The Problem With Shatterpoint - One Detail the Game is Critically Lacking 

I'm picking up Shatterpoint so I can play with my son. He's 11. I think the lack of being able to wipe out each other will make the game more approachable and fun for him.

While I love the direction that Tabletop Mini games are becoming more objective based, I'd still like some lethality to the game. Tabling isnt fun but neither is everything surviving.

I will say I actually really enjoy not being able to table a whole team. I have lost so many game of MCP because my opponent would rather table me rather then playing objective. Having this game where I don’t have to worry about getting wiped is a lot more fun for me personally.

Gonna join what seems to be the consensus of the lack of lethality in Shatterpoint is a feature not a bug. I love how you have to be much more strategic. It truly is an objectives-based game.

Respectfully, I could not disagree more. Wounding has a lot of value. Stops units from holding objectives and makes them pay extra force cost on abilities. I really hope they don’t change the rules. Keep the game as it is.

I could see a rule change to prevent “wound camping” being that you MUST activate a wounded unit if you draw their card. No putting in reserve and no using special abilities like the B1s have. I don’t mind main characters having plot armor and basically being immortal, but maybe multi-character support units should only have 1 stamina (and some tiny buffs to make up for that). They’re supposed to be the generic expendable units anyway and should be easy to remove from the board if they’re throwing themselves on objectives.

I understand why some people don't like how difficult it is to remove units in this game. But coming from legion its actually one of my favorite features. So many times in legion cad bane or han solo get blown off the table before they get to show off their cool abilities. In this game your center piece will for sure get to perform, maybe less efficiently because of wounds, but you won't feel like your favorite character did nothing (unless 3rd sister is your favorite character lol)

The objective focus and the reduced lethality opens up the decision space so much that it's one of the things I love about ShatterPoint. I can't think of another system that requires me to consider when to wound vs. when to leave something almost wounded. One minor adjustment to the rules that may solve a lot is "you cannot reserve a drawn card for a wounded unit." The differences in rule sets is one reason why the studio has MCP, Legion, ShatterPoint, and a variety of historic miniatures at the ready.

I disagree fully. Board wiping people isn't fun and isn't unique in any way. It's the first tabletop game I've played where it actually feels different from the rest of them

Gonna have to completely disagree here. The low lethality is what makes this game interesting. It’s also what makes attacking a tactical decision instead of “big stick hit squishy target” every time. Also if models were easier to kill then the game would just devolve into “kill more models than the opponent so I can hold more points.” That game already exists with a variety of different skins.

Love your videos but have to disagree with your thoughts on "tableing" / "killing". This isn't that kind of game - it's not Legion, or 40K or AOS where removing your enemy from the table is the main route to winning the game. Shatterpoint is all about securing the objectives. It's about positioning, using the numerous unit synergies to best achieve this. Having your models on the table for longer also rewards players for the time spent painting. I've seen games of 40K and Legion where someone has spent $$$ and time painting their new centrepiece model which immediately gets wasted, sometimes even before it has had chance to do anything in the game. Not so with Shatterpoint - your new squad, freshly painted, gets wounded, injured and damaged, but fights on, though your opponent gains some momentum. It stays on the table for all to see, struggling on in a desperate attempt to find a way to either secure an objective or aid an ally. It's a refreshing change to play a game that isn't a single route to victory.

The infrequency of units being removed from the game Is Actually what finally sold me and made pull the trigger on Shatterpoint. Since covid, The vast majority of games that I've managed to get in have been with folks Who usually don't play these kinds of games, Usually in groups 3 to 4 people large, And I found that tabling someone's units in these situations usually result in one of two things happening. If it's just one other person i'm playing with, It tends to discourage them a good amount As far as any future games are concerned. And if it's a group of more than two people, The person(s), Who had them tabled is now just sitting there on the sidelines, Waiting for everyone else to finish. I'm hoping shatterpoint's unique spin on the genre may be the thing thats helps me introduce/keep more friends to the hobby 😁🤞🏻

Wounded units do have penalties by not being able to hold objectives and some abilities cost a force point or an extra force point. I like the fact it’s extremely hard to remove units. One thing I don’t like about legion is how quickly my minis can be removed. Shatterpoint is by far my favorite tabletop game right now.

