The 3 Range Turrets change tactics, and make taking damage inevitable, but they don't remove tactics. It becomes, How do I keep that thing in my arcs to get it off the field versus how do I stay out of their Arcs because I cost way too much to go down without eaarning my points but take 6 turns to do so.

You reduce the effectiveness of R3 turrets by reducing the effectiveness of their dice vs. yours, keeping in mind your numerical advantage.

First and most effective is action denial, with a full 33% reduction in the effectiveness of their dice vs. yours. Use your extra ships to get in their way.

Second, you can use upgrades that affect dice rolls, especially when facing Gunner/Luke. For example; Flight Instructor, Sensor Jammer, Predator, etc.

Third, you can stack actions on your own ships in order to reduce the damage you take, which is more effective for you because of the limited number of shots a big turret list will take. Because they have fewer ships, you won't run out of tokens to defend yourself with as easily (like you would facing a swarm for example). For example; Lando (ship and crew), Kyle, and Push the Limit all help provide multiple effective actions.

Maneuvering with and against Falcons is not straightforward, at least not if you want to win. Again, I did not start this thread to talk about balance but to refute the idea that turrets are "Easy Mode". I concede the point that poor players can do something with turrets while they would likely not do anything without them and in that sense they are "easier". A poor player gets to roll red dice if they run turrets, which they might not have done as much of if they did not. However, they are going to lose, badly and consistently, against non-turret lists unless and until they learn to play turrets correctly. There is no practical difference between doing nothing and doing something that makes me lose as far as I am concerned.

Turrets are only "easy" in that you get to roll dice. Actually winning with them, however, is every bit as challenging as running turretless lists. Sometimes, even more so.

I can absolutely support this, because I am absolutely one of the aforementioned "poor" players that KO is referring to. (Whether or not he knows it).

I don't think these days its a problem with Turrets its more of a Falcon problem.

I think people have, being able to take a 13 HP ship guaranteed 2 evades a turn (C3PO+Title), gunner and you can't crit it? at that point the turret seems a bit much, though I have more of a problem stacking all of the things making one impossible to kill rather than letting it shoot out of arc

51pts as mentioned above for Chewie Predator makes 54 and you have a mini HSF list with a more durable Falcon with comparable offense and you still have 46 points for upgrades

PTL Chewie+3PO+Lando+Falcon will get reaaally bad after Wave 5 but I think things will certainly be different once the VT is out

I do think in terms of game balance it really is not fair that one side has turrets and to date the other side does not. By default it is a game mechanic that completely favors one side over the other.

I don't think it's fair that Imperials have 50% more ships in play than Rebels do.

I do think in terms of game balance it really is not fair that one side has turrets and to date the other side does not. By default it is a game mechanic that completely favors one side over the other.

You mean like Rear Firing arcs, bombs, The Full Stop Manuever, White K-Turns, and Cloaking?

I do think in terms of game balance it really is not fair that one side has turrets and to date the other side does not. By default it is a game mechanic that completely favors one side over the other.

Kinetic Operator just gave us a treatise on how turrets are balanced against the rest of the game. This is a contradiction, not an argument.

I do think in terms of game balance it really is not fair that one side has turrets and to date the other side does not. By default it is a game mechanic that completely favors one side over the other.

You mean like Rear Firing arcs, bombs, The Full Stop Manuever, White K-Turns, and Cloaking?

Or shields on every ship, better pilots, turrets etc? There's no denying that turrets are one side only at until the next wave goes out and even then it is only available to one Imp ship.

Are you honestly complaining about all the things that make the two factions different? Sounds like you'd be happier playing chess...

Are you honestly complaining about all the things that make the two factions different? Sounds like you'd be happier playing chess...

Or better yet battle chess now there was an awesome game in its day.

Turrets are only "easy" in that you get to roll dice. Actually winning with them, however, is every bit as challenging as running turretless lists. Sometimes, even more so.

