The Buzzsaw Shuttle has been tried and tested true. With the release of the Star Viper, we get a new System upgrade, the Accuracy Corrector.

It costs one point more than FCS, but grants a guaranteed two hits. Does anyone think this in combination with Gunner will be decent?

It might not be bad. I don't do the maths thing very well, but I would think it we be a pretty good guarantee of at least one hit. However, its kind of expensive to pay for that. I honestly think AC might be better by itself on a shuttle maybe with EU. It allows you to use your action for boosting and you still get 2 hits out of an unmodified attack.

At range 1 it will be kind of a waste. Its unlikely you'll roll two attacks with only 1 hit.

The accuracy corrector is very interesting, to me.

Basically, it takes away the benefit of offensive actions, in favor of odder ones.
Best ship for it is likely the Phantom, honestly.

I am not sure I can agree with putting AC on a Phantom. It has 4 dice so you are only assured of 50% of hits. I'd rather keep FCS and save the point.

Are you "correcting" on the first shot or second?

I don't see Accuracy Corrector getting a lot of play unless it pairs with another ability well (or a ship with less than 3 dice). With 3 dice you already have good odds of getting 2+ hits:

Unmodified: 50% chance of getting 2+ hits

Focus or TL: 84% chance of getting 2+ hits

Focus & TL: 98% chance of getting 2+ hits

(not to mention it's impossible to get crits with AC, and if you're at range 1 there is almost no way you'll need AC)

So a Shuttle with no upgrades, just focusing has an 84% chance of not needing to use AC... and even if you somehow lost your action it's still only a 50/50 shot of AC coming in handy... It's just not good on its own and gunner doesn't help.

I think gunner + AC is too redundant. Gunner + FCS is great because if you missed you can do another primary attack and get a target lock. With gunner + AC if you miss you can shoot again. It might be goo against high agility but it is get 2 hits and if evade get another 2 hits.

Well since AC doesn't come out until wave 6 I would say AC + greedo. ACS deals 2 hits and Gredo sets them face up.

I would say AC + greedo. ACS deals 2 hits and Gredo sets them face up.

I don't see how greedo helps here. Greedo only deals the first damage card face up... you still have to get the damage through. The only way AC helps is if you roll 1 or less hit on your attack, which with 3 dice is unlikely.

I think gunner + AC is too redundant. Gunner + FCS is great because if you missed you can do another primary attack and get a target lock.

Both AC and Gunner serve the same function of fixing a bad dice roll without using actions, but since they do so in different fashions e.g. AC makes you dice roll a two, and gunner lets you re-roll I don't think they pair as well as Gunner - FCS. AC might be a cheap way to do the same as a gunner though if you need a low cost option like a 25 pt Blue Squadron w/ AC vs a 30 pt Blue w/ FCS + E2 + Gunner

Gunner + Accuracy Corrector is a great way to strip tokens. You could think about adding a Mercenary Copilot as well if you wanted to really jack up the price.

Gunner + Accuracy Corrector is a great way to strip tokens.

Is it though? You've got to modify attack dice before the defender even rolls, so you're making the call for two hits before they even see if they need to spend tokens.

I think Gunner is redundant with the Corrector. Most of the ships that can take both would prefer a focus or target lock anyway, depending. I think Accuracy Corrector is going to do best on something that spends its action on getting out of arc, and second best when you spend your action defensively. The Lambda and B-Wing are mediocre at both of those.

The accuracy corrector is very interesting, to me.

Basically, it takes away the benefit of offensive actions, in favor of odder ones.

Best ship for it is likely the Phantom, honestly.

The phantom gets on average 2 hits withouth any action.

It is by far one of the least efficient ships where to place it, if it not the least efficient ship.

But if you have Engine Upgrade, then you can feel free to Boost.

But if you have Engine Upgrade, then you can feel free to Boost.

You're not wrong, but now you're still spending even more points to upgrade a ship and only throwing two hits guaranteed, when instead a Gunner and/or Fire-Control System would keep you more consistently at three or four hits, still without using your action.

Gunner/FCS is a lot at seven points, so I can see a case for just slapping the Corrector on there and calling it a day, but Corrector + Engine Upgrade is also seven and doesn't offer as much damage. Gunner + FCS + Engine Upgrade is most expensive, but the attack power of that shuttle is pretty well-known. A 24pt OGP+AC would be interesting and relatively point-efficient, I think I'll have to proxy that soon and test it out.

Gunner + Accuracy Corrector is a great way to strip tokens.

Is it though? You've got to modify attack dice before the defender even rolls, so you're making the call for two hits before they even see if they need to spend tokens.

Accuracy corrector does not modify dice. It cancels dice. That happens during compare results not during modify attack dice. The defender rolls and modifies before the attacker decides to (not) use accuracy corrector.

Having said that, it does not make a real difference. With 0 or 1 hit/crit results the attacker will use AC. With 2+ hit/crit results he won't. Both players know that. The defender knows if the attacker will use AC. It's a no-brainer.

