How I 'fixed' the A-Wing without changing a thing. (The rule of cool called for an answer to 'Why am I in this ship instead of a Y-Wing?'.)

With no stat changes of any kind, I focused on the sensor range. The sensors go out to Medium range while in passive mode, long in active. The sensors are what allow the pilot to begin interacting with a 'target'. Combined with there being no range restriction on GTA, I allow the A-Wing to be gaining the advantage while their target is still asking, "What A-Wing?"

Also, yes it is fluff, but the description says the engines are over sized, so again, without actually changing anything I allow the A-Wing to be at max speed at the beginning of an encounter, its engines are just humming, "I can do this all day." Think of it as the A-Wing just doing patrol circles around whatever other ships the PCs may be controlling. Whereas other ships may have maintenance issues keeping their engines peaked out all the time, therefor they start at half max speed.

Put these two together and not only is the A-Wing pilot a hero for alerting the rest of the party to a danger while it is still at Medium instead of the Short range their YT-1300 or Y-Wings are giving them (making running a viable option), but would allow the A-Wing to almost always start an engagement at Medium range, giving it that round to gain the advantage with the target unable to get it back. Then next round is when you let the A-Wing take early initiative, take the extra strain to Fly/Drive in from Med to Close and take Evasive maneuvers, swoop in, hopefully at least put some setback on the target as well as damage, and then it is up to the target, do they try to get the advantage back (meaning they did not shoot at the A-Wing) or try and shoot (with extra setback and upgraded difficulty). Next round the A-Wing is already leaving on his way back out to Medium Range where he can bleed strain, then gain the advantage back and come in for another run.

This really puts allot on the A-Wing pilot to be patient after their 'big entrance', because if they come back in at the wrong time or against the wrong numbers they will get in trouble real quick, or especially if they get greedy and decide to stick in the fur ball with the real dog-fighters.

Can the A-Wing hang with anything but a TIE in a 'true' dog fight, probably not, but it should scare the pants off any single target to know a threat is out there at medium range, that can be here, and firing, and evading, before you can even shoot back. Also, don't forget the jamming equipment would allow a pilot with Tricky Target to reduce the Sil by 2 for another base increase in difficulty to hit it from another fighter. (Reflecting the 'hard to master, but worth it' fluff of the A-Wing I assume.)

Easily abused and easily countered, so the GM should think about the role of the A-Wing ahead of time as well, but, put all of this together and I think the 'Cool' of A-Wings has been restored, without making them the ultimate power in the universe, all without changing a thing.

My work here is done.

Bravo, Chu Wolf!

Great post and great ideas--I'm not sure when I'd have a chance to try out these suggestions but I think they'd go a long way to making exciting space encounters!

Sensor range mod... yeah. I can see that as a viable solution. Nice idea!

I'm just thinking though. An A-wing at speed 6, with activated ECM thingy and with the Tricky Target talent (and there's no reason to exclude that talent from the equation, it's a must have, particularly for an A-wing pilot)... its gain the advantage is Easy, whereas the X-wing requires a Hard check, never mind the increased difficulty to gain the advantage after someone else has gained the advantage on you first... second, if the X-wing attacks, it's attack difficulty is Hard, whereas the A-wing yet again has an Easy check... now the X-wing could also have tricky target, increasing the A-wing's attack difficulty to Average again, but that's fair - there's not much the X-wing can do when it comes to gaining the advantage though - except perhaps Full Throttle, but so could the A-wing.

The sensor thing is perhaps a good solution, the sensor rules are a bit wonky at times - my solution is that you can see farther, but not who or what, just that there is "something" there, using active sensors - and I've made some attempts at a "sensor sweep" action, with somewhat increased difficulty, and you can sweep at active sensor range, but also further - advantages and triumphs are important in this case. Although I guess the increased sensor range in this case is an easier solution.

I ran an x-wing v some modified TIEs scenario tonight, in an asteroid field. Two players with two minion helpers, against four rival TIEs. Granted my players weren't starter characters, but one of them weren't even an Ace... she played a Squadron Leader... Form on Me is an excellent talent. EXCELLENT! The TIEs had shields, but only in one defensive zone. Sure it applies against one target, but that makes ganging up and flying close formation that much more effective... now imagine that with an A-wing squadron. Yes.

Can't this just be resolved with a house-rule that states that if a target is moving faster then you, add the difference in speed as setback dice to the attack? It's simple and effects the game, but not so much that it hurts the existing dynamic.

