ATST and Airspeeder still extremely overcosted

[riker2800 30]

Indeed, the AT-ST is way better than the Airspeeder: Easier access to Aim tokens (Veers, Generic Officer, New Pilot, and even Coordinated fire), much harder to kill, easier to repair while keeping droid in a DLT squad near it, can provide light cover, throw ton of dices, can cancel heavy cover at range 2 with Grenade (which is a huge bonus).

 

 

[Derrault 1,091]

@DarkTrooperZero
"Dude do you even maths? it's been Very clear for a long time the T47 doesn't kill many storm troopers for its points and in comparison isn't that hard to shoot down."

Of course I do, that's why I recognize the value the 47 brings. You seem to not be following the discussion. It was already stipulated that the T-47's offense is lower than an equivalent number of points of Troopers (Which, for the record, is actually just under 4 units of Stormtroopers without DLT-19s).

The difference is that the T-47 damage output does not degrade with damage, whereas the Stormtrooper damage output does. To compound this, the corps units have worse defense, across the board, than the T-47. It's useful not because it has the best possible damage dice (although its dice are quite good), but because it's harder to kill than those corps units, and it gets its damage all in one activation, instead of spreading it out amongst several and risking not activating at all, or only activating at a severe handicap from incoming damage.

@thepopmobile100
"You're assuming that all rebel troops are in range to fire as well despite their low speed in comparision to the 47 and same attack range. You're also assuming that all the stormtroopers are in range to fire at the 47. The most likely case is that you can't bring much of either to bear down on the speeder and the only way the rebel player is able to keep his corp up with the speeder is if the speeder has been flying around a couple of turns doing nothing."

It's likely that the units will be engagable for the sake of objectives, if they aren't (and are effectively pinned in place in their deployment zones in the hope of fighting the 47), then they aren't scoring points, which is valuable in its own right because they're losing ground.

Most likely, there will not be a mass of 6 corps units able to all target the 47, this was just looking at the "worst case scenario", and it turns out that it's not bad.

"Even if you are taking two troops off of each stormtrooper squad in a volley, 3+dlt with no aim still does at least one damage after defense the 72% of the time or two damage 17% of the time. Great odds to do one damage and a more than insignificant chance to do 2 damage after defense. Your rebel troops who have been shooting haven't done much to keep the 47 alive. God forbid full units with an aim take shots against it as it won't last the end of the round."

It's only 1.08 wounds on average, the full unit average is 1.25. So, yeah, if there were 6 full units in range, there's only a small chance (yes 50% is small) that they can kill the 47 by concentrating firepower. You know what else they could hypothetically kill by concentrating fire? Luke. (The same fire would inflict 10.875 wounds). Although the T-47 can frustrate all these efforts by taking a single dodge token, reducing the output from 7.5 average across 6 units to only 6.5 average. (That's before those units suffer incoming fire of course, realistically they just won't even come close to that much on average).

Remember, for most Objective scenarios it simply won't be feasible to mass and fire on a single target with more than 1-3 squads because concentrating that many units means being overwhelmed at the other objectives, and losing the game outright.

With those low levels (1-3 units) they basically do nothing more than scratch the 47 each round, if they waste their time focusing on it. HH-12s are another matter, although the 47 is still better equipped to survive them than, for example, the AT-RT, which fills a similar role, providing support for infantry units.

[lologrelol 488]

22 minutes ago, Derrault said:

@DarkTrooperZero
"Dude do you even maths? it's been Very clear for a long time the T47 doesn't kill many storm troopers for its points and in comparison isn't that hard to shoot down."

Of course I do, that's why I recognize the value the 47 brings. You seem to not be following the discussion. It was already stipulated that the T-47's offense is lower than an equivalent number of points of Troopers (Which, for the record, is actually just under 4 units of Stormtroopers without DLT-19s).

The difference is that the T-47 damage output does not degrade with damage, whereas the Stormtrooper damage output does. To compound this, the corps units have worse defense, across the board, than the T-47. It's useful not because it has the best possible damage dice (although its dice are quite good), but because it's harder to kill than those corps units, and it gets its damage all in one activation, instead of spreading it out amongst several and risking not activating at all, or only activating at a severe handicap from incoming damage.

