Personally I don't get how the turrets are a problem. Getting to shoot doesn't mean they get to kill you. Normal rules apply for dodging, and you're no more likely to be hit by a turreted attack than a regular one. Plus, it's very easy to chase turret ships, whether those turrets are artificial or not. Add to the table the new card Outmaneuver, which heavily punishes turreted ships (because their normal method for flying is to only worry about range and not facing) by completely stripping them of their only evade die. Not to mention they're some of the most predictable ships in the game thanks to their dials. Really, I enjoy the challenge that these ships introduce. You have to think of new ways to topple them, you can't engage them like normal starfighters. This game would be worse without them, you'd see a very samey build style out there otherwise.

I'm defining "Whisper"s gender. She's a beautiful lady, like her sister "Echo"

FFG refers to Echo as he.

I've seen only one place where "Echo" was referred to as a he, and it was in a guest article talking about potential tactics of the phantom. Considering the misspellings on Leia's card, I'm not confident their editing staff would have caught it if that isn't the case. If you can find a place where FFG specifically says "he", I'm all ears.

Personally I don't get how the turrets are a problem. Getting to shoot doesn't mean they get to kill you. Normal rules apply for dodging, and you're no more likely to be hit by a turreted attack than a regular one. Plus, it's very easy to chase turret ships, whether those turrets are artificial or not. Add to the table the new card Outmaneuver, which heavily punishes turreted ships (because their normal method for flying is to only worry about range and not facing) by completely stripping them of their only evade die. Not to mention they're some of the most predictable ships in the game thanks to their dials. Really, I enjoy the challenge that these ships introduce. You have to think of new ways to topple them, you can't engage them like normal starfighters. This game would be worse without them, you'd see a very samey build style out there otherwise.

the problem as i stated is not that turrets are a bad thing, but that they provide more advantages over disadvantages to playing them and as more and more of them get released they will be more and more common

and when you slap a hlc onto one, it severely hinders the usefulness of an interceptor as a whole as the player running an interceptor will be at a major disadvantage should he/she encounter an outrider.. not a slight one.. a major one

the Y wings and the hawks are great because they are slow moving ships and have a blind spot at range 3 so it gives you major pause to consider running them

the falcon is a solid option for any list but its only drawback is its 1 agility and large point sink. yet it still proves to be a ship that makes top lists on regular occasions. so really this drawback is not very much at all especially when flown correctly. also the falcons dial is extremely solid and on average better than most of the ships currently released to date

but at least falcons only have a 3 attack base. and 3 attack can be dealt with easily at range 3 for interceptors as they have very high chances of survival and a solid chance to escape the fire completely unscathed with the 4 evade dice and a focus and evade token to protect it.. even if it also has gunner

but when you start throwing in a HLC on a large base that barrel rolls.. it's really going to come down to what the dial is like.

if the ship moves like a turtle then yes it can be dealt with; though still tricky thanks to barrel rolls and potential engine upgrade but a slow moving large base ship can easily be blocked.. but if it's anywhere near remotely quick this HLC is going to tear all ties in general, a new one

and if the outrider dial is pretty solid it's going to be extremely difficult, even for interceptors let alone slower moving ships to catch it and let alone stay in range one while it blasts 4 dice into base agility all the time

and if i am guessing correctly, the range one blind spot will not be much of a hindrance at all and more like a "you got lucky" to get that shot

still very skeptical

Lots of smart things being said here, as well as a lot of nonsense.

i am coming around i'm just angry.. it will really depend on the dial of the outrider to make full judgement.. hell it's possible that such a ship may not even have a green maneuver on its dial so that it needs alternate ways to shed stress (i know i'm now being facetious) but one can dream

i'm just being more realistic about this that i'm sure the dial will be more than sufficient to make it a must have in all rebel lists

See, and you had me all hopeful that you actually were coming around. A "must have in all rebel lists"?! Outrider + HLC is not only not going to break the game, it's something people who enjoy Interceptor play ought to be cheering on: a turret that makes a compromise, a turret that can still be outflown.

now if there was no way to strap a hlc to the outrider's back i would have never started this thread in the first place..

