Jump to content

Recommended Posts

So, I've heard rumors of 500 points becoming more standard to help games finish on time. I happen to enjoy playing at 500 as well, so this is good with me. But that's not what this is for.

 

A) Suppose the only change to a 500 point format is dropping the minimum corps units to 2 (because this basically has to happen), how does the meta shift from the current 800 point format. Do we still see 3 snipers, or are bodies more important? Do vehicles still suffer, or can they now destroy enough units?

 

B) What other changes would you like to see at 500? 3x4 ft board, 3x3? Reduce all long edge deployment zone measurements by 1? One less of all max unit types (barring commander)? Does it need new missions entirely?

Share this post


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

So, I've heard rumors of 500 points becoming more standard to help games finish on time. I happen to enjoy playing at 500 as well, so this is good with me. But that's not what this is for.

 

A) Suppose the only change to a 500 point format is dropping the minimum corps units to 2 (because this basically has to happen), how does the meta shift from the current 800 point format. Do we still see 3 snipers, or are bodies more important? Do vehicles still suffer, or can they now destroy enough units?

 

B) What other changes would you like to see at 500? 3x4 ft board, 3x3? Reduce all long edge deployment zone measurements by 1? One less of all max unit types (barring commander)? Does it need new missions entirely?

Given that snipers do rock bottom damage, I don’t see how this does anything but improve their cache.  Fewer enemy units means a small amount of damage increases in importance. 300 Fewer points also makes t far less likely a more expensive unit gets taken. So, no, I’d expect this to compound the hypothetical problem. (Strike teams are just terribly weak units, a virtual waste of points compared to corps)

 

If you want to make Strike teams less likely/valuable, you’d do a points increase to get more/bigger units on the field. That diluted the value of 1 damage and makes tiny cheap units (TCU) more of a liability.

I don’t think that needs to happen, but if your end goal is to encourage fewer strike teams without mandating less SF slots (or making Strike teams unique, which is an absurdly terrible idea all its own), or requiring more of X, than an increase to total points would be a way to do it.

Dropping the point cap just makes the cheapest possible unit more valuable, because you know it’ll face less opposition.

Share this post


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

B) What other changes would you like to see at 500?

These rule sets are good starting points for discussion:

https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/filer_public/1a/b2/1ab2ccdd-9837-4212-8a35-abcc822a877d/swl_take_the_hill_eo.pdf

 

https://imperialdiscipline.blog/2019/06/04/creating-a-500-point-format-for-legion/

 

Taking a well equipped Heavy is pretty impractical, so it does not really solve the issue with lack of vehicles. But if lack of vehicles is a problem, then just play 800pts and agree that each side must take 1 heavy and/or 1 support.  I think the purpose of 500pts is just to be able to get in more games that actually finish inside of 3 hours!

i.e. it greatly reduces # of activations, amount of terrain, deployment time, etc.

Share this post


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

If you want to make Strike teams less likely/valuable, you’d do a points increase to get more/bigger units on the field. That diluted the value of 1 damage and makes tiny cheap units (TCU) more of a liability.

The 500 pt format has nothing to do with strike teams, its to make the games shorter so they can actually play through to round 6 within a more reasonable amount of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Grammer Pollice said:

B) What other changes would you like to see at 500? 3x4 ft board, 3x3? Reduce all long edge deployment zone measurements by 1? One less of all max unit types (barring commander)? Does it need new missions entirely?

I think a smaller game board would be great - 3x3 might be too small, so I would prefer 3x4. Either way though, a new set of deployment cards would be needed.

Share this post


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

The 500 pt format has nothing to do with strike teams, its to make the games shorter so they can actually play through to round 6 within a more reasonable amount of time.

If that were true you could just put a chess clock in. Each player has 45 minutes, if you run out of time before the match ends, you lose.

Share this post


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

If that were true you could just put a chess clock in. Each player has 45 minutes, if you run out of time before the match ends, you lose.

That wouldn't really help. The idea is to make it so a full, 6 round game can be played. Although in a tournament setting, a time limit would also be imposed of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ghost Dancer said:

That wouldn't really help. The idea is to make it so a full, 6 round game can be played. Although in a tournament setting, a time limit would also be imposed of course.

Yeah that’s the point, if they aren’t making it to 6 rounds in 2 hours, someone is slow playing. Either deliberately, or because they are indecisive.

Neither is something worth fostering, and both can be eliminated by using a chess clock. 

Share this post


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

Yeah that’s the point, if they aren’t making it to 6 rounds in 2 hours, someone is slow playing. Either deliberately, or because they are indecisive.

Neither is something worth fostering, and both can be eliminated by using a chess clock. 

I think the slow play just comes from the length of time it takes to set-up 10-11 activations/side, activate all those units, put them in cohesion, etc. So many activations creates so many variables and decisions it’s difficult to avoid slow play. Couple that with command cards and free actions that give bonus actions and you make for a lot of little movements that simply add up. I don’t think a chess clock would solve this, it would simply diagnose the problem and/or lead to bad games and/or make a time management meta.