@thepopmobile100
"You're assuming that all rebel troops are in range to fire as well despite their low speed in comparision to the 47 and same attack range. You're also assuming that all the stormtroopers are in range to fire at the 47. The most likely case is that you can't bring much of either to bear down on the speeder and the only way the rebel player is able to keep his corp up with the speeder is if the speeder has been flying around a couple of turns doing nothing."

It's likely that the units will be engagable for the sake of objectives, if they aren't (and are effectively pinned in place in their deployment zones in the hope of fighting the 47), then they aren't scoring points, which is valuable in its own right because they're losing ground.

Most likely, there will not be a mass of 6 corps units able to all target the 47, this was just looking at the "worst case scenario", and it turns out that it's not bad.

"Even if you are taking two troops off of each stormtrooper squad in a volley, 3+dlt with no aim still does at least one damage after defense the 72% of the time or two damage 17% of the time. Great odds to do one damage and a more than insignificant chance to do 2 damage after defense. Your rebel troops who have been shooting haven't done much to keep the 47 alive. God forbid full units with an aim take shots against it as it won't last the end of the round."

It's only 1.08 wounds on average, the full unit average is 1.25. So, yeah, if there were 6 full units in range, there's only a small chance (yes 50% is small) that they can kill the 47 by concentrating firepower. You know what else they could hypothetically kill by concentrating fire? Luke. (The same fire would inflict 10.875 wounds). Although the T-47 can frustrate all these efforts by taking a single dodge token, reducing the output from 7.5 average across 6 units to only 6.5 average. (That's before those units suffer incoming fire of course, realistically they just won't even come close to that much on average).

Remember, for most Objective scenarios it simply won't be feasible to mass and fire on a single target with more than 1-3 squads because concentrating that many units means being overwhelmed at the other objectives, and losing the game outright.

With those low levels (1-3 units) they basically do nothing more than scratch the 47 each round, if they waste their time focusing on it. HH-12s are another matter, although the 47 is still better equipped to survive them than, for example, the AT-RT, which fills a similar role, providing support for infantry units.

That's the thing, your assumption that non-depreciation's power is wasted on the T-47. It's too big and too clumsy not to be a valid target for most impact weapons on the table. I've focused the T-47 down in one round easily and BAM, there goes a quarter of my enemies' army. 4 wounds before a damage roll, then you are significantly gimped. So it's not very hard to negate that supposed benefit.

Another point. How do you reconcile the all in one approach of the T-47 with the extra activations of the squads? This is an activation based game, not IgoUgo. So having multiple activations is a tactical advantage.

Like I said before, I think you and the designers over-estimated the power of non-depreciation vs multiple actions. It's not massively overcosted, but enough to not warrant the attention of the best players. Anything can look good on paper, but to actually fly the **** thing in a 3 by 6 area is too hard. It's sheer height really makes it far more vulnerable than other units.

[thepopemobile100 977]

36 minutes ago, Derrault said:

It's likely that the units will be engagable for the sake of objectives, if they aren't (and are effectively pinned in place in their deployment zones in the hope of fighting the 47), then they aren't scoring points, which is valuable in its own right because they're losing ground.

Most likely, there will not be a mass of 6 corps units able to all target the 47, this was just looking at the "worst case scenario", and it turns out that it's not bad.

37 minutes ago, Derrault said:

It's only 1.08 wounds on average, the full unit average is 1.25. So, yeah, if there were 6 full units in range, there's only a small chance (yes 50% is small) that they can kill the 47 by concentrating firepower. You know what else they could hypothetically kill by concentrating fire? Luke. (The same fire would inflict 10.875 wounds). Although the T-47 can frustrate all these efforts by taking a single dodge token, reducing the output from 7.5 average across 6 units to only 6.5 average. (That's before those units suffer incoming fire of course, realistically they just won't even come close to that much on average).

Remember, for most Objective scenarios it simply won't be feasible to mass and fire on a single target with more than 1-3 squads because concentrating that many units means being overwhelmed at the other objectives, and losing the game outright.

With those low levels (1-3 units) they basically do nothing more than scratch the 47 each round, if they waste their time focusing on it. HH-12s are another matter, although the 47 is still better equipped to survive them than, for example, the AT-RT, which fills a similar role, providing support for infantry units.

Claiming this is worst case scenario is dumb and you know it.