Honestly, it's the thing that makes the game unique.

I think the lack of lethality give Shatterpoint a unique identity. Most fights in Star Wars don't end in that much death anyways. Especially the lightsaber duels and skirmishes.

Honestly, if you're able to remove just one unit from the enemy team, that puts them at a serious disadvantage because this is an area control game and they simply wouldn't have the numbers to match you at that point. That's why it's honestly not a bad idea to try and snag a kill in the first struggle, maybe take the loss, and then just dominate the next two struggles with your board presence

I just want to say, I appreciate videos like this one describing personal takes on games that are still supportive of the game. I really like the "Its an interesting/good game, just not for me" mentality, thanks for that. And it helped make the video easier to watch, and let me know that Shatterpoint probably won't be a game I pick up, so thanks for that too

Although I agree it’s hard to remove a unit it’s not impossible. I like that the game is more about positioning then killing. It leads to interesting interactions and a bit of stress while scoring. And that’s part of the fun of this game.

I could not disagree more...That this game is not like 95% of other games, is the selling point! Others have pointed out how much positioning, unit synergy, conditions and every activation counts. I could add more, but this is a fresh design and something the hobby needed! Most other games are skewed towards turn 0, playing out a plan with a pretty static game state (good players know most of the time how it is going to play out - especially Legion - most things allow for a lot of pretty specific planning etc), lots of perfect / near perfect information and positioning gunlines for killing (so boring) or as a recent 5th Trooper blog post called it - winning the fight. What passes for positioning and "strategy" is actually far less strategic and dynamic than Shatterpoint - it is really more about planning it out and not making mistakes with all the perfect / near perfect information at your disposal. Whilst in Shatterpoint you get really interesting, tough and dynamic activations (forcing you to play to a general strategy not mostly predetermined plan) - because it gets the RNG, agency and objective play mix just right IMHO.

I’m new to Shatterpoint, but here are my two thoughts on this: 1) I think a new mission set that rewards model removal would be a better choice than changing the rules as they are. 2) I think they have a great game here, even without figure removal. In fact, I think not having removal is such a great aspect, considering all the other games where you can lose a unit before you even activate it. When you look at SW, generally main characters don’t die right away. Even secondary characters, most of them get into a few fights over the course of a few movies/episodes before they die. Plus, we’re talking about using the force here, so when opponents are pushed around, think of force pushes and backflips and all the other ways someone might move around in a fight, it’s just using the Push mechanic. Think about how cinematic the source material is, and the game might make more sense. 3) Bonus thought: on the table, we see 6 B1s, 4 B2s, just a pair of clones…but why not look at these bases as representing a FRACTION of the troopers actually on the battlefield? So yes, Anakin can cut down swathes of droids, and maybe he does! And the base of droids still on the table represent the squad that marches over their crumpled bodies to join the fight. Endless hordes. Even the clones: they don’t come in two at a time, it’s a whole squad joining Rex!

Saturday morning cartoons don't end in deaths. Losing a wound feels like losing a life and then getting respawned much like competitive shooting video games. This is why the game is quite balanced at any given point in time.

The biggest problem with shatterpoint is that it's not legion.

I think this aspect is what sets it aside from other games. The fact that downing a unit prevents them from getting a objective is reward enough for it. There are so many other games which are focused on killing models that I feel that if I'm looking for that feel, I'll just play those games. Is it perfect? No. Maybe they could make dead units respawn at the edge of the board?

I like to kill models but thematically this makes sense for star wars. In the shows and movies everyone has plot armor so fighting and getting wounded is waaay more normal then characters dying so i think it makes prefect sense haha. When ventress goes to kamino shes trying to steal the clone's dna not kill anakin. Hes just in her way.

