Point. It's kind of silly that a missile slot costs anything at all, really. Given how ridiculously expensive the unreliable one-shot ordnance is.

Fortunately for us, I think they've figured that one out. The Bomber and Headhunter point that direction, and the Chardaan Refit sort of does, too--together they look like an admission that you used to pay for missile slots, and that led to overpriced ships, so here's a discount on your A-wings.

Point. It's kind of silly that a missile slot costs anything at all, really. Given how ridiculously expensive the unreliable one-shot ordnance is.

Fortunately for us, I think they've figured that one out. The Bomber and Headhunter point that direction, and the Chardaan Refit sort of does, too--together they look like an admission that you used to pay for missile slots, and that led to overpriced ships, so here's a discount on your A-wings.

But... screw you TIE Advanced and Screw you Vader and Steele

It's a hypothesis, not an argument, and it needs evidence. It's easy to demonstrate that the A-wing is overcosted, but demonstrating a particular cause is harder.

I think my hypothesis is more plausible: I think A-wings overpaid for their missile slot because at the time FFG didn't want to risk lists with 5 Concussion or Cluster Missiles, and I think FFG overvalued 2 Attack fairly substantially. The largest piece of evidence for my position is that the other ship with 2 Attack and a missile slot is also substantially overcosted; supporting evidence includes the fact that in Waves 1-2 missiles were restricted to the Firespray and named Falcons (no more than 2 missiles per list) and A-wing and TIE Advanced (no more than 4 missiles per list).

That theory kind of runs into trouble when you compare the A-wing to the Interceptor though. The two have the same dials, the A-wing has 1 more THP, the Interceptor 1 more attack. Yet, even though the Interceptor lacks a missile slot, it is still more expensive than the A-wing. If the missile slot was the reason the A-wing is over-costed, then the Interceptor who lacks one should have been cheaper as well.

With a missile slot comes the ability to Target Lock. Where the Interceptor has barrel roll to modify being in and out of arc (both offensively and defensively), the A-Wing gets another dice modification option, one which may be saved for an opportune moment, but the spending of which is a prerequisite to be able to use a missile.

So what price the barrel roll? We all know the barrel roll is a strong action after all.

It looks like FFG values it higher than target lock at any rate.

Now if the Chardaan Refit would have given A-Wings a Barrel Roll instead of a discount at the cost of a missile slot...

Now if the Chardaan Refit would have given A-Wings a Barrel Roll instead of a discount at the cost of a missile slot...

... then what? You can have it - for free. Add the Zamzarramm Refet and Expert Handling

It's a hypothesis, not an argument, and it needs evidence. It's easy to demonstrate that the A-wing is overcosted, but demonstrating a particular cause is harder.

I think my hypothesis is more plausible: I think A-wings overpaid for their missile slot because at the time FFG didn't want to risk lists with 5 Concussion or Cluster Missiles, and I think FFG overvalued 2 Attack fairly substantially. The largest piece of evidence for my position is that the other ship with 2 Attack and a missile slot is also substantially overcosted; supporting evidence includes the fact that in Waves 1-2 missiles were restricted to the Firespray and named Falcons (no more than 2 missiles per list) and A-wing and TIE Advanced (no more than 4 missiles per list).

That theory kind of runs into trouble when you compare the A-wing to the Interceptor though. The two have the same dials, the A-wing has 1 more THP, the Interceptor 1 more attack. Yet, even though the Interceptor lacks a missile slot, it is still more expensive than the A-wing. If the missile slot was the reason the A-wing is over-costed, then the Interceptor who lacks one should have been cheaper as well.

The A-wing pays for access to the missile slot, and for the extra durability compare to the interceptor, but the Interceptor pays for that extra Attack. I think it still works

It's a hypothesis, not an argument, and it needs evidence. It's easy to demonstrate that the A-wing is overcosted, but demonstrating a particular cause is harder.

