-snip for content advisory warning-

Rude.

I do not like that idea...

Bingo. Margin of Victory. Once dual Falcon, Deci-Echo, Dash-Horn, etc have killed 2 fighters, the only way for a small ship build to win is to table the opponent.

Also works with the 1 large turret + swarm. Fat Han + 3xZs being the current net-list du jour. I you go after Han, the Zs rip you apart unmolested. You may kill Han, but at the cost of most of your ships. And now you have a damaged ship or 2 facing 3 full health ships. If you go after the Z's, it may take you most of the game killing them off...36 points. About as much as a kitted out Wedge or Soontir. All your opponent need do is kill off 2 average 25 point ships and he wins outright.

Its a 50-50-90. Chose to kill 1 or the other and 90% of the time you'll lose anyways.

A recent event I went to had the final 8 being: Dual Falcon, 4x Han+3Zs, Dash-Horn, Deci-Phantom, and the lone Panic Attack (3 Bs with tactician+1 Y with Ion and the stress droid). Of the 20+ players, 4 had small ship builds and, except for Panic, all were in the bottom half.

How would everyone feel if the FFG stated that going forward all 360 primary weapons only earned +1 attack dice at range 1 in their primary arc? Is is too much of a nerf to them?

I'm wondering about this from the community. My store has been play testing this for a while.

thanks,

Can we stop trying to castrate turrets? There are two classes of ship that can't deal with them: the TIE interceptor and the TIE phantom. Everything else has enough health by means of durability or numbers to take them on. The TIE interceptor just got turret protection in the form of Autothrusters. The phantom really, really doesn't need a buff against turrets.

This ship sailed like 2 years ago.

Yeah, I'm with quasistellar on this, for this proposed fix as well as any other that involves nerfing.

It seems to me that officially nerfing would almost require a new edition of the game in which they try to fix everything in one go. However, that does not seem to be FFG's approach to maintaining the game's balance. Instead, they offer little fixes in the shape of buffs here and an official rules reinterpretation there. While that does mean that the tweaks to the balance are slightly one-sided and mostly determined by their product release schedule, I do think that is preferable to a solution that involves a new edition or just blunt we-changed-our-mind rules change.

I also think that the cries for nerfing the big turrets underestimates the community's capacity for finding and exploiting the big turrets' Achilles heels. I'd say, let the free market work! Lately, I've been having a great time against turrets, because I think I have found a little underappreciated ship/upgrades/tactics combination that fares pretty well against them, which isn't the TIE swarm. If I am doing it, I'm confident that others are too.

Why change the rules, when we can all change how we build and fly?

Why change the rules, when we can all change how we build and fly?

Because nobody wants to see ships get completely killed off, hence the distaste for turrets before (they made the Interceptor untenable). Now our boost ships have Autothrusters, that's no longer an issue.

The only real fixes needed in X-Wing now are with some of the players.

The only real fixes needed in X-Wing now are with some of the players.

I'll say!

The only real fixes needed in X-Wing now are with some of the players.

I'll say!

Technically-speaking, they'd be more likely to lose the +1 at range 1. It takes significantly more traverse to track close targets, which tends to negatively impact accuracy.

would be fine with this.

These posts will probably not stop until non turrented big ships and other lists are about equal in the top of most tournaments.

Technically-speaking, they'd be more likely to lose the +1 at range 1. It takes significantly more traverse to track close targets, which tends to negatively impact accuracy.

would be fine with this.

Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty much fine with turrets rules-wise at the moment, I just like looking at rule:source interfaces.

These posts will probably not stop until non turrented big ships and other lists are about equal in the top of most tournaments.

*turret

I don't think it's the right fix, and there needs to be time to see if Autothruster builds can tip the balance back, but I do think certain primary turret pilots are a little too high up on the balance curve.

The only real fixes needed in X-Wing now are with some of the players.

I don't know, I still like to see something to get this guy back on the field...

The YT-2400 won't like it.

The YT2400 won't care if it has a heavy laser.

Nope.

Nerfs are the way of the Dark Side.

Nerfs lead to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to rage quitting.

We'll the reason we have been trying it is because we want to promote those who fly better. We have found it's not as much as a nerf as everyone thinks. Our group in general loves the dodging and dog fighting aspects. Right now piloting any big sip with turrets is too easy in our opinion. We're not changing the rules but it really make you fly better with big turret ships

I'm pretty sure turrets are fine. Hell there was a store championship at FFG'S store and the winner flew 6 A-wings. His final match was against Paul heavers fat Han build. If 6 a wings without auto thrusters can do it then it's fine imo.

These posts will probably not stop until non turrented big ships and other lists are about equal in the top of most tournaments.

No, it won't stop until turrets are not competitively viable. People have been complaining about turret primaries since they began. The current "issues" with the Falcon, Outrider, and Decimator has nothing to do with their primary weapon.

We're not changing the rules but it really make you fly better with big turret ships

I'll believe that it makes you fly differently with big turret ships, with an additional incentive to bring Engine Upgrade as well as Gunner or PTL (or both) to offset the action cost of EU.

But saying it makes you fly better implies a standard for performance that Large ships with turrets don't meet under the default rules, and I don't believe that standard exists--or, if it did, that players like Paul Heaver at World's last year would fail to meet it.

No thanks, makes o *F'in* sense no other than as a GAME mechanic and I oppose it on that principle alone.

Maybe not remove the +1 entirely, even though that's how it is for non big turret ships, and even though mechanically it makes sense.

maybe count the final dice as a focus if it hits or crits?

Personally i like the original idea in terms of it's mechanics, but it'd need a point re-balance because of it, so it's not viable.

I like the big ships, but I think the turrets need a hole. With zero places to fight them from there is nowhere you can fight them from without suffering return fire. The Falcon, Decimator, and Outrider are all so boring to fight with because there is no benefit to outflying them, you can be anywhere to get range on them and they can hit you just as hard as if you were right in front of their face.

I like the big ships, but I think the turrets need a hole. With zero places to fight them from there is nowhere you can fight them from without suffering return fire. The Falcon, Decimator, and Outrider are all so boring to fight with because there is no benefit to outflying them, you can be anywhere to get range on them and they can hit you just as hard as if you were right in front of their face.

Outflying your opponent always has benefits.

No, turrets do not need to be nerfed.