It's 1.25 without the aim and 1.47 with one aim, it drops in less than 5 attacks that have one aim. The imperial army really isn't in a bad spot to get aim tokens at all so it's not unreasonable to assume that they would have at least 1, which you seem to be ignoring because it breaks your argument in half. You're overvaluing cover on the snowspeeder and dodge for that matter in this scenario since vehicle dodges don't cancel crits normally.

That 50% chance to kill on average that you're toting about like a victory still means you have a 50% chance of losing the unit. Which by your standards is a small chance to leave.

It's not feasible to concentrate fire on a single unit? That is the worst statement you've made yet. Vader and the Emperor both require focused fire to bring down. The RT requires focused fire to bring down. IRG require focused fire to bring down. Boba Fett requires focused fire to bring down.

The 47 can still be ignored, which is something you didn't bother trying to refute. All the units I just listed can't be ignored because they don't have bad damage. You're right the 47 is a pain to bring down, because why waste time shooting a unit that does slightly more damage than a sniper team on average when every single rebel unit besides the sniper team averages more damage and is cheaper.

Rushing it in is dumb as it'll die right away, and keeping that much of your army back for a few turns is dumb when the unit in question has poor damage for how much it costs. The ST at least as the advantage of doing high damage when you add the extra weapons. The RT has the advantage of being fairly cheap and specialized for a specific role while not being that much weaker than the 47, which is a concept that has flown over your head in every discussion I've had with you.

[Derrault 1,091]

27 minutes ago, lologrelol said:

That's the thing, your assumption that non-depreciation's power is wasted on the T-47. It's too big and too clumsy not to be a valid target for most impact weapons on the table. I've focused the T-47 down in one round easily and BAM, there goes a quarter of my enemies' army. 4 wounds before a damage roll, then you are significantly gimped. So it's not very hard to negate that supposed benefit.

Another point. How do you reconcile the all in one approach of the T-47 with the extra activations of the squads? This is an activation based game, not IgoUgo. So having multiple activations is a tactical advantage.

Like I said before, I think you and the designers over-estimated the power of non-depreciation vs multiple actions. It's not massively overcosted, but enough to not warrant the attention of the best players. Anything can look good on paper, but to actually fly the **** thing in a 3 by 6 area is too hard. It's sheer height really makes it far more vulnerable than other units.

Spreading your firepower over multiple activations is a negative unless you can bring them to bear (it’s easier to ensure that fewer, tougher, units get their licks in).

Where more activations is a positive is in being able to cover more zones or the map, for objective purposes, but that doesn’t have a bearing on winning unit match ups.

Also, a speed 3 unit with compulsory is just about the opposite of clumsy, it’s fast and agile, able to cover large distances across line of sight blocking terrain to strike.

@thepopemobile100

Your stormtrooper dlts are probably better off ignoring the t-47 in favor of softer targets; that doesn’t mean you should ignore the t-47. Hardly, it has the capacity to disable key units in different parts of the battlefield because of its speed. 

[thepopemobile100 977]

5 minutes ago, Derrault said:

Hardly, it has the capacity to disable key units in different parts of the battlefield because of its speed

It doesn't have the capacity to do so at all. Averaging less than 2 damage after dice roll on an open target is really bad on a unit that costs 175 points. The only units it could possibly "disable" on the empire's side are a sniper team who isn't running duck and cover for whatever reason. The 47 still has the worst damage/cost of any unit in the game.

I want you to provide an actual example from a game you've played and your list where the 47 did a job better than any other unit could have for the 47's cost, because all you have seems to be numbers that anyone could come up with and then trying to force the numbers into a hypothetical.

[Derrault 1,091]

7 minutes ago, thepopemobile100 said:

It doesn't have the capacity to do so at all. Averaging less than 2 damage after dice roll on an open target is really bad on a unit that costs 175 points. The only units it could possibly "disable" on the empire's side are a sniper team who isn't running duck and cover for whatever reason. The 47 still has the worst damage/cost of any unit in the game.

I want you to provide an actual example from a game you've played and your list where the 47 did a job better than any other unit could have for the 47's cost, because all you have seems to be numbers that anyone could come up with and then trying to force the numbers into a hypothetical.

2 wounds against red defense dice, just with the main gun; throw in the rear gun and that’s 18 wounds over 6 rounds. Average. The middle of the road. It has the capacity to deal up to 60 wounds.