I am sorry, but i don't understand how you can say this with a straight face. People say turrets are easy, because they are easier to shoot than managing to get into the right arc. It's just common sense. I am not speaking about them being OP, but how easy they are to use compared to other weapons.

They may be balanced at top level (results tell that they are totally competitive, most tournaments after wave 4 having half or more falcon lists in the tops for rebels) but the skill floor needed is much lower than any list that doesn't use it. And i will repeat myself, yes, this is because they are easier to play even though they can be hard to master (but i don't see how frekkin hard to master can be to fly a c3po predator/han/luke falcon, but sure, i will give you that)

Turrets are only "easy" in that you get to roll dice. Actually winning with them, however, is every bit as challenging as running turretless lists. Sometimes, even more so.

I am sorry, but i don't understand how you can say this with a straight face. People say turrets are easy, because they are easier to shoot than managing to get into the right arc. It's just common sense. I am not speaking about them being OP, but how easy they are to use compared to other weapons.

They may be balanced at top level (results tell that they are totally competitive, most tournaments after wave 4 having half or more falcon lists in the tops for rebels) but the skill floor needed is much lower than any list that doesn't use it. And i will repeat myself, yes, this is because they are easier to play even though they can be hard to master (but i don't see how frekkin hard to master can be to fly a c3po predator/han/luke falcon, but sure, i will give you that)

Oh sure you want to avoid arcs. Like every other single ship. The big difference is that you can avoid arcs withouth sacrificing shooting capacity, and since you don't need to take that your own firing arc into account, well, you do the maths on who is easier to play.

Turrets are only "easy" in that you get to roll dice. Actually winning with them, however, is every bit as challenging as running turretless lists. Sometimes, even more so.

I am sorry, but i don't understand how you can say this with a straight face. People say turrets are easy, because they are easier to shoot than managing to get into the right arc. It's just common sense. I am not speaking about them being OP, but how easy they are to use compared to other weapons.

They may be balanced at top level (results tell that they are totally competitive, most tournaments after wave 4 having half or more falcon lists in the tops for rebels) but the skill floor needed is much lower than any list that doesn't use it. And i will repeat myself, yes, this is because they are easier to play even though they can be hard to master (but i don't see how frekkin hard to master can be to fly a c3po predator/han/luke falcon, but sure, i will give you that)

Because, in a 100 point list you will have fewer ships, and even one to one your ships will have less firepower, less maneuverability, and fewer green dice. So if your 23 point, 3 attack dice 2 agility PS 4 Red Squadron with an X-Wing dial faces my 23 point, 3 attack dice (limit 1 damage and range 2) 1 agility Gold with a Y-Wing dial I can assure you that you have the advantage unless I can manage to find a few turns where I can shoot but you cannot. 8 health vs 5 health notwithstanding, if I simply fly in a line and let you trade fire with me, even if you have to K-Turn once or twice, that fight is going to the Red Squadron 9/10 times at least. Four on four, and you can drop a Gold before it even shoots leaving the advantage even more firmly in your hands.

If 100 points of Y-Wings face one another 5 Grey vs. 4 Gold/Ion, the Greys are going to win that fight most of the time. They can focus down Golds before they shoot, and every lost ship dramatically affects the Gold Squadron's ability to control the engagement. If the Golds choose to drive straight in and Ion on the first pass, they will probably lose a Gold before it shoots and Ionize 3 ships in return. That is not a good trade, leaving at LEAST 2 non-ionized Greys free to continue firing while the Golds are 7 turns (SEVEN!) away from destroying their 3 targets while Ionizing. If the Golds choose primaries on that first pass, they still lose a ship, put 5 or 6 damage on a Grey, but pay for that by having ALL 5 Greys still shooting at them next turn. The Gold/Ion player MUST outmaneuver the Greys significantly even before he begins Ionizing ships, or he will lose every time.

