Smaller ship lists also have less attacks per turn, making C3PO much more effective.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. A 4-5 rebel list, or 6-7 Imperial list has less attacks per turn then what?

C-3PO provides at best 1 extra evade result per round. Which is handy, and likely worth the 3 points, but it's still only going to stop 1 hit per round. When you're throwing 12-16 dice, that one evade isn't exactly amazing.

Worst part is that there really isn't too much you can do to compensate strategically; falcon will always have a shot.

That's why action denial is big against the YT, because without an action the odds of a successful attack go down quite a bit. Which means the best flown YT's are not easy mode, because you have to avoid the other ships on the table.

People bring up that you're paying a lot for three attack dice, but this is a simplification.

The system the whole game is balanced around is a simplification?

That one three dice attack will do more consistent damage than other three dice ships if you have your falcon equipped properly.

No actually it won't, because for 1 point less you can put down a B-Wing with AdvSen and HLC plus a Tam with an R7 astromech. That's 7-8 dice per attack vs the YT-1300's 3-4. Those two ships flown well can do a ton of damage, plus Tam with R7 is very hard to kill.

BUT at a point reduction.

Yes but point reductions don't happen in this game. So it's not really a valid point, not for something like the YT-1300 and such a fundamental change in how it works.

My point is, that as is, it's balanced just fine. Yes the turret makes it easy to fly, but that doesn't mean you can just spin the dial and pick a random maneuver to make, you still have to think about where you're going and where everything else will be.

It's also only 1 shot per round, which may but most likely won't kill a tie each round. Yet people come here acting like you can fly the YT-1300 and kill Tie Swarms in 3 rounds with out even looking at the table.

I don't think anybody claimed that it eats Tie Swarms. Those are an obvious counter. As I said previously, it just hurts the viability of smaller imperial ship lists whose defense relies at least partially on maneuvering. This includes the Tie Defender; a ship that FFG really made you pay top dollar for that 4 k-turn. Smaller ship lists also have less attacks per turn, making C3PO much more effective. Worst part is that there really isn't too much you can do to compensate strategically; falcon will always have a shot. People bring up that you're paying a lot for three attack dice, but this is a simplification. That one three dice attack will do more consistent damage than other three dice ships if you have your falcon equipped properly. And with a 360 degree firing arc, that shouldn't be understated.

Yes, it can manage a very reliable 3 hits on each attack minus the number of evades rolled.

But lets put this into real perspective.

For the cost of Chewie with Gunner I can get 2 X/B-Wings. 2 X/B-Wings WAY outdamage that Chewie with Gunner. Beyond that they allow for the benefits of focus fire, that thing where you can kill a ship in one round. There's a reason 4 Ship Rebel builds and Tie Fighters dominated the last Meta. That Firepower was immense. Enough to Kill Shuttles in one round. Falcons in two.

3 Consistent Damage is very meh for 40+points. The Arc-Dodging potential of the Falcon is its saving grace, and good flyers can very much mitigate that. The reason it does so well right now is because of its performance against the Phantom until people learn to Phantom Trap and higher Firepower lists can do well again.

I'm not saying that you can't get more firepower otherwise. But just stating that it's only three red dice understates the attack advantages it has:

1. Those three red dice always have a shot if a ship is within range three of the falcon. You'll likely get more shots off with the falcon than any other ship.

2. Gunner is more than just a reroll. It's a way to make your opponent burn their evade or focus tokens and still do damage after, for one and it leaves your opponent with a tough decision: do I take one damage now and save my token, or do I spend it and risk taking even more damage on the second attack? Three red dice + gunner is just plain terrifying, especially for fragile imperial ships. Put gunner on Han Solo and you potentially have four chances to get damage through without spending an action.

So, again, stating that its just three red dice belittles its true value. That's my point. Obviously a rebel swarm will have more firepower.

You'll likely get more shots off with the falcon than any other ship.