In my opinion, this is where your whole argument died and came to a halt.

You're saying that the only reason you lost it was because of an ability on a ship that isn't released yet?

...I actually hope this inspires someone out there in X-Wing Land to proxy this and let us know of your findings.

I've had proxies on the table a few times. Flying an HLC Outrider against Interceptors/Phantoms makes it action-hungry and therefore often inefficient on attack; it can barrel roll (or, with the right upgrade, boost) to force you out of its blind spot, but that eats an action and only works reliably if you move after your target. Taken iIn combination, that means you're perched on an uncomfortable fork: either you take Dash+VI in order to ensure you can attack the high-PS ship you're aiming for, or you take Dash + Predator or Dash + PTL in order to make sure you can still modify your attack dice even when you're forced to BR.

Dash + HLC is strong but eminently beatable.

It's like Vorpal said earlier, it's to keep arc dodgers honest (though, I'd like to hear how it keeps jousters honest).

The very short version: it's hard to joust with someone who's actively seeking a firing position that's either parallel or perpendicular to your vector. It still requires good prediction to keep that firing position, which is why turrets aren't the god-mode nightmare a lot of players make them out to be, but it's something they bring to the game that almost no other ship does.

but when you start evening the playing field for new players in the competitive scene by adding more 360 arcs, you hurt those that logged months to almost now 2 years of practice to get as good as they did in the first place

turrets cheapen the game play and feel vs actually out witting your opponent by flanking and punishing them for it

See above. Turrets are not tools for noobs.

falcons are great balanced ships.. and a few turrets are fine to keep phantoms and interceptors in check.. but FFG is starting to go overboard with these

we will have a Bwing with 360 torp option

the falcon

the decimator

the outrider

the hwk 290

and the y wing

that's going to be approx 1/3 of the ships once wave 5 is released.. call me crazy but that's too much invested in 360 arcs in a game based on dogfighting and maneuvering.

Okay, you're crazy. It's a drastic overstatement to say "approx 1/3 of the ships", since about 1/3 of Rebel pilots can attack outside their firing arcs, but less than 1/10 of Imperial pilots can, which means it's only about 1/5 of all pilots.

And as noted repeatedly by me and others, you still have to maneuver ships with turrets.

and i'm not ok with this because it poses a threat to the viability of even playing with maneuverable ships in the first place which basically means your best chance is to joust.. i can't think of a more boring game than to joust all day long with your opponent

As noted above, turrets don't want to joust any more than arc-dodgers do. You're not thinking this through: why would someone who's paid a premium for the privilege of attacking when his or her ship isn't pointed toward you want to waste that?

And moreover, I understand that it's frustrating that your arc-dodging Interceptor has its main trick neutralized by a ship with no arc to dodge--but what people miss so often is that your highly maneuverable Interceptor is also neutralizing the turret's advantage against jousters.

After 5 pages I see this thread as "FFG is releasing ship that makes my one trick pony list less good, lets hulk rage".'

With all due respect to executor, it's becoming clear to me that you're right: people with only one trick up their sleeves are upset that there are more ships against which their trick isn't an automatic win.

But sure. It just so happens that everyone and their grandmother have a love for specifically the Falcon, usually flown by Chewbacca.

Isn't it weird that these people who 'just love turrets much' never feel the urge to try the Y-wing?

This is a really, really critical point. I see lots of complaints (both in this thread and elsewhere) but they're not complaining about Gold Squadron + Ion Cannon Turret or Roark + Blaster Turret + Recon Specialist, they're complaining about the Falcon and now the Outrider. That says to me that turrets with range limitations, damage limitations, action limitations, etc. aren't a problem for the game--they're not even a problem for people who hate turrets.

What people mind, apparently, is extremely durable turrets that get Range 1 bonuses. That means the Falcon and the Decimator--just one ship for each side.

Yeah it'd be easier to argue turrets arnt an issue if we hadn't seen how prolific the falcons become.

