LVO Top 6 lists and (brief) Recap - Never Tell Me The Odds

[Orkimedes 592]

A look at the top 6 lists from LVO.

 

https://swlegionodds.com/2019/02/10/lvo-top-6-lists-and-brief-reca/

[DarkTrooperZero 304]

So many strike teams

[Katarn 317]

1 hour ago, DarkTrooperZero said:

So many strike teams

Maybe a limit of 2 each of Z6, DLT or sniper's rifles per force would make for more interesting forces.

[Dave Grant 248]

Out of interest what where the boards like ??

These top lists look like they are better suited to relatively open boards 

[KommanderKeldoth 3,141]

2 hours ago, Katarn said:

Maybe a limit of 2 each of Z6, DLT or sniper's rifles per force would make for more interesting forces.

That's actually not a bad idea. Limit 2 of ANY upgrade in your army. It would future-proof against spam lists and make the other heavy weapons more appealing

[Orkimedes 592]

3 hours ago, Dave Grant said:

Out of interest what where the boards like ??

These top lists look like they are better suited to relatively open boards 

Fairly balanced, actually.  I forgot to include pics but there are plenty floating around Facebook.

[Orkimedes 592]

1 hour ago, KommanderKeldoth said:

That's actually not a bad idea. Limit 2 of ANY upgrade in your army. It would future-proof against spam lists and make the other heavy weapons more appealing

I mean, what else are you going to do right now?  Run naked squads?  Corps options are still limited

I really don't have a problem with the corps spam.  A battle should be mostly between Storms and Rebel troopers.  I'm glad this isn't like 40k where you only take your token couple of troops and then fill in with jank; you want a lot of corps naturally, because corps is good.

[lologrelol 488]

It's a shame the top lists are so boring. 2 of anything rules would help definitely.

NO VEHICLES... Really tells you something.

[MasterShake2 5,184]

Man, top 6 split evenly amongst both factions.  Who could've guessed that?

[MasterShake2 5,184]

1 hour ago, lologrelol said:

It's a shame the top lists are so boring. 2 of anything rules would help definitely.

NO VEHICLES... Really tells you something.

 

Eh, still a lot of unrevealed spread for the occupier and X-34.  Maybe some goodies in there.

[Alpha17 2,853]

The table pictures I saw generally looked light on terrain, or at least on true line of sight blocking terrain.  That wasn't universal, granted, but follows the trend I've noticed from tournament pictures.  The Imperial/Rebel split is interesting.

[Orkimedes 592]

Table pics

[Orkimedes 592]

I think we are going to see some more variety in the next few months with what's been previewed.

[NeonWolf 942]

I think the tables look great and exactly what one would expect for a "competitive tabletop wargame". The lists are pretty much what I expected to see for this type of event as well. Thanks for sharing the info and pics!

There will always be a difference in opinion between those that play this game as a competitive Star Wars tabletop wargame and those that play this game as a tabletop Star Wars re-enactment/storytelling game.

This is exactly why that grimdark future game has different game modes for different types of players.

Edited February 10, 2019 by NeonWolf

[DarkTrooperZero 304]

Tables looked great.

Don't think any event should be limiting any upgrades or units for a game that's been out less than a year.

Hopefully sniper spam will run it's course in time

[UnitOmega 2,818]

23 minutes ago, DarkTrooperZero said:

Don't think any event should be limiting any upgrades or units for a game that's been out less than a year.

Yeah, I kind of agree with this and Orkimedes up there, forcing players to pick different units/upgrades does nothing if they have nothing else worth picking. Right now it looks like at least competitive, the backbone of armies is whatever the cheapest and most general purpose units is for bodies (Corps with Anti-Infantry weapons, cheap sniper teams for their long range potential) and then since you need to have commanders anyway, it seems like a lot of the flashy point value is in them since there are actually quite a few of them out now so you can kind of use them to taste as needed. As unit count in other org slots goes up and other stuff like the specialist pack comes out you might actually start seeing more variance in the "foundation" of the army because you have different stuff to pick from. 

[thepopemobile100 977]

14 hours ago, lologrelol said:

It's a shame the top lists are so boring. 2 of anything rules would help definitely.

NO VEHICLES... Really tells you something.

The game already has a limiting mechanic built in with max unit type and I hope we never see a rule like that come out to try and force diversity in lists. 

