I am with Kinetic on this one. I fly a Y wing with Ion Turret and R3-A2 now and that requires you to use front arc and hands you stress on the Y. Keeping the Y on target in that set up isn't that hard and the A4 is much better as damage > stress any day.

The harder match ups will be the high agility fighters for sure, but 1 and 2 aglity ships are going to hate this build.

Finally, the ship won't be flying alone. Placed with the correct squad, it is very, very viable. 2 of these, is going to give Fat Han and Dash some real issues.

The final judgment will be in flying them, but I can see real use here.

The final judgment will be in flying them, but I can see real use here.

This. We can argue the pros and cons to and fro forever. The real test is how they handle themselves.

YESSSS! The A4 is getting the rep that I felt it needed. A4 were used alot for dogfighting and actully did well agianst TIE/LN they had way better flight capabilities than the S3.

That being said I wouldnt call it a Warthog, A-10 are not dog fighters. If the upgrade was more like the lore based on the A4 I would say it should be called the Tomcat or Turkey. As it is though I propose it be called the "Y cepter" if its not called a "Y-Wing" "Y-Wing A4" "BLT-A4 or " A Y-Wing." It operates alot like a classic Interceptor. It goes out to a point of Interception, engages target at firing range AND hopes it kills the intruder or makes it bug off because it cant turn for ****.

The rules are very simular to what I made up for a Gold Squadron BLT-A4 upgrade. Since theres ARE just as fast as X-Wings and nearly as manuverable, Gold 2 was just as manuverable as a T-65 A from Red, I would have also thrown in a boost to turning capabilities and speed.

Oh well this is good for now, they could do a squadron upgrade thing later.

Just think of what can happen if you got a 100 pt Y Cepter flight lead by Dutch and his gifty Astromech friend and you get to fire your primary and turret.

OMG Read carefully:

It is like a gunner function, you DON'T have to use the second attack, lets say you miss with your first attack but still have a focus, you can trigger a second attack. If you hit with your 1st attack without the focus, great you get a second attack, if you need the focus to hit, you can sacrifice the second attack to get for sure damage (like accuracy corrector), you don't HAVE to use the second attack.

Yes, I get this. I really do. Well, except the part about it being sure damage like Accuracy Corrector, that's pretty wrong... But let's leave that one for a moment and stick to the utility of the Blaster Turret as a second attack. Take a deep breath, release the death-grip on the Y-wing plushy, set it to the side, and look at what this means.

Here's the problem: The whole point of the -A4 title is the second attack. You're spending 4 points on a turret that has no turret capability. The trade-off with the -A4 is that you get a second attack each turn, trading the lost utility of the turret for the extra damage in your forward arc.

So let's take it to an extreme and assume you ALWAYS spend your focus. What have you got? A bog-standard Y-wing at +4 cost. That hasn't proven to be a terribly effective fighter at its current cost; at +4, no way. If we go all the way to the other end, you always roll pure hits, and you can always spend the focus for a free extra attack with the blaster turret.

But it won't fall out that perfect, so let's look at the cases we've got. There are basically 3 outcomes from each attack:

1. You roll all blanks. No need to spend the focus, no damage but you have the turret attack. This is basically your Gunner scenario.

2. You roll all hits. No need to spend the focus, you get damage and the blaster. This is ideal.

3. You roll at least one eyeball. Now you have a choice. You spend the focus, which means that this round your turret is wasted points, or you don't, which means your primary attack is less effective than it could be.

It's not like having a Gunner. It's worse. It's having a Gunner that will guarantee that your better (3 dice) attack has nothing to modify it. Powering two attacks to effectiveness is tricky on any ship... doing it when your second attack eats an additional focus is a trap.

The part about sure damage is like if you know your opponent won't be able to cancel your hits if you focus. It is essentially a 4 pt. gunner. Nice to have, but you don't always have to use it. Heck you could stick on the Agromech to modify your BT rolls.

YESSSS! The A4 is getting the rep that I felt it needed. A4 were used alot for dogfighting and actully did well agianst TIE/LN they had way better flight capabilities than the S3.

That being said I wouldnt call it a Warthog, A-10 are not dog fighters. If the upgrade was more like the lore based on the A4 I would say it should be called the Tomcat or Turkey. As it is though I propose it be called the "Y cepter" if its not called a "Y-Wing" "Y-Wing A4" "BLT-A4 or " A Y-Wing." It operates alot like a classic Interceptor. It goes out to a point of Interception, engages target at firing range AND hopes it kills the intruder or makes it bug off because it cant turn for ****.