Sure people expected the phantom to turn up and dominate but it really wasn't hard to predict rebel lists and decide it wasn't worth including.

Turret ships being the new meta would not be an issue if both sides had access to them, but right now it's just the rebels.

Turrets are the new meta in deliberate, planned reaction to the Phantom. If the Phantom isn't being flown because it's too scared of turrets, then turrets aren't the metagame: they were the metagame, and now it's something else no one knows yet.

More in a moment...

Did you miss the outmaneuver EPT upgrade? Make all yer handy dandy interceptors feel like Wedge?

Wave 2 introduced extreme arc dodging with Interceptors, and their counter: the YT-1300. Nothing new to see here.

if you want an interceptor that doesn't pop like an academy. you need push the limit

PTL is still powerful, but the belief that you need it is an outdated crutch. Royal Guard + Outmaneuver + Hull + Shield isn't going to "pop like an academy".

imperial players are already playin at the Master difficulty of this game its not like chosing the very easy mode from the beginning like rebels that have shielding and 360 arcs ;P.

Right, "Master difficulty". That's why Imperial lists took 100% of major tournaments up through Wave 3, and are still hitting about 60%.

Personally I don't get how the turrets are a problem. Getting to shoot doesn't mean they get to kill you.

It's easy: complaining about the fact that you have to change is easier than the iterative process of coming up with a strategy, testing it out, and making changes based on the outcome.

It is both amusing and a bit frustrating that the lynch pin of this rant is the one turreted ship option that can actually have it's firing arc outmanuvered.

But it can barrel roll! Good, so it won't be stupidly easy to render that huge point sink ineffective. Still that's not an easy base to fit into a tight space on a barrel roll. Given that it encourages people to get in close isn't that a bit problematic when it comes to resolving those extra movement actions?

So the one turret option that actually can be arc dodged is the crux of the issue for those that want to play list of arc dodging ships? That makes less sense then raging so hard about an unreleased model that you call the FFG designers monkeys.

Lots of smart things being said here, as well as a lot of nonsense.

falcons are great balanced ships.. and a few turrets are fine to keep phantoms and interceptors in check.. but FFG is starting to go overboard with these

we will have a Bwing with 360 torp option

the falcon

the decimator

the outrider

the hwk 290

and the y wing

that's going to be approx 1/3 of the ships once wave 5 is released.. call me crazy but that's too much invested in 360 arcs in a game based on dogfighting and maneuvering.

Okay, you're crazy. It's a drastic overstatement to say "approx 1/3 of the ships", since about 1/3 of Rebel pilots can attack outside their firing arcs, but less than 1/10 of Imperial pilots can, which means it's only about 1/5 of all pilots.

And as noted repeatedly by me and others, you still have to maneuver ships with turrets.

wait what?

1. falcon

2, y wing

3 hwk 290

4 outrider

5 decimator

6 x wing

7 b wing

8 e wing

9 a wing

10 z 95

11 shuttle

12 bounty hunter

13 defender

14 phantom

15 interceptor

16 bomber

17 tie fighter

18 tie advanced

that's 5 out of 18 ships do the count yourself

that's just about 1/3 of all the ships once wave 5 is released. is your math ok? 1/5 would mean there would have to be 25 ships released

unless i missed any ships? but i'm pretty sure i got em all

and i'm not including the transport and tantive because they have no relevance in competitive play. i'm sure many could argue the tie advanced as well

Did you miss the outmaneuver EPT upgrade? Make all yer handy dandy interceptors feel like Wedge?

Wave 2 introduced extreme arc dodging with Interceptors, and their counter: the YT-1300. Nothing new to see here.

if you want an interceptor that doesn't pop like an academy. you need push the limit

PTL is still powerful, but the belief that you need it is an outdated crutch. Royal Guard + Outmaneuver + Hull + Shield isn't going to "pop like an academy".

no you don't "need" it. but you won't be doing nearly as much arc dodging against standard fighters as you can with both boost and barrel roll available to you in the same round

the true goal of the interceptor is to try an not to be shot at, period. which is why they have the hp of a tie

besides? wasn't it FFG that said it themselves that they were in the process of giving players options for "high risk, high reward" options? i'm pretty sure interceptors are high risk already, but they will rarely reward you anything once you get blasted hard with a HLC and more turreted ships seeing play

Did you miss the outmaneuver EPT upgrade? Make all yer handy dandy interceptors feel like Wedge?