I think my hypothesis is more plausible: I think A-wings overpaid for their missile slot because at the time FFG didn't want to risk lists with 5 Concussion or Cluster Missiles, and I think FFG overvalued 2 Attack fairly substantially. The largest piece of evidence for my position is that the other ship with 2 Attack and a missile slot is also substantially overcosted; supporting evidence includes the fact that in Waves 1-2 missiles were restricted to the Firespray and named Falcons (no more than 2 missiles per list) and A-wing and TIE Advanced (no more than 4 missiles per list).

That theory kind of runs into trouble when you compare the A-wing to the Interceptor though. The two have the same dials, the A-wing has 1 more THP, the Interceptor 1 more attack. Yet, even though the Interceptor lacks a missile slot, it is still more expensive than the A-wing. If the missile slot was the reason the A-wing is over-costed, then the Interceptor who lacks one should have been cheaper as well.

The A-wing pays for access to the missile slot, and for the extra durability compare to the interceptor, but the Interceptor pays for that extra Attack. I think it still works

With barrel role, the interceptor is also far more maneuverable, especially with PTL. Pointing out an Awing with refit even with future upgrades and double EPT, I still think the interceptor is a better ship than an upgraded Awing that covers one or more of the elements an interceptor has built in.

A PTL Interceptor is also going to cost at least 24 points. Compared to an Chardaaned A-wing's 20.

It's a hypothesis, not an argument, and it needs evidence. It's easy to demonstrate that the A-wing is overcosted, but demonstrating a particular cause is harder.

I think my hypothesis is more plausible: I think A-wings overpaid for their missile slot because at the time FFG didn't want to risk lists with 5 Concussion or Cluster Missiles, and I think FFG overvalued 2 Attack fairly substantially. The largest piece of evidence for my position is that the other ship with 2 Attack and a missile slot is also substantially overcosted; supporting evidence includes the fact that in Waves 1-2 missiles were restricted to the Firespray and named Falcons (no more than 2 missiles per list) and A-wing and TIE Advanced (no more than 4 missiles per list).

That theory kind of runs into trouble when you compare the A-wing to the Interceptor though. The two have the same dials, the A-wing has 1 more THP, the Interceptor 1 more attack. Yet, even though the Interceptor lacks a missile slot, it is still more expensive than the A-wing. If the missile slot was the reason the A-wing is over-costed, then the Interceptor who lacks one should have been cheaper as well.

The A-wing pays for access to the missile slot, and for the extra durability compare to the interceptor, but the Interceptor pays for that extra Attack. I think it still works

With barrel role, the interceptor is also far more maneuverable, especially with PTL. Pointing out an Awing with refit even with future upgrades and double EPT, I still think the interceptor is a better ship than an upgraded Awing that covers one or more of the elements an interceptor has built in.

A PTL Interceptor is also going to cost at least 24 points. Compared to an Chardaaned A-wing's 20.

Now if the Chardaan Refit would have given A-Wings a Barrel Roll instead of a discount at the cost of a missile slot...

... then what? You can have it - for free. Add the Zamzarramm Refet and Expert Handling

At the cost of an EPT slot and a stress token. Hardly for free. .

It's a hypothesis, not an argument, and it needs evidence. It's easy to demonstrate that the A-wing is overcosted, but demonstrating a particular cause is harder.

I think my hypothesis is more plausible: I think A-wings overpaid for their missile slot because at the time FFG didn't want to risk lists with 5 Concussion or Cluster Missiles, and I think FFG overvalued 2 Attack fairly substantially. The largest piece of evidence for my position is that the other ship with 2 Attack and a missile slot is also substantially overcosted; supporting evidence includes the fact that in Waves 1-2 missiles were restricted to the Firespray and named Falcons (no more than 2 missiles per list) and A-wing and TIE Advanced (no more than 4 missiles per list).

That theory kind of runs into trouble when you compare the A-wing to the Interceptor though. The two have the same dials, the A-wing has 1 more THP, the Interceptor 1 more attack. Yet, even though the Interceptor lacks a missile slot, it is still more expensive than the A-wing. If the missile slot was the reason the A-wing is over-costed, then the Interceptor who lacks one should have been cheaper as well.

