I don't think you get how I'm describing them. I'm not saying they are OP or broken. I'm saying they're like training wheels for people who can't, or don't want to maneuver well. Not every rebel player needs a crutch, that's why they aren't the most common.

That is calling them OP. Anything termed as a crutch is being called too good to create fair play. It's calling players that use them inferior. The implications are all there and adopting that mentality builds resentment in the community. Turret upgrades are functionally bad for your squads overall damage. The Blaster Turret is overpriced and requires support or one of two upgrades to work without being horrible. The ion turret is only situationally useful and is slow to deal damage. Using them right and knowing when to and not to takes a great deal of skill and awareness. The Falcon costs as much as any two rebel ships most of the time, cutting down their damage. That makes the squads that use them innefective for the most part. Pretty much implies they are not a crutch.

Yep, pretty much this. I'm primarily an Imperial player. Turret builds can be a challenge, but I like them and don't consider them a crutch. It's not like the points for them are off or something. Calling them a "crutch" is insulting to the folks who like Y-Wings and such, despite their generally-accepted inefficiency.

I play a lot of games, and X-Wing is among the most balanced IME, including the turrets. Also, I like that the game lets you play Gold Squadron and have a chance to win some games.

While you have all the right to hate turrets and flying them or against them, you can't speak for everyone else. Some people like to include them in their build and have as much fun flying against them than any other squad. To each their own.

You need to adjust your playstyke to them. It is true that they are easier to fly in the sense that you don't have to mind your firing arc to be able to shoot at a ship, but from my experience, it tends to give some kind of overconfidence to your opponent that you can exploit. I'm sure that outmaneuver will be really good against turret ship, they just don't care about their facing.

IMO Turret ships (especially Y-wings/HWKs) are like AdvS B-wings: Easy enough that beginners can play with them, yet offering interesting and unique strategies to the more experienced players.

Ions are only handy when another ship can take advantage of the shot. Blasters burn focus so they hit less hard and can be totally denied by collisions.

I dont agree with this at all. Ions are a rebel weapon - so are going to often (mostly) be up against imperal ships. What sheilds do most imperials have? Oh none on the tie fighers or interceptors.

Ions roll 3 dice. Thats pretty tough. Ok so only one damage? Thats a third of a tie gone - and then ioned too. Two turrent ships - you are at 6 dice.. it adds up to regular and consistant damage.

Did you read what you posted? A tie ln can expect to survive a hit from a blaster turret and knows it will survive a ion hit. More over it knows it can hurt any ship using turrets because they all have low defense. Regular consistent low damage will not kill ties fast enough. The ion is for control not damage. The blaster is a expensive single shot that can be silenced with ramming. The Falcon is awesome but it has to do the job of two because of the high cost.

ITT: People who don't understand how to play against turrets make loud complaints about how "OP" turrets are.

Seriously, turrets aren't that hard...you just have to think when you encounter them. Sometimes you have to change your strategy

Dude, pay attention, half the posts here are anti-turret tactics.

I don't think you get how I'm describing them. I'm not saying they are OP or broken. I'm saying they're like training wheels for people who can't, or don't want to maneuver well. Not every rebel player needs a crutch, that's why they aren't the most common.

That is calling them OP. Anything termed as a crutch is being called too good to create fair play. It's calling players that use them inferior. The implications are all there and adopting that mentality builds resentment in the community. Turret upgrades are functionally bad for your squads overall damage. The Blaster Turret is overpriced and requires support or one of two upgrades to work without being horrible. The ion turret is only situationally useful and is slow to deal damage. Using them right and knowing when to and not to takes a great deal of skill and awareness. The Falcon costs as much as any two rebel ships most of the time, cutting down their damage. That makes the squads that use them innefective for the most part. Pretty much implies they are not a crutch.

I'm sorry you're struggling to see the difference between laziness and brokenness, but please don't put words in my mouth and then use them to claim I'm fostering resentment. I'm not twisting your words, please do me the same courtesy.

I've got no problem with turrets as a concept, as I've said (and you've subsequently disregarded) in nearly every one of my posts. If I resented them, I wouldn't use them. What I do resent is the concept of using them in lieu of piloting prowess. An all-turret force exemplifies that mentality in its most extreme form. Even if it doesn't produce stellar results, it definitely produces obvious, boring, tactless games. And THAT, my friend, I do have a problem with.