The rules are very simular to what I made up for a Gold Squadron BLT-A4 upgrade. Since theres ARE just as fast as X-Wings and nearly as manuverable, Gold 2 was just as manuverable as a T-65 A from Red, I would have also thrown in a boost to turning capabilities and speed.

Oh well this is good for now, they could do a squadron upgrade thing later.

YESSSS! The A4 is getting the rep that I felt it needed. A4 were used alot for dogfighting and actully did well agianst TIE/LN they had way better flight capabilities than the S3.

That being said I wouldnt call it a Warthog, A-10 are not dog fighters. If the upgrade was more like the lore based on the A4 I would say it should be called the Tomcat or Turkey. As it is though I propose it be called the "Y cepter" if its not called a "Y-Wing" "Y-Wing A4" " BLT -A4 or " A Y-Wing." It operates alot like a classic Interceptor. It goes out to a point of Interception, engages target at firing range AND hopes it kills the intruder or makes it bug off because it cant turn for ****.

The rules are very simular to what I made up for a Gold Squadron BLT -A4 upgrade. Since theres ARE just as fast as X-Wings and nearly as manuverable, Gold 2 was just as manuverable as a T-65 A from Red, I would have also thrown in a boost to turning capabilities and speed.

Oh well this is good for now, they could do a squadron upgrade thing later.

Your BLTs are making me hungry

YESSSS! The A4 is getting the rep that I felt it needed. A4 were used alot for dogfighting and actully did well agianst TIE/LN they had way better flight capabilities than the S3.

That being said I wouldnt call it a Warthog, A-10 are not dog fighters. If the upgrade was more like the lore based on the A4 I would say it should be called the Tomcat or Turkey. As it is though I propose it be called the "Y cepter" if its not called a "Y-Wing" "Y-Wing A4" "BLT-A4 or " A Y-Wing." It operates alot like a classic Interceptor. It goes out to a point of Interception, engages target at firing range AND hopes it kills the intruder or makes it bug off because it cant turn for ****.

The rules are very simular to what I made up for a Gold Squadron BLT-A4 upgrade. Since theres ARE just as fast as X-Wings and nearly as manuverable, Gold 2 was just as manuverable as a T-65 A from Red, I would have also thrown in a boost to turning capabilities and speed.

Oh well this is good for now, they could do a squadron upgrade thing later.

No, the S3 had better combat capabilities, the S3 was designed to replace the A4, and for the most part, did.

Well thats debateable. The A4 has the advantage of being faster, more manuverable, it carries two heavy duty LASER cannons while the S3 has two blaster cannons, and the A4 has more armor. Its turret is locked BUT the targeting computer has more control control in this configuration.

The S3 has more shielding and a gunner. Both can be heavily modded to do diffrent jobs.

Even though the S3 pilots proclaim the A4 is junk and gives all Y-Wings a bad name, the A4 is still the only version used by Gold Squadron and ironically its the only version of Y-Wing I see Rogue squadron use. Both are a elite ACE squadrons, Gold being a Pure Y-Wing BLT A4 squadron.

In the end I would just chalk it up to being pilot prefrence AND bad hotdogs or pilots not flying a fighter alt gen that reguires more flight time to make it shine.

YESSSS! The A4 is getting the rep that I felt it needed. A4 were used alot for dogfighting and actully did well agianst TIE/LN they had way better flight capabilities than the S3.

That being said I wouldnt call it a Warthog, A-10 are not dog fighters. If the upgrade was more like the lore based on the A4 I would say it should be called the Tomcat or Turkey. As it is though I propose it be called the "Y cepter" if its not called a "Y-Wing" "Y-Wing A4" " BLT -A4 or " A Y-Wing." It operates alot like a classic Interceptor. It goes out to a point of Interception, engages target at firing range AND hopes it kills the intruder or makes it bug off because it cant turn for ****.

The rules are very simular to what I made up for a Gold Squadron BLT -A4 upgrade. Since theres ARE just as fast as X-Wings and nearly as manuverable, Gold 2 was just as manuverable as a T-65 A from Red, I would have also thrown in a boost to turning capabilities and speed.

Oh well this is good for now, they could do a squadron upgrade thing later.

Your BLTs are making me hungry

GOBLE GOBLE GOBLE!