Wave 2 introduced extreme arc dodging with Interceptors, and their counter: the YT-1300. Nothing new to see here.

if you want an interceptor that doesn't pop like an academy. you need push the limit

PTL is still powerful, but the belief that you need it is an outdated crutch.

Can't agree with this more. Sure PtL Interceptor is very nice, but should not be considered the only option for Interceptors.

I'm defining "Whisper"s gender. She's a beautiful lady, like her sister "Echo"

FFG refers to Echo as he.

I've seen only one place where "Echo" was referred to as a he, and it was in a guest article talking about potential tactics of the phantom. Considering the misspellings on Leia's card, I'm not confident their editing staff would have caught it if that isn't the case. If you can find a place where FFG specifically says "he", I'm all ears.

If you can find a place where FFG specifically says ''she'', I'm all ears.

I really don't care that people think that Echo or Whisper are girls or boys. They are fictionous characters created by FFG for the sake of giving named pilots to the Phantom. But correcting someone like Glen did because he personally consider them girls is useless, just like if someone corrected another by saying it's a boy. Consider them the gender you want, but don,t correct others on their case as if they were real character from the Star Wars EU like Howlrunner and Ibtisam.

Did you miss the outmaneuver EPT upgrade? Make all yer handy dandy interceptors feel like Wedge?

Wave 2 introduced extreme arc dodging with Interceptors, and their counter: the YT-1300. Nothing new to see here.

if you want an interceptor that doesn't pop like an academy. you need push the limit

PTL is still powerful, but the belief that you need it is an outdated crutch. Royal Guard + Outmaneuver + Hull + Shield isn't going to "pop like an academy".

That's also 32 points a ship though. Quite a bit of points for a 5 THP ship with no pilot ability.

I'm sorry but I think the game is fine as it is

If people had it their way the game would become stale.

"I like to fly intercepter so please don't introduce anything that can make what I enjoy harder "

That's how I kind of see this.

Ya so they put some new ships that have Turret options. So what?

It's not like your going to see them all in one squad.

Y wings and hwks have ion Turrets. No biggie. They are only range one - two. Stay away.

One new bwing pilot can shoot protons through a turret. Again no biggie. He'll shot maybe one or two and have no more.

Not like he can do it the entire game.

The new yt-2400 can equip a hlc as a turret. That's fine, get into range one and see what he does.

All these turrets can still be fought against just fine.

All it means is you have to think of new strategies.

Like I said, if people could have it there way they game would not evolve. The same lists will be used over and over again.

The whole idea is to keep the game fresh. Keep the game interesting.

No reason to get upset over spilled milk

I've scoured Wookiepedia and the general interwebs for any clues as to the identity of the two Phantom pilots...I've yet to come across any evidence that they were pre-existing characters. Indeed, the Enpire's entire stock of Phantoms was destroyed by Rookie One and Ru Marleen anyways, so they wouldn't have had named pilots anyways. I think it was just FFG making up code names that were relevant to the ship. The fact that existing code names have little to do with their role (excepting Backstabber) is another clue to this.

Lots of smart things being said here, as well as a lot of nonsense.

falcons are great balanced ships.. and a few turrets are fine to keep phantoms and interceptors in check.. but FFG is starting to go overboard with these

we will have a Bwing with 360 torp option

the falcon

the decimator

the outrider

the hwk 290

and the y wing

that's going to be approx 1/3 of the ships once wave 5 is released.. call me crazy but that's too much invested in 360 arcs in a game based on dogfighting and maneuvering.

Okay, you're crazy. It's a drastic overstatement to say "approx 1/3 of the ships", since about 1/3 of Rebel pilots can attack outside their firing arcs, but less than 1/10 of Imperial pilots can, which means it's only about 1/5 of all pilots.