I do believe maneuvers matter even with turret ships. The ships that are allowed turrets have lots of shields and hull but are light on agility dice. If you plan correctly, you can dodge your opponent's arcs while still having a shot of your own. That is the same goal with most other ships. Being able to fire outside of your arc allows you a greater chance of having a target. Which ships to focus and what actions to take are 2 other facets of tactful play that you still see with Y's, Hawks, and YT's. I don't view them as less tactful, strategic or "easier" than other ships. They are just built for a different style of play than other ships.

I have literally gone entire games moving exclusively with green maneuvers on a Y-Wing and had it do its job every turn. Can you move only 1 or 2 forward with ANY other ship and claim the same? No.

If you don't think they're easier to play with, you're fooling yourself.

I have literally gone entire games moving exclusively with green maneuvers on a Y-Wing and had it do its job every turn. Can you move only 1 or 2 forward with ANY other ship and claim the same? No.

If you don't think they're easier to play with, you're fooling yourself.

That just sounds like your opponent didn't know how to play against it.

I have literally gone entire games moving exclusively with green maneuvers on a Y-Wing and had it do its job every turn. Can you move only 1 or 2 forward with ANY other ship and claim the same? No.

If you don't think they're easier to play with, you're fooling yourself.

That just sounds like your opponent didn't know how to play against it.

That's absolutely true but also misses the point. I'm not saying they can't be out-played (in fact I earlier offered advice on how to do just that). My point is nothing else can SUCCEED by flying in a straight line.

It is the lowest common denominator, tactically speaking.

I still feel the maneuvers matter. Flying straight won't do a thing if your opponent starts on the other side of the play area and converges upon your y with the full force of his red dice. If the maneuvers still matter then your idea that you don't need to care about maneuvering is invalid.

You are saying that its not tactical because you CAN win by flying straight. Just because there is a possibility does not mean it WILL happen. I have fought a HSF list with Vader, mauler, backstabber and dark curse with some upgrades. Four ships with low attack dice, yet I managed to win due to better maneuvering and blocking. Just because I can defeat that list with four low attack ships does not mean I will everytime.

My point was that your example proves that maneuvers do matter for both parties. If your opponent just flew around all squirrely then it's less that the y is easy to fly and more that he didn't fly accordingly. You just took advantage of an unskilled player in that instance. Any player who's been around should know how to deal with the y and punish you for doing 1 and 2 straights the whole time. Sure you CAN do 1 straights the whole game and actually still pull off stuff, if the other player doesn't expect it. The same could be said of a b+hlc+fcs. Start at one edge, stay at range 3 and focus+tl 4 red dice until you reach the middle of the map. Koiogran and repeat. Still, that doesnt mean its not tactical or a strategy. You essentially turn the b into a precision sniper. Whether that will work depends on how your opponent flies.

What it really comes down to are the dice rolls.

No matter what in this game, no matter how well you fly, and line up your shots, if you roll crap you will lose either way

Yeah, but the dice are a pretty neutral force. There's the occasional game where the dice win someone a game, but most of the time it's not hard to control your dice well enough to win. In fact you win by controlling your dice.

Blaming the random factor claims that there is no skill to this game, and that is patently and obviously untrue.

As for Turret lists being Tasteless. Bull. If Turrets are what you enjoy then you should play them. They aren't broken, or even overpowered. They don't hurt the game or make it unfun unless you want it to. And of course they will get you within range two sometimes. If this was a game where ships could avoid arc forever it wouldn't be a well designed game. But you can avoid their arcs just fine and fire back. Except for the Falcon.

I find the Falcon annoying, but that has more to do with it's manueverability and the amount of accuracy stacking it can have paired with a Turret than the Turret itself. If the thing could miss, or lose arc(either one) I wouldn't be so annoyed by it. But even then, I have no issue with people who play it. I just want to kill it fast.

I never said there is no skill to this game.

There are a lot of factors that come into play.

Set up, asteroid placement, flying, colliding.

There is a lot of skill, but in the end the dice decides who wins.

I've played games where I've rolled 8 attack dice and would roll all blanks and one hit. Even though I had a focus did nothing to help.

I've seen games where my opponent would roll all hits, every time and I'd roll blanks even with 4 evade dice.