We have been culturally conditioned with wargames (Chess for example), that taking pieces off the board is an indication of progress and then potentially winning a game. I like Shattterpoint because it breaks that mentality.

for this game, attrition is i think 100% viable...but it is treated differently than in most other games. I have found that in this game, aside from the resource tax of being wounded (which DOES add up), It allows for point control for a longer duration. Sure pushes and other displacement can help swing a point once, but with so many in game effects allowing for out of sequence movement there is real value knowing that the model or models you wound don't count at all until their next activation. I'd trade the small swings of shatterpoint over the NPE of not getting to activate a model even once before its removed. (has happened more than once in MCP, which is still a great game btw)

Concur with the majority of comments. Honestly, any game where you can get tabled easily feels piorly designed. Nothing less fun than not getting to use your models.

I disagree, big time. Not needing to remove minis from the table, having your whole force on the table for most of the game is one of the major upsides of Shatterpoint. Wounded units being basically invulnerable is just a trigger for a player to change their strategy, switch targets for example. Dynamic gameplay without the need to put minis back into their case early.

I don't agree it is a problem. Maybe it's because I play Republic but my units go down in one hit and I've had multiple instances of units coming off the board. I frequently find myself not able to afford to use defensive maneuvers or covering fire. I switched to Mandos for one event and it was like I was playing a different game.

My main issue is how shallow the squad customization is. With a lack of choosing things like objectives and no replacement for tactics/command cards it doesn’t feel as customizable as other games

The lack of killing in this isa benefit of this game. After playing competative Warmachine and 40k for decades, where there are technically “objectives” but “kill the other guy” is always the best strategy, I like playing a game where that’s pretty actively discouraged by the system itself.

I love Shatterpoint. No game is perfect, but this game has tactical depth and doesn't have the feelbad of getting shot off the table before getting to play the game. I get my skirmish fix but it's not stupid-simple.

Personally I am currently really enjoying shatterpoint. New mission pack arrived today and excited to try it out

Video starts at 2:35

Well, you get momentum for wounding a unit, right? Some other things (like the lack of scenario and no really distinctive play style) hurt the game so much more imho.

The game is basicly Star Wars crisis protocol. AMGs handling of Armada and X-wing basicly kept me away from thier products.

Not wiping someone off the map makes this game more interesting for new players and the casual player.

Really is that the issue? Tabling someone isn't the point of this game. What I have a problem with is that range is worthless. Most shooting range is 4. With is a jump or dash 2 away to be engaged, which is very easy to tie up your Blaster unit. Plus Luminara is broken and I'm tired of seeing her in competive play and just dominating.

No reason to do combat? Don't the majority of area control abilities come from doing combat?! After suffering crippling defeats in Legion and X-Wing from just not bringing the right force. It's nice to be able to play a game with my miniatures and not have to pack them away once they are hit.

I could see the squad units getting killed, and they’re the most likely to be killed. However, the point of this game was to replicate Clone Wars and similar shows where the main named characters rarely die. I think the current system does reflect that. “Pushing” with a lightsaber represents the movement that happens during a lightsaber fight.

Lightsabers not killing people?!? that sounds very (current) star wars! 😜

If by tabling, everyone is killed , no. But losing a game quickly? Yes. The fastest loss I’ve had was 13 activations. Perhaps the way to make wounding someone more effective would be to say after they remove their damage tokens and one condition, the wounded character’s activation ends. Given that missions are random, activations are random and dice are involved, with so much that is random , the question becomes, do players decisions matter? If you can manipulate your activations by reserving units, that helps. But characters that can look at the deck or other manipulations have a more outsized effect. Same with those that can modify their or opponent’s dice results. Or characters that can negate other players decisions (I’m looking at you Obi Wan). I do enjoy the game. It has a lot going for it. But I do think it needs work.