The A-wing pays for access to the missile slot, and for the extra durability compare to the interceptor, but the Interceptor pays for that extra Attack. I think it still works

This ^^

Attack Dice cost more points than agility OR hit points. Other factors are obviously included in the cost such as the dial and the durability, but it always comes back to the attack value. Interceptors are fragile, but they excel at remaining un-attackable. And if you can't attack them, you can't remove those three attack dice. Look at the Phantom. It's stats are 4222. There are two main reasons for its base cost of 25 points: FOUR attack dice, and cloak. Cloak makes those 4 attack absurdly mobile. Boost and Barrel Roll make the Interceptors 3 attack quite mobile, also.

For another comparison, look at the Z95 vs. the X-wing. The dials are near identical, with some different greens and the Z's shorter K-turn. The Z has a missile, the X has a torpedo. The astromech slot IS worth something, but much less than the 3rd attack die and 3rd HP, which create the 9 point disparity in the price. But, then, the B-wing has 3 more shield than the X-wing and has a more stressful dial, but it only costs 1 extra point.

Attack dice and flexibility of those attack dice represent the majority of the cost of any ship.

imo rebels are winning this war. B-Wings and new x-wing pilots on the way. rebel aces gives rebels many more options and strengthens them further. just look at the new astromechs!

i dont think imperial aces will address this imbalance.

c'mon FF where is the love for the empire!

I think Imperial aces does a fantasitc job. See Interceptors can get the RGI title while A-Wings get test pilot. RGI gives the Interceptor the ability to have two upgrades both can be used at the same time. Test pilot grants two ep abilities but that doesnt mean they can both be used at the same time.

I find using targeting computer and stealth device a better combo than having two ept with only one that can be used at a time. The Interceptor combo is even more lethal with ptl and focus extra more so if used on the Baron.

Even though you cant use it in ternies the Prototype TIE Interceptor you can use in mission 7 is nothing to dismiss. You can end up with 7 attack dice with its primary attack. Or you can have a Prototype TIE Phantom that can do 3 vollies in one turn.

RGT upgrade adds to the problem of the Interceptor which is that it's pricey for a 3H ship.

Proto upgrade let's you have Vet Instincts, Determination, Adrenaline Rush...etc + PTL. I would trade Proto upgrade on the Interceptor over RGT any day of the week and twice on Saturdays.

Your better off with the RGT upgrade. You become a dangerous jouster with targeting computer + ptl. You will not be seeing much with a -2 discount.

Shall we add Predator and Outmaneuver to the "Not many good combos for dual EPT" discussion?

I hope the A-Wing uses Predator because its a crap EPT. If you want rerolls use a targeting computer. Even better just use expose or oppurtunist you get a +1 attack die.

Just for the heck of it if I had that prototype Interceptor or any prototype with 3 attack and I traded expose or oppertunist for Predator and then I some how miss with all 6 attack dice I will only be getting 1 reroll... With TC I can reroll all 6 or 7 if I hade kept expose or oppertunist.

I dont care that prototype imperials cant be used in tournaments most of us will be playing in house causual battles most the time.

Free rerolls are worse than ones that require actions. Got it.

Rexler will take care of the B-Wings

These are the kinds of statements that make people discount anything you might have to say, because... well, you're clueless.

I love Rexler, but against a ship that's 60% shields, he's going to do approximately nothing.

Rexler has some hope of screwing with A-wings/Headhunters, because there's the threat of a Direct Hit. He is going to be solid against Shuttles/Firesprays/YTs/Bombers/Y-wings because they have so much hull. The B-wing is, honestly, the worst ship in the entire game for Rexler to have to face.

<sigh> I'd feel better about being concerned about the new Rebel toys if so many other Imperial pilots weren't so **** embarrassing.