The are ways to alter the dice and etc but like I said, what it comes down to is the dice.

Is all odds. The more dice you roll, the better the chances, but even if you fly perfect and your opponent crashes around like a bunch of clowns, you can't win if you roll blanks, and your opponent rolls hits every time.

I've seen it more than I've cared for.

I've nearly threw the dice out on multiple occasions where we would play, first round of attacking I remember I focus fired on a a wing with a bounty hunter, tie interceptor, and fighters, not a single hit, then he turned around and killed 2 of my ships.

I flew it just right. I was where I wanted to be. Logically that many ships firing at an a wing should have killed it but it didn't. He even agreed as to what took place was not right.

It was all in the dice. Even with target locks and focus, It didn't matter.

I believed at that time I counted 13 dice is what I rolled because some were in range one.

After first round of attacking I had no choice but to forfeit cause there was no way coming back after that.

I forget all the details but do know I had rolled something like 12-13 attack dice and when I was defending he rolled all hits and I didn't roll a single dodge or focus.

How do you defend against that? Especially when I had the first attack and the dice were just the worst rolls?

Honestly I've never seen someone roll as good as he does. Even others who played against him can't seem to understand how someone can roll so **** lucky

It was one of the biggest piss offs that I've had, and nearly caused my to stop playing

What you are saying is that the dice are all that matters. Which is saying there is no skill. You can deny that, but it doesn't change the tone or implication of what you're saying. Probability is probability. If you examine your numbers over the course of the time you play the game those numbers will be statistically identical across every player in the game. Even across most games, if you manage more attacks than your opponent you will do more damage. Dice cannot win most games. They may win a few, but that's an excuse.

Is a dice game. No matter what, what decideds the outcome is the dice.

In the game I mentioned above, I did everything right. My opponent knows how to play as well, but what happened?

The way I he hoped it would go down was to kill at least one of his ships and possibly another, or if anything hurt another. What happened was I didn't even scratch him, and he turned around and one shooted two of my ships.

We both flew well but what decided the outcome was the dice.

If I had destroyed his ship and hurt another the outcome of the game would have been different.

It's no excuse. Just simple logic. You can fly perfect, and always get shots off, even if you shoot ten times and roll blanks each time, then your opponent shots once and one shots two of your ships in one round, how is that using it an excuse. Is luck.

Just like playing risk or axis and allies no matter how good your strategy is, don't mean crap when you roll crap and your opponent just beats you with dice.

Of coarse there are things that you can do do modify and give more dice or take away from your opponent, but even if you could use 10 target locks and focus, don't mean crap if you roll blank, blank, Blank, hit,and you opponent rolls evade, evade, focus

I still feel the maneuvers matter. Flying straight won't do a thing if your opponent starts on the other side of the play area and converges upon your y with the full force of his red dice. If the maneuvers still matter then your idea that you don't need to care about maneuvering is invalid.

You are saying that its not tactical because you CAN win by flying straight. Just because there is a possibility does not mean it WILL happen. I have fought a HSF list with Vader, mauler, backstabber and dark curse with some upgrades. Four ships with low attack dice, yet I managed to win due to better maneuvering and blocking. Just because I can defeat that list with four low attack ships does not mean I will everytime.

My point was that your example proves that maneuvers do matter for both parties. If your opponent just flew around all squirrely then it's less that the y is easy to fly and more that he didn't fly accordingly. You just took advantage of an unskilled player in that instance. Any player who's been around should know how to deal with the y and punish you for doing 1 and 2 straights the whole time. Sure you CAN do 1 straights the whole game and actually still pull off stuff, if the other player doesn't expect it. The same could be said of a b+hlc+fcs. Start at one edge, stay at range 3 and focus+tl 4 red dice until you reach the middle of the map. Koiogran and repeat. Still, that doesnt mean its not tactical or a strategy. You essentially turn the b into a precision sniper. Whether that will work depends on how your opponent flies.

Imagine I've got a Y-wing on your TIE's tail, and anticipate you doing a 3 turn to the right to shake me so place my dial accordingly. Only it turns out you turned to the left, I could say, "well it's a good thing that doesn't matter," and shoot the TIE anyway. Is the reverse of that true? No. Is that true of ANY ship without a turret (not including Fett, navigators, etc.)? No. They are the most forgiving ship to fly because maneuvering matters LESS than any other ship.

