Thrawn TM Swap
If I swap TM with an ally, how can another ally or enemy go before the ally that I swapped with does? Seems to negate what a turn is in that who I swapped with should immediately go.
Forum Discussion
"BubbaFett;c-1592633" wrote:"cannonfodder_iv;c-1592620" wrote:"BubbaFett;c-1592582" wrote:
... A very important part of this game is reading kit mechanics and knowing exactly what will happen when you use the ability....
This is exactly the issue. You have no idea what is going to happen next.
"When a debuff on an enemy expires, Empire and Sith allies gain 5% turn meter". Let's just say I've got two toons (Thrawn and target of TM swap) each with three dots, speed down and pain. That's 50% TM gain when Thrawn executes Grand Admiral's Command. So, don't use this skill unless the opposing zEP team has < 50% TM (but wait, is that 49% TM or 51% TM, ah who cares, maybe I'll get lucky...never.gets.to.go).
I'm really not sure how "whose turn is next is random and that's ok" is actually ok in a turn-based strategy game?
Don't get me wrong, I don't like the random who goes next at all.... I'm actually more in favor of FIFO like what Kyno said.... I'm just saying there is a difference between swapping TM and giving another toon your turn.....
Folks seem to be assuming that CG's intentions were to have that toon go next. What if their intentions were simply to give TM to a toon that had low TM?....
That's a fair point. We don't know, and it's pointless to discuss beyond that. But that doesn't mean I won't try!!!
I would think if that was their intent, then that's what they would have done, sort of like Rex and R2. Swapping TM, when you know factually that one toon already has 100% TM (by virtue of them taking their turn), to me strongly implies that the target of said swap will be the next toon to go. I understand your argument. It's solid. Based on the letter of the kit, that's what happens. Agreed.
But, can we discuss the correctness of it? Does it make sense that the target of my TM swap actually never gets a chance to go again (it's happened, more than a few times). Is there strategy involved in it? Does the current implementation severely devalue the ability (like CLS' Call to Action)?
There weren't nearly as many passive TM gains when Thrawn was introduced last year. Feels like this one got away from them. I can't really imagine that this was the type of game play they wanted (unpredictable with an option to feel inherently unfair).