I agree that a BTL with blaster turret probably isn't that good(unless you are playing rebels and running kyle or garvin), however I think it was custom made for the ion turret. The problem with using Ion anything is you only get 1 damage so you always had to decide if it was better to do more damage or take the control option. Now you get a primary attack and an ion shot that kind of fixes the problem with ions. So a scum Y-wing with Agromech can spend the focus on the primary attack and have a target lock for the ion shot. Unless you are firing at a cloaked phantom or a 3 agility fighter there is a good chance your first shot stripped any defensive tokens the fighter had unless they saved it to try and prevent the ion. Also this upgrade comes with the scum which are suppose to be a control style faction which if that does turn out to be true is right in their wheelhouse. Also I know alot of people have derided the use of bombs if you have your opponent ioned bombs are very easy to get their worth in points back.

OK, I ran the BTL-A4 Y-wing numbers, within the context of the assumptions that I am using for everything else as well.

Disclaimer: I assumed that the BTL-A4 Y-wing has the same durability as a regular Y-wing. In reality this will not be true, because it is more likely to spend its focus token on offense and not have it for defense. So its numbers are slightly optimistic here.

TL;DR:

• The attacker and defender potentially loosing their respective focus tokens on the first attack essentially cancel each other out, so the net damage of the 2nd Ion Cannon shot is essentially the same as a normal attack. These are meta-game wide averages.
• The 2nd shot with an Ion Cannon Turret can't attack out of arc, so it will do less damage because it can't operate at range 3. I assume that 25% of shots are at range 3, so the BTL-A4 Ion Cannon Turret in this case adds 70% more damage compared to a single attack with 2 base attack. That puts it almost exactly on par with a 3-attack ship.
• The jousting value of a Y-wing + BTL-A4 + Ion Cannon Turret is about halfway between a naked Y-wing and a naked X-wing. That's not very good in and of itself, but the possibility of putting an Ion token on the target on the 2nd shot probably makes it worth running.
• Ion Cannon Turret + BTL-A4 is now auto-include compared to running a naked Y-wing, but nobody runs Y-wings without turrets so that doesn't really tell us anything.

Calculating Expected Damage Output
In order to calculate the average damage that different attacks do relative to 2 dice, the following assumptions were used:

• The attacker has no action 1/3 of the time, and focus 2/3 of the time.
• The defender has focus 1/2 the time.
• The range bins probabilities are [30% 45% 20% 5%] for [R1 R2 R3 R3+obstacle].
• The defender base defense dice is meta dependent, see below.

Since we are looking to get an overall aggregate score, I'll treat each of these categories as independent, assign the weighted probability to each, and then calculate the aggregate totals. The base number of defense dice was evaluated in three different "meta" environments:
[{0 defense dice} {1 defense dice} {2 defense dice} {3 defense dice} {4 defense dice}]:

• low defense meta: [15% 35% 25% 23% 2%]
• "standard" defense meta: [ 7% 30% 30% 25% 8%]
• high defense meta: [ 2% 28% 25% 30% 15%]

These numbers are based on the current wave 4 meta and extrapolating into the anticipated wave 5 meta.

Note: you don't always need to spend your focus for attack or for defense, so adding up the probability of having focus available for both can certainly be more than 100%. Since we only care about the overall statistical averages, and not conditional probabilities in a specific scenario, we can treat these as independent variables.

This results in the following damage numbers, normalized to 2 attack dice:

defense meta
low defense normal defense high defense
1 dice: 0.4610 0.4406 0.4242
2 dice: 1.0000 1 .0000 1 .0000
3 dice: 1.6539 1.7058 1.7511
4 dice: 2.3741 2.5012 2.6161
5 dice ¹ : 3.1304 3.3472 3.5486

Secondary weapons:
Heavy Laser Cannon ² : 2.2657 2.3750 2.4721
Ion Cannon Turret ³ : 0.8737 0.9247 0.9669
BTL-A4+Ion Turret ⁴ : 0.6480 0.6950 0.7379

BTL-A4+Ion Turret ⁵ : 0.8663 0.9295 0.9873

Notes:

1. 5 base attack dice does not exist in the game, this is purely for speculative reference.
2. This assumes that the attacker always has a HLC shot, so the only range bin that changes the number of dice is range 3 + obstacle.
3. This assumes that the attacker always has a range 1-2 unobstructed Ion Cannon shot.
4. If range 3 shot, then zero damage since ion turret is range 1-2. Otherwise, calculate the probability of the attacker and defender each still having a focus after the first attack. These are assumed to be independent to make the calculation simpler. Then calculate the average Ion Cannon Turret damage with these resulting action probabilities.
5. For reference only. Assume that the Ion Cannon Turret always has a shot even if the range bin is range 3. Do not allow for obstruction at range 3+. I.e. the calculation is the same as #3, but with the action economy in #4.