Also you compared it to in my opinion one of the worst mechanics of MCP and said it as a positive. Going up against of the big killy characters in MCP and having one or multiple characters round one dazed then taken off the board round two or three is a horrible game experience. There's a reason why none of the overpowered characters are included in affiliations to use in AMG's Timeline events for 2024.

So I think you are right on lot of it. Personally I had change rules for house play to make the game a bit more board removal to spice it up as the game doesn’t have that option really. I think shatter point is missing the opportunity to add characters with less actual coverage like things in. Legends. I hope we get different terrain ideas or more iconic things like adding creatures that can operate as a neutral threat to both sides like a rancor for example.

I really like shatterpoint but its hard to get my friends to play it over imperial assault. Everyone always wants to play imperial assault.

only played two games so far third game is tomorrow. I've played 40K, Legion, AoS and this. I like how much less Killy it is although my small amount of experience wounding people stops them from holding objectives so damage-dealing is important right?

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the game, I feel like this game doesn’t really fit your play style, which is totally ok!

I was hesitant to get into miniatures but shatterpoint cought my attention, it felt approachable specially with the figures being based on the clone wars which made it nostalgic and encouraged me to learn to play.

honestly, it sounds like if the 'zombie' effects were removed and units were knocked out for that round, it would make combat feel more meaningful.

I do not always wash my socks... Thanks for the heads up

Im still holding to the biggest issue being they created a fantastic system to enable dynamic missions (an example would be grab a x and move it to point y) that dont feel unfair because you can move your opponent around, and then they went with the most boring generic missions they could come up with (i.e. stand on a point)

I appreciate any Shatterpoint videos you give us even if I disagree:) Shatterpoint favors the individual decision making over pre-planning. There's a number of advantages to it not being lethal, people make great points in the comments. I agree removing units can be satisfying, and legion is a really fun game to do that. It doesn't break the realism to be less lethal in this game. Characters in SW often get temporarily immobilized or removed from a fight, and you can imagine droids being injured is just a new wave coming in. Also as a skirmish game you have more time to focus painting on fewer models, so nice that they stay around to be used and seen.

It’s a strategic movement game. I don’t think it was designed for tpk. Hence the heal trees on most character cards. Which you can do to other units within a certain distance.

For me what I didn't care for what the micro level of movement. With ranges being so short and objectives being so important, things like pushing a model 1 inch can win or lose a game. Fiddly movement with miniatures is difficult and many games have done away with these more micro forms of movement. Being unable to kill other units means moving them is more important and with terrain this can be a hassle.

The competitive leagues have Vader dominating. Units with the ability to one shot a Unit to Wounded are considered high value. Holding a wounded unit in reserve to avoid it being taken out is often not the ideal play, you may need that unit active for scoring or need the reserve for a more time dependent Unit. There is a lot of tactical nuance to Shatterpoint, way more than I first thought. I love that it is different. It honestly feels more like chess than a skirmish or war game.

I'm losing interest in the game after playing it once or twice a week since October. Players where I play are all about winning to the point where they are building squads comprised of characters who are deadly enemies to each other. This sucks the fun out of it for me. When I first stated playing, we would all show up equipped with good guys and bad guys. This way we wouldn't have Obi Wans fighting each other. It's the thematic quality that hooked me right away. I brought it up a few weeks ago, about going back to that, and they asked me, "Don't you want to win?" I was like, "Doesn't matter, it's frikkin Star Wars, dude." I have also noticed the game can get a little boring. Oh well. I was going to give Legion a try. Not sure yet.

So based on this and your previous comments, do you now like Legion better than Shatterpoint now?

I don't have an opinion based on experience, it just sounds more fun to be able to remove enemy units to me. I bought the legion core set this week, looking forward to playing!

