Outmaneuver has no place in this discussion outside of the fact that it is an example of a card that rewards some measure of flying skill with a bonus. It is an offensive bonus and not really relevant to the fact that interceptors can't survive any sort of turret attack with any certainty.

The reason it came up (I think) is because I put forth the idea of a card that would work like outmaneuver, but grant a DEFENSIVE bonus.

I think the idea has a lot of merit. It helps against turrets without negating them. It is useless against other ships. So you are paying points to MAYBE get a small defensive boost. If it were unique and a mod, it would only help on one ship and probably not on a Phantom.

There are 2 advantages for the high mobility. Getting out of shots and getting set up for great shots yourself. Yes, you really can't get out of shots of primary turrets, but you can still get into the blind spots of the turret upgrades. I've use Alphas as great blockers as well.

Sure, turrets hurt. But in no way do they obsolete Interceptors.

There are 2 advantages for the high mobility. Getting out of shots and getting set up for great shots yourself. Yes, you really can't get out of shots of primary turrets, but you can still get into the blind spots of the turret upgrades. I've use Alphas as great blockers as well.

Sure, turrets hurt. But in no way do they obsolete Interceptors.

You mean those turret upgrades like gunner and Luke? What blind spots do they have?

There are some you can avoid (Tactician, ions), but those aren't really problematic. You can already get rewarded for flying well.

Lets be honest and not say "turrets". It is gunner/Luke Falcons were talking here.

You can't field 4 interceptors that do what you say, but I digress.

Do you mean you can't field 4 Interceptors with PTL? Because both Saber and Royal Guard's fit at 100 points with a 3 point EPT.

To be precise, I was responding to someone who said 4 interceptors, with 2 actions each, that move last. Royal Guard does not do this. My point being that you can basically only have 2 of the 3 - move last, have 2 actions, or have 4 squints. But this isn't really a path I was looking to diverge on, was just pointing out that the poster was painting an impossible scenario. I don't think most classify PS6 as a safe enough bet on moving last, or anyways I don't.

You can. Royal Guards move last and shoot first 63% of the time. When they don't the opponent is either:

1) bidding for initiative and therefore paying for it with more expensive ships, which means he will be outnumbered

2) has one or two high PS ships and the rest low PS. Dodge the low PS and guess where the high PS ships will be.

In either case, an agile ship like an Interceptor, when facing a turret can elect to fly more defensively. Staying at RB3 and focus + evade makes it hard for a Falcon to kill Interceptors. You have 4 dice + focus and evade vs incoming fire of 3 dice.

R7

There are 2 advantages for the high mobility. Getting out of shots and getting set up for great shots yourself. Yes, you really can't get out of shots of primary turrets, but you can still get into the blind spots of the turret upgrades. I've use Alphas as great blockers as well.

Sure, turrets hurt. But in no way do they obsolete Interceptors.

You mean those turret upgrades like gunner and Luke? What blind spots do they have?

There are some you can avoid (Tactician, ions), but those aren't really problematic. You can already get rewarded for flying well.

Lets be honest and not say "turrets". It is gunner/Luke Falcons were talking here.

Precisely. We're talking about a small fraction of ship combination possibilities. Let's not cry out for a fix for something that makes up such a small part of the meta and still has counters.

Lol I love these threads. Its always people that want to field 4 interceptors with ptl that complain about turrets having no skill. Want to hear something that you are not going to like, flying 4 high ps interceptors with PTL takes no skill. Arc dodging is stupidly easy if you move last and can both barrel roll and boost.

Every thread about turrets essentially is the following, "Ugh I hate turrets. Their no skill ability to fly in a circle takes away from my no skill ability to use two actions a turn to get out of fire lanes."

You can't field 4 interceptors that do what you say, but I digress.

While I agree that arc-dodging with a high-PS interceptor requires little skill, that only applies to the first dodge. The mistake most often made is not considering the next turn and your options left after you arc-dodge. Too often people PtL their movement options away, get pointed a bad direction, or maneuver too close to obstacles and find that on the next turn they can't escape. Continuously arc-dodging with an interceptor takes quite a lot of skill.