If character heavy lists ever become a thing, I guarantee you that the AT-ST will make a comeback

[Darth evil 906]

it's very simple really DTL's shoot red with surge and have R4, Z6's shoot 6 dice for 1 model, Snipers have unlimited range , pierce 1 and sharpshooter 1 and Leia Veers are cheap, and Leia is pretty good with that pistol.All this makes units like Vader( slow no surges what so ever), AT-ST no Surges has white dice in attack pool for 195 points, Bikes( low wounds bad save), E-Webs' um range 3 not good enough. 

[Viperhook 38]

What about Jyn and Pathfinder's Infiltrate, might be good for killing snipers, so maybe we'll see less of them.

[lologrelol 488]

Yes, games have competitive and fluffy players. But I don't want to have to make the distinction. I want to be able to sit opposite any opponent, and know that I won't just see the same units add nauseum, or smash them because they didn't take 'the right combos'.

There is clear evidence here that certain units are just far more useful than others. It's clear that all vehicles are not powerful enough to fulfill their role for their points costs. Having some missions that don't allow certain units to be effective is really disparaging.

90% of those tables look great, whether you're rebs or imps. It's not the tables that are the problem. I like going to tournaments, but the fact that half the units in the game weren't used in a tournament, by the top tier, is worrying. I want clear balance at the top level, so I can feel comfortable making the list that suits MY playstyle, and not suffer big drawbacks in competitiveness. I love tournaments btw.

Maybe this problem will be partially solved as we get more releases, but how does that help the already sidelined units?

I defs want some more corps options. Corps units are really boring. I play rebs and don't even take fleets, they are too impractical in most situations.

I also think some of the upgrades need points drops. When bodies are more effective than training/good equipment, you know the system is somewhat tilted to the bodies aspect.

My 2c.

[RaevenKS 111]

This Top6 is sad as ****.

The only surprise is the Palpatine Top 2.

I clearly can't say "this is the most efficient tactict available" right now. We can't state this is the most advanced meta. It is barely "last year meta". With IRG. Lel.

Moreover, calling this a "World Championship" when there is almost only US players...

Can't wait for some "real" tournament coming in Europe. Europe always been better in meta creation.

[Derrault 1,091]

18 hours ago, lologrelol said:

Yes, games have competitive and fluffy players. But I don't want to have to make the distinction. I want to be able to sit opposite any opponent, and know that I won't just see the same units add nauseum, or smash them because they didn't take 'the right combos'.

There is clear evidence here that certain units are just far more useful than others. It's clear that all vehicles are not powerful enough to fulfill their role for their points costs. Having some missions that don't allow certain units to be effective is really disparaging.

90% of those tables look great, whether you're rebs or imps. It's not the tables that are the problem. I like going to tournaments, but the fact that half the units in the game weren't used in a tournament, by the top tier, is worrying. I want clear balance at the top level, so I can feel comfortable making the list that suits MY playstyle, and not suffer big drawbacks in competitiveness. I love tournaments btw.

Maybe this problem will be partially solved as we get more releases, but how does that help the already sidelined units?

I defs want some more corps options. Corps units are really boring. I play rebs and don't even take fleets, they are too impractical in most situations.

I also think some of the upgrades need points drops. When bodies are more effective than training/good equipment, you know the system is somewhat tilted to the bodies aspect.

My 2c.

Mmm

Without knowing what percentage of players had various unit makeups, there’s no conclusion that can be drawn at all. For that matter, without knowing who played who, and without an obvious control for player ability (ie players swap lists and play), there’s no certainty.

 

[DarkTrooperZero 304]

Would like to get say the top 20 lists to have a better understanding of what units were common and which weren't . I suspect much of the same with a few funky lists in the mix. But as far as I can see positions 7-20 could all be Vader & AtSt lists

[The captn 199]

All 62 list from the event will likely be posted. The top 6 is a nice insight.  From what i understand every unit was represented to some degree.  2 fd1.4 cannons made top 12.

[NeonWolf 942]

The one person  from my local area (that means something entirely different here than in other parts of the world ) that was able to attend said that out of the 4 games he played only 1 of them actually went to Turn 3, the rest were over in turn 2 due to time limit.

The 2 hour time limit is fine, but when you plan to play a 6 round game and only finish two, it completely skews your strategy and lists. It would be interesting to see if @Orkimedes has the info on game rounds completed to go with lists and Battle Cards. It could shed some light on why the Top tier lists are what they are.

Edited February 12, 2019 by NeonWolf