Which again, is why a named YT with no upgrades costs nearly half your point total.

2. Gunner is more than just a reroll.

Which again is why the Gunner costs 5 points. You can not simply ignore the point costs of the ships and upgrades.

You'll likely get more shots off with the falcon than any other ship.

Which again, is why a named YT with no upgrades costs nearly half your point total.

2. Gunner is more than just a reroll.

Which again is why the Gunner costs 5 points. You can not simply ignore the point costs of the ships and upgrades.

Against most lists the Falcon player has to play very very smart or they will lose. Even at their smartest there are lists no falcon list is statistically likely to be able to deal with because of the enormous amount of Bulk they bring along. If it takes skill to make a ship work it cannot by default be easy mode.

Smaller ship lists also have less attacks per turn, making C3PO much more effective.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. A 4-5 rebel list, or 6-7 Imperial list has less attacks per turn then what?

C-3PO provides at best 1 extra evade result per round. Which is handy, and likely worth the 3 points, but it's still only going to stop 1 hit per round. When you're throwing 12-16 dice, that one evade isn't exactly amazing.

The less ships the opponent has, the more valuable C3PO becomes. Unless the smaller ship list has at least equal the amount of attack dice of a tie swarm, C3PO is much more potent, as you're evading a higher proportion of attacks every turn.

Quote

Worst part is that there really isn't too much you can do to compensate strategically; falcon will always have a shot.

That's why action denial is big against the YT, because without an action the odds of a successful attack go down quite a bit. Which means the best flown YT's are not easy mode, because you have to avoid the other ships on the table.

I agree that it can be important, but it's not devastating. Gunner and C3PO can be used without actions, so the damage of blocking is mitigated somewhat. And if you don't end up blocking, you probably put yourself at range one of a falcon that you might not have a shot on, so it's a very risky strategy.

No actually it won't, because for 1 point less you can put down a B-Wing with AdvSen and HLC plus a Tam with an R7 astromech. That's 7-8 dice per attack vs the YT-1300's 3-4. Those two ships flown well can do a ton of damage, plus Tam with R7 is very hard to kill.

That one three dice attack will do more consistent damage than other three dice ships if you have your falcon equipped prope

I never said it would out damage other builds. It obviously won't.

sooo.. back on topic I'd say that ion and turrets do not take away from the game.

They fit well with the overall story and maintain another balanced aspect of gameplay.

Plus they make the y-wing worth taking.. if it wasn't for the ion turret not sure if you'd see it in a game at all (and I'm a y wing fan.. sigh need some new pilots).

You'll likely get more shots off with the falcon than any other ship.

Which again, is why a named YT with no upgrades costs nearly half your point total.

2. Gunner is more than just a reroll.

Which again is why the Gunner costs 5 points. You can not simply ignore the point costs of the ships and upgrades.

You're missing my point. I'm not disputing the cost. I was commenting on the fact that just stating that the falcon only has three red dice and leaving it at that belittles the value of those three red dice relative to other ships. The three red dice on falcon are more valuable because of the 360 firing arc and gunner, meaning more shots and more consistent shots. Obviously, it costs a lot to run and I'm not disputing that.

The less ships the opponent has, the more valuable C3PO becomes.

Sure but the days of the 3 ship list seems to be numbered. That makes C3PO less valuable. Plus again it's a chance that he'll even trigger. The same goes for the Gunner, if you let just one hit though gunner doesn't trigger. Between the 2 you've spent 8 points on crew that may not have any effect the whole game.

I never said it would out damage other builds. It obviously won't.

I'm pointing out that the X and B can produce more consistent damage then even a YT-1300. Sure the YT will almost always have a shot, but put 2 X's and 2 B's on the table, and you should always have a shoot with at least one of them as well.

You'll likely get more shots off with the falcon than any other ship.

Which again, is why a named YT with no upgrades costs nearly half your point total.

