I'm interested in a slightly different Winged Gundark house rule.

MJ, I'm curious about your comments on the balance if:

-Points cost kept the same

-Added EPT slot

-Changed card text to read, "When attacking, if there are any number of uncanceled <critical> results, you may cancel them to deal that many cards facedown to the defender."

My initial thought is that it's a mild change that uniquely equips him to be a shield-bypasser when crits are rolled, which Marksmanship could help generate more reliably. Could shine against B-Wings and R2-D2ers, could one-shot an E-Wing or a Phantom in lucky cases, cuts a Lambda's HP almost in half if it survives long enough to kill it, but still has just the 2 attack dice and general fragility of the TIE Fighter.

I'm interested in a slightly different Winged Gundark house rule.

MJ, I'm curious about your comments on the balance if:

-Points cost kept the same

-Added EPT slot

-Changed card text to read, "When attacking, if there are any number of uncanceled <critical> results, you may cancel them to deal that many cards facedown to the defender."

My initial thought is that it's a mild change that uniquely equips him to be a shield-bypasser when crits are rolled, which Marksmanship could help generate more reliably. Could shine against B-Wings and R2-D2ers, could one-shot an E-Wing or a Phantom in lucky cases, cuts a Lambda's HP almost in half if it survives long enough to kill it, but still has just the 2 attack dice and general fragility of the TIE Fighter.

Well, when in doubt, do as Alex Davy said in one of his interviews: the game is whatever you make it to be, if you have house rules then try them!

My 2 cents: the main benefit here would be gaining the EPT slot, as uncanceled critical hits are hard to generate to begin with, and against unshielded craft his ability wouldn't make a difference anyway. I don't think you would want to spend 18 points on him with Marksmanship.

I'm personally trying to keep the House Rules here as close to the original intent as possible, but it is an interesting idea.

Hi,

Thanks for all the work you have put into this!

I put some house rules up for the TIE Bomber/ ordnance that tries to reach a similar points cost to your ordnance reductions, but does so through an upgrade card that benefits dual slot secondary weapon ships over standard fighters:

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/134943-tie-bomber-house-rules-heavy-ordnance-title-and-payload-upgrade/

It's an alternative to the -1 cost reduction for missiles and torpedoes. I know you play a lot of X-wing so if you get a chance to play test this with your other ordnance play testing I would love to get your feedback!

Cheers,

Phil

Neat ideas. The direction I am leaning for really fixing ordnance is to introduce the concept of a "deferred action", because the biggest problem with ordnance is not just cost, but reliably getting the target lock.

But this fundamentally changes the game mechanics and since I am trying to keep these changes as close to the original intent as possible, I may not include them here.

Some ships will now have certain actions classified as eligible to be taken as a "deferred action". For example Target Lock on TIE Bombers and Y wings, and boost and barrel roll on TIE Interceptors.

During the activation phase, a ship may declare that it will instead later perform a deferred action from its action bar.

Immediately after the end of the activation phase but before the start of the combat phase, the "deferred action phase" occurs. Ships may then perform deferred actions, in ascending order of pilot skill as in the regular activation phase.

A ship that declared a deferred action may now perform a deferred action from its action bar. A ship is only allowed to perform a normal action instead if it is impossible to perform any of the deferred actions listed on the ship's action bar. Once a deferred action or normal action is performed during the deferred action phase, pilot abilities or upgrade cards such as Push the Limit or Experimental Interface that grant a free action have no restriction on the type of action that may be performed.

Whooooo more PS and remembering things? :/ complex

Whooooo more PS and remembering things? :/ complex

Right, which is why I will probably never roll them into these House Rules.

But for remembering you would place a generic "deferred action" token during the activation phase to help you remember, a unique color like something orange. Then remove the token after performing an action in the deferred action phase.

My personal house rules

1.) The out of arc portion of auto-thrusters applies to every ship in the game regardless of action bar

2.) deadeye is in the base rules instead of an upgrade card

How is the -1 cost for ordnance working for you in the playtesting? Does it make the bombers playable?

I sometimes wonder if the entire discard card effect was just ignored, if that would make them viable. Only being able to fire once just seems like such a restriction... The lore says that TIE Bombers have something like 8 to 12 torpedoes and 16 to 20 missiles, so it's not like we would be going crazy.

PS I'm listening to your NOVA podcast right now on the TIE Bomber.

