When I was a kid I would have killed for an X-wing cockpit play set. I once made my own out of a refrigerator cardboard box, an old PC joystick, and some markers...

Ah, what it would be like to be 6-8 years old again. Nobody yelling about the definition of "Aces", nobody trying to pass loaded dice as legitimate game tools, and miniatures of my favorite things from my favorite movies which are better than any early 90s MicroMachines...

When I was a kid I would have killed for an X-wing cockpit play set. I once made my own out of a refrigerator cardboard box, an old PC joystick, and some markers...

Ah, what it would be like to be 6-8 years old again. Nobody yelling about the definition of "Aces", nobody trying to pass loaded dice as legitimate game tools, and miniatures of my favorite things from my favorite movies which are better than any early 90s MicroMachines...

The main issue with this approach is that the Y-wing needs to come with instructions that say:

WARNING: THIS SHIP IS TERRIBLE FOR ITS COST UNLESS YOU PUT A TURRET ON IT!*

* Blaster Turret sucks without action stacking, so it really needs to be an Ion Cannon Turret.

Another change that's currently in progress is ordnance becoming more viable as a choice. Hopefully that trend will continue, and Y-wings with torpedoes will be worth considering as an alternative to Y-wings with turrets.

The main issue with this approach is that the Y-wing needs to come with instructions that say:

WARNING: THIS SHIP IS TERRIBLE FOR ITS COST UNLESS YOU PUT A TURRET ON IT!*

* Blaster Turret sucks without action stacking, so it really needs to be an Ion Cannon Turret.

Another change that's currently in progress is ordnance becoming more viable as a choice. Hopefully that trend will continue, and Y-wings with torpedoes will be worth considering as an alternative to Y-wings with turrets.

Funny you should say that because in my current 300 point rebel build half of the ships have the munitions fail-safe upgrade.

I also have the following additional possibilities.

Fire-Linked Ion Turret (2 pts)

Turret. Y-wing only.

Increase primary attack by 1. After you perform a primary attack that hits, the defender rolls 1 attack die, on a {hit} or {crit} the defender receives 1 ion token.

This is a very good example of how NOT to fix the y-wing, because it just makes it into a better x-wing. Add a generic R2 and now you have a ship that costs the same 21 points, has a better dial (red fast maneuvers but lots of slow greens), has better durability, and has a much better gun. Some of the named pilots might still see occasional use, but you might as well remove generic x-wings from the game if you add this upgrade.

What this really does is demonstrate the problem with trying to make the naked y-wing a viable option instead of making it a turret/torpedo platform: you can't give it the third attack die required for an expensive ship without competing with the x-wing, and you can't make it a cheap swarm ship without competing with the z-95.

Haven't gone through the who convo yet but what about the astromech slot? Instead of messing with point costs and structural changes maybe a few specialized R2 units could be the answer, such as adding range or adding Outmaneuver to the entire 360 arc. I like the Y-Wing as is but if we are going on a wish-list shopping spree then a bad a$$ droid could make a huge difference without altering the core ship. My 2 cents.

You have to be very careful with the Astromech slot and either make them Y-wing only or accept they will be hijacked by E-wings/X-wings. That said a Y-wing only generic version of R2-D6 (or just a Y-wing only version with a different name so you can have 2 Y-wings with EPTs) would be nice.

Of course as an Imperial Player I acknowledge any cool astromech ideas will lead to screams of faction imbalance

I also have the following additional possibilities.

Fire-Linked Ion Turret (2 pts)

Turret. Y-wing only.

Increase primary attack by 1. After you perform a primary attack that hits, the defender rolls 1 attack die, on a {hit} or {crit} the defender receives 1 ion token.

This is a very good example of how NOT to fix the y-wing, because it just makes it into a better x-wing. Add a generic R2 and now you have a ship that costs the same 21 points, has a better dial (red fast maneuvers but lots of slow greens), has better durability, and has a much better gun. Some of the named pilots might still see occasional use, but you might as well remove generic x-wings from the game if you add this upgrade.

What this really does is demonstrate the problem with trying to make the naked y-wing a viable option instead of making it a turret/torpedo platform: you can't give it the third attack die required for an expensive ship without competing with the x-wing, and you can't make it a cheap swarm ship without competing with the z-95.

oye, how about the fire-linked weapons as just replacing

the turret upgrade slot with a cannon upgrade slot?

HCL and Ion Cannon, which has a slightly better range.

oye, how about the fire-linked weapons as just replacing the turret upgrade slot with a cannon upgrade slot?