2. Gunner is more than just a reroll.

Which again is why the Gunner costs 5 points. You can not simply ignore the point costs of the ships and upgrades.

You're missing my point. I'm not disputing the cost. I was commenting on the fact that just stating that the falcon only has three red dice and leaving it at that belittles the value of those three red dice relative to other ships. The three red dice on falcon are more valuable because of the 360 firing arc and gunner, meaning more shots and more consistent shots. Obviously, it costs a lot to run and I'm not disputing that.

That increase is not hugely significant in relation to the firepower lost.

The less ships the opponent has, the more valuable C3PO becomes.

Sure but the days of the 3 ship list seems to be numbered. That makes C3PO less valuable. Plus again it's a chance that he'll even trigger. The same goes for the Gunner, if you let just one hit though gunner doesn't trigger. Between the 2 you've spent 8 points on crew that may not have any effect the whole game.

I never said it would out damage other builds. It obviously won't.

I'm pointing out that the X and B can produce more consistent damage then even a YT-1300. Sure the YT will almost always have a shot, but put 2 X's and 2 B's on the table, and you should always have a shoot with at least one of them as well.

My dispute over the efficacy of the falcon against 3-4 ship lists is that it's just one more component in the game encouraging swarm play. It would be nice to see more diverse lists. FFG seems to be trying to discourage swarm play somewhat, but I can't see swarms becoming irrelevant with falcon on the table. And to some of us here, we simply don't like ships like the falcon. I wish there was some component to exploit other than blocking. Like others have stated, even making it two dice at range three (with a lower base cost) gives a player a little bit more to work with strategically when facing it. It's obviously too late to change anything now, but we're just here to share our opinion of it. And wave five is two more 360 turret ships...

Sure. You have me convinced. Our local meta is filled to the brim with tactical geniuses and they all happen te prefer to fly a Falcon with Chewie.

since they like to challenge themselves a lot.

Can I beat it? Yep. I most of the time can.

depending on what I bring it can be downright scarily easy. (tie Swarm/2X2B)

But the question was not is it OP? Nope. it is not IMO.

The question was; "is it fun?"

Nope it is not. It dumbs down the game.

360 degree turret with all 3 range bands available with 3 red dice, some awesome upgrades (gunner/C3P0/title) on top of awesome named pilots.

All I said is that the game would benefit if the YT would lose one red die at range 3 at the very least.

Or my preferred option; 2 red die at range 3 unless in your front arc. (but at a point reduction)

(see what I did there? Made manoeuvre important)

For the record; I play Rebels almost as much.

Peace. (unless in a fictional galaxy far, far away)

The three red dice on falcon are more valuable because of the 360 firing arc and gunner, meaning more shots and more consistent shots.

I agree, the YT is a great ship and worth the point. It does have a more effective attack then a X-Wing or B-Wing, or even Tie Interceptor.

Nope it is not. It dumbs down the game.

An opinion that many if not most of us do not share. The YT is forgiving, but it is not easy mode, it won't make a bad player great. It won't win you games without having to try.

It costs a ton of points, which makes it balanced, and IMO a balanced game is fun.

I love playing against the Falcon. Especially in the hands of skilled players. They make it a challenge. If you're not having fun playing against it that's your problem, but I love the way the game goes currently. Unless I'm flying squints. But there's a reason I don't fly those without a Hull upgrade.

You'll likely get more shots off with the falcon than any other ship.

Which again, is why a named YT with no upgrades costs nearly half your point total.

2. Gunner is more than just a reroll.

Which again is why the Gunner costs 5 points. You can not simply ignore the point costs of the ships and upgrades.

You're missing my point. I'm not disputing the cost. I was commenting on the fact that just stating that the falcon only has three red dice and leaving it at that belittles the value of those three red dice relative to other ships. The three red dice on falcon are more valuable because of the 360 firing arc and gunner, meaning more shots and more consistent shots. Obviously, it costs a lot to run and I'm not disputing that.

