Alternately, what about just preventing the defender from spending tokens? So the dice still apply, but focus and evade tokens can't be spent. Works against the fatties, reduces the effectiveness of some of the arc dodgers, but doesn't turn into insta-kill necessarily.

I like that idea Hawkstrike. Although I would tweak that to only not being allowed to spend a focus on defense. Simple, yet effective. Also does not require any changes to already printed cards.

You can already give Ten his near guaranteed uncancellable crit by giving him a Mangler Cannon.

Which is only 3 dice and only has one guaranteed hit result. Torpedoes would be 4 dice (though requiring him to expend an action, and generally unmodified), and Rebels have ways to pump that to 5 or 6.

Ten Numb can only make one crit unavoidable anyway.

It's a balancing act. Ordnance needs a boost, but they can't be so good that they can routinely 1 shot a cloaked Phantom behind an asteroid.

Also: any update to ordnance generally needs to be something that would fit comfortably in an FAQ entry of about 2 sentences. That sort of FAQ entry can be huge: the recent Phantom change was tiny in words, but big in effect.

So: let's assume that you knew you were going to face a Decimator. Would you run Prockets? Advanced Proton Torpedoes? Regular Proton Torpedoes? Cluster Missiles? Why or why not?

Anything you do to make ordnance more effective needs to address both the low reliability aspect and the low damage aspect. But can't make it possible to do 10 damage in one attack!

I might think of a FAQ entry something like: when an attack instructs you to spend a target lock, the defender may not cancel one {hit} result.

This would make every on-hit munition effect automatically happen, and may be too strong. It would also make Munitions Failsafe basically useless, so I'm not sure if it's awesome.

You can already give Ten his near guaranteed uncancellable crit by giving him a Mangler Cannon.

Which is only 3 dice and only has one guaranteed hit result. Torpedoes would be 4 dice (though requiring him to expend an action, and generally unmodified), and Rebels have ways to pump that to 5 or 6.

Ten Numb can only make one crit unavoidable anyway.

But if people are talking about an ordinance fix that allows full damage when you hit, then this won't matter. Ten shoots, gets a crit either through converting eyeball with torpedo, Etahn, etc, torpedo cannot be avoided, attack ignores defensive roll, Soontir dies.

We're not though. The suggestion was (originally):

"If this attack hits, then all defence dice results are cancelled".

That suggestion DOES NOT say "and the attack deals maximum damage" as well.

Ten Numb would still actually have to roll the necessary damage to one-shot an opponent. In your example above, he could potentially acquire a Target Lock on Soontir, somehow get Soontir in arc, fire a Proton Torpedo, roll blank, blank, blank, focus. Change that focus to a Critical Hit, causing Soontir's Defence Dice roll to be ignored, only for Soontir to then cancel the damage anyway with an Evade token.

He'd STILL be better off with a Mangler Cannon, as he can use the Target lock to modify the dice roll and get a Critical Hit that way. He MIGHT be better off with his regular attack and Calculation.

HOWEVER - on the off chance that he manages to roll 3+ hits with the Proton Torpedo, then Soontir has the right to be worried.

Can't find my post way back where I suggested removing a green die for the defender and adding a red die against defenders without a green die. Even that might not be enough.

Anyway, the only solution for ordnance will be such a global change of the rules. With that many ordnance and ordnance carriers out, you can't give out errata for every card. You can't touch the requirements of shooting ordnance either, as that would wreak havoc with the balancing of different types of ordnance. For balancing reasons you have to stay off the astromech and mod slot as well.

I still prefer the extremely easy fix of allowing the token spent firing the ordnance to modify the die roll. It does everything that needs to be done and is just easy to implement without any major errata or mandatory buffs cards.

I'm kind of surprised it hasn't already been patched into the rules, honestly.

I still prefer the extremely easy fix of allowing the token spent firing the ordnance to modify the die roll. It does everything that needs to be done and is just easy to implement without any major errata or mandatory buffs cards.

I'm kind of surprised it hasn't already been patched into the rules, honestly.

But that still doesn't make it cost effective.

I still prefer the extremely easy fix of allowing the token spent firing the ordnance to modify the die roll. It does everything that needs to be done and is just easy to implement without any major errata or mandatory buffs cards.

I'm kind of surprised it hasn't already been patched into the rules, honestly.

But that still doesn't make it cost effective.

And it destroys the balance with ordnance, that does not require to spend a token.

I like the OPs suggestion, it would make clusters kind of insane through.

The thing to remember is that on average most protons and missiles will do more damage than primaries especially at range, even with discarding the (cannons are a different story). The issue is that they are not worth 4 points more of damage.

Ordnance needs to either be more powerful or cheaper (and because FFGS stance, there is only one way to go). Personally, I would prefer to see ordnance on every ship that can take them over no missiles ever. Make those 5 straights worth something.