Houserule for Rhymer:

Let it at 26 points but change his ability:

Any secondary weapon equipped gets range 1-3.

How is the -1 cost for ordnance working for you in the playtesting? Does it make the bombers playable?

I sometimes wonder if the entire discard card effect was just ignored, if that would make them viable. Only being able to fire once just seems like such a restriction... The lore says that TIE Bombers have something like 8 to 12 torpedoes and 16 to 20 missiles, so it's not like we would be going crazy.

PS I'm listening to your NOVA podcast right now on the TIE Bomber.

that's a tricky issue

comparing Proton torps to HLC, for example, raises a few troubling comparisons. The Proton Torps, though much more difficult to get off especially for low PS ships, will hit roughly as hard as a focused HLC (actual mathematics should be used to determine the exact probability you have of more than one focus versus the "damage" the crit inflicts etc.). You could imagine that stacking what is essentially a more conditional HLC on pilots such as Wedge, who can then augment it with Predator, might get a bit crazy.

On the other hand, it certainly beats what we have now

I'd personally be satisfied with even two shots per ordinance, though that might be a difficult thing to track (one shot --> tap ordinance, second shot --> remove). It would certainly make me much more terrified of character A-wings, at least (maybe justifying the "5" point cost of rockets )

Hell, it'd open up some neat builds, especially with Test Pilot. Deadeye + PTL+ Homing Missile, for one. Green Squadrons with deadeye, Ion Pulse, failsaife...

How is the -1 cost for ordnance working for you in the playtesting? Does it make the bombers playable?

I sometimes wonder if the entire discard card effect was just ignored, if that would make them viable. Only being able to fire once just seems like such a restriction... The lore says that TIE Bombers have something like 8 to 12 torpedoes and 16 to 20 missiles, so it's not like we would be going crazy.

PS I'm listening to your NOVA podcast right now on the TIE Bomber.

To be honest I still have very limited playtesting with -1 cost ordnance, but it's clearly needed from tourney results and even some preliminary math that I have done on expected damage done vs cost. Ordnance is fundamentally a one-off so you have to evaluate it differently than say cannons.

As an example of what you could do with -1 cost ordnance (and -2 cost Y-wing Turret Refit), I have an example in my New Player quick Start List Guide , see "Rebel Firestorm"

Stock (100 points):

• Airen Cracken + Veteran Instincts + Cluster Missiles
• Horton Salm + 2x Proton Torpedoes
• "Dutch" Vander + Proton Torpedoes
• Bandit Squadron Pilot + Concussion Missiles

• Airen Cracken + Veteran Instincts + Cluster Missiles
• Horton Salm + 2x Proton Torpedoes + Push the Limit + R2 Astromech + Y-wing Turret Refit
• "Dutch" Vander + Proton Torpedoes + Y-wing Turret Refit
• Lieutenant Blount + Assault Missiles

This is without changing game mechanics. The Stock list is obviously not very competitive, but still fun. The House Rules version has a lot more teeth to it. Note that with Turret Refit, the PS2 Y-wing and PS2 TIE Bomber become very similar craft for ordnance carrying. Both are 16 points and about the same durability.

Houserule for Rhymer:

Let it at 26 points but change his ability:

Any secondary weapon equipped gets range 1-3.

Still way too expensive though.

That's why I went with this to take one the secondary torpedo and missile slots on the bomber:

Payload – 2 points

Torpedo, missile or bomb slot

When instructed to discard a card to perform a secondary weapon attack of this payload type (i.e. torpedo, missile or bomb), you may instead discard this card in its place.

Costs you 2 points, but you get, in effect, a second shot. It lowers the cost of ordnance in total, while encouraging people to take a full loadout.

Doesn't change the fact that the bomber is still very expensive and a crit magnet with 6 hull.

Honestly, I don't think you're ever balancing one shot ordinance on a game of this scale

Given that it is a singular attack in a game where an augmented attack very well rolled could blow apart or cripple one of not very many ships, you're bound to get skewed results no matter how you price or tweak them.

The current ordinance is far too weak for its one use, which imo is far superior to overpowered ordinance being auto-include and one-shotting everything. Giving it multiple shots, just one more specifically, would vastly improve its consistency and potentially justify its pricing.