These threads wouldn't light on fire if they were titled "Proposed house-rule on x" or "help me fix x" rather than a more inflammatory "x is broken." I have found that people are much more polite and willing to work things out in those cases.

These threads wouldn't light on fire if they were titled "Proposed house-rule on x" or "help me fix x" rather than a more inflammatory "x is broken." I have found that people are much more polite and willing to work things out in those cases.

I agree, but we aren't the ones who named the thread (original poster left half-a-dozen pages back). This just happens to be where the creativity wellspring opened up.

With no stat changes of any kind, I focused on the sensor range. The sensors go out to Medium range while in passive mode, long in active. The sensors are what allow the pilot to begin interacting with a 'target'. Combined with there being no range restriction on GTA, I allow the A-Wing to be gaining the advantage while their target is still asking, "What A-Wing?"

Is this a house rule about sensors ? I've read in the rulebook the definitions of each range bands... a brief resume would be close = blasters, short = missiles, medium = cruisers... But no where does it state that you have to be within sensor range to interact with your target (but it is logical I agree).

But since speed 6 ships can move from medium to close (blaster range) in one move, then they could GTA at medium and next round move to close and shoot. Would be a nice strategy...

If it's RAW, then I really like it that way.... Hit'n'Run A-wing really feels interesting.

But for houseruling... here is a suggestion :

- Shields doesn't give a setback anymore, it now increases the Armor of the ship for the chosen defense zone (they can still be angled

- Handling now gives setback against ennemy attacks.

This houserule is kinda fun and will make combat feel a bit more like the older "X-Wing", "Tie Fighter" or "X-Wing vs Tie Fighter" video games that we used to love... but it might break a little from canon where, in the movies, a starfighter shot is usually a starfighter downed.

What do you guys think ??

The thing is though, anything Speed 5-6 can move range just as well as an A-Wing. The run and gun thing works well against transports/shuttles, but isn't useful against any other target (against cap ships they have medium-long range weapons anyway, and against most fighters fielded by the Empire they are fast enough to keep up).

And once an X-Wing is aware of an enemy, he can focus sensors and do the exact same thing.

I'm not saying passive medium sensors aren't good. That and the jamming system are two of the better things the A-Wing has going for it. But not every fast and maneuverable ship has those.

Also, if I was in an X-Wing and an A-Wing GtAed me... I'd just fire at him. With 4 agi 2 gun (ace pilot can start with this) I have around a 70%+ chance of just one shotting him with a 2 hit shot or a 1 hit, 2 advantage shot to activate linked. Performing Evasive Maneuvers myself only changes the chance of someone hitting me by about 4ish% and I can just double aim instead to shoot the A-Wing. (Not to say Evasive Maneuvers is useless, the real use of it is to generate Despair, but if someone already has GtA on you, and you don't think you are likely to pull it back, its better to drop the person with GtA than to Evasive + GtA back).

Seems correct to me. A PC and Star Wars in general favors stronger, more versatile multirole craft like the Y-Wing and Falcon, as well as the X-WING

Specialist craft like the A-WIng have very little appeal. The A-Wing isn't an attack fighter, it's a scout. It focuses on early detection and intercepting fleeing aircraft, not ship-to-ship fighting.

Like any starfighter, having any kind of metal in the air is better than nothing, so that's why so many of them were fielded at Endor. A fighter is a fighter and fills fighter roles..they only start to distinguish themselves when being compared against other snubfighters.

Just remember, it was an A-wing that took out the executor at endor.

Except there is almost nothing that an A-Wing does better than an X-Wing by the rules. The sensor range is really the only thing it has, and in that case something like the YV-560 would serve better (yes its slower, but it can double move easier with the higher strain threshold and has an even LONGER sensor range). For the same cost, which do you think would be more useful for scouting/run and gunning, 4 X-Wings paired with a YV-560, or 4 A-Wings. Keep in mind this is the same cost.

Keep in mind the A-Wing is supposed to be one of the most advanced Alliance starfighters. Its more expensive than an X-Wing to build. If the only purpose it had was as a scout ship, and it isn't even the best scout ship for the cost, why would anyone make one?