Quit painting everyone with the same broad brush. Not everyone who thinks a tweak is needed thinks we need to be able to field a homogenous squad of interceptors. Some of us would just like 1 or 2 interceptors to have a tad more options to be competitive against turrets.

4x Royal Guards + PTL. While not the highest of PSes, thats enough to get the jump on the majority of builds. Before you argue further, according to MajorJuggler`s stats http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/105107-2014-regionals-results/page-44#entry1184894 compiled from the Regional Results where Wave 4 was legal, the mean PS was 5.28, with PS6 outright beating 62.92% of ships.

Thats enough for me to say 4 RGs + PTL to make the quintessential dodgy Interceptor build.

Misleading statistics are always helpful in making an argument. It isn't about beating 69% of "ships". You have to be able to stay away from your opponent's "squad". I'll take superHan and 3 bandits (average PS of 3.75) against 4 Royal guards any day. He'll out-PS 75% of my ships, I'll still easily swat interceptors all day long. And it isn't like a high PS ship or two with a bunch of generics is some unseen creature. It is the norm. But you know that And were just kind of hoping I'd see numbers and be be all "you got me".

Hell, I'd even take Fat Chewie against that list, but that is kind of unrelated to the PS issue and more related to the topic at hand.

I don't think most classify PS6 as a safe enough bet on moving last, or anyways I don't.

Ok, I was genuinely confused what you meant. I'd agree that PS6 isn't good enough to guarantee moving last, but I'd consider it a safe bet that you'd move last 75% or more of the time.

sometimes you just roll 3 blanks and your interceptor goes POP!

TIEs don't go "pop". Their deaths are much more spectacular. Every time you shoot down a TIE this happens:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPYhi3Zu8Pg

Outmaneuver is a fair counter to turrets. That is all.

People have been bandying about ideas for a TIE Scout with some kind of electronic warfare capability type stuff. What if you had a new ship and gave it a UPT or action like this?

Jam (whatever, we can come up with a better name later)

Action: choose an enemy ship within range 2. The chosen ship may only fire from its front arc for the remainder of the turn.

OR...

Action: choose a friendly ship at range 1-3. For the duration of the turn, the chosen ship may only be targeted and attacked if it is within the attacker's primary arc.

In general I don't like the idea of "hard counters," which is basically what this is - once you start introducing hard counters into a game, it trends towards the ultimate game of hard counters, rock paper scissors.

But this could be interesting. The second option, in particular, seems like it could be workable - it doesn't totally remove the turret from the game, and the choices by the jamming player of what ship to protect and the turret player of how to respond could be an interesting dynamic. I'm imagining a Phantom or Fel arc-dodging the Falcon, while the Falcon player desparately tries to shoot down the jamming Scout and the Imperial player tries to keep it out of range of the Falcon while staying in range of his own ship. That'd be fun, right?

It's not really a small percent of ships when you're looking at usage now and adding 2 more turret ships to the game. Then add ways for non-turret ships to affect mobility ships and we're back to a thread from 3 months ago about how the interceptor is dying off due to the multitude of mobility counters being added to the game...

Turrets are bad for mobility based ships, better turrets are worse, more turrets are worse, turrets backed up with other anti-mobility tech (and sometimes that combine both) is worse still.

Anti-turret tech doesn't exist in the game yet. Outmaneuver would be a good ept if turrets were not even in the game. Outmaneuver is called "the answer" right now because of C3po who is only currently available on the most offensive (and offending) turret ship.

People have been bandying about ideas for a TIE Scout with some kind of electronic warfare capability type stuff. What if you had a new ship and gave it a UPT or action like this?

Jam (whatever, we can come up with a better name later)

Action: choose an enemy ship within range 2. The chosen ship may only fire from its front arc for the remainder of the turn.