Your better off with the RGT upgrade. You become a dangerous jouster with targeting computer + ptl. You will not be seeing much with a -2 discount.

Uhm... No, you really don't. If you choose to use that Targeting Computer, your defense is minimizedand you're going to be a floating pile of debris before you can say "Wait, WTF just happened??"

Targeting Computer is great for those times when a PtL Interceptor ends up out of any enemy arcs, and hasn't got anything to do with the spare action... but not much more than that.

Shall we add Predator and Outmaneuver to the "Not many good combos for dual EPT" discussion?

I hope the A-Wing uses Predator because its a crap EPT. If you want rerolls use a targeting computer. Even better just use expose or oppurtunist you get a +1 attack die.

Getting a reroll that don't need you to use an action, even if it's just one dice, is very good, especially when there is no constraint whatsoever like get one stress token, your opponent need to have no evade or focus token, need to shoot from out of sight... it will be useful every time you attack and free you up an action that you don't need to spend on target lock. With 2 dice, odds are you'll do just fine by rerolling 1 dice per attack. I prefer to attack with 2-3 dice combine with 1 reroll+focus than 2-3 dice with rerolls.

Shall we add Predator and Outmaneuver to the "Not many good combos for dual EPT" discussion?

I hope the A-Wing uses Predator because its a crap EPT. If you want rerolls use a targeting computer. Even better just use expose or oppurtunist you get a +1 attack die.

Getting a reroll that don't need you to use an action, even if it's just one dice, is very good, especially when there is no constraint whatsoever like get one stress token, your opponent need to have no evade or focus token, need to shoot from out of sight... it will be useful every time you attack and free you up an action that you don't need to spend on target lock. With 2 dice, odds are you'll do just fine by rerolling 1 dice per attack. I prefer to attack with 2-3 dice combine with 1 reroll+focus than 2-3 dice with rerolls.

This.

To add to Red Castle's point. A TIE Fighter rolls 2 dice. With focus, each die has a 75% chance to hit. This gives you a 56% chance to get two hits, which isn't shabby (.75*.75=.5625). Anything over 50% is pretty good in a dice game. Combine that with a single reroll. This increases one die to 94% (1.00-.75=.25 .25*.75=.1875 .75*.1875=.9375). This gives you a 70% chance to roll 2 hits (.9375*.75=.703125).

The trend is the same with more dice, or the additional reroll from Predator. Each time you add a die, your likelihood for at least 2 hits doesn't change, 3 hits is still above 50%, and 4 dice is right about 40%, all because you had a focus AND a reroll.

Focus+Target lock is statistically better, but as Red Castle said, this method frees up an action. Push the Limit may still be favorable on Rebel Ships, but most empire ships don't have target lock as an action. Predator will significantly increase their hit averages.

Not to mention that Interceptors rely on their actions to avoid return fire, so being able to re-roll a dice while still being able to boost or barrel roll will make Interceptors all the deadlier. Especially since the upcoming Rebel Transport is going to severely punish ships who can't get rid of stress tokens as they acquire them.

Not to mention that Interceptors rely on their actions to avoid return fire, so being able to re-roll a dice while still being able to boost or barrel roll will make Interceptors all the deadlier. Especially since the upcoming Rebel Transport is going to severely punish ships who can't get rid of stress tokens as they acquire them.

Because interceptors rely on their actions, though, something like Predator isn't going to match PTL for them, for reasons Buhallin mentioned. You take up that EPT slot with anything other than PTL and you actually lose defensive flexibility (both in the form of an action and maneuver) that helps keep an interceptor alive.

It's an issue of the economy of upgrades. On an interceptor, first choice should be PTL. If you have some extra points and/or are very good at flying them you still have the modification slot open, which could be used for a targeting computer, especially on those interceptors in squad you know won't be early priority targets or will be flankers. There's probably someone who could do the math a bit better than I, but I think using targeting computer just a couple of times a game will probably outstrip the point efficiency of Predator. Though, as I said, it's simple placement as a modification already makes it a more useful upgrade than Predator on an interceptor. (I think it's an interesting upgrade on an A-Wing, but I've argued in other places that I don't think it's going to be the "ultimate" upgrade there either).