Except there is almost nothing that an A-Wing does better than an X-Wing by the rules. The sensor range is really the only thing it has, and in that case something like the YV-560 would serve better (yes its slower, but it can double move easier with the higher strain threshold and has an even LONGER sensor range). For the same cost, which do you think would be more useful for scouting/run and gunning, 4 X-Wings paired with a YV-560, or 4 A-Wings. Keep in mind this is the same cost.

Keep in mind the A-Wing is supposed to be one of the most advanced Alliance starfighters. Its more expensive than an X-Wing to build. If the only purpose it had was as a scout ship, and it isn't even the best scout ship for the cost, why would anyone make one?

Take an A-24 Sleuth (from Enter the Unknown) as a replacement for the A-wing. It's only Silhouette 3 so it can fit where a fighter can, but it has way more endurance for long scouting missions. It only requires a single crewman but it has room for a second (and an astromech droid according to the fluff text). It only costs 45,000 credits! If you want to add Concussion Missile Launchers, an ECM Suite, and a High-Output Ion Turbine (giving you Speed 5) you can still get this little beauty for less than half the cost of the A-wing.

Apparently the Rebel Alliance suffered from shifty contractors and assigned vendors despite not being a government. I guess they really want everything from the Republic back including the bureaucrats!

Except there is almost nothing that an A-Wing does better than an X-Wing by the rules. The sensor range is really the only thing it has, and in that case something like the YV-560 would serve better (yes its slower, but it can double move easier with the higher strain threshold and has an even LONGER sensor range). For the same cost, which do you think would be more useful for scouting/run and gunning, 4 X-Wings paired with a YV-560, or 4 A-Wings. Keep in mind this is the same cost.

Keep in mind the A-Wing is supposed to be one of the most advanced Alliance starfighters. Its more expensive than an X-Wing to build. If the only purpose it had was as a scout ship, and it isn't even the best scout ship for the cost, why would anyone make one?

A 560 with 4 x-wings requires 5 pilots, a copilot/ engineer (a dedicated commscan officer is optional but probably recommended) and 4 astromechs. The four a-wings require four pilots. Basic cost comparison, the a-wings require less manpower, less hanger space, and can also be used to actually fight. The x-wings with a 560 can do the same job, but requires more people droids and hangerspace and a bantha that's questionable at best in a fight without the addition of weapons and equipment that would easily put its cost at roughly the same level as another a-wings and also probably increase the crew requirement even more.

Its simple resources. 30,000 in spaceframe is easily of set by savings in other areas.

I seem to remember from the WEG fluff, that Dodonna requested the A-wing after observing in the battle of Yavin that they needed a ship with raw speed. They were custom built so parts were not easy to stockpile, unlike X-wings and Y-wings. Dodonna got his blisteringly fast ship but it required more maintenance per flight hours than any other rebel fighter by far.

I don't have anything to back this up, but from later "Legends" material it seems like the A-wings were eventually phased out as upgraded X-wings and E-wings became more common. Were there any later generations of the A-wing? Was it a flawed design? Perhaps the cross-compatibility of the Incom parts in the other fighters made more sense?

There was at least a 2nd generation of A-Wings though those were manufactured by Incom and had more standardized parts. Plus their guns could be pointed aft as well.

There was at least a 2nd generation of A-Wings though those were manufactured by Incom and had more standardized parts. Plus their guns could be pointed aft as well.

You know, I was Goofing around with my old Action Fleet A-Wing toy, and noted the swiveling blasters. They got me thinking about Gain the Advantage, fire arcs, and turreted weapons. For the A-Wing, what would increasing its fire arcs do for the ship? For GtA, what happens if you institute the house-rule where holding the Advantage keeps you out of the forward firing arc?

I think if you changed the arc to all, I would put setbacks on it for firing at anything not in the front arc. I can't imagine its easy trying to fire at something not in front of me while also piloting.

(or just do that for any pilot fired weapon that has more than front fire arcs.)

I think if you changed the arc to all, I would put setbacks on it for firing at anything not in the front arc. I can't imagine its easy trying to fire at something not in front of me while also piloting.

(or just do that for any pilot fired weapon that has more than front fire arcs.)

I honestly don't think it would be harder than using the targeting system we see Luke using while targeting a TIE at Yavin. It would basically be the same system only with the blasters swiveled aft it would show targets behind you rather than in front.

I'm fine with a GM who says this is all that Gain the Advantage does at my table and the X-Wing can just fire back and the A-Wing is toast. If I'm at that table I might sigh a bit, agree the A-Wing is broke under these circumstances then not bring it up again as me and my buddies decimate the Empire in our Y-Wings with ridiculous amounts of maneuvers and actions.