What about introducing a missile/torpedo token that get assigned to a target ship and the ordinance rolls on multiple turns? Maybe subtracting 1 attack die per turn till it is zero or it hits the target? For example, assume the ordinance has 3 native attack dice on the turn it's fired it rolls 3 dice, next turn 2, then 1, then the token get removed. No re-rolls or focus allowed after the initial attack.

I think if you could fire them out of arc they'd be fine. People are happy with the hot-shot blaster, missiles and torps tend to have a bit more bite but require an action to launch and cost a little more. Seems like an easy, fluffy-ish nudge to secondaries that gives them a bit more versatility and makes them easier to use

I do not recall what ordnance requires a target lock but I could picture ordnance tracking even target behind you. That would most definitely shake up the game.

But is that enough for a one-shot weapon to be worth taking over and HLC?

I like the OPs suggestion, it would make clusters kind of insane through.

The thing to remember is that on average most protons and missiles will do more damage than primaries especially at range, even with discarding the (cannons are a different story). The issue is that they are not worth 4 points more of damage.

Ordnance needs to either be more powerful or cheaper (and because FFGS stance, there is only one way to go). Personally, I would prefer to see ordnance on every ship that can take them over no missiles ever. Make those 5 straights worth something.

Clusters missiles? How bout APTs? They would be guaranteed death against most small based ships. Rhymer with PTL and APTs would be almost silly.

I said 2 awings because I assumed people on this forum understood that you have 100 points to put into ships and 2 awings with prockets doesn't come out to 100 points.

That doesn't even make sense. That's words to the effect of "2 A-wings is actually 5 A-wings because dogfight point limit is 100 therefore you should assume when I say 2 I mean 5."

You said the exact words "You could taking out a falcon in 1 turn with 2 awings." No sane individual is going to assume from that that you mean more than three A-wings.

I can change my original post to "practically take out a falcon in 1 turn by themselves" if you'd like.

It would be left on 3 hit points, 25% of its total health, assuming both proton rockets hit for 5. The chance of ten focused dice all hitting is 5%.

A single one of those shots against a phantom would obliterate it in one hit if it rolled four evades, and the chance of five focused dice all hitting is just under 24%. That's not factoring in the fact that you only need 4 hits to kill a phantom and it's not certain to roll four evades. Give the phantom the benefit of the doubt, give it a focus token on its defence. It's got a roughly 40% chance of being oneshot. The Falcon? Zero.

It's got 13 hit points. You'd need at least 3 prockets to kill it. I'm not going to do the maths for it, but 13 hits off 15 focused dice?

Assuming no Minor Explosion or Direct Hit,

Two prockets, no chance of killing it. 5% chance of knocking it down to 3 hit points. You'll probably knock out about half its health, but that's not "practically killing it."

Three prockets, 15 focused dice, 24% chance of 13 hits.

Four prockets, 20 focused dice, 90% chance of 13 hits.

But four prockets on A-wings will cost you eighty points. Three prockets costs you sixty, which is about the same as the Falcon you're trying to kill.

I'm figuring two 5 dice attacks with the TL reroll and a focus that your most likely going to get 8 hits on it. That leaves the falcon at 5 hit points left, in my books that is practically dead. I'll be sure to be more detailed in my posts next time and say exactly how many ships are needed and used and what upgrades each has and exactly how many points it comes out too so it's easier for you. Was speaking generally with the proposed idea of canceling defense dice 2 awings with prockets would have a good chance of demolishing a falcon in 1 round of shooting.

I'm figuring two 5 dice attacks with the TL reroll and a focus that your most likely going to get 8 hits on it. That leaves the falcon at 5 hit points left, in my books that is practically dead. I'll be sure to be more detailed in my posts next time and say exactly how many ships are needed and used and what upgrades each has and exactly how many points it comes out too so it's easier for you. Was speaking generally with the proposed idea of canceling defense dice 2 awings with prockets would have a good chance of demolishing a falcon in 1 round of shooting.

A Falcon with 5 Hull points remaining is practically dead? Good luck explaining that one to most tournament attendees.

At range one (which the Prockets would be firing at), the Falcon would lose a MAXIMUM of 2 (two) potential evades if the idea of cancelling defence dice was used. In reality, it would likely lose one at best. I'm not seeing much difference here, unless of course we're talking hyperbole, in which yes of course there's an INCREDIBLE difference.

What can we learn from this? YT-1300's ships with one evade dice don't like being shot by multiple PtL A-Wings with Prockets at range one. Well, duh. It's still an irrelevant discussion within the scope of the topic.

That leaves the falcon at 5 hit points left, in my books that is practically dead. I'll be sure to be more detailed in my posts next time and say exactly how many ships are needed and used and what upgrades each has and exactly how many points it comes out too so it's easier for you. Was speaking generally with the proposed idea of canceling defense dice 2 awings with prockets would have a good chance of demolishing a falcon in 1 round of shooting.