No, those three dice combined with uprades are more valuable. About 10% or so more vaulable counting in the number of times my small ships have nothing in arc when I want them to.

That increase is not hugely significant in relation to the firepower lost.

10%? Seems low. Maybe if you're flying against a slow ship list. And that number is probably a lot higher against phantoms and interceptors, so, granted, part of the falcon's value is context dependent.

Also, another advantage of the falcon is that it has more choices. You might be able to have *a* ship in your arc most of the time, but a 360 turret also means you have more choices. And, again, I'm not saying that the falcon is more deadly on a per point basis. But its abilities make it a very hard counter against smaller ship lists that rely on clever maneuvering to stay alive. For example, I love interceptors, phantoms, and tie defenders, and a list including two out of three would do well against many lists if I maneuver strategically. The falcon is the only thing discouraging me from running such a build.

Unless I'm flying squints.

Best win ever... 4 Squints w/PtL vs my friends 4 Y-Wing list w/Ion's. He rocks with the Y's so the victory was quite sweet.

You'll likely get more shots off with the falcon than any other ship.

Which again, is why a named YT with no upgrades costs nearly half your point total.

2. Gunner is more than just a reroll.

again is why the Gunner costs 5 points. You can not simply ignore the point costs of the ships and upgrades.

You're missing my point. I'm not disputing the cost. I was commenting on the fact that just stating that the falcon only has three red dice and leaving it at that belittles the value of those three red dice relative to other ships. The three red dice on falcon are more valuable because of the 360 firing arc and gunner, meaning more shots and more consistent shots. Obviously, it costs a lot to run and I'm not disputing that.

No, those three dice combined with uprades are more valuable. About 10% or so more vaulable counting in the number of times my small ships have nothing in arc when I want them to.

That increase is not hugely significant in relation to the firepower lost.

10%? Seems low. Maybe if you're flying against a slow ship list. And that number is probably a lot higher against phantoms and interceptors, so, granted, part of the falcon's value is context dependent.

Also, another advantage of the falcon is that it has more choices. You might be able to have *a* ship in your arc most of the time, but a 360 turret also means you have more choices. And, again, I'm not saying that the falcon is more deadly on a per point basis. But its abilities make it a very hard counter against smaller ship lists that rely on clever maneuvering to stay alive. For example, I love interceptors, phantoms, and tie defenders, and a list including two out of three would do well against many lists if I maneuver strategically. The falcon is the only thing discouraging me from running such a build.

I generally stay away from the falcon and ion turrets/weapons and their platforms (I've never even flown a y wing) because I feel it takes away from the fun of maneuvering for both me and my opponent. Plus as a mainly imperial player, ions and 360 shooting takes away some of their main advantage of being generally more maneuverable. Plus, combined with blocking tactics or using Anti pursuit lasers it gets even less enjoyable for the player against it. With ion torpedoes incoming and ion pulse missiles, almost every ship will have ion weapon capabilities through ordinance, cannons, or turrets. Plus wave 5 adds two more 360 shooters. Are turrets and ion weaponry important to the game? Or do others share my opinion and generally stay away from 360 turrets and ion weapons to preserve the fun of maneuvering, and wish that wave 5 wasn't all 360 shooters?

Movement, control, quality of attack and attrition are all aspects of the game. I tend to build squads the maximize quality of attack; however, the ships that pack the biggest punch often have low agility and are vulnerable to ships that can maneuver. In order to counter movement ships I need an element of control. An ion cannon is an excellent way to do so.

A well build squad has balance. It is no surprise that a squad that banks on only one aspect of the game is countered by the other aspects, e.g. a squad that only relies on control or maneuver often lacks punch. If you find that your squad falls apart when faced with turrets perhaps the deficiency is not in the game design but in the squad you've built. I find that Imperial movement squads often need an anchor piece like a shuttle or bounty hunter to deal with the threats interceptors can't handle.