And as noted repeatedly by me and others, you still have to maneuver ships with turrets.

wait what?

1. falcon

2, y wing

3 hwk 290

4 outrider

5 decimator

6 x wing

7 b wing

8 e wing

9 a wing

10 z 95

11 shuttle

12 bounty hunter

13 defender

14 phantom

15 interceptor

16 bomber

17 tie fighter

18 tie advanced

that's 5 out of 18 ships do the count yourself

that's just about 1/3 of all the ships once wave 5 is released. is your math ok? 1/5 would mean there would have to be 25 ships released

unless i missed any ships? but i'm pretty sure i got em all

and i'm not including the transport and tantive because they have no relevance in competitive play. i'm sure many could argue the tie advanced as well

The B-wing isn't a turret ship, though--one pilot is. So if you want to count Nera Dantels correctly, you have to count the number of pilots with turret options, not the number of ships. There are 94 pilots in the game, of which 21 can attack outside their firing arcs, and 21/94 = 22%.

If you want to count ships instead, sure: HWK, Y-wing, Falcon, Outrider, and Decimator makes 5, and 5/18 is 27%--which is about a quarter, not a third.

PTL is still powerful, but the belief that you need it is an outdated crutch. Royal Guard + Outmaneuver + Hull + Shield isn't going to "pop like an academy".

no you don't "need" it. but you won't be doing nearly as much arc dodging against standard fighters as you can with both boost and barrel roll available to you in the same round

the true goal of the interceptor is to try an not to be shot at, period. which is why they have the hp of a tie

Why is that the true goal of an Interceptor, though? We're used to thinking about Interceptors as arc-dodgers because--as MajorJuggler would say--their jousting value is low relative to ships like the X-wing. But the Hull Upgrade changed that: now you can modify an Interceptor so that (on average, and relative to its cost) it actually outperforms X-wings and even B-wings defensively.

besides? wasn't it FFG that said it themselves that they were in the process of giving players options for "high risk, high reward" options? i'm pretty sure interceptors are high risk already, but they will rarely reward you anything once you get blasted hard with a HLC and more turreted ships seeing play

It will typically take 7-8 shots from ships with 3 Attack to take down a YT-2400. That's quite plausibly just two rounds. How much damage is that HLC going to do in just two rounds? Because if it's less than about half your list, your Interceptors win that matchup.

Or let's put this another way: why is Chewbacca any good? In terms of defensive efficiency he's flopping around down in the basement next to naked Interceptors, and in terms of raw offensive efficiency he's no great shakes either. By all rights, he should be far less effective than a pair of Rookie Pilots.

But instead, he's a staple of Rebel play, and was even before Threepio and the Phantom were options. Why?

My answer is that it's because the Falcon can make you miss attack opportunities without losing its own--just like an arc-dodging ship. It's because the Falcon never has to lose out and make itself vulnerable by K-turning--just like a ship with a bunch of white and green turns and access to the boost action. It's because the Falcon can pick a target and stick to it, regardless of how it maneuvers--just like an Interceptor. And, like the Interceptor builds that managed to pick up some share of the metagame between the release of Imperial Aces and the release of Wave 4, the Falcon doesn't fall apart in a single bad round.

You're making a number of really bad assumptions, and they're driving your thinking into a place that's negative and unproductive. Turrets are tools for advanced players just as Interceptors and Phantoms are. Turrets require a different mode of thinking and a different way of flying, just as Interceptors and Phantoms do. Turrets counteract a number of advantages Interceptors and other highly maneuverable fighters typically enjoy, but that doesn't suddenly make the Falcon less of an investment--or less of a risk, once it's exposed to fire from ships that can't be easily outflown.