OR...

Action: choose a friendly ship at range 1-3. For the duration of the turn, the chosen ship may only be targeted and attacked if it is within the attacker's primary arc.

In general I don't like the idea of "hard counters," which is basically what this is - once you start introducing hard counters into a game, it trends towards the ultimate game of hard counters, rock paper scissors.

But this could be interesting. The second option, in particular, seems like it could be workable - it doesn't totally remove the turret from the game, and the choices by the jamming player of what ship to protect and the turret player of how to respond could be an interesting dynamic. I'm imagining a Phantom or Fel arc-dodging the Falcon, while the Falcon player desparately tries to shoot down the jamming Scout and the Imperial player tries to keep it out of range of the Falcon while staying in range of his own ship. That'd be fun, right?

Another option would be to introduce this same mechanic as a modification.

Say, "advanced countermeasures." 3 pts? Could be a passive ability or grant a "countermeasures" action. Result would be the same as above - ship cannot be targeted except through the attacker's primary arc.

Wouldn't get much use on Phantoms, I wouldn't think, due to competing with Advanced Cloaking Device. But it would be a great option for PTL interceptors, right?

EDIT: wanted to add that this since this would take up a modification slot, would still require an action, and would only be useful against turrets, it shouldn't be game breaking - just a useful option making certain builds viable against the full range of opponents (e.g., squints v. falcons).

It's not really a small percent of ships when you're looking at usage now and adding 2 more turret ships to the game. Then add ways for non-turret ships to affect mobility ships and we're back to a thread from 3 months ago about how the interceptor is dying off due to the multitude of mobility counters being added to the game...

Turrets are bad for mobility based ships, better turrets are worse, more turrets are worse, turrets backed up with other anti-mobility tech (and sometimes that combine both) is worse still.

Anti-turret tech doesn't exist in the game yet. Outmaneuver would be a good ept if turrets were not even in the game. Outmaneuver is called "the answer" right now because of C3po who is only currently available on the most offensive (and offending) turret ship.

I'm sorry, this whole turret thing is such a poorly identified problem. It's not that turrets are game changing, it's that the ships they are equipped to are tough to kill. I don't ever hear anyone complain that someone is flying the HWK with a Blaster turret and ruining the game.

The issue is that people are flying double YTs, or Super Han and people don't know how to do enough damage fast enough to winnow them down. And most of the reason why that's a problem is because people are so worried about anti-swarm meta, that no one wants to fly 5-6 ships in a list right now.

All of this will eventually settle out, so let's not overreact and start calling for FFG to redesign the game.

Want to kill a Super Falcon:

Tarn + R7

3 x Red + R7

1 x Cigar to smoke when you're done tabling your opponent

4 x Saber + Outmaneuver

6 x Academy

Howlrunner

5 x Black + Predator/Outmaneuver

And the list goes on...

Zoccola,

Are you seriously going to sit there and suggest flying ints is easier then falcons or 360 turrets?

Yes, the first pass is stupid easy to arc dodge. But the problem comes after that where there are arcs all over the place. One bad mistake and you are toast. Unlike a falcon where you can make bad decisions time after time and still survive the round.

You obviously are a proponent of falcons and turrets and that's fine. But don't sit there and suggest fying squints in easy. Makes you look like you've never flown the ship before. 1 mistake will wipe out a squint instantly.

How many int squads do you see running tourneys? How many turret or falcons squads do you see running a tourney?

Outmaneuver is a fair counter to turrets. That is all.

No it isn't. Outmaneuver can help, but its far from a counter. Certainly not a hard counter.

Are you really going to deck your entire squad out with outmaneuver? Especially when that upgrade slot has far better options for general purposes?

To stop a super falcon you need to practically build your entire squad against it. That it the problem here.

Wave 6 better bring the falcon/turret hurt otherwise this game will get stale awfully quick.

Too many turrets is simply bad for this game as it completely neuters certain ships and they can't do squat about it.