To be fair if they just release updated cards with one less life for each character it will be way more fun to attack people

Im a legion player, I have watched a few videos on shatterpoint and have not seen anything that makes me wanna buy the game. These thoughts are shared by my gaming group too

I agree that the combat isn't as lethal as schematically feels like it should be. I think if there wasn't an IP tied to the game there wouldn't be a problem with that. Mechanically I think it is largely fine as wounding a unit is a tax on your opponent's resources as well as giving you a momentum.

Oh, I thought you going to say "it's from AMG"....

Now that Shatterpoint has had an opportunity to "settle in" for gamers, the observations in the video are the ones I'm hearing most often. It doesn't seem to have the opportunity for tactical creativity that Legion has in abundance. I think opening up those opportunities and offering more mortal risk would make the game much more thematic. The whole selling point for Shatterpoint in the beginning was that it would offer more personal, small squad interaction.

They're just paying homage to the new Star Wars and how NOBODY dies and EVERYTHING sucks: fight me.

Enjoy your vids but I totally disagree with this opinion. Shatterpoint does have mechanics built in that make it beneficial to wound characters such as the additional force cost and wounded characters not contesting objectives which controlling objectives with changing conditions us what AMG did these battles should feel like.

It would be nice if it was easier to eliminate units but I like that you cannot table someone. The wounded being invulnerable to attack is the part I find minorly irritating. My main issue is that the objectives are too abstract.

I have heard several negative comments about the game as well as a bunch of positives. This is normal for newer games and I would love to give it a try and hopefully the issues get ironed out as time goes on. I love the concept of smaller hero focused stuff for Star Wars.

This is a bizarre take imo. Not losing your units as often is exactly what separates this game from the rest of the field.

I have only played shatterpoint a couple of times and the lack of combat in the game does turn me off a bit. Like objective based game but making it pure objective and the way it plays just doesn't really work for me. You can have both combat and objective based gameplay. I have played a few games where you can table your opponent and still lose due to you can't score pts to win by killing your opponent.

Shatterpoint seems like a fine game but the reason I like Legion more is that it gives the avg joe a chance to become the hero through a memorable moment on the table. Shatterpoint is just too hero/main-character focused.

I think of it was six rounds like mcp their would be alot more killing but doubling the game time might turn it into a bit of a slog

Another thing I find lackluster in the design of both MCP and Shatterpoint is that these are essentially 2d games board games. Terrain rules, line of sight etc feel off and unelegant. Coming from Batman and DC miniatures games, can´t really say it´s an improvement.

I loke shatterpoint but it's not perfect as you say... however the new mission pack does put a bit more emphasis on combat and makes it so you need to wound units to out score your opponent on objectives... played the new mission the other day and we had 5 full units removed from the game in total

My issue is that the best of 3 doesn't seem to be working. Whoever wins the first struggle is winning pretty much every match. So it's tight and filled with drama for the first struggle, but after that, the ending seems to be written on the wall, the loser of the first struggle is just playing out the game even though they've essentially lost after the first struggle. In my games the winner may be an underdog in struggle 2, but even if they lose 2, they will win struggle 3. Many games, and I've never had someone win after losing struggle 1.

I'm having a blast playing Shatterpoint. I run droids myself and really want to see some droidekas.

That's the first thing that struck me and made me immediatly not even try it. It just becomes a shoving match between characters hardly interesting after seeing a couple of battle reports.

Honeymoon is over, huh? Think ill keep with my "wait and see" approach

It would be interesting if you could no longer remove minis from an X-wing game.

It would be nice if the game was a little more killy, but I don't think I want to be able to table my opponent consistently.

I disagree. I actually enjoy that there’s a game that doesn’t reward tabling. I feel like most games can be won just by killing and the whole point of the game like objectives tend to be ignored. This is actually why I like this game.

My "problem with shatterpoint" is I don't want to invest in another game because Xwing and Legion are already taking so much

My problems with games like this is I do not like playing a specific character, always prefer to play "my guys"

I wish characters were easier to knock out. I wish you could throw objects, or cause damage from terrain like MCP. I dont like the rubber-banding of the force track - it moves when you knock out a character... or when you are losing on your turn? It feels wrong. Still love the game though.