Right.

Here is your post.

I still think the "if it hits cancel all defense dice" is op. You could taking out a falcon in 1 turn with 2 awings with proton rockets. I think a better solution is to not have to spend the TL only require that you have a target lock that way you can reroll bad rolls.

Your EXACT WORDS.

On it being pointed out to you that it's impossible for two A-wings to kill a Falcon with prockets in one round, you then attempt to state that it's "obvious" that you'd have more than two A-wings. Please read back what your post says.

I said 2 awings because I assumed people on this forum understood that you have 100 points to put into ships and 2 awings with prockets doesn't come out to 100 points.

You then suggest I'm somehow stupid for not appreciating that "obviously" when you say two A-wings you actually mean more than 2 A-wings. That, whenever someone states a number of ships one is an idiot for assuming they mean number they actually, explicitly said. That I'm somehow the fool for not appreciating the oh so obvious truth that two is surely greater than two.

You then, upon seeing that nobody's buying the "two is not equal to two" approach respond with this:

I'm figuring two 5 dice attacks with the TL reroll and a focus that your most likely going to get 8 hits on it. That leaves the falcon at 5 hit points left, in my books that is practically dead. I'll be sure to be more detailed in my posts next time and say exactly how many ships are needed and used and what upgrades each has and exactly how many points it comes out too so it's easier for you. Was speaking generally with the proposed idea of canceling defense dice 2 awings with prockets would have a good chance of demolishing a falcon in 1 round of shooting.

Here you dish out the sarcastic, patronising tone, now claiming I'm asking for exact list loadouts. Dear god, why is it so hard for you to accept that you're simply wrong? These backtracking attempts are frankly insulting to everyone you believe has low enough intelligence to fall for them.

And to add a slice of irony, you DID give an exact number of ships and their upgrades. TWO A-WINGS WITH PROTON ROCKETS. Even if you did give exact costings and loadouts, how is that meant to help when you suddenly decide that two means five and we're fools for not assuming that?

And then to cap it off, you try to say that a Falcon with five hitpoints is practically dead, that reducing a 13 hit point ship to 5 hit points (the total health of an X-wing) is somehow taking it out. A B-wing has the same defence: is a B-wing "practically dead" when it's taken 3 damage? Is a Y-wing "practically dead" when you strip its shields off?

I'm sorry, but you can't say the exact words "You could taking out a falcon in 1 turn with 2 awings," try to defend it by claiming 2 A-wings somehow means 2 A-wings + other things, and then try to spin me as the idiot.

But if people are talking about an ordinance fix that allows full damage when you hit, then this won't matter. Ten shoots, gets a crit either through converting eyeball with torpedo, Etahn, etc, torpedo cannot be avoided, attack ignores defensive roll, Soontir dies.

We're not though. The suggestion was (originally):

"If this attack hits, then all defence dice results are cancelled".

That suggestion DOES NOT say "and the attack deals maximum damage" as well.

Ten Numb would still actually have to roll the necessary damage to one-shot an opponent. In your example above, he could potentially acquire a Target Lock on Soontir, somehow get Soontir in arc, fire a Proton Torpedo, roll blank, blank, blank, focus. Change that focus to a Critical Hit, causing Soontir's Defence Dice roll to be ignored, only for Soontir to then cancel the damage anyway with an Evade token.

He'd STILL be better off with a Mangler Cannon, as he can use the Target lock to modify the dice roll and get a Critical Hit that way. He MIGHT be better off with his regular attack and Calculation.

HOWEVER - on the off chance that he manages to roll 3+ hits with the Proton Torpedo, then Soontir has the right to be worried.

Soontir (or anyone else) cannot cancel a critical hit due to Ten's ability. Ten's first crit cannot be cancelled by defense dice, and Evade tokens have been ruled as a defense dice modification under the most recent Autoblaster FAQs. As long as Ten has one critical hit result among his dice, then the attack is a hit and the rest of his damage would go through.

Soontir (or anyone else) cannot cancel a critical hit due to Ten's ability. Ten's first crit cannot be cancelled by defense dice, and Evade tokens have been ruled as a defense dice modification under the most recent Autoblaster FAQs. As long as Ten has one critical hit result among his dice, then the attack is a hit and the rest of his damage would go through.

I think you may have read that wrong:

Dice Results

Results that are added are treated as dice results that can only be canceled (they cannot be modified or rerolled). For example, when attacking with “Autoblaster” a [Evade] result added by an evade token cannot cancel a [Hit] result

Seems to me that [Evade] tokes are results not modifications.

P.S. This was on the FAQ before last.

Soontir (or anyone else) cannot cancel a critical hit due to Ten's ability. Ten's first crit cannot be cancelled by defense dice, and Evade tokens have been ruled as a defense dice modification under the most recent Autoblaster FAQs. As long as Ten has one critical hit result among his dice, then the attack is a hit and the rest of his damage would go through.