[thepopemobile100 977]

5 minutes ago, Derrault said:

2 wounds against red defense dice, just with the main gun; throw in the rear gun and that’s 18 wounds over 6 rounds. Average. The middle of the road. It has the capacity to deal up to 60 wounds.

It can't shoot with the rear gun on turn one under almost any circumstances and it's less than 2 wounds on average against red dice OUT OF COVER. What you're suggesting is rushing it down the opponent's throat turn one when almost every unit they have doesn't have anything else to shoot. That's a stupid move that does two damage and throws away the speeder. Move one then shoot. No aim necessary at that point as it's dead by the end of the round, especially if a corp unit is packing impact grenades.

If you want to start throwing out maximum capacities for damage, then here's a few for you. 6 man Z6 can do a maximum of 66 damage. 6 man scatter gun is 72. Flamethrower RT is 72. The pathfinders with Bistan is 78, and with Pao it's back at 60. Since we're on this track, DLT storms max out a 7 damage vs the 47 and then kill in the next shot. HH-12 storms can kill it in one shot. I can keep going with this max damage junk even though it doesn't prove anything if you want me to. I don't even know why you brought it up.

[Derrault 1,091]

1 hour ago, thepopemobile100 said:

It can't shoot with the rear gun on turn one under almost any circumstances and it's less than 2 wounds on average against red dice OUT OF COVER. What you're suggesting is rushing it down the opponent's throat turn one when almost every unit they have doesn't have anything else to shoot. That's a stupid move that does two damage and throws away the speeder. Move one then shoot. No aim necessary at that point as it's dead by the end of the round, especially if a corp unit is packing impact grenades.

If you want to start throwing out maximum capacities for damage, then here's a few for you. 6 man Z6 can do a maximum of 66 damage. 6 man scatter gun is 72. Flamethrower RT is 72. The pathfinders with Bistan is 78, and with Pao it's back at 60. Since we're on this track, DLT storms max out a 7 damage vs the 47 and then kill in the next shot. HH-12 storms can kill it in one shot. I can keep going with this max damage junk even though it doesn't prove anything if you want me to. I don't even know why you brought it up.

You don’t have to “run down their throat” to get a target on turn one, just deploy properly and two speed three moves is sufficient to reach out and touch the desired portion of the map, no problem.

Effectively ignoring terrain at less than height 2 means you can take a direct line towards most enemies that infantry can’t, and deprive them of cover.

For an infantry unit to succeed at a ranged 1 attack would require the Speeder at just inside range 2 of the Troopers. Now, tactically, why would you choose to do that against a trooper unit with impact grenades, instead of maintaining range 3 until that unit was gone? That’s just bad play.

Lastly, I explained the actual capacity because you claimed it did not have the capacity to disable an enemy unit. Which was wrong. 

[thepopemobile100 977]

42 minutes ago, Derrault said:

You don’t have to “run down their throat” to get a target on turn one, just deploy properly and two speed three moves is sufficient to reach out and touch the desired portion of the map, no problem.

Effectively ignoring terrain at less than height 2 means you can take a direct line towards most enemies that infantry can’t, and deprive them of cover.

For an infantry unit to succeed at a ranged 1 attack would require the Speeder at just inside range 2 of the Troopers. Now, tactically, why would you choose to do that against a trooper unit with impact grenades, instead of maintaining range 3 until that unit was gone? That’s just bad play.

Lastly, I explained the actual capacity because you claimed it did not have the capacity to disable an enemy unit. Which was wrong. 

Just because you can do that turn 1 doesn't make it a good idea. The snowspeeder has to still put itself in range to be shot on a turn where most units units aren't shooting at all. You're going to take a good bit of damage turn 1 and you can't escape out the next round without using all of your actions to move as your compulsory takes you even further into the opponents territory and taking much more fire during the second turn. You've still created a situation in which the speeder is dead by the end turn 2 and does an optimistic 5 wounds spread across two targets. Turn 2 by the way still doesn't see a large amount of fire traded between the two players. So effective

So you can take the direct route. Whoop-de-doo. All you accomplished is putting yourself in a position to be shot turn one.