You're making a number of really bad assumptions, and they're driving your thinking into a place that's negative and unproductive. Turrets are tools for advanced players just as Interceptors and Phantoms are. Turrets require a different mode of thinking and a different way of flying, just as Interceptors and Phantoms do. Turrets counteract a number of advantages Interceptors and other highly maneuverable fighters typically enjoy, but that doesn't suddenly make the Falcon less of an investment--or less of a risk, once it's exposed to fire from ships that can't be easily outflown.

you speak to me as if i don't know how to fly turreted ships

i play both factions but more exclusively empire. turreted ships are stupidly easy to fly with and the only thought process you ever need to think about is "how is my opponent likely to block me"

there is not setting up for a shot.. you just take them no matter where you land.

setting up a shot with normal front arcs require finesse but you also need to worry about how your opponent is likely to block you.. so your movements can be quite limited at times.. something the interceptor and phantom players and all other ships that don't have a 360 arc know all too well

the worst part of it all is that ships like the falcon actually make better flankers than the ships that were specifically designed to be flankers

I'm defining "Whisper"s gender. She's a beautiful lady, like her sister "Echo"

FFG refers to Echo as he.

I've seen only one place where "Echo" was referred to as a he, and it was in a guest article talking about potential tactics of the phantom. Considering the misspellings on Leia's card, I'm not confident their editing staff would have caught it if that isn't the case. If you can find a place where FFG specifically says "he", I'm all ears.

If you can find a place where FFG specifically says ''she'', I'm all ears.

I really don't care that people think that Echo or Whisper are girls or boys. They are fictionous characters created by FFG for the sake of giving named pilots to the Phantom. But correcting someone like Glen did because he personally consider them girls is useless, just like if someone corrected another by saying it's a boy. Consider them the gender you want, but don,t correct others on their case as if they were real character from the Star Wars EU like Howlrunner and Ibtisam.

You're mistaken. I never said Echo was a girl. All I said was that FFG hasn't said one way or another. All we actually know is Echo and Whisper pilot phantoms.

And we know that FFG is quick to correct their articles should something be wrong or misleading (e.g. removing the word "separate" from their most recent one), which means that not only do they pay careful attention to the words chosen for said articles, but that their silence on the matter can be taken as tacit approval. Simply put, if FFG didn't want the article to say "he," it wouldn't. Whether the article was written by a guest - at FFG's invitation, mind you - or a staff member is immaterial.

I was mainly refering to the quote that started the argument:

Correcting someone about the gender of a pilot, be it girl or boy, when we really have no idea is pointless, to not use another word. Especially if after you admit that it's just part of your own little world.

Lagomorphia addressed the fact that the only place where the gender was mentioned was into an FFG article and refered to it as a he. Guest writing or not, it has more relevance than the comment Glen posted earlier since FFG still read the article and correct them if they consider something wrong, like they did with the B-Wing article about the exemple of Jan crew use when they removed the word 'separate'.

So, would you be kind enough to also correct Glentopher like you did with Lagomorphia?

i play both factions but more exclusively empire. turreted ships are stupidly easy to fly with and the only thought process you ever need to think about is "how is my opponent likely to block me"

Sorry, but this is just not correct. Like with any other ship, one with a turret must consider more than just where an opponent might move to block it. Most importantly, it needs to consider where it can move to avoid being shot at, while still getting to fire itself. If a turret ship is getting shot at every turn (just like any other ship), it dies. Most of the existing turrets have range restrictions and/or action restrictions, and thus pilots must consider their moves carefully. You are talking like a turret ship can just spin its dial randomly, move, and win the game. Y-wings, HWKs, Outer Rim Smugglers all have either low health or low agility, and are not very hard hitting. They won't last if you don't fly them well. Turret ships are not any easier to fly with. If they were, they would be in all the winning lists at the big events. They are not. As has been discussed ad nauseum in this thread, the only quasi-exceptions to all of this are Han and Chewie. Please, let's be specific: only 2 of the 12 current turret pilots are causing any sort of problem at all. Likely 8 more turret pilots will be added in Wave 5, but they have built in weaknesses that should limit their potential dominance. KineticOperator started a great thread on the turret topic that says all this better than I can, but really, turrets are difficult to use well. I, for one, enjoy flying with and against them!