I think you may have read that wrong:

Dice Results

Results that are added are treated as dice results that can only be canceled (they cannot be modified or rerolled). For example, when attacking with “Autoblaster” a [Evade] result added by an evade token cannot cancel a [Hit] result

Seems to me that [Evade] tokes are results not modifications.

P.S. This was on the FAQ before last.

PhantomFO is correct, by the very paragraph you quoted. Evade tokens are treated just like regular dice results, except that you can't modify them. So if an ability (such as autoblaster or Ten Numb) would prevent you from using dice results to cancel damage (be it hit or crit), then you can't use evade tokens to cancel that damage either.

Which is why a few of us proposed that the "cancel all defense dice" fix be reworded to say if there are more hits+crits than evades, then cancel defense dice. Worded that way it neatly takes care of any possible Ten Numb or Lt Blount shenanigans.

I like the OPs suggestion, it would make clusters kind of insane through.

The thing to remember is that on average most protons and missiles will do more damage than primaries especially at range, even with discarding the (cannons are a different story). The issue is that they are not worth 4 points more of damage.

Ordnance needs to either be more powerful or cheaper (and because FFGS stance, there is only one way to go). Personally, I would prefer to see ordnance on every ship that can take them over no missiles ever. Make those 5 straights worth something.

Clusters missiles? How bout APTs? They would be guaranteed death against most small based ships. Rhymer with PTL and APTs would be almost silly.

APT's are crazy expensive though and require TL. Rhymer is sposed to be a stud.

That leaves the falcon at 5 hit points left, in my books that is practically dead. I'll be sure to be more detailed in my posts next time and say exactly how many ships are needed and used and what upgrades each has and exactly how many points it comes out too so it's easier for you. Was speaking generally with the proposed idea of canceling defense dice 2 awings with prockets would have a good chance of demolishing a falcon in 1 round of shooting.

Right.

Here is your post.

I still think the "if it hits cancel all defense dice" is op. You could taking out a falcon in 1 turn with 2 awings with proton rockets. I think a better solution is to not have to spend the TL only require that you have a target lock that way you can reroll bad rolls.

Your EXACT WORDS.

On it being pointed out to you that it's impossible for two A-wings to kill a Falcon with prockets in one round, you then attempt to state that it's "obvious" that you'd have more than two A-wings. Please read back what your post says.

I said 2 awings because I assumed people on this forum understood that you have 100 points to put into ships and 2 awings with prockets doesn't come out to 100 points.

You then suggest I'm somehow stupid for not appreciating that "obviously" when you say two A-wings you actually mean more than 2 A-wings. That, whenever someone states a number of ships one is an idiot for assuming they mean number they actually, explicitly said. That I'm somehow the fool for not appreciating the oh so obvious truth that two is surely greater than two.

You then, upon seeing that nobody's buying the "two is not equal to two" approach respond with this:

I'm figuring two 5 dice attacks with the TL reroll and a focus that your most likely going to get 8 hits on it. That leaves the falcon at 5 hit points left, in my books that is practically dead. I'll be sure to be more detailed in my posts next time and say exactly how many ships are needed and used and what upgrades each has and exactly how many points it comes out too so it's easier for you. Was speaking generally with the proposed idea of canceling defense dice 2 awings with prockets would have a good chance of demolishing a falcon in 1 round of shooting.

Here you dish out the sarcastic, patronising tone, now claiming I'm asking for exact list loadouts. Dear god, why is it so hard for you to accept that you're simply wrong? These backtracking attempts are frankly insulting to everyone you believe has low enough intelligence to fall for them.

And to add a slice of irony, you DID give an exact number of ships and their upgrades. TWO A-WINGS WITH PROTON ROCKETS. Even if you did give exact costings and loadouts, how is that meant to help when you suddenly decide that two means five and we're fools for not assuming that?

And then to cap it off, you try to say that a Falcon with five hitpoints is practically dead, that reducing a 13 hit point ship to 5 hit points (the total health of an X-wing) is somehow taking it out. A B-wing has the same defence: is a B-wing "practically dead" when it's taken 3 damage? Is a Y-wing "practically dead" when you strip its shields off?

I'm sorry, but you can't say the exact words "You could taking out a falcon in 1 turn with 2 awings," try to defend it by claiming 2 A-wings somehow means 2 A-wings + other things, and then try to spin me as the idiot.

Don't believe I ever called you an idiot and I don't think your stupid or called you that either. And when you reduce a ship to less than half of its hp ( 5/13) that is practically dead imo, you can agree or disagree that's why it's called an opinion. I'm sorry you got so irritated with those posts maybe just try to fly casual on the forums here as well.

May want to reread the tone of your posts.