To be honest I still have very limited playtesting with -1 cost ordnance, but it's clearly needed from tourney results and even some preliminary math that I have done on expected damage done vs cost. Ordnance is fundamentally a one-off so you have to evaluate it differently than say cannons.

As an example of what you could do with -1 cost ordnance (and -2 cost Y-wing Turret Refit), I have an example in my New Player quick Start List Guide , see "Rebel Firestorm"

Thanks - that is a great resource! I'm going to send that around for my next game day.

Minor update, I pulled in the "Junkyard Deal" house rule that I floated in my Quick Start List Guide here.

Junkyard Deal

• Title. Outer Rim Smuggler only.
• 0 points.
• Decrease the total cost of all equipped upgrades on this ship by 4 points, to a minimum of 0.

Junkyard Deal FAQ:

• The cost reduction does not apply to each upgrade individually. The total cost of all upgrades assigned to the Outer Rim Smuggler is added up, and then up to 4 points is removed. For example, equipping Anti-Pursuit Lasers and Gunner will cost a total of 5+2-4 = 3 points.

I actually tweaked the wording fro the initial wording on the Squad Lists post, so that it is 4 points of the total of all upgrades, not just one.

Honestly, I don't think you're ever balancing one shot ordinance on a game of this scale

Given that it is a singular attack in a game where an augmented attack very well rolled could blow apart or cripple one of not very many ships, you're bound to get skewed results no matter how you price or tweak them.

The current ordinance is far too weak for its one use, which imo is far superior to overpowered ordinance being auto-include and one-shotting everything. Giving it multiple shots, just one more specifically, would vastly improve its consistency and potentially justify its pricing.

Only issue I have with that is that it makes every ship with that slot more powerful, while ships like the TIE Bomber who have two missile and two torpedo slots are unlikely to fire off 6 or 8 attacks, so the secondary slots become redundant.

Considering the point cost, and action set-up you have to go through to fire ordinance, the burden of determining whether it should hit or not should be entirely up to the defender. Its a fire and forget missile. The weapon should have been balanced like prox mines, with say the ability to use evade tokens against the results. So say a Proton Torpedo shot at tanked-up Fel would roll 4 dice. Say you get hit-hit-eye-blank, eye becomes crit, evade token cancels 1 hit, Fel is dealt 1 hit 1 crit. Considering you spent 4 points, had to TL as an action, and can easily waffle the dice roll, i think thats fair.

Honestly, I don't think you're ever balancing one shot ordinance on a game of this scale

Given that it is a singular attack in a game where an augmented attack very well rolled could blow apart or cripple one of not very many ships, you're bound to get skewed results no matter how you price or tweak them.

The current ordinance is far too weak for its one use, which imo is far superior to overpowered ordinance being auto-include and one-shotting everything. Giving it multiple shots, just one more specifically, would vastly improve its consistency and potentially justify its pricing.

Only issue I have with that is that it makes every ship with that slot more powerful, while ships like the TIE Bomber who have two missile and two torpedo slots are unlikely to fire off 6 or 8 attacks, so the secondary slots become redundant.

better one slot being redundant than two being effectively useless, imo

on the other hand, you could take two different ordinance types to give you options on a turn by turn basis. Given the option for control ordinance such as ion pulse and flechette as well as damage such as homing missiles and proton torps, it might not work out too badly (especially with flechette being a relatively inexpensive 2 points).

Good work, Major!

I was thinking of a change for the Tie Bomber to really strengthen its role as an ordnance ship. I think some way to discount the cost of equipping more than one piece of ordnance would be great.

Something like: When you equip more than 1 piece of ordnance on this ship, reduce the overall cost of the ship by 2.

isn't tetran cheaper than turr because the ability is bad? I guess it does work though because with these rules I would almost be tempted to take him because he is cheap but with a fairly high PS

isn't tertran cheaper than turr because the ability is bad?

Who knows, ask FFG?

That's the idea.

I have not play tested it yet, but for R5-K6 what do you think of changing his text to?:

After spending your target lock on an attack, immediately acquire a target lock on that same ship. Keep the same points cost, 2.

It makes him similar too, but not quite as good as Fire-Control Center in that you have to target lock to get the benefit rather than attacking which allows for other actions. It would be good on Hobbie as well and stays with the intent of the astromech.

That could work. Strictly speaking you would have to change the wording if you don't want to be able to spend it on the same attack.

Thanks for typing this all out. Can print and use for our casual play as desired. Very well thought out.