You're making a number of really bad assumptions, and they're driving your thinking into a place that's negative and unproductive. Turrets are tools for advanced players just as Interceptors and Phantoms are. Turrets require a different mode of thinking and a different way of flying, just as Interceptors and Phantoms do. Turrets counteract a number of advantages Interceptors and other highly maneuverable fighters typically enjoy, but that doesn't suddenly make the Falcon less of an investment--or less of a risk, once it's exposed to fire from ships that can't be easily outflown.

you speak to me as if i don't know how to fly turreted ships

i play both factions but more exclusively empire. turreted ships are stupidly easy to fly with and the only thought process you ever need to think about is "how is my opponent likely to block me"

there is not setting up for a shot.. you just take them no matter where you land.

setting up a shot with normal front arcs require finesse but you also need to worry about how your opponent is likely to block you.. so your movements can be quite limited at times.. something the interceptor and phantom players and all other ships that don't have a 360 arc know all too well

the worst part of it all is that ships like the falcon actually make better flankers than the ships that were specifically designed to be flankers

Yes because a turreted ship is flying all alone.

So you don't have to consider where the rest of your squad is.

You don't have to keep them alive.

Keep the pressure off a turret ship.

Maybe the new imperial ship will be a ffg exclusive called Rambo because yout seem to think it is.

If you did fly them I really question how often.

The is a lot more to it than just flying straight and worry about getting blocked.

you speak to me as if i don't know how to fly turreted ships

No--I've formed the conclusion that, regardless of how well you fly, you aren't thinking about how and why turrets are successful. Statements like this are exactly why:

i play both factions but more exclusively empire. turreted ships are stupidly easy to fly with and the only thought process you ever need to think about is "how is my opponent likely to block me"

I'll ask again: since most turret ships are priced so that they're ineffective jousters, how do they win at all? In my experience, the answer is that they succeed by forcing their opponent to lose attack opportunities, or by forcing their opponent into low-probability shots rather than effective ones. Which makes this...

there is not setting up for a shot.. you just take them no matter where you land.

...a completely inaccurate description.

the worst part of it all is that ships like the falcon actually make better flankers than the ships that were specifically designed to be flankers

Again--bad assumptions. How do you know the Falcon wasn't designed to be a flanker? Even if it was designed as a flanker, what's wrong with its role changing in response to pressure from the metagame?

I was mainly refering to the quote that started the argument:

Whisper can use decloak to ensure he'll either be at range 1

She'll

Correcting someone about the gender of a pilot, be it girl or boy, when we really have no idea is pointless, to not use another word. Especially if after you admit that it's just part of your own little world.

Lagomorphia addressed the fact that the only place where the gender was mentioned was into an FFG article and refered to it as a he. Guest writing or not, it has more relevance than the comment Glen posted earlier since FFG still read the article and correct them if they consider something wrong, like they did with the B-Wing article about the exemple of Jan crew use when they removed the word 'separate'.

So, would you be kind enough to also correct Glentopher like you did with Lagomorphia?

The correction we have seen is a rules clarification, in an official FFG written article. We have seen them leave misspellings on official materials as well, and let guest writers name things like buzz saw shuttles. So, I don't believe we can take a guest article as any clear official statement of fact one way or another.

Again, I'm not correcting on male or female, simply about a fact we don't actually have.

Side note: I may be incorrect on Whisper, I believe an official FFG article said "he" but I'd have to go back and look. I was actually open to official statements on echo, thus the "all ears" thing at the end of my first post

It's considerably harder to fix printed cards that it is an online article. I guess this is all moot anyways, since the Star Wars property doesn't even belong to FFG. Unless Disney steps in and tells us specifically what we're playing with, we might as well consider FFG an unofficial "guest."

Fair enough. Though, you would think somebody would catch that before it hits the printing phase, it's really bad/funny.

You would think, considering their otherwise immaculate record. I find it less bad/funny than I do mysterious, since I'm having a hard time imagining how they could have let it slip through (twice!) like that. But, stranger things have happened.