You keep comparing in a vacuum, as if points values and relative stat lines didn't exist. Of course if all other things were equal turrets would dominate, but they are NOT equal. You are trading firepower, health, actions, and maneuverability for greater freedom to choose your flight path. Poor play does not reward trading hard statistical advantage for increased movement options.

Turrets are only "easy" in that you get to roll dice. Actually winning with them, however, is every bit as challenging as running turretless lists. Sometimes, even more so.

I am sorry, but i don't understand how you can say this with a straight face. People say turrets are easy, because they are easier to shoot than managing to get into the right arc. It's just common sense. I am not speaking about them being OP, but how easy they are to use compared to other weapons.

yes he can say that with a straight face for several reasons that you seem to be ignoring.

Yes the one facet of Turrets that you refer to is that they have a 360 degree arc, that's a given but it is only one small element of flying a "Turret Ship".

Other facets include (but not necessarily limited to):

Paying extra points for ships that can carry turrets (particularly in the case of a decked out YT costing more than half your squad points)

Turret ships predominantly have much worse dial (and are more prone to action denial and stress effects)

Turret ships have low agility, so they melt under focus fire if flown poorly.

ICT only ever does 1 damage (yes I am aware of the ion effect but the damage is still only 1)

You see you cannot assess the turrets without fully assessing the ships attached to them and the significant drawbacks they must take in terms of having the privilege of taking a turret.

Everybody is taking for granted they are priced with that in mind, which is just not true for all this weapons. The agility doesn't really matter when you have c3p0 and the falcon has an amazing dial i don't know how you can deny this. An Ywing with an ion turret costs 24 points. Is that really overpriced ?

Turrets are only "easy" in that you get to roll dice. Actually winning with them, however, is every bit as challenging as running turretless lists. Sometimes, even more so.

I am sorry, but i don't understand how you can say this with a straight face. People say turrets are easy, because they are easier to shoot than managing to get into the right arc. It's just common sense. I am not speaking about them being OP, but how easy they are to use compared to other weapons.

They may be balanced at top level (results tell that they are totally competitive, most tournaments after wave 4 having half or more falcon lists in the tops for rebels) but the skill floor needed is much lower than any list that doesn't use it. And i will repeat myself, yes, this is because they are easier to play even though they can be hard to master (but i don't see how frekkin hard to master can be to fly a c3po predator/han/luke falcon, but sure, i will give you that)

Because, in a 100 point list you will have fewer ships, and even one to one your ships will have less firepower, less maneuverability, and fewer green dice. So if your 23 point, 3 attack dice 2 agility PS 4 Red Squadron with an X-Wing dial faces my 23 point, 3 attack dice (limit 1 damage and range 2) 1 agility Gold with a Y-Wing dial I can assure you that you have the advantage unless I can manage to find a few turns where I can shoot but you cannot. 8 health vs 5 health notwithstanding, if I simply fly in a line and let you trade fire with me, even if you have to K-Turn once or twice, that fight is going to the Red Squadron 9/10 times at least. Four on four, and you can drop a Gold before it even shoots leaving the advantage even more firmly in your hands.

If 100 points of Y-Wings face one another 5 Grey vs. 4 Gold/Ion, the Greys are going to win that fight most of the time. They can focus down Golds before they shoot, and every lost ship dramatically affects the Gold Squadron's ability to control the engagement. If the Golds choose to drive straight in and Ion on the first pass, they will probably lose a Gold before it shoots and Ionize 3 ships in return. That is not a good trade, leaving at LEAST 2 non-ionized Greys free to continue firing while the Golds are 7 turns (SEVEN!) away from destroying their 3 targets while Ionizing. If the Golds choose primaries on that first pass, they still lose a ship, put 5 or 6 damage on a Grey, but pay for that by having ALL 5 Greys still shooting at them next turn. The Gold/Ion player MUST outmaneuver the Greys significantly even before he begins Ionizing ships, or he will lose every time.

