Jump to content
Desidious

AT-RT is to Good

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
57 minutes ago, Desidious said:

Hi

I think that the AT-RT should have weak armour and that its to cheap

Looks like a troll post to me, maybe I can take your post serious if you write some detailed arguments about why it is too strong...

Edited by Staelwulf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Staelwulf said:

Looks like a troll post to me, maybe I can take your post serious if you write some detailed arguments about why it is too strong...

Judging by their profile I don’t believe they’re a troll.  They are just not a strong English speaker.  I disagree with their opinion, but flagging them as a troll seems a bit harsh/lynch mob-like.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a open vehicle and the driver is exposed = weak armour.

Thanks Kwatchi for not flaging me as a troll!!

It has 6 wounds for 55 points and the occupier tank is 4x times as large and only has 8 wounds!!

 

Only my thought!!


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to agree that the AT-RT is stronger than it really has any right to be.  It honestly should have weak sides, like the Occupier, or just Armor X, rather than a blanket armor value.  That said, the AT-RT was the best vehicle in the game for a long time, and was the only original one that was decent.  I'm not exactly sure how it could have been "fixed" and still be playable though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Desidious said:

It is a open vehicle and the driver is exposed = weak armour.

Thanks Kwatchi for not flaging me as a troll!!

It has 6 wounds for 55 points and the occupier tank is 4x times as large and only has 8 wounds!!

 

Only my thought!!



 

Yes, but you MUST add a weapon upgrade to the AT-RT to make it worth offensively, so it ends up costing between 80 and 90 points.
On the other hand even if the tank has only 2 more HP, the AT-RT has 1/6 chances of defending damage while the tank has 3/6. That is a huge difference.
I'm not saying the AT-RT is not good (it actually is), but at least that it's not too good for it's cost in my opinion.

Edited by Lemmiwinks86

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think it's too good for the cost, but i dont get all the hate on the AT-RT...its a very viable option in my opinion since it has the same firepower as the cannon (when using rotary gun which is a must have IMO), is maneuverable with expert climber, and fairly survivable. Very worth the cost. Putting one on top of a piece of terrain overlooking part of the board can really shut down an opponents movements in a large area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/25/2019 at 8:54 AM, FearofaBlankPlanet said:

It'll be interesting to see what happens with AT-RT's once Tauntauns are out.

I don't think "never ever seeing it on the table ever again" will be that interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, arnoldrew said:

I don't think "never ever seeing it on the table ever again" will be that interesting.

And I hope that won't be the case. 

The AT-RT can still accomplish things that Tauntauns can't (and vice versa), so we'll just have to see what happens post-release. 

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.


×
×
  • Create New...