*Joke deleted by good taste*

Predator doesn't replace PtL for sure, but in a game where stress is more and more a threat, I can see it as an alternative. You still keep your freedom of movement next turn, doing a 1 sharp turn, 3 bank or a K-turn is still an option. So while you lose the possibilty to do a second action this turn, you gain maneuvrabilty for the next . You can do a K-Turn and still get to reroll 1 dice, that makes this upgrade very interesting on Tetran. For my part, on Interceptor, I will prefer outmaneuver, but I don't consider predator a crappy EPT like Black Knight suggested; it has its purpose and can be very useful in a game about action economy and threatening stress. It's still useful even when you normally can't do any action, a nice compensation for the times you'll get stop by another ship in your path.

I hope the A-Wing uses Predator because its a crap EPT. If you want rerolls use a targeting computer. Even better just use expose or oppurtunist you get a +1 attack die.

Suppose an X-wing with an EPT is attacking a TIE Fighter at Range 2. Suppose the TIE Fighter doesn't get an action or has already spent its token on a previous attack. Also suppose the TIE Fighter has PS3 or better.

• With no upgrade action at all, the X-wing does an average of 0.67 damage per attack.
• Using Expose, it does 1.06 damage, and takes a penalty to Agility.
• With a focus token, it does 1.22 damage.
• With Predator and a focus token, it does 1.59 damage.
• Using Push the Limit to get target lock and focus does 1.70 damage, and it gains a stress token.
• Activating Opportunist with focus does 1.91 damage, and it gains a stress token.

[EDIT: Also worth pointing out that with no action, Predator results in 0.99 average damage--not as much as an action, but far better than no modification at all (and almost as good as Expose).]

***

TL;DR: Predator is not a crap EPT.

I hope the A-Wing uses Predator because its a crap EPT. If you want rerolls use a targeting computer. Even better just use expose or oppurtunist you get a +1 attack die.

Suppose an X-wing with an EPT is attacking a TIE Fighter at Range 2. Suppose the TIE Fighter doesn't get an action or has already spent its token on a previous attack. Also suppose the TIE Fighter has PS3 or better.

• With no upgrade action at all, the X-wing does an average of 0.67 damage per attack.
• Using Expose, it does 1.06 damage, and takes a penalty to Agility.
• With a focus token, it does 1.22 damage.
• With Predator and a focus token, it does 1.59 damage.
• Using Push the Limit to get target lock and focus does 1.70 damage, and it gains a stress token.
• Activating Opportunist with focus does 1.91 damage, and it gains a stress token.

Expose is not a good upgrade, because in this kind of situation you pay 4 points and lose a point of Agility in order to do less damage than focus. Predator gives you a nice bump to your damage good upgrade; it's cheaper than Opportunist, and unlike Opportunist and Push the Limit, it doesn't result in stress. Opportunist is the best buff of all, but it's situational.

[EDIT: Also worth pointing out that with no action, Predator results in 0.99 average damage--not as much as an action, but far better than no modification at all (and almost as good as Expose).]

***

TL;DR: Predator is not a crap EPT.

Good analysis. Thanks for the numbers. A point that I think gets missed in this discussion is that Target Lock is something you can do on a previous turn and/or when you aren't able to shoot at anything at all and aren't being shot at. That's still limited since it is still situational, but I thought worth pointing out since a lot of the scenarios people describe are those where they are taking a target lock on the same turn they are using it.

I hope the A-Wing uses Predator because its a crap EPT. If you want rerolls use a targeting computer. Even better just use expose or oppurtunist you get a +1 attack die.

Suppose an X-wing with an EPT is attacking a TIE Fighter at Range 2. Suppose the TIE Fighter doesn't get an action or has already spent its token on a previous attack. Also suppose the TIE Fighter has PS3 or better.