At my table, however, Gain the Advantage is read as the minimum benefits it gives you to be augmented by any Advantage, extra Successes and of course Triumphs rolled during the GtA roll and the Gunnery roll (remember the A-Wing is almost certainly going to fire first). Then, sense the A-Wing has the advantage any of those narrative dice results are also more potent because they were gained by someone who already had the Advantage. Also the A-Wing with the advantage is assumed to be able to fire its forward facing weapons, while the X-Wing without the advantage must address how it can fire its forward facing weapons against a target who determined the attack vector it came in on. The Gunnery skill refers to a piloting maneuver to allow an arc facing weapon to fire, and the piloting skill refers to an opposed piloting Skill (action) roll to allow it to fire an arc facing weapon, so at a minimum the X-Wing must spend its maneuver to achieve a firing solution (meaning no aiming), and possibly an action.

Examples (especially if supported by player explanation) on spending Advantage:

1 Adv = "Noticing a . . . fatal flaw in the in an enemy ship's course" the X-Wing must spend an extra maneuver (2 Strain) to bring the target into its forward arc.

2 Adv = As a free action the X-Wing must make an opposed piloting roll to be able to fire. (Probably with a setback)

3 Adv = Free Pilot only maneuver for the A-Wing meaning it is back out to Medium range (and no, the X-Wing can't just catch up on its next turn and fire everything); OR require the opposed piloting as a NOT free action to come around on the A-Wing.

Why can't the X-Wing just get back into close range with a Fly/Drive? Because Fly/Drive has nothing to do with distance. "It is important to remember that range is based on the moving ship's perspective, and is not a measure of actual physical distance." so even though the X-Wing can go from close to Medium range from where IT started, it cannot go as far as the A-Wing has, meaning the A-Wing is at short, not close range, and that is assuming movement between range bands is a linear scale where two ships go up and down a ladder, but we are in 360 (x 360) meaning when the A-Wing hit you and swept by it was not flying away directly in the direction your X-Wing was already going at Speed 5, your Speed 5 is actually increasing the distance between you and the A-Wing until you pilot (maneuver or action) to bring it around, so I may require the second Fly/Drive maneuver just to get to Short (mitigated by your own narrative dice results, of course).

So, at my table the X-Wing is not going to be able to just shoot the A-Wing while ignoring the fact it had and is maintaining the Advantage; the A-Wing is moving at as high as a relative Speed 11 compared to the X-Wing at the beginning of the X-Wing's turn and the A-Wing has no intention of turning back into a dog fight.

Consider using the chase rules then to try and catch up, where if the A-Wing fails the opposed check he only loses 1 range band, but if he wins he gains 2, meanwhile the A-Wings buddies are coming in behind you. Leading defenders away in a useless chase is a classic A-Wing cool moment. Don't forget the chase rules are a full action use of the Piloting skill, so again, no shooting.

The cool of A-Wings only goes up with the Talent Trees as I allow an A-Wing to outrun ordinance on a successful Full Throttle roll. (Dropping Shields and Weapons in the old X-Wing PC game in an A-Wing to outrun honing missiles is one of my favorite gaming memories.)

So, are these 'House Rules'? Well, if the Maneuvers and Actions in the RAW are a ceiling to their benefit and there is no difference between a Speed 5 and a Speed 6 then yeah, the A-Wing is pointless; but if they are a foundation from which to build the cool of different ships from well then, I still feel a need for speed, and the A-Wing is my tool of choice.

6 is more than 5 and I reflect that in my rules judgments on relative speed and positioning, a +3 Handling is higher than a +1 and I allow that to impact my rulings. Such as an X or Y-Wing needing to make easy piloting skill checks in an asteroid canyon while the A-Wing gets a pass, why? The book says the A-Wing is just way more maneuverable, so if the book says it is faster, and the book says it is more maneuverable I don't consider those numbers impacting my table as House Ruling.

In other words I consider myself Pro A-Wing and Pro RAW at the same time.

This game really plays into the Marine GM, "We don't plan, we improvise." This forum also really demonstrates how differently this game will feel from table to table.

Hope one or more of these ideas help you enjoy your A-Wings more.

