This thought went through my head when I was facing a few autoblasters in the last few casual matches I've been in. Wincing while I was on the receiving end, they don't seem so terrible to me, especially when being fired at my Defenders...

Thinking about new list possibilities for an upcoming tournament and I wondered about arming Rexler with an Autoblaster with an Engine Upgrade. Since I expect some phantoms to be out there this seems like a great counter.

Are Autoblasters really so bad it's better not to take them than it is to do so? Because ignoring agility looks great to me.

Ignoring agility is great. Paying 5 points to do it at Range 1 only, and take a 1 die reduction in firepower while you do it is kinda bad.

Well, ignoring agility is cool and all, but you're also paying 5 pts for a range 1 secondary weapon.

Considering that all the ships that can take the autoblaster have a primary attack of 3 (except the YT-2400, when it is released), you're actually LOSING an attack at range 1 (since your autoblaster does not get the +1 die bonus from short range).

If I score two out of three hits with my autoblaster, isn't it better to force those hits through on a TIE Phantom than allow it to roll its 4 agility dice and cancel them?

If I was able to squeeze out reliable 3+ damage out of a 4-dice range 1 attack, I'd agree with you. But the Autoblaster looks like an attractive 5-point pressure device on high agility starfighters. Yeah it could be cheaper, but what would be a better alternative to take with it when facing down phantoms? Empire doesn't have turrets.

If an Autoblaster was going to be equipped, it almost begs to be on a lower PS ship in the way I'd build a squad. The liklihood of an opposing ship already having burned off their Evade and/or Focus tokens later in the Combat Phase would be better for the AB attack. However, then you're opening your own AB ships to being thumped on earlier in the round.

With only three attack, the AB isn't a powerhouse other than it's ability to ignore defense dice. Giving up that extra Range 1 die too is something to consider as well.

i've been here for quite some time and have never really posted in the "autoblasters are bad" threads.

I agree with you 100%. I've played quite a few games where AB pays for it's points cost 3x over.

Unfortunately just about everyone here (unless you have remained silent like myself) will disagree with me about how they only work at range 1 and you get an extra att die anyways ect ect.

some things to think about:

1. board control, a lot of ships do not want to end up in range one of a autoblaster which leads you to point #2

2. eats a-wings and tie fighters who are trying to get in range 1 of you anyways

3. stick on a flanker with predator or opportunist

4. Only evade tokens can save a ship from getting ping'ed.

The problem is that autoblasters are just too situational.

Against low-agility targets you're paying 5 points to do less damage than your primary weapon.

Against medium-agility targets you're paying 5 points for a very small (almost nonexistent) damage increase.

Against high-agility targets you're getting a huge increase in firepower over your primary weapon, but those high-agility targets can probably outmaneuver you and stay outside range 1.

So most of the time you're breaking even at best compared to a 4-dice primary shot, or not getting to shoot at all. Insult to injury is that a HLC, a far superior weapon that improves your damage in almost all situations, is only a bit more expensive.

Yes.

If I score two out of three hits with my autoblaster, isn't it better to force those hits through on a TIE Phantom than allow it to roll its 4 agility dice and cancel them?

If I was able to squeeze out reliable 3+ damage out of a 4-dice range 1 attack, I'd agree with you. But the Autoblaster looks like an attractive 5-point pressure device on high agility starfighters. Yeah it could be cheaper, but what would be a better alternative to take with it when facing down phantoms? Empire doesn't have turrets.

If you can hunt down a Phantom, and have it in your forward arc at Range 1, you're doing something right. However, the likelihood of managing to do that is somewhere between slim to none for most ships.

Empire doesn't have turrets, yet. Soon enough once the Decimator gets here.

There are two problems with the Autoblaster: the first is the range limitation, and the second is that its marginal effectiveness (with respect to your primary weapon) depends heavily on your opponent's Agility value.

You can control your response to the first issue, although it's hard to do reliably; the second is entirely dependent on your matchup, which makes it a potentially worthwhile patch to lists that might otherwise struggle against high-Agility opponents--but not if the cost to address the first issue is too high.

So, for instance, Rexler Brath + Autoblaster + Engine Upgrade might make very short work of a Phantom, but against Falcon + Headhunters he's wasting points.

EDIT: The board-control argument might be the best one in favor, since (like Assault Missiles and Proton Bombs) it's a 5-point upgrade that can have an drastically out-of-scale effect on your opponent's choices.

If I was able to squeeze out reliable 3+ damage out of a 4-dice range 1 attack, I'd agree with you. But the Autoblaster looks like an attractive 5-point pressure device on high agility starfighters. Yeah it could be cheaper, but what would be a better alternative to take with it when facing down phantoms? Empire doesn't have turrets.

If I score two out of three hits with my autoblaster, isn't it better to force those hits through on a TIE Phantom than allow it to roll its 4 agility dice and cancel them?

If I was able to squeeze out reliable 3+ damage out of a 4-dice range 1 attack, I'd agree with you. But the Autoblaster looks like an attractive 5-point pressure device on high agility starfighters. Yeah it could be cheaper, but what would be a better alternative to take with it when facing down phantoms? Empire doesn't have turrets.

If you can hunt down a Phantom, and have it in your forward arc at Range 1, you're doing something right. However, the likelihood of managing to do that is somewhere between slim to none for most ships.

Empire doesn't have turrets, yet. Soon enough once the Decimator gets here.

Of course, if you can hunt down a Phantom and have it in your forward arc at Range 1, you're a godly pilot and don't need the autoblaster.

The idea of auto blasters is that they are firing so rapidly and wildly the enemy ship can't evade right?

So how about this for a fix.

Your attack applies to up to TWO enemy ships within your range 1 firing arc. After all if it's firing so crazy it has a good chance of hitting other ships nearby as well right? You wouldn't attack twice, just roll once, and whatever hits you get applies to both targets and they both get to do their defensive rolls.