• With no upgrade action at all, the X-wing does an average of 0.67 damage per attack.
• Using Expose, it does 1.06 damage, and takes a penalty to Agility.
• With a focus token, it does 1.22 damage.
• With Predator and a focus token, it does 1.59 damage.
• Using Push the Limit to get target lock and focus does 1.70 damage, and it gains a stress token.
• Activating Opportunist with focus does 1.91 damage, and it gains a stress token.

Expose is not a good upgrade, because in this kind of situation you pay 4 points and lose a point of Agility in order to do less damage than focus. Predator gives you a nice bump to your damage good upgrade; it's cheaper than Opportunist, and unlike Opportunist and Push the Limit, it doesn't result in stress. Opportunist is the best buff of all, but it's situational.

[EDIT: Also worth pointing out that with no action, Predator results in 0.99 average damage--not as much as an action, but far better than no modification at all (and almost as good as Expose).]

***

TL;DR: Predator is not a crap EPT.

Good analysis. Thanks for the numbers. A point that I think gets missed in this discussion is that Target Lock is something you can do on a previous turn and/or when you aren't able to shoot at anything at all and aren't being shot at. That's still limited since it is still situational, but I thought worth pointing out since a lot of the scenarios people describe are those where they are taking a target lock on the same turn they are using it.

I hope the A-Wing uses Predator because its a crap EPT. If you want rerolls use a targeting computer. Even better just use expose or oppurtunist you get a +1 attack die.

Suppose an X-wing with an EPT is attacking a TIE Fighter at Range 2. Suppose the TIE Fighter doesn't get an action or has already spent its token on a previous attack. Also suppose the TIE Fighter has PS3 or better.

• With no upgrade action at all, the X-wing does an average of 0.67 damage per attack.
• Using Expose, it does 1.06 damage, and takes a penalty to Agility.
• With a focus token, it does 1.22 damage.
• With Predator and a focus token, it does 1.59 damage.
• Using Push the Limit to get target lock and focus does 1.70 damage, and it gains a stress token.
• Activating Opportunist with focus does 1.91 damage, and it gains a stress token.

Expose is not a good upgrade, because in this kind of situation you pay 4 points and lose a point of Agility in order to do less damage than focus. Predator gives you a nice bump to your damage good upgrade; it's cheaper than Opportunist, and unlike Opportunist and Push the Limit, it doesn't result in stress. Opportunist is the best buff of all, but it's situational.

[EDIT: Also worth pointing out that with no action, Predator results in 0.99 average damage--not as much as an action, but far better than no modification at all (and almost as good as Expose).]

***

TL;DR: Predator is not a crap EPT.

Good analysis. Thanks for the numbers. A point that I think gets missed in this discussion is that Target Lock is something you can do on a previous turn and/or when you aren't able to shoot at anything at all and aren't being shot at. That's still limited since it is still situational, but I thought worth pointing out since a lot of the scenarios people describe are those where they are taking a target lock on the same turn they are using it.

While true Predator offers a free accuracy boost and works well with focus, giving more action adaptability. I mean Krassis is considered amazing for his ability to reroll one dice on secondaries. Predator is far better.

I don't know that I've heard people describe his ability as "amazing" but I certainly understand that predator is better, even for three points. It's pretty clear that if you could put predator on a bounty hunter, Krassis would become obsolete.

I've said it many times, and while I think it's a solid card, I'll be surprised if it gets used as much as people think. The options for its use, where PTL isn't optimal, are somewhat rare.

I think X-wing pilots would love this, but that's limited to Wedge and Luke for now, and will cost an extra point on Reds, Garven, and Biggs in the future (thanks to the droid). The Falcon and Firespray pilots could also make good use of it, but they have an option for Gunner, which is a different spot, so if they are looking to use that elite spot for something else, gunner might be a better fit. I just don't see it replacing PTL on interceptors, and I'm not sure it's a great fit for the two dice A-Wing except as a second EPT, but then that gets to be an expensive ship.