I mean you could just easily house rule that each unit got 1 to 2 lifes less or even say each unit can only be wounded once, which might mess with balance though because I think the amount of lifes was taking into account for balancing purposes.

I totally get what you are saying, it feels off that wounding an enemy does not do more. Then again in MCP if you play a harsh list your list can be ineffective very quickly. With effect that make the wounded character move or shoot. Think shooting is the stronger one, I had a scenario where I controlled an objective with an enemy in range. Then a wounded character shoots resulting in me being pushed off the objective and then the end of the actual characters turn they move to a second objective, meaning at the end of the character turn they got 2 objectives. As for removing models from play, has not happened yet, came close with 1 activation left on 2 units before they get removed, but with the limited activations and the ability to put cards in reserve, its pretty hard to do. A force user vs a droid or clone trooper should be effective where it just does not feel like this. Shatter point is a very sold game, easy to learn and flows well. It sometimes feels like they designed a great game and then looked for an IP to skin on it and not sure if Star Wars with some real OP characters, fits. (Think Vader or Ahsoka who can force pull a ship cannot kill a B1/B2 droid or clone trooper in 1 shot) Gues its the same as MCP where we have humans with high threat and abilities beyond super humans. some things dont always fit when comparing the character self. Does not mean I will not play it or go buy more models :)

I enjoy Shatterpoint, but I have found I am playing it a lot less lately as feels a little stuck at the moment

I haven't played shatterpoint yet, I'm just starting out with legion

So I agree there should be a bit more of a reward for wounding or taking models out but I love this game because model don't get taken off quickly and you can't board wipe, definitely more fun because people then build lists of models they like and play fun instead of janky lists of what's going to murder everything you

Yah, Star Wars is about fast-paced deadly combat. They shoot plasma bolts out of blasters, swing plasma swords, and shoot giant lasers. For me, legion captures that as the units die very quickly if they are misplaced. The threat of danger seems real in legion while everytime I see shatterpoint I think wow what fantastic models and then that's about the end of it because it doesn't look like a game of star wars combat. Sure, it's objective-based amd not about killing all the units but so is Legion. Legion however can have variety and feels different every game all while still having that deadly aspect to the combat. Of course, elimination objective in skirmish is about killing units, bit legion is much more dynamic and flexible. I would also argue that it is not that hard to set up and play a 500 pt game of legion when compared to shatterpoint, and the game is much more flexible, dynamic, deadly, and enjoyable. But Shatterpoint does have amazing models though and some of my favorite characters that I wish we had in legion...

I’ve been curious about Shatterpoint, so this is an interesting video.

I hate that this is the second game balanced for objectives gameplay rather than straight up battling. I've never used objectives in Armada, ever. It's Star WARS after all, not Star Skirmish. War is literally in the name of the franchise. Sprues were also a deal breaker.

Yeah dude I love tabling my opponent and taking away strategic options. Makes for a really interesting game.

I don't mind the idea that it's hard to remove a unit, but I agree that you should get more benefits from wounding a unit.

I still haven’t played shatter point - it seems great but I have invested so much in legion!

I would say if anything support units could drop down to 1 injury. They would be removed but then your opponent gets to use their big hitters more often. But I am happy with the game as is currently.

Maybe killing units wasnt family friendly enough for Disney :D

I just got the core set, need to build it, it does look intimidating and a happy Life Day

I'd just like a little more flexibility in my list-building. The first box I bought was the Inquisitors, and given that Reva spends multiple episodes wearing the mantle of Grand Inquisitor it's a little weird to me that she's restricted to only being a Secondary.

I just think for all the great miniatures and characters, it's just an unexciting area control game at heart. Not my thing.

I’m not familiar with shatter point and probably will not get into it because I’ve seen what happened to imperial assault and legion. I hate to get into a game and then it dies/fades away.