Would make it a great anti-swarm weapon like the assault missile for the same cost.

Magic 8 ball says: "Signs point to yes"

Take that with a grain of salt, it also told me that I didn't need to change my underwear daily.

So how about this for a fix.

Too complicated. The concept of the autoblaster is fine, it just needs a point reduction to reflect that it's the weakest of the three cannon options instead of being almost as good as a HLC. If it was 1-2 points it would be an appealing choice.

Yeah I should have remembered the mantra about posting questions on forums

It's just... whenever I've flown against an autoblaster-equipped list (with empire), I've regretted it , and I felt the pressure to kill that autoblaster equipped ship as soon as I could. I thought it would be useful to take into a tournament on a star TIE Defender to up the pressure on an enemy. Better, if it's Rexler, I can take focus and convert those easy-scored hits into criticals.

It isn't just facing down Phantoms though. Autoblasters in theory will work well against TIE Fighters and splash some damage even on X-Wings. And if you're facing down large or agility 1 ships, you don't have to use the autoblaster. It's just there when you need it.

Every time I have played against the autoblaster I've been extremely unimpressed, and I almost exclusively play the kinds of high agility ships that it is most effective against. I don't play any differently than normal, as taking a range 1 shot from any 3-attack ship is something to avoid as it is.

Put it on an A-wing or something and maybe you have some real value, but you cannot. As it is the situations in which it actually proves useful are too limited and I would rather save the points or pay two more for the heavy laser cannon. The best argument for the autoblaster is probably the phantom, but the kind of effective package you need for that is like ten numb + autoblaster + veteran instincts+ engine upgrade and that is a LOT of points for a niche counter build. might as well just run a Falcon list at that point

If anything has the chance of maybe somehow kind of making the autoblaster useful it's probably the YT-2400

Autoblasters work decently on the best B-wing pilot, Ten Numb, but to get the most out both the AB and his special rule, you almost need to upgrade him with EU and PtL as well. Thats one very expensive B-wing.

Norsehound, I understand your love for the Autoblaster. If it works for you, great. Keep using it. The hivemind here won't adapt without solid proof that it works in a National or higher tournament. And there's video evidence. Just keep flyin' casual with it and have fun.

I love the HWK-290 despite being told it's a support ship, and only somewhat worth owning one (and I have two!). I don't expect it to win any Nationals titles, but hey... I like it and I fly it.

Norsehound, I understand your love for the Autoblaster. If it works for you, great. Keep using it. The hivemind here won't adapt without solid proof that it works in a National or higher tournament. And there's video evidence. Just keep flyin' casual with it and have fun.

I love the HWK-290 despite being told it's a support ship, and only somewhat worth owning one (and I have two!). I don't expect it to win any Nationals titles, but hey... I like it and I fly it.

That's not a fair characterization. I'm speaking from personal experience of trying to get it to work, and being frustrated.

I also mentioned that the area-denial/psychological-impact effect is one of the better arguments for putting it into play, and although I didn't say this part explicitly, that point makes it worth at least trying out again in the new metagame.

If I score two out of three hits with my autoblaster, isn't it better to force those hits through on a TIE Phantom than allow it to roll its 4 agility dice and cancel them?

If I was able to squeeze out reliable 3+ damage out of a 4-dice range 1 attack, I'd agree with you. But the Autoblaster looks like an attractive 5-point pressure device on high agility starfighters. Yeah it could be cheaper, but what would be a better alternative to take with it when facing down phantoms? Empire doesn't have turrets.

You've got to catch them first.

In spite of the slow-turns being red the TIE Defender has some good mobility, especially with the engine upgrade, and I don't think it would be too hard to get a target in range 1. I haven't run Autoblasters yet on my defenders but I've been on the other end of one, as I said.

Hopefully I'll have some X-wing time before the actual tournament to try Autoblasters with Brath and Engine upgrade. It'll be expensive, but so long as he performs well enough I'll be happy. Unless there are other suggestions for better combinations to run against high-agility ships? Predator seems good, and I like outmanuever, but these things don't seem to have the punch that an autoblaster pushing 3 damage past agility dice could deliver.

Autoblaster Defenders? If you're paying that much you might as well pay the three more points to go up to Heavy Laser Cannon and punch through that Agility by weight of dice numbers.

Autoblaster Defenders? If you're paying that much you might as well pay the three more points to go up to Heavy Laser Cannon and punch through that Agility by weight of dice numbers.

Well ,im for sure not any kind of guru about this game (last sunday proved that once again) but what i see mostly as an argument "against" autoblaster is just ... weird....

"I could have 4 dice with my primary in range 1"

"Pay 3 more points and use HLC"

Well, im sure you know how valuable 3 points are on a build.

Me as an Imp player just say this... 2 ships on rebels side which can take an evade.

A Wing and E Wing... (out of the box)

And shooting against any other Rebel Ship with an Autoblaster.. even against A and E since Rebels like to forget that they have evade.. is pure insanity.

With a Defender you have no problem getting in Range 1 beside you really cant fly that good... (and neither can i but still i manage very easily to get in range 1).

Rexler Autoblaster and Predator... throw in a TL and a Focus

Most insane combo i have seen in a while...

Good luck Han evading that... ohhh you cant.. guess what... 3 crits...

On the imp side, depending on the ship you fly against, this is a guaranteed hit.

And i take a guaranteed hit even two over any 4 red against 3 green...

Thats my penny....

Yes. I'm sure.

How are you going to get in range one of a Phantom anyway? All that decloak-dancing....probably not gonna happen.

Also: HLC is only two points more expensive. (Not 3)

Ruthlessness is making me squint at Autoblaster rather closely...