You keep comparing in a vacuum, as if points values and relative stat lines didn't exist. Of course if all other things were equal turrets would dominate, but they are NOT equal. You are trading firepower, health, actions, and maneuverability for greater freedom to choose your flight path. Poor play does not reward trading hard statistical advantage for increased movement options.

Totally untrue. The ion will win, it is also a poor example, because Y-wings are very easy to ionize, and their shooting capabilities withouth ion is pretty bad, so i will give you that.

I feel like you are just splitting hairs at this point. You want to try to counter an argument as simple "shooting a 360 is easier than shooting with an arc". You can say it is balanced by some other fact, but not that they are hard to use. You are paying those points to have an easier to shoot weapon for gods sake.

I will agree with many of the things here said about turrets, but I'm not so sure that they are more difficult to win with.

That being said, I won't try to assert that there isn't a significant deal of thought that goes into planning maneuvers with turreted ships. I will say that that amount of forethought and skill is not really more or less difficult than planning your advance with a Lambda shuttle, making optimal use of flanking with an Interceptor, dogfighting with a TIE Bomber, strafing with an A-Wing, trying to eyeball your end position with echo after a decloak and a 3 bank, or pulling off a series of K-turns with a squad of B-Wings without being blocked by close-fighting TIEs.

C3P0 is only good in a 3 ship lisy heavy metagame. 1 Damage a round, even 2 removed is meaningless in the face of 12 attack dice.

And an easier to shoot weapon does not make the game easier. That's what you're missing. The falcon needs just as much thinking and strategy as anything else in the game. It goes to different places, but it is not Easier to play. Just easier to shoot with. If you can't grasp the difference keep playing. You'll get there.

Yipikayey:

The 360 degree turrets are easier to get shots off, sure. That does not make them easier to actually WIN with however, because those turrets are attached to ships and you only get those turrets by purchasing those ships. You pay for your 360 arc of fire with decreased numbers and stats, which makes actually winning with turret ships much more difficult than the 360 arc would have led you to expect. If you want another analogy, try playing 5 Rookie X-Wings vs. 4 Rookie X-Wings and see how the game turns out. Obviously, the 5 X-Wing list has a major advantage. Running 4 turrets is 20 points, only 1 point less than that extra Rookie.

Or, take my example of 5 Greys vs. 4 Golds with Ions (or 3 Golds and Dutch). I can assure you, if two players of equal skill play that matchup the Greys will win a large majority of those games. Despite the vulnerability of Y-Wings to Ions, the numerical and PS advantage the Greys possess is decisive.

They balanced turrets and non-turrets well as far as effectiveness. Tournament results prove that clearly. My contention is that winning consistently with turret ships is far from easy. I find it extraordinarily odd that people claim there is more skill involved in using Soontir Fel than a Y-Wing. You pick from a very wide variety of maneuvers on your dial, wait to see where your opponent's ships move to and move your ship. Then, after you see EXACTLY where they are compared to you, you can choose to barrel roll/boost out of their arcs or turtle up. You have perfect knowledge when your most important decisions are being made, a luxury no turret ship has.

If turrets are easy win, why do they rarely feature in top placed lists and why doesn't Paul Heaver and Hothie fly them always and be undefeatable. Answer because they are not easy win and are not the face palm simple ship list several folks are arguing they are.

C3P0 is only good in a 3 ship lisy heavy metagame. 1 Damage a round, even 2 removed is meaningless in the face of 12 attack dice.

And an easier to shoot weapon does not make the game easier. That's what you're missing. The falcon needs just as much thinking and strategy as anything else in the game. It goes to different places, but it is not Easier to play. Just easier to shoot with. If you can't grasp the difference keep playing. You'll get there.

No, it is more effective the lower the attack per ship is. If you are throwing 12 dice but you are not saying "how you are throwing those dice", if it is 2 dice at a time, 3, etc. That´s what you are missing. I can't believe i need to explain this.