Nope it is not. It dumbs down the game.

An opinion that many if not most of us do not share. The YT is forgiving, but it is not easy mode, it won't make a bad player great. It won't win you games without having to try.

It costs a ton of points, which makes it balanced, and IMO a balanced game is fun.

Sure it is my opinion.

That is why I posted it.

You mind?

Your rebuttal that is costs a lot of points? Quite irrelevant to the 'fun' factor IMO.

(yes; opinion. again)

Your rebuttal that is costs a lot of points? Quite irrelevant to the 'fun' factor IMO.

First off, fun is a completely subjective term, but clearly based on this and other posts like it, most people don't find things like the YT ruins the fun of the game for them.

Second, balance is not nearly so subjective, and the points is a big part perhaps the biggest part of the balance of this game. As long as things like the YT costs the correct amount of points, then the game is balanced.

Is that's true, then there isn't really anything that needs to be fixed.

Lastly I find it interesting that someone who posts everything as an opinion takes issues with other people disagreeing with him.

VanorDM; once again I think you miss the point.

Unless it is your OPINION that a game is fun when it is balanced.

I agree that balance is important but it sure is not everything to a game.

Or I would play chess more often.

I never said or thought that the YT was OP or underpointed or completely destroying the fun of the game.

The game would certainly in MY opinion be more fun with a Falcon where it would matter more how and where it moved.

My main gripe with the Falcon (especially the Chewie build) is that is is dumbing down the game.

And many, many use these training wheels and deploy it far more than is fun.

I hope you don't mind me stating *my * OPINION.

Oh and note that you are most certainly entitled to your own opinion.

Just know you are wrong.

(yes; cheeky. On purpose.)

My main gripe with the Falcon (especially the Chewie build) is that is is dumbing down the game.

And I disagree. I don't believe it's dumbing down the game. A Chewie + 2 fighter list maybe forgiving, but it's hardly a "iWin" button. You still have to fly well to win, Chewie by himself can't do it. So you have to use your escorts or else you'll get stomped.

I wasn't trying to tell you that you can't have an opinion, I was just pointing out why I think your wrong.

"Dumbing down the game." does not equal "I win."

But perhaps that is just my opinion.

Perhaps instead of the falcon and 360 shooting ships being modified, we could just have a pilot ability or upgrade in future waves that would force them to lose dice at certain ranges, or to only be able to fire out of the front arc.

For me, a huge part of this game is planning my moves to be outside of my enemies firing arc, while at the same time positionng myself to be in the correct range and angle to attack them.

(With) Turrets... you could close your eyes, spin that dial, and as long as you don't fly off the edge or land on an asteroid, if they can shoot you, you can shoot them. It removes any kind of maneuvering strategy.

Bottom line? Turrets take away a huge part of the game for me.

So I don't fly them.

But that's a personal thing. I don't expect every other player to play the same way.

Admiral Thrawn,

It is clear, as you say, that you do not fly fighters with turrets; if you DID, you would know the fallacy of that statement. As someone who flies both Rebs and Imps, I know the thrill and challenge you speak of, when going on the hunt with a flock of Interceptors. I also know, that I have to consider carefully, what maneuvers I pick for my Y-wings (for example), as they are not the most maneuverable or fast fighters out there. I am less concerned about keeping enemies in my frontal arc (if I have a turret) as I am about not running into things (like asteroids, other ships and the board edge) and maintaining optimal range (to friends, as well as enemies) and trying to avoid the firing arcs of enemy ships, which nearly always have a speed and maneuverability (and increasingly frequently a firepower advantage, as well). So, a you see, it is not as simple as you say but then, again, you would not know that as you have never experienced it.

All that said, I understand that certain ships fit certain play styles and we all get our jollies in our own way. My only bit of advice would be to paraphrase that Native American saying about not criticizing someone until you have walked a mile in their moccasins. In other words, try flying some turret ships, if only to better know your opponent.

Fly Casual