 

A 500pt game is simply a way to let you get more games in, not a way to shift the meta or try out a new competitive list. It’s just for fun! If at some point there were 500pt tournaments, then you’d see Leia with a bunch of z-6s with med droids and snipers; but most people just want to try out janky things without wasting a lot of time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, smickletz said:

I think the slow play just comes from the length of time it takes to set-up 10-11 activations/side, activate all those units, put them in cohesion, etc. So many activations creates so many variables and decisions it’s difficult to avoid slow play. Couple that with command cards and free actions that give bonus actions and you make for a lot of little movements that simply add up. I don’t think a chess clock would solve this, it would simply diagnose the problem and/or lead to bad games and/or make a time management meta.

 

A 500pt game is simply a way to let you get more games in, not a way to shift the meta or try out a new competitive list. It’s just for fun! If at some point there were 500pt tournaments, then you’d see Leia with a bunch of z-6s with med droids and snipers; but most people just want to try out janky things without wasting a lot of time.

 

Setup can be done in as little time as the players want it to take. It doesn’t require more than 10 seconds of activity to place a unit, if that.

Some players dawdle because it’s in their nature to waste time, others are more malevolent, neither is a desirable trait in an opponent. I wouldn’t want to play a 500 point game where an opponent is using more than their fair share of time. Having a smaller force doesn’t make it any better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, smickletz said:

This! Thank you.

Operation: Take the Hill is great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, BenBot said:

Operation: Take the Hill is great.

Yeah, I like the conditions that Take the Hill has. I don’t really like the “Fog of War” condition, though I’d give it a try.

I also like that in Take the Hill you do not need to have a Commander, opening up points for something like an airspeeder or allowing you to use Sabine, Chewbacca, Boba, or Bossk as your commanders instead. Needing a commander + taking any of those units really restricts your options for army building.

Share this post


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

Yeah, I like the conditions that Take the Hill has. I don’t really like the “Fog of War” condition, though I’d give it a try.

I also like that in Take the Hill you do not need to have a Commander, opening up points for something like an airspeeder or allowing you to use Sabine, Chewbacca, Boba, or Bossk as your commanders instead. Needing a commander + taking any of those units really restricts your options for army building.

Fog of war?

I liked War Weary from the conditions for being anti-infantry (commander courage does not apply to panic!)

Share this post


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

Yeah that’s the point, if they aren’t making it to 6 rounds in 2 hours, someone is slow playing. Either deliberately, or because they are indecisive.

I don't think I've ever completed a full 6 rounds in 2 hours. I'm not the quickest player but I don't waste time.

I don't play tournaments and this is one of the reasons, the game is just too slow for the time allowed. Granted, some players are quick and can do it, but I've not met any such players - and from other comments and feedback it seems like its a large portion of the player base who can't play in that timeframe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd need to test it out.  Theoretically it just crushed out everything but Corps spam and snipers with Veers/Leia.  It's possible that at that point that expensive/durable stuff like Vader/AT-ST/etc can play more recklessly because they are strong enough to survive the opponent's entire army focusing on them, but realistically their durability to point isn't enough to make them anything more than a greater liability than they already are.

Finishing games on time in tournaments just comes down to using a chess clock.  It just keeps people on task and focused on getting through their turns.  I'm in no way a fast player, but I find playing on the clock rather liberating.  Having ownership of my time to use or misuse as I see fit is more relaxing than worrying that my speed of play might negatively affect the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am very surprised to hear games aren't finishing. Even at a rally point level where I am playing if time is called and a game is still going they are always already on turn 6.

Share this post


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

Fog of war?

I liked War Weary from the conditions for being anti-infantry (commander courage does not apply to panic!)

Would limiting the Commander inspiration range to 1, with an upgrade card/ability for +1 be an effective way to shift from the staleness of corp spam? Panic immunity would be something big for vehicles to leverage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Grammer Pollice said:

Would limiting the Commander inspiration range to 1, with an upgrade card/ability for +1 be an effective way to shift from the staleness of corp spam? Panic immunity would be something big for vehicles to leverage.

I mean, I think having a condition card that eliminates the transfer of courage for panic would certainly be anti-infantry. And it would raise the value of Inspire, and various upgrades that remove extra suppression. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I think the real solution is know who your opponents are and go in with reasonable expectations.

Unless you’re playing competitively (in which case you should know what you’re in for and plan accordingly), a gentleman’s agreement goes a long way.

”hey, I want to alter the force org chart. Should we each agree we must have at least one heavy?”

“Sure! Pew pew!”

500 points isn’t about fixing the game - it’s about making it fit in a smaller size package due to space or time limitations. And I’m pretty stoked for trying some to see if I can get more games in. I haven’t pushed around a legion mini since May 4 :( 

 

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...