I find it funny that you're claiming bad play when you're the one who wants to create a situation where that can happen, especially since it's reasonable that the opponent has an activation advantage and can just wait for you to plop the speeder down then drop his impacts. Crazy idea maybe there's multiple squads with impacts. Frags replaced the impacts in the LVO for snows, but they're still the popular choice around here for the possibility that someone will bring armor.

It's still right. 5 damage spread across 2 units is still bad as you yourself claim that splitting fire and spreading your damage out between attacks. Getting as close as you need to attack turn one is a bad plan. It doesn't work for the same reason why you can't do that with bikes and they do even more damage than the 47.

[Derrault 1,091]

2 hours ago, thepopemobile100 said:

Just because you can do that turn 1 doesn't make it a good idea. The snowspeeder has to still put itself in range to be shot on a turn where most units units aren't shooting at all. You're going to take a good bit of damage turn 1 and you can't escape out the next round without using all of your actions to move as your compulsory takes you even further into the opponents territory and taking much more fire during the second turn. You've still created a situation in which the speeder is dead by the end turn 2 and does an optimistic 5 wounds spread across two targets. Turn 2 by the way still doesn't see a large amount of fire traded between the two players. So effective

So you can take the direct route. Whoop-de-doo. All you accomplished is putting yourself in a position to be shot turn one.

I find it funny that you're claiming bad play when you're the one who wants to create a situation where that can happen, especially since it's reasonable that the opponent has an activation advantage and can just wait for you to plop the speeder down then drop his impacts. Crazy idea maybe there's multiple squads with impacts. Frags replaced the impacts in the LVO for snows, but they're still the popular choice around here for the possibility that someone will bring armor.

It's still right. 5 damage spread across 2 units is still bad as you yourself claim that splitting fire and spreading your damage out between attacks. Getting as close as you need to attack turn one is a bad plan. It doesn't work for the same reason why you can't do that with bikes and they do even more damage than the 47.

You do keep just assuming the worst case scenario, it’s hard to see how this is a good faith argument. 

[Prokins 57]

@Derrault and @thepopemobile100, you two should just play on Legion Table Top Simulator.  Pope has to take 6 DLT troopers and Derrault a T-47.  Fill out the rest of your armies however else you want.  Play ten matches and let us know the results.

[Derrault 1,091]

1 hour ago, Prokins said:

@Derrault and @thepopemobile100, you two should just play on Legion Table Top Simulator.  Pope has to take 6 DLT troopers and Derrault a T-47.  Fill out the rest of your armies however else you want.  Play ten matches and let us know the results.

If you can teach me how, I’d be game.

Hmm:

2x T-47 airspeeder w/Groundbuzzer + Comm Jammer, one with Wedge

Chewbacca w/Tenacity + Hunter

Leia w/Esteemed Leader + Environmental Gear + Improvised Orders

2x Rebel Troopers (one w/Z-6)

1x Fleet Trooper

Command cards:

1) Coordinated Bombardment + Sabotaged Communications

2) Brains and Brawn + Turning the Tide

3) Somebody Has to Save Our Skins + Covering Fire

4) Standing Orders

 

Edited February 20, 2019 by Derrault
Overcosted on the recon

[DarkTrooperZero 304]

And that would be a 10-0 win for the stormies, gotta hold objectives in this game.

[thepopemobile100 977]

8 hours ago, Prokins said:

@Derrault and @thepopemobile100, you two should just play on Legion Table Top Simulator.  Pope has to take 6 DLT troopers and Derrault a T-47.  Fill out the rest of your armies however else you want.  Play ten matches and let us know the results.

I live out in the boonies where the internet connection is shoddy at best. I can't play games online without dropping every two minutes.

[costi 1,297]

On 2/19/2019 at 12:27 AM, lologrelol said:

If the designers gave impact a more powerful effect against infantry, it would solve all of this. Think about it. A massive laser turret somehow can smash through a vehicle's armour, but it doesn't make the weapon more effective against infantry???

I know we're talking lasers here, but anti-armor weapons are typically not very useful against infantry. They concentrate the energy of the shot in as little area as possible for penetrating power, while anti-personnel weapons are more about saturating an area.

[RaevenKS 111]

14 minutes ago, costi said:

I know we're talking lasers here, but anti-armor weapons are typically not very useful against infantry. They concentrate the energy of the shot in as little area as possible for penetrating power, while anti-personnel weapons are more about saturating an area.