Jousting Efficiency (normal meta)

note: the specific values here may be out of date. For the most recent values see this thread

1. Computed by changing the action economy: give a free TL every round (simulating a free focus from Kyle Katarn) and increase the chance of having focus token on defense from 50% to 67%.

{Non-jousting coefficient} = (1 / jousting efficiency ) ²

For example, if a ship has a jousting efficiency of 80%, then it needs to increase its damage output before it dies by 1 - (1/0.8) ² = 56% more beyond what its stat line alone provides.

Juggler-

I believe the 70% value is too low. Just out of curiosity, what is the jousting value for an A4 if you don't penalize the Y-Wing for lack of a R3 turret? For example, how would it do at Range 1 or 2?

Well, it's 70% because I'm assuming that it misses a shot 25% of the time with its Secondary. Otherwise it would be doing +92% damage over 2 dice attack, which is actually more than 3 base dice. If it always had a shot, then its jousting efficiency would be 93.9%. That's a hair below a refit A-wing. But you Ion-zap things. So, if you can fly them with always getting shots with their secondary turrets, they will be pretty good. But that might be difficult, since you're flying a Y-wing.

And, again, the numbers should be a couple percentage points lower because the BTL-A4 has less of a chance of having focus on defense.

Thank you. I ask because on the table, I find myself pretty comfortable about ensuring the first volley occurs at R1 or 2. It has been my experience that the A4 title gives the Y-Wing a dramatic boost in damage output, more damage than an X-Wing or B-Wing in fact, and your numbers reflect that experience. I was just curious what your numbers actually were. :-)

In a list with Dutch with the boost astromec and a gold with engine garvin and Kyle could make for a hot combo, Horton for even more dice modification but that may be too expensive

The attacker and defender potentially loosing their respective focus tokens on the first attack essentially cancel each other out, so the net damage of the 2nd Ion Cannon shot is essentially the same as a normal attack. These are meta-game wide averages.

How did you reach this conclusion? I understand your assumption of having focus 2/3 of the time for the attacker and 1/2 of the time for the defender (I don't necessarily agree with them because I don't know if they actually have a statistical source), but how does this apply to the second attack? Do you use the same stats?

Not sure why everyone is comparing the A4 Y-wing to the Standard turret Y-wing, they have totally different battlefield roles. Turrets are designed to threaten huge swathes of table space, while the A4 is designed to hammer single targets. People have been complaining about Fat Hans and the incoming turret ships for a while and they release an upgrade that counters those ships VERY hard for cheap.

And arguing that the two shots suck because you cant modify both is ridiculous. What do you do normally if you're denied a Focus/TL due to stress/bump/asteroid? Say "balls to this" and not even roll dice?

Look at it this way, people don't usually take Bwings with ion cannon because they dont do that much damage right? Now you have a viable Ion Cannon that does damage, for much cheaper. No ones saying to take 4 A4 ywings, you'll get hammered, but you can take a Gold with A4, Ion, and R3-A2 at 25pts and instead of having a stress bot that ions and does 1 damage a round max, you have a stress bot that ions and does 2-3 damage a round.

The attacker and defender potentially loosing their respective focus tokens on the first attack essentially cancel each other out, so the net damage of the 2nd Ion Cannon shot is essentially the same as a normal attack. These are meta-game wide averages.

How did you reach this conclusion? I understand your assumption of having focus 2/3 of the time for the attacker and 1/2 of the time for the defender (I don't necessarily agree with them because I don't know if they actually have a statistical source), but how does this apply to the second attack? Do you use the same stats?

See notes #4 and #5 in post #165 above. It is a brute force calculation. Edit: longer answer to clarify...

The entire damage calculator runs in a set of nested loops. One loop each for:

• attacker focus
• defender base dice
• defender focus
• range

So that's 4 nested loops, with 2, 5, 2, and 4 options respectively, for a total of 80 permutations. Each of these results is weighted by its probability of occurrence given the assumptions listed above.

For the 2nd shot, there are 4 possibilities:

• attacker focus NO, defender focus: NO
• attacker focus NO, defender focus: YES
• attacker focus YES, defender focus: NO
• attacker focus YES, defender focus: YES

In that innermost loop, I calculate the damage for all 4 of these cases, and then weight each one according to how likely it is. If the attacker had no focus, then he will still have no focus. Otherwise, the chance of having focus on attack for the 2nd attack is (3/4)^(# attack dice on first attack)

When I calculate the damage on the first attack, I also calculate the probability of the defender still having a focus token for defense. That's brute-forced as part of the damage calculation.