Edit:

Are you "correcting" on the first shot or second?

Both!

Gunner + Accuracy Corrector is a great way to strip tokens.

Is it though? You've got to modify attack dice before the defender even rolls, so you're making the call for two hits before they even see if they need to spend tokens.

Accuracy corrector does not modify dice. It cancels dice. That happens during compare results not during modify attack dice. The defender rolls and modifies before the attacker decides to (not) use accuracy corrector.

Having said that, it does not make a real difference. With 0 or 1 hit/crit results the attacker will use AC. With 2+ hit/crit results he won't. Both players know that. The defender knows if the attacker will use AC. It's a no-brainer.

I don't know if I agree with that. The phrasing on the card is a little ambiguous, I suppose, but it starts with "when attacking" which to me is either the entire attack phase or explicitly your rolling of red dice. You cancel all dice results and then add two hits to your roll, which sounds like modifying your dice to me. It then goes on to mention that your dice cannot be modified again during that attack. From the way it's constructed I feel that it's a modification to attack dice, even though the modification is to negate whatever the dice say. It's the "add two hits" part that makes me feel it's an attack modification, because I don't know that FFG would allow you to change your attack results for any reason after the green dice are thrown. They haven't yet, anyway.

I can see where you're coming from, and I don't have a lot of evidence to support my disagreement, but I think an FAQ will clear it up before Wave VI shows up.

I don't know if I agree with that. The phrasing on the card is a little ambiguous, I suppose, but it starts with "when attacking" which to me is either the entire attack phase or explicitly your rolling of red dice. You cancel all dice results and then add two hits to your roll, which sounds like modifying your dice to me. It then goes on to mention that your dice cannot be modified again during that attack.

We have an example of triggering on a roll - HLC. Accuracy Corrector doesn't use that language.

"When attacking" is the standard terminology for anything that applies to the entire attack process.

Cancelling dice results is not modifying dice - modifications are explicitly called out as adding, modifying, or rerolling results.

It mentions not being able to modify them further because other abilities can still trigger, even if you're past the point where most of the standard ones do.

At least per the rules as currently printed, dvor has it exactly right.

There are two ships per faction that fit Systems, and some of them have some very interesting combos with Pilot Abilities:

E-Wing (Corran Horn) - He can attack twice in a turn and so would be able to have 2 x 2 unmodifiable hits in one round, that's quite a lot.

B-Wing (Nera Dantels) - She can fire Torpedoes outside of her firing arc, and with Accuracy Corrector can make sure they hit even more.

That's the both ships that can fit Systems for Rebels.

Any of the Phantom pilots - Accuracy Corrector, Advanced Cloak and Tactician - you use your huge 4 dice at range 3, if you hit then cool, if you don't then AC kicks in, but either way you are also putting a Stress on the target before get a free Cloak action.

Lambda pilots - Ion Cannon + Accuracy Corrector works out cheaper than using a Gunner to make sure your Ion attacks hit, and frees up a crew slot for something more useful (Like a Tactician to also put on Stress)

That's both the ships can fit Systems for Imperials. Less useful Pilot abilities with Imps, so i expect to see AC used less with them.

Aggressor - Much like the Lambda, but can fit a 2nd Cannon upgrade, so your Accuracy Corrector can also benefit an Autoblaster in case you roll terribly. It can also fit a Hot-Shot Blaster to allow a 360 degree attack once per game, this however only has 3 dice so anything that increases the chance of hitting is a worthwhile upgrade.

Star Viper (Prince Xizor) - The Star Viper is tough, manouverable and has high attack so doesn't feel like it needs AC to thrive. Indeed i think this is the ship that benefits the least from AC, however it can fit a Hot-Shot Blaster which as mentioned before needs odds stacked in its favour.

That's both the ships that can fit Systems for S&V. I feel they benefit from AC more than Imperials do, but not as much as Rebels.

I don't know if I agree with that. The phrasing on the card is a little ambiguous, I suppose, but it starts with "when attacking" which to me is either the entire attack phase or explicitly your rolling of red dice. You cancel all dice results and then add two hits to your roll, which sounds like modifying your dice to me. It then goes on to mention that your dice cannot be modified again during that attack.

We have an example of triggering on a roll - HLC. Accuracy Corrector doesn't use that language.

"When attacking" is the standard terminology for anything that applies to the entire attack process.

Cancelling dice results is not modifying dice - modifications are explicitly called out as adding, modifying, or rerolling results.

It mentions not being able to modify them further because other abilities can still trigger, even if you're past the point where most of the standard ones do.

At least per the rules as currently printed, dvor has it exactly right.

Yes, but like you said, adding a result or results to your roll is a modification, and the Corrector card has you do just that. That's really where me reservation comes from. It would be very interesting if they let you modify your attack after the defender rolls and modifies dice, but I don't think that's in the spirit of the rules so far.

Yes, but like you said, adding a result or results to your roll is a modification, and the Corrector card has you do just that. That's really where me reservation comes from. It would be very interesting if they let you modify your attack after the defender rolls and modifies dice, but I don't think that's in the spirit of the rules so far.