HCL and Ion Cannon, which has a slightly better range.

The question we need to answer is what would make us take Grays and Horton? Grays obviously have a higher ps but with ions the lesser ps is better. Horton has a great ability that is only limited by 2 attack dice. Maybe some new torpedoes would help with taking those ships. Ps4 is betrer than ps2 for ordinance sake. I haven't used bombs at all so I don't know if those would be better or on high or lower ps ships.

oye, how about the fire-linked weapons as just replacing

the turret upgrade slot with a cannon upgrade slot?

HCL and Ion Cannon, which has a slightly better range.

If it only applied to the ion turret/ion cannon it would be fine. You can already get four ion b-wings in a 100 point list, so ion cannon y-wings wouldn't be much of a change. Though I'd question the appeal of making a ship that is just like an ion b-wing except cheaper, that seems like too much of a role overlap.

The HLC, on the other hand, would be incredibly dangerous. If it's just a straight turret -> cannon swap with no point cost you can now take four HLCs in a 100 point list, something FFG has so far avoided (for good reason). And if you make the cannon slot cost enough to make the HLC a safe option it's almost certainly going to be too expensive to use the ion cannon.

A range-3 blaster turret, which would be the actual equivalent of the ion cannon, wouldn't work. If you keep the "spend a focus to shoot" rule you're paying points to add a 3-dice primary weapon that does the same damage as the 2-dice primary weapon you get for free, and you don't have the blaster turret's 360* arc to make up for it. If you remove the focus cost then you're right back to the problem of making an x-wing replacement.

oye, how about the fire-linked weapons as just replacing the turret upgrade slot with a cannon upgrade slot?

HCL and Ion Cannon, which has a slightly better range.

Because then you run into it threatening to become a differently-shaped B-wing. The Y-wing needs to maintain it's strengths to make it stay unique. The best I can think of is the modification/title posted earlier (I believe by Juggler, though I'm too lazy to go back and look) fixing the turret arc forward and reducing the points cost. It prevents the Y-wing from encroaching on both X-wing and B-wing territory (the former by improving its tank for the same damage output but cheaper cost, the latter for a much ability to have specialized cannons), keeps one of the Y-wing's strengths (a cheap platform for Ionization shenanigans), doesn't diminish the Y-wing's other strengths (cheap torpedo boat), and improves the cost/benefit ratio, making it more worthwhile to bring, especially if you're going for points efficiency. It won't be as effective as a normal Ion Cannon because of range limitations, but that's the trade off for it being a cheaper option on a cheaper ship (again, points efficiency).

speaking of shenanigans:

• Longprobe title card that adds the system upgrade.

• BTL-A6 Y-wing II "Recon" title card, like the long probe adds the system upgrade, but twice.

• BTL-E9 Y-wing title card, a ship capable of performing a Jam action, same range as the Rebel transport.

The question we need to answer is what would make us take Grays and Horton?

Grays don't have any problems at all. They're the same +2 points, +2 PS upgrade (almost) every ship gets, and useful or not useful for the exact same reasons.

Salm needs an EPT (I don't know what FFG were thinking when they didn't give him one) and a way to take torps (which his ability demands) without pushing his point cost up past the 30-35 point range where he has to compete with Wedge/Luke/etc. IMO the solution is the modification I posted earlier: pay a fixed price for the modification and all of your torpedo upgrades are free. If you could pay 2-4 points for a pair of torps instead of 8 points it would make him (and torp y-wings in general) a lot more appealing.

speaking of shenanigans:

• Longprobe title card that adds the system upgrade.

• BTL-A6 Y-wing II "Recon" title card, like the long probe adds the system upgrade, but twice.

• BTL-E9 Y-wing title card, a ship capable of performing a Jam action, same range as the Rebel transport.

The Jam action on a Y-wing is a curious notion, however...the only problem I see is that a ship with a native Jam plus the ability to ionize will spell certain doom for small ships, severely unbalancing the ship. That card must either be a very expensive upgrade, or it removes the Turret slot as well (though the latter problem merely offsets the issue, rather than resolves it).

Does this ewar y-wing variant actually exist in any canon sources? Because from what I've found with a little searching it seems like its origin is in a fan-made RPG book and it doesn't exist anywhere else. And if this is accurate then I don't see why anyone is discussing it here, FFG isn't going to use random fan ideas they've probably never even heard of.