No, sorry, I don't prescribe to the "its not broken because the GM can fix it" school. Slow, high toughness ships get tons of bonuses straight from the rules, exactly as written. Fast, fragile ships get almost nothing from the rules, and require the GM to do rulings in favor of them.

If you are constantly having to rule in favor of the faster ship in order to make them viable, there is an issue.

I always figured the boon to flying a fast, fragile ship was that you could get into and out of danger quickly - this has been my M.O. for gaming for some 30 years now. The first stipulation is that you never operate solo, the second was that you never hang around for the incoming fire. Seems like this tactic could work here as well without having a spreadsheet open to tract the combat.

I'm going to be running a 2x A-wing + 1 B-wing story here for my group shortly, if it blows up in my face I'll report back how I've dealt with it.

No problems, Emperor Norton. I have no issue with your interpretation of the rules. As the first paragraph under Combat Turns (page 244 AoR CRB) says "This means that the maneuvers a starship performs are open to narration and the interpretation (actually my book says 'interpenetration', not sure what that is but it sounds painful) of both the Game Master and the players." So if your table allows Fly/Drive to negate the A-Wings Speed advantage I am fine with that.

I gotta say, I disagree that I am ruling 'for' the A-Wing, I feel it is always my job to make rulings, informed and controlled by the starship combat rules and stat blocks of the ships involved; and when I need to interpret what the dice say is happening I go to the rules, exactly as written, which tell me the A-Wing is faster and more maneuverable so those statistical numeric advantages must be reflected in my rulings. The A-Wing is not faster at my table because the game is narrative and cinematic, so we somehow disregard the rules, on the contrary (does anyone actually say that? Apparently I do.) it is precisely because the numbers in the rules say the A-Wing is faster that I am required to reflect that in the narrative (and cinematic) dice results. I am not 'fixing' anything, just giving the A-Wing its due.

So, agree to disagree.

I always figured the boon to flying a fast, fragile ship was that you could get into and out of danger quickly - this has been my M.O. for gaming for some 30 years now. The first stipulation is that you never operate solo, the second was that you never hang around for the incoming fire. Seems like this tactic could work here as well without having a spreadsheet open to tract the combat.

I agree its a good tactic. Unfortunately, by the rules its not a viable one in most cases. Against cap ships (which all fighters will get mauled by anyway unless there are tons of fighters and other targets for it to choose from, just don't do it) they have long range weapons anyway, so you can't move out of their targetting area. Against most Imperial fighters (TIE Fighters being the most common), you can't outrun them by the combat rules, as speed 5-6 ships move the same bands by the rules. It would work against bombers, except bombers also have torpedoes for a bit of extra range. And if you are jumping in and out using fly/drive you probably aren't using Evasive Maneuvers.

The only real target it works against are shuttles/transports.

And remember, since speed 5-6 ships move the same bands, you could also do it in the X-Wing, that costs 30k less. Or spend a bit of that difference to use its one hard point to buy up a +speed upgrade, at which point the X-Wing has the advantage or equals the A-Wing in everything but handling, in which it isn't exactly a slouch either.

No, sorry, I don't prescribe to the "its not broken because the GM can fix it" school.

I don't think it's that so much as it is the rules are based on choices you don't agree with.

There is not an objective correct way to do things, so all systems end up being rooted in the developer's sensibilities. Now, those may clash with what you want from a game. That doesn't make them wrong, just not what you are looking for. It's best to look at RPGs as "season to taste" rather than "RAW is law."

I can't remember the last game I was in that used strict RAW without even the slightest rules tweak. I don't know any GMs who are 100% happy with the entirety of RAW for even their favorite games. Hell, I came into this thread thinking that starship combat was fine – after having played a number of combats – and even then, I'm starting to think that house rule I threw out there may be something I'll use. Season to taste.

If your soup isn't salty enough you can go and yell at the patrons about how crappy the chef is and demand they change the recipe, or you can just look for a salt shaker and eat.

Do you not realize my point is "if one ship relies on the GM to be good, and the other can rely on the rules to be good, the one that has to rely on the GM to be good is probably going to be consistently worse across the game system as a whole."

Yes, every GM will change things. But without GM intervention, the difference between 5-6 speed is miniscule, and +2 handling over an X-Wing in no way makes up for the X-Wing being tougher, harder to hit, better weapons, and being cheaper.

You can't talk about rules without actually talking about rules. If your answer is "well the GM will fix it" there is no reason to talk about ANY rules in the game, because no rules can't be changed.