Just because the ability can modify dice does not make it a modification ability. The HLC modifies dice based on a trigger, and that happens outside the normal modify step. The Accuracy Corrector does the same thing - it has a main, triggering effect (the cancellation) and then provides an additional modification (the adds).

Again, the rules on it are pretty clear, "spiritual" interpretations aside. It's certainly possible that FFG will be surprised by their own rules - nothing previously has used that particular timing rule. But the rules, as they're actually printed, are perfectly clear until FFG changes them.

Yes, but like you said, adding a result or results to your roll is a modification, and the Corrector card has you do just that. That's really where me reservation comes from. It would be very interesting if they let you modify your attack after the defender rolls and modifies dice, but I don't think that's in the spirit of the rules so far.

Just because the ability can modify dice does not make it a modification ability. The HLC modifies dice based on a trigger, and that happens outside the normal modify step. The Accuracy Corrector does the same thing - it has a main, triggering effect (the cancellation) and then provides an additional modification (the adds).

Again, the rules on it are pretty clear, "spiritual" interpretations aside. It's certainly possible that FFG will be surprised by their own rules - nothing previously has used that particular timing rule. But the rules, as they're actually printed, are perfectly clear until FFG changes them.

I suppose that your reading is perfectly acceptable until an FAQ happens, because the timing really is ambiguous. It just seems to me that FFG would be looking to avoid the following scenario:

Xizor with an Accuracy Corrector is attacking an X-Wing. Xizor has a Range 2 shot, and a focus token. The X-Wing also has a focus token.

Xizor rolls, and the dice come up with a blank and two focus symbols. Xizor elects not to modify his dice with a focus token.

The X-Wing rolls, and comes up with a blank and a focus. The X-Wing elects not to modify his dice with the focus token.

They move on to comparing their dice. Xizor says "lol jk two hits" and triggers Accuracy Corrector. Having moved past the dice modification phase of his roll, the X-Wing cannot change his dice, and must suffer two damage.

That just seems unsporting to me, and the spirit of the rules (as opposed to the letter) would indicate that's not something that could happen. I suppose I will have to wait for an explicit ruling, however.

The way I see it, Auto-Corrector lets you roll the dice first and see the results. If your results suck, you use it. What this is used for will be those times when your dice just flub. You roll your dice and if you get less than 2 hits, you use AC. It's there for your heavy hitter as backup to make sure you get those steady hits in.

I did just read Vorpal Sword just posted that it's good for manueverable ships that want to use their action for a barrel roll or something. That way, you get your 2 hits instead of a Focus or TL.

Xizor with an Accuracy Corrector is attacking an X-Wing. Xizor has a Range 2 shot, and a focus token. The X-Wing also has a focus token.

Xizor rolls, and the dice come up with a blank and two focus symbols. Xizor elects not to modify his dice with a focus token.

The X-Wing rolls, and comes up with a blank and a focus. The X-Wing elects not to modify his dice with the focus token.

They move on to comparing their dice. Xizor says "lol jk two hits" and triggers Accuracy Corrector. Having moved past the dice modification phase of his roll, the X-Wing cannot change his dice, and must suffer two damage.

Then the X-wing pilot's an idiot. And, honestly, if this is the best trick he can come up with, Xizor's reputation as a criminal mastermind is highly overrated.

Seriously. This is what dvor was trying to say above - what's the X-wing pilot thinking? "Hm, he rolled no hits, I'm not sure I need to spend my focus, because he might not use that Accuracy Corrector. I mean sure, it doesn't cost him anything, but maybe he won't use it just to screw with me, so I'll save my focus!"

By the time you get to the defender's dice, you know whether the Accuracy Corrector will improve the results. Since there's no cost to it, the attacker will ALWAYS use it. It doesn't matter what the results are when the defender rolls, because he knows that by the time it gets to resolution, there will be 2 hits there. If there were some cost to it - if you had to take a stress to use the Corrector, or spend a token of some form, or perform an embarrassing recitation of the "I love you" scene from the carbon freezing chamber, then there would be a point there. But... really just not.

Then the X-wing pilot's an idiot. And, honestly, if this is the best trick he can come up with, Xizor's reputation as a criminal mastermind is highly overrated.

I get what you're saying, and I'm not trying to be argumentative on purpose, but I think you might have missed my point slightly. I wasn't trying to show Xizor tricking the opponent, rather I was trying to show a situation with as little meta-game as possible where the defender has no hits to evade but must roll dice anyway, and is then later held to a choice made when the hit/evade situation was different. You and I both know the smarter move is to spend the focus on the one evasion die because of the Accuracy Corrector, and I'm not trying to say otherwise.

So, if the attacker and defender both know whether or not AC should trigger the instant the red dice are rolled, why would AC trigger at any other time? Why create a paradoxical situation where I'm rolling evasion dice and modifying them to evade hits that potentially haven't even happened yet? That seems unfair and unintuitive, and makes the game harder to keep track of than necessary.