ostentatiously in the script/on the screen.

I haven't seen the movie since 1999 so I don't know a lot of the details. Him living on Naboo would I suppose lend some more weight to the fan theory that Jar Jar is the Sith Yoda.

 

14 hours ago, Geressen said:

...but it looks pretty fun to have a bunch of objective cards and get dealt random objective through the game and to score victory points like that.

Yeah. There's downsides to it as mentioned. But it's way better than letting list optimization determine the winner.

Share this post


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

The cards are irrelevant because you can get better cards using cheaper units. SEE: Leia Organa. 

Luke’s Range is simply inferior, that’s indisputable. His max damage at that inferior range is equally inferior. The Pierce is very much there to make him not completely terrible despite throwing only two dice; don’t mistake it for great. At best you’re dealing 12 wounds over the course of 6 rounds assuming he survives. T-47 is capable of dealing 3x as many wounds in the same time frame (heck, one volley with the tail gun added on is 10 dice).

The T-47 suffers .99 damage on average from a full Stormtrooper unit with a DLT, requiring an average of 7.7 attacks.

Luke suffers 1.8125 from the same, dying in an average of 3.3 attacks.

It’s literally twice as survivable to direct fire. The AT-RT is not similarly protected, as it, like Luke, is vulnerable to melee, blast, lacks innate cover, and doesn’t have both speed 3 and a free speed 3 movement (not to mention the t-47 being able to fly past height 2 terrain to break line of sight).

 

Your argument against the T-47 boils down to: If you fly badly it doesn’t last one.

Yeah no kidding, that’s user error, not a fault of the unit.

Yes the cards are relevant because one unit has them and one doesn't regardless of how good they are. That's like me saying armor is irrelevant because better cheaper units have it.

Potential max damage is fine, but it seldom happens and certainly not when you need it most. By that same argument, the rebels with Z-6 should be the best unit in the game because they are capable of throwing out more damage then then almost every unit.

And now you go back to averages when they suit you best. Yeah T-47 takes less damage per attack on average, but it's also in a position where it's getting shot at more frequently and by more units which is going to bring it to the magical 7.7 attacks sooner. Your numbers for Luke are also for him in the open and it also doesn't account for cover from suppression. Assuming Luke doesn't have any cover or dodge (despite 2 of his cards giving him a free dodge and reflexes giving him a third so he should have a dodge token in half of the rounds), we'll round that first shot to two damage for simplicity. Luke now has light cover and next shot deals on average 1.3125 damage (rounded to 1). Each shot after that has averages to .8125 which is even less likely to take damage than the T-47. This also affects his time to kill to being over 6 attacks. The T-47 hits damage threshold sooner than that and is 1-2 hits from being destroyed. If Luke is in heavy from the start by the way (because why would anyone have their commander out in the open in the middle of the field) it takes 7.6 attacks without a dodge to kill Luke and it jumps to 8.6 with one behind heavy cover. So no, the T-47 really isn't all that much survivable compared to Luke in in the open and is equal to or worse if Luke has good conditions.

As shown above, T-47 is literally not twice as survivable to direct fire. The AT-RT doesn't need cover 1 to be similarly protected as melee is only dangerous with lightsabers to armor (except saber throw which T-47 is also vulnerable to), who cares about blast against armor as you still need crits to actually do damage which already ignore cover. The only argument that you presented that I can't refute is speed 3 and free movement.

Your argument against Luke boils down to: If you run him badly he won't last

Yeah no kidding, that's user error, not a fault of the unit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2019 at 7:37 AM, Copes said:

Hey!

I haven't read the full thread yet, but wondering if you can add the new Imperial Pilot as an option for the ATST. :)

Which one are you meaning? I don't actually play the game so if you could tell me the name of the upgrade so I can search it out, that would be helpful. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×