I actually happen to think it was a fairly accurate description. He clearly was implying the usage of single use ordnance in competitive play, and even if he was referring to the wider game in a casual sense in my own experience at least MF has not at all had a “substantial” impact.

In fact I would say that from the results I have seen as well as anecdotal evidence MF has had an inconsequential impact and quite fairly described as a failed remedy for single use ordnance.

I never shut up about Hot Shot Blaster + MF, so some people use that... but outside Flechettes you won't see much use of MF.

We have tried playing where the ordnance shot was used in addition to the normal attack, rather than either/or. Not all secondary weapons, only expendables. It isn't as powerful as it appears at first glance because of the poor action economy (multiple shots, some needing to spend TL just to fire, but no more actions to be accurate). It does however make spending 4 points for a 4 die proton torpedo attack more palatable if you don't have to give up your normal 3 dice attack to perform it.

Did you specify the order attacks happen in? Primary w/ focus -> FCS -> Torpedo would be a pretty effective volley. Or Primary -> ICT (via BTL-A4) -> Flechette from Drea... all with re-rolls and R4-B11 just because... gotta love stress

We used ordnance first.

When wave 4 came out, Alex and Frank both commented on it and how they were trying to address it qith Blount and Munitions Failsafe.

Turns out, they were still bad. Munitions Failsafe should really have been free. That strikes me as balanced as it could be. Alternatively, I, as have few others, have suggested a reload mechanism, such as a delay or the concept of ammo (eg you have the slot for a missle and can only carry 3).

No he did mention wave 7 specifically. And if I recall, he described it as "bomber love." I hope it's not just a fix specifically for TIE bombers, but a fix to ordinance in general. The TIE bomber would hopefully just profit the most from it.

I do have a suggestion to fix ordnance, with just one card.

“One Card to control them all, One Card to fix them,

One Card to make them work and have the player use them.”

“Weapons Reload” 1 point

“When a card states to “discard this card to perform this attack”, discard this card instead.

This means you get can get 2 Concussion missile or Proton Torpedoes for 5 points. If you have two “Weapon Reload card you have 3 Concussion Missile or Proton Torpedoes for 6 points.

I already posted this in another topic, but perhaps it fits better here

I think the following two mods can make a difference. It doesnt change the cost of ordnance tough:

Auto Target Lock (modification)

When firing missles/torpedo's you may treat a ship inside your firing arc as if you would have a target lock on it.

(You can still use focus action to modify dice, you just dont have to get - and spend - a target lock to fire your missles/torpedos. Much more action economy and efficient)

And:

Bombs away! (modification)

You may fire two missles in a single turn on the same target lock

(Both attacks are rolled seperatly)

This can potentially destroy most ships in a single turn, making the threat for ordnance much bigger

I would say munitions failsafe was a boost to ordnance users.

It was certainly intended as such. Unfortunately it did not have that effect.

Munitions Failsafe is a failed attempt at improving ordnance.

I think this is an inaccurate statement. It failed to improve ordnance ENOUGH to be widespread, but I think it factually improves ordnance pretty substantially.

I actually happen to think it was a fairly accurate description. He clearly was implying the usage of single use ordnance in competitive play, and even if he was referring to the wider game in a casual sense in my own experience at least MF has not at all had a “substantial” impact.

In fact I would say that from the results I have seen as well as anecdotal evidence MF has had an inconsequential impact and quite fairly described as a failed remedy for single use ordnance.

I don't think MF fixed the bevy of issues that ordnance faces either, but to say it is not an improvement is wholly inaccurate and factually false. If the only issue with using missiles and torpedos was the single use part (aka you can miss and have wasted points), the MF is a great solution. MF has solved half of the issue, and pretty neatly at that. What we need now is a way to improve the impact of that single shot, whether that is from more damage or less cost for it. My only point is that to say MF is a failed improvement is purely wrong, it just is not the perfect improvement or the total fix. For a 1 point modification, I'm pretty okay with how effective it is by itself.

I think they were just trying to be conservative with their fixes as far as munitions failsafe goes. Its better to make a small change and see how it goes rather then make big changes and go too far.

I find giving each side a munitions allowance of about 10-20 points works rather well and encourages lists to take bombers just to they can dip into the pool of free ordnance. It is quite the big change some lists get better others get worse and makes the initial alpha strike more of a thing.

Personally I would like to see a modification along the lines of "While making an attack with a [missile] or [torpedo] weapon, if the attack hits, cancel all of the defender's defense dice."

Seriously. No more of this hitting a TIE fighter with a freaking explosive and only doing 1 damage nonsense. If you hit something with a torpedo/missile it should HURT.