C3P0 is only good in a 3 ship lisy heavy metagame. 1 Damage a round, even 2 removed is meaningless in the face of 12 attack dice.

And an easier to shoot weapon does not make the game easier. That's what you're missing. The falcon needs just as much thinking and strategy as anything else in the game. It goes to different places, but it is not Easier to play. Just easier to shoot with. If you can't grasp the difference keep playing. You'll get there.

No, it is more effective the lower the attack per ship is. If you are throwing 12 dice but you are not saying "how you are throwing those dice", if it is 2 dice at a time, 3, etc. That´s what you are missing. I can't believe i need to explain this.

You are incorrect. C3P0 loses effectiveness with the number of attacks, not the size, which is why he said C3P0 is effective in a 3 ship meta game. Tokens also lose effectiveness based on the number of shots, not their size. This is why Super Chewie is still hard countered by Swarms despite his defensive advantages.

Something I would like to point out about turreted ships: They are one of the only ships in the game that significantly lose advantages at range 3.

Some explanation is likely required.

First off, I came to this conclusion once ages ago, when I was finally learning how to fly effectively against the Falcon. It has 3 attack dice. Now normally, this game is all about securing range 1 shots. But if you get that close to it and it can fire at you no matter what you've played into its hands. However, it only has 1 evade. And again, as we all know, you get the extra die there too. But this is what I really learned.

If you stay at range 3 of a Falcon you've given yourself an advantage, while they're still at a disadvantage. TIEs, Bombers and Advanced all have 2 attack dice. So without any mitigation, statistically you've got a good chance to get at least 1 hit result. However, the Falcon actually doesn't have a good chance of evading (again, unaided). As people have pointed out previously, 2 attack v. 2 evade comes out slightly on the attacker's side. When you factor in that many other Imperial ships have 3 attack dice, the advantage creeps up even further.

However, Imperial ships still get an advantage. They're taking 3 dice but rolling 4 evades, giving them a decent chance to cancel 2 out of 3 attack dice. Even Bombers with 3 evade at this distance stand a chance to negate some damage coming their way, most likely not all of it but at least protracting any engagement considerably.

It's also much easier to stay at this range, even with the faster TIEs thanks to the Large base of the Falcon. If you can get a range 3 shot, then next turn you should be able to keep it fairly easily if that's your goal. And the Falcon gains almost nothing by zooming out of range and coming around, because then it gives the opposing squad the chance to regroup and concentrate their firing arcs (which we've all kinda agreed seems to be their downfall).

C3P0 is only good in a 3 ship lisy heavy metagame. 1 Damage a round, even 2 removed is meaningless in the face of 12 attack dice.

And an easier to shoot weapon does not make the game easier. That's what you're missing. The falcon needs just as much thinking and strategy as anything else in the game. It goes to different places, but it is not Easier to play. Just easier to shoot with. If you can't grasp the difference keep playing. You'll get there.

No, it is more effective the lower the attack per ship is. If you are throwing 12 dice but you are not saying "how you are throwing those dice", if it is 2 dice at a time, 3, etc. That´s what you are missing. I can't believe i need to explain this.

3PO is good when he's eating up a significant portion of one rounds hits. Same with the falcon title.

Against 3 ships with 3 dice(Say, han Shot First) You can expect to have about 7 hits a round. Eating 2 of those means you take 5 damage a round, allowing the Falcon to survive 3 rounds of fire, dying on the fourth evade rolls are good.

Against 12 attack dice you can assume 9 hits. Knock that down to 7 and the Falcon dies in the second round of fire, third with a couple of evade rolls.

Every round the falcon lives, every shot it dodges makes 3P0 better. Every ship it kills, until at some point, it becomes impossible to kill that tanking Falcon. But it has to live that long. And that takes skill.

2 attack dice makes the Falcon's evade a little better, as it gets to roll more. But 3P0 is less effective the more attacks being rolled against the falcon.