Does this ewar y-wing variant actually exist in any canon sources? Because from what I've found with a little searching it seems like its origin is in a fan-made RPG book and it doesn't exist anywhere else. And if this is accurate then I don't see why anyone is discussing it here, FFG isn't going to use random fan ideas they've probably never even heard of.

what FFG doesn't need is anyone telling them what they are never going to combine.

Ha Ha, you're a funny kid... Y-wings are in the game, and Jamming is in the game,

what FFG doesn't need is anyone telling them what they are never going to combine.

B-wings are in the game, and automatically destroying everything you ram is in the game, so FFG doesn't need anyone telling them that the two are never going to combine. Now let's all waste time talking about my 1-point title card that lets me barrel roll into your ship and instantly destroy it.

The simple fact here is that you're inventing upgrade cards to represent a ship that doesn't exist outside of a fan-made RPG supplement. Your ewar y-wing is never going to happen.

Does this ewar y-wing variant actually exist in any canon sources? Because from what I've found with a little searching it seems like its origin is in a fan-made RPG book and it doesn't exist anywhere else. And if this is accurate then I don't see why anyone is discussing it here, FFG isn't going to use random fan ideas they've probably never even heard of.

Ha Ha, you're a funny kid... Y-wings are in the game, and Jamming is in the game,

what FFG doesn't need is anyone telling them what they are never going to combine.

Hey, remember when you were banned from BoardGameGeek for bizarrely aggressive and incoherent spam?

The Longprobe is a real thing, but the "Recon" variant isn't, and two system upgrades would be insane. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for either.

Hey, remember when you were banned from BoardGameGeek for bizarrely aggressive and incoherent spam?

The Longprobe is a real thing, but the "Recon" variant isn't, and two system upgrades would be insane. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for either.

Oh, that sounds like a good read. Can I get a link?

Does this ewar y-wing variant actually exist in any canon sources? Because from what I've found with a little searching it seems like its origin is in a fan-made RPG book and it doesn't exist anywhere else. And if this is accurate then I don't see why anyone is discussing it here, FFG isn't going to use random fan ideas they've probably never even heard of.

Isn't the Vigil one of those?

That being said, really not sure about putting Jam on such a cheap platform because of how many of them you could have. We've got that stress astromech for this job.

I also have the following additional possibilities.

Fire-Linked Ion Turret (2 pts)

Turret. Y-wing only.

Increase primary attack by 1. After you perform a primary attack that hits, the defender rolls 1 attack die, on a {hit} or {crit} the defender receives 1 ion token.

This is a very good example of how NOT to fix the y-wing, because it just makes it into a better x-wing. Add a generic R2 and now you have a ship that costs the same 21 points, has a better dial (red fast maneuvers but lots of slow greens), has better durability, and has a much better gun. Some of the named pilots might still see occasional use, but you might as well remove generic x-wings from the game if you add this upgrade.

What this really does is demonstrate the problem with trying to make the naked y-wing a viable option instead of making it a turret/torpedo platform: you can't give it the third attack die required for an expensive ship without competing with the x-wing, and you can't make it a cheap swarm ship without competing with the z-95.

You are indeed correct that this particular opytion makes the Y-wing a bit X-wing like. It also moves it closer to the B-wing. At 21 points for 3/1/5/3 with a 50% ion chance. An Option would be to limit the effect to range 1-2.

I would disagree that the ship is better than a base X-wing. Durability is similar because of the X-wing's additional defence die. The gun is indeed a bit better. Could increase the cost to 3 to combat that.

Fire-Linked Ion Turret (2 pts)

Turret. Y-wing only.

When attacking at range 1-2 with your primary weapon you roll 1 additional attack die. After you perform a primary attack that hits a target at range 1-2, the defender rolls 1 attack die, on a {hit} or {crit} the defender receives 1 ion token.

Or:

Fire-Linked Ion Turret (3 pts)

Turret. Y-wing only.

Increase primary attack by 1. After you perform a primary attack that hits, the defender rolls 1 attack die, on a {hit} or {crit} the defender receives 1 ion token.

Or:

Fire-Linked Ion Turret (2 pts)

Turret. Y-wing only.

Action: Until the end of the round, increase your primary weapon value by 1, after you perform a primary attack that hits, the defender rolls 1 attack die, on a {hit} or {crit} the defender receives 1 ion token.

If you want to be constructive, try adding to the discussion rather than just being negative.

The question we need to answer is what would make us take Grays and Horton?

Grays don't have any problems at all. They're the same +2 points, +2 PS upgrade (almost) every ship gets, and useful or not useful for the exact same reasons.