I can keep providing more examples if you'd like, but if you can't yet see how a 360 degree arc is more forgiving than a 90 degree one (4 times as forgiving as a matter of fact), I'm not sure further examples will help you.

So much hubris in this thread. You folk blathering about how turrets are skill less are wrong. I can post the same mindless crap about tie swarms and not having to care if one or two ships explode, except that is also wrong. All ship lists take skill and have basic and deeper strategies, that is part of having a well balanced game. Your sounding like that post from scissors about how paper is balanced but rock needs adjustment because it is a newb strategy of smashing instead of "skill flight" like cutting.

Sekac,

I can make that exact same analogy with the words two ships replacing turrets. With two ties I can guess both and still have a shot and your y wing can only shoot at one. Seriously your bias is showing.

Sounds like a good result for the Y. He's got half as many TIEs on his tail than he had a second ago. I'm not sure what point you're making. Maybe that focus fire isn't necessary to bring down resilient ships...?

The point is your entire argument is subjective perspective. The same advantage you claimed as proof for how the turret is easy mode can be delivered with fewer points using ties.

Ergo, you are wrong about the turret being easy mode.

Imo the Turret is something that can kind of give ships that aren't as agile and /or strong offensively something to bring to the table.

They can be countered easily.Just have to plan ahead, be smart.

I don't think people think they're overpowered. They're balanced pretty well. They're just not fun when every ship is flying them or there's a 60 pt Falcon flying around.

the only hate i have towards turrets is the YT simply because it's R3 and 3 attack dice, had they restricted it to R2 then i would have no problem with it.

I don't think people think they're overpowered. They're balanced pretty well. They're just not fun when every ship is flying them or there's a 60 pt Falcon flying around.

YES this was kinda my point. Not that it was an impossibe list to play against, but the that fun factor died. There have been good suggestions in this thread about how best to fly against turrets, but thus far no good suggestions about how to make playing against an all-turret list any FUN.. ;-)

I don't think people think they're overpowered. They're balanced pretty well. They're just not fun when every ship is flying them or there's a 60 pt Falcon flying around.

YES this was kinda my point. Not that it was an impossibe list to play against, but the that fun factor died. There have been good suggestions in this thread about how best to fly against turrets, but thus far no good suggestions about how to make playing against an all-turret list any FUN.. ;-)

The point is your entire argument is subjective perspective. The same advantage you claimed as proof for how the turret is easy mode can be delivered with fewer points using ties.

Ergo, you are wrong about the turret being easy mode.

First of all, 2 TIEs don't cost fewer than 23 points. Secondly, getting value out of TIEs is completely dependent on maneuvering properly. If you make an error with a TIE, you don't get to shoot with it. If you make an error with a turreted ship, you may still shoot regardless. Why you think that is an opinion eludes me.

Is it a subjective perspective that 360 degrees covers 4 times as much area as 90 degrees?

Every ship with a turret has there own set of limitations and downsides. The Falcon has just 1 agility die and can be shredded by Focused fire from a formation of attackers.

Y-Wings using Ion Turrets deal only 1 damage and unless they are paired with other ships that can collectively deal damage they are quite limited in overall effectiveness.

Blaster Turrets require a focus to shoot and are easy to block. On a HWK it's even less scary since they have just 1 Shield and only 4 hull and can go down very quickly.

Any turret equipped ship has advantages but very clear disadvantages. You can choose to let them be a problem or negative play experience or you can choose to focus on their weaknesses and defeat them.

Is it a subjective perspective that 360 degrees covers 4 times as much area as 90 degrees?

Are you talking the YT or including the blaster/ion turrets? Although it ignores base size the R1-2 turrets only cover 78% more area than a ship's primary weapon's arc. If we exclude the overlap the R3 portion of the primary covers another 3.9 units of area while the R1-2 turret adds 9.4 units and the "shared" area is Pi (3.14). Turrets do get to cover more area than a ship's primary weapon but isn't that what they are equipped for?

Although they are one use items maybe splash weapons are no fun to play against. Charges and Mines let you "attack" an additional 3.14 units of area.

PS. All of these number should be bigger as they use point as the measure of comparison instead of the actual square base.