I do assume that the attacker and defender having focus are independent, when in reality they are not. But it shouldn't significantly change the results.

Also, I agree about the 2/3, 1/2 action economy. It will require some data mining to get a more accurate number.

I would still very much like to get into range 1 with primary and a blaster turret. A BTLA4 with a blaster turret should be called "Clubber Lang." A4 Dutch with R5-K6 and a blaster turret while being fed focus firing at a target at range 1 puts the image in my head of Clubber Lang bashing Rockys face in over and over agian.

I would still very much like to get into range 1 with primary and a blaster turret. A BTLA4 with a blaster turret should be called "Clubber Lang." A4 Dutch with R5-K6 and a blaster turret while being fed focus firing at a target at range 1 puts the image in my head of Clubber Lang bashing Rockys face in over and over agian.

Range 1 will make the primary 3, but the blaster will still only be 3 (secondary weapon).

I would still very much like to get into range 1 with primary and a blaster turret. A BTLA4 with a blaster turret should be called "Clubber Lang." A4 Dutch with R5-K6 and a blaster turret while being fed focus firing at a target at range 1 puts the image in my head of Clubber Lang bashing Rockys face in over and over agian.

Range 1 will make the primary 3, but the blaster will still only be 3 (secondary weapon).

So like Corran at Range 2-3.

Except for the points you pay for the average Corran you can also fit in Garven Dreis, have even more hull, 3 more red dice, and give out that focus for that turret, letting Dutch T/L for his action and giving Garven a TL as well. And you dont have to worry about not shooting next turn like you do with Corran. Hell, im starting to not even like Corran all that much now, and I love me some doubletapping Corran.

I would still very much like to get into range 1 with primary and a blaster turret. A BTLA4 with a blaster turret should be called "Clubber Lang." A4 Dutch with R5-K6 and a blaster turret while being fed focus firing at a target at range 1 puts the image in my head of Clubber Lang bashing Rockys face in over and over agian.

Range 1 will make the primary 3, but the blaster will still only be 3 (secondary weapon).

So like Corran at Range 2-3.

Except for the points you pay for the average Corran you can also fit in Garven Dreis, have even more hull 3 more red dice, and give out that focus for that turret, letting Dutch T/L for his action and giving Garven a TL as well. And you dont have to worry about not shooting next turn like you do with Corran. Hell, im starting to not even like Corran all that much now, and I love me some doubletapping Corran.

Corran can barrel roll into position and use systems, Also higher evade.

I would still very much like to get into range 1 with primary and a blaster turret. A BTLA4 with a blaster turret should be called "Clubber Lang." A4 Dutch with R5-K6 and a blaster turret while being fed focus firing at a target at range 1 puts the image in my head of Clubber Lang bashing Rockys face in over and over agian.

Range 1 will make the primary 3, but the blaster will still only be 3 (secondary weapon).

Yup, I hope we can get some more turrets someday, one based on the alternate A4 turret we see in ANH and I think ROTJ. It looks like a long barrel medium anti tank weapon mounted on a hummer.

I would still very much like to get into range 1 with primary and a blaster turret. A BTLA4 with a blaster turret should be called "Clubber Lang." A4 Dutch with R5-K6 and a blaster turret while being fed focus firing at a target at range 1 puts the image in my head of Clubber Lang bashing Rockys face in over and over agian.

Range 1 will make the primary 3, but the blaster will still only be 3 (secondary weapon).

So like Corran at Range 2-3.

Except for the points you pay for the average Corran you can also fit in Garven Dreis, have even more hull, 3 more red dice, and give out that focus for that turret, letting Dutch T/L for his action and giving Garven a TL as well. And you dont have to worry about not shooting next turn like you do with Corran. Hell, im starting to not even like Corran all that much now, and I love me some doubletapping Corran.

Yup and in theory you should be able to get a target lock for the primary and turret weapon. CLUBBER LANG!

I dont have the card near me but now that I think about it I think Dutch can only share things at range 1.

BTL-A4 with Ion Turret and Bomb Loadout could be fun, especially if you can lure your opponent into a joust.

Close to within range 2. Shoot. Shoot again with Ion Turret. If you ion the target, next turn drop your Seismics and K-turn...