I actually disagree, different ships have very different cost structures for PS escalation. The more expensive the ship, the better a deal +1PS for +1 point is. The cheaper the ship, the worse it is. Really cheap ships give better than +1/+1: TIE Fighters and Bandits (+2PS/+1cost) and A-wings (+2PS, +EPT / +2 cost).

The Y-wing being 18 points is at an awkward no-mans land where it's not worth spending 2 more points to get +2 PS, but its not cheap enough to give it a full point discount or an EPT. The TIE Interceptor has the same exact problem, PS3 squints almost never get used.

Seriously, he needs an EPT. PS 8 and no EPT? It's not like he's flying a Lambda shuttle!

...different ships have very different cost structures for PS escalation. The more expensive the ship, the better a deal +1PS for +1 point is. The cheaper the ship, the worse it is. Really cheap ships give better than +1/+1: TIE Fighters and Bandits (+2PS/+1cost) and A-wings (+2PS, +EPT / +2 cost).

The Y-wing being 18 points is at an awkward no-mans land where it's not worth spending 2 more points to get +2 PS, but its not cheap enough to give it a full point discount or an EPT. The TIE Interceptor has the same exact problem, PS3 squints almost never get used.

I think you're right, but there are a few other factors in play as well. The Y-wing rarely carries ordnance but almost always carries an Ion Cannon Turret. Ion tokens don't have an effect until the following activation phase, and the turret's damage is capped; additionally, the Y-wing's heap of hp also means you're relatively unlikely to lose it before it can get a few shots of its own. So not only does it have the worst cost structure for PS, but it gets less value out of its bid than any other ship I can think of offhand. (Even the HWK has three great pilot abilities to drive up its typical PS.)

It's not really relevant to a Y-wing Aces pack, but the Interceptor has the opposite problem. Y-wings don't care at all about moving first and shooting last, because they have no need to invest in speed. Interceptors' brittle nature means they do need to move last and shoot first more desperately than any ship except the Phantom--but the +2 PS/+2 cost bid leaves them behind so many other common threats that it's not worth making. Either you take an Alpha for pure efficiency, or you bid up to something with real speed (and, not incidentally, something that can take Push the Limit to beat the action-economy trap).

The question we need to answer is what would make us take Grays and Horton?

Grays don't have any problems at all. They're the same +2 points, +2 PS upgrade (almost) every ship gets, and useful or not useful for the exact same reasons.

I actually disagree, different ships have very different cost structures for PS escalation. The more expensive the ship, the better a deal +1PS for +1 point is. The cheaper the ship, the worse it is. Really cheap ships give better than +1/+1: TIE Fighters and Bandits (+2PS/+1cost) and A-wings (+2PS, +EPT / +2 cost).

The Y-wing being 18 points is at an awkward no-mans land where it's not worth spending 2 more points to get +2 PS, but its not cheap enough to give it a full point discount or an EPT. The TIE Interceptor has the same exact problem, PS3 squints almost never get used.

Salm needs an EPT (I don't know what FFG were thinking when they didn't give him one)

Seriously, he needs an EPT. PS 8 and no EPT? It's not like he's flying a Lambda shuttle!

He is the reason R2-D6 exists. Try it.

Salm needs an EPT (I don't know what FFG were thinking when they didn't give him one)

Seriously, he needs an EPT. PS 8 and no EPT? It's not like he's flying a Lambda shuttle!

He is the reason R2-D6 exists. Try it.

Horton shouldn't have to pay the +1 cost tax, and lose his droid, to get an EPT slot that he should have been given from the start at his point cost. If it was actually worth putting R2-D6 on Horton, then it would show up somewhere at Regionals. It hasn't.

Fire-Linked Ion Turret (2 pts) Turret. Y-wing only.

When attacking at range 1-2 with your primary weapon you roll 1 additional attack die. After you perform a primary attack that hits a target at range 1-2, the defender rolls 1 attack die, on a {hit} or {crit} the defender receives 1 ion token.

*snip*

If you want to be constructive, try adding to the discussion rather than just being negative.

Though this particular option is the best of all three you posted, I still think we're missing something. Again, the problem is that we don't want the Y-wing encroaching on B-wing or X-wing territory, and the increase to the attack die alongside the ion effect does this. Additionally, the extra attack die itself is usually worth about 4 points. Instead, how about this:

Fire-Linked Ion Cannon (2pt)

Turret upgrade. Y-wing Only.

After making a primary weapon attack, if the attack hits, you may roll one attack die. On a {hit} or {crit} the defender receives one ion token.