That's why each time we saw both an airspeeder or a AT-ST shot in every single movie, everything explode around

It's a bit sarcastic, but I get your point. But I'm not sure "this" can translate to SW world.

[costi 1,297]

Yeah, this was in response to the quoted comment about a massive antitank gun not doing much against infantry

I agree the T-47 and (especially) the ATST need some anti-personnel capability on their main weapon.

[ScummyRebel 5,346]

6 minutes ago, costi said:

Yeah, this was in response to the quoted comment about a massive antitank gun not doing much against infantry

I agree the T-47 and (especially) the ATST need some anti-personnel capability on their main weapon.

I feel like the AT-ST is pretty solid where it is. It may be a hair overpriced but much better and it would be too dominant.

And I say this as a primarily Empire player.

The t47 needs some more help for sure. How exactly to go about that is the question.

[thepopemobile100 977]

22 minutes ago, ScummyRebel said:

I feel like the AT-ST is pretty solid where it is. It may be a hair overpriced but much better and it would be too dominant.

And I say this as a primarily Empire player.

The t47 needs some more help for sure. How exactly to go about that is the question.

I've been saying that vehicles should be able to cancel criticals with cover for half a year now.

[ScummyRebel 5,346]

35 minutes ago, thepopemobile100 said:

I've been saying that vehicles should be able to cancel criticals with cover for half a year now.

Cover is applied before impact though, so it would only matter against natural/surge crits. Impact hit-> crit can be yanked by cover before they bump up to crits.

[Derrault 1,091]

9 hours ago, DarkTrooperZero said:

And that would be a 10-0 win for the stormies, gotta hold objectives in this game.

I’m in the process of learning to use tabletop sim, using the LVO winner list for the Imperials (as I figure that’s indicative of a popular infantry loaded choice for Imps; granted he only had 5 corps, one of which is snowtroopers with frag grenades; but on the other hand, it won overall so...)

In the first two test rounds, the Stormtroopers on the flank with the 47s and Leia got shredded, one unit entirely destroyed, one with just a leader remaining, one strike team also down. That half of the army was only able to target the 47s initially due to line of sight, and they managed 4 total wounds. Not enough to impair one.

 

1 hour ago, thepopemobile100 said:

I've been saying that vehicles should be able to cancel criticals with cover for half a year now.

How would you even harm a 47? It’d be like .3 damage per round from a DLT unit.

edit: If you have TabSim, I’d be curious to see the results of you playing against yourself, or even just enlisting a friend to run a few matches.

Edited February 20, 2019 by Derrault

[thepopemobile100 977]

@Derrault 

Dlts would still average a hit a shot with that rule. I should've clarified that it would be against natural crits and not impact crits. It would also encourage the use of the anti tank weapons

I'm really not going to be in a position where I could play on the sim unfortunately until fall. I'd like to play as the legion crowd here is three people counting me, and the competition isn't great.

I reread my stuff and I started to get a little rude, and I apologize for doing so.

Edit: just realized what your edit meant. I don't find playing again St myself to be good for results. Good idea about trying against someone.

Edited February 20, 2019 by thepopemobile100
spell check is the the enemy of the people

[Thraug 1,066]

12 hours ago, DarkTrooperZero said:

And that would be a easy 10-0 win for the stormies, gotta hold objectives in this game.

Fixed, heh.

It's laughable people think 2 47s would be better than 6 DLT Troopers.  Even if the game was just a fire fight the DLTs would annihilate the 47s, if not poorly played.

And the ATST does need a lot of help, as does the T47.

[Prokins 57]

Awesome @Derrault!  Thanks for taking the time to learn a new tool and do some testing.

Bummer about your internet connection @thepopemobile100 .    I think this would have been great to see two knowledgeable players test their hypotheses against each other.  Maybe in the future!

I just finished painting my two T-47s and I'll be running at least one of them this Fri. night.  This will be the first time I have one on the table, so we'll see how it goes.

Regarding the AT-ST and the T-47 being expensive, inefficient, sub-optimal...this very well may be by design.  Luke Eddy, in this interview mentioned that the designers think about the MtG three different player types when designing their game.  I wonder if the vehicles are there to draw in the "Timmy/Tammy" type of player.  If so, it's quite possible that these units will never be competitive because they're not designed to be so.

That doesn't mean we should stop talking about improving them of course.