It kind of makes sense. It would make HLC less annoying on Dash, and would allow things like Ion or Flechette or mangler to get a range one bonus. Autoblasters now rolls 4 dice and might actually be worth it.

Turret slot upgrades ignore range bonuses.

Getting range 3 one shot without being able to get an extra defense die is kind of annoying. Slight nerf to IG's and Dash and B wings, which are all a little OP anyways. Slight buff in relative effectiveness to missiles and torpedoes.

It might fix some cannons, but it won't change the effectiveness of missiles and torps. Their issue has always been how they relate to primary weapons. Not how they relate to cannons.

Although I think Blaster Turret would really appreciate the buff.

Missing from your post: any evidence that cannons are actually causing a balance problem.

I don't understand this logic

Just like the comparisons between X-wings and B-wings, making the better option worse will not magically make the worse option better

Missing from your post: any evidence that cannons are actually causing a balance problem.

But they're so annoying.

Ordnance suffers relative to primaries, making cannons worse relative to primaries will only hurt cannons.

Remember, the range behaviors of cannons are build into the price. Why is HLC so expensive? A large part of it is the 4 dice, but another large chunk is denying the bonus defensive die at R3. Will anyone take a Mangler cannon at its current price if all it gets you is the hit-to-crit function, and actually reduces your offense at R1?

Cannons that can fire at range one would also get a range one bonus. It's not really so much that these things are OP and annoying, it's that one of the aspects I like about this game are the range modifiers. Against ships that use cannons that aspect is lost and that is kind of less interesting. Against super Dash not only do you lose any benefit to maneuvering well against it because it has a turret, but you also lose any benefit to staying at a particular range because it is constantly firing with a cannon.

I suppose HLC would suffer, but in return we'd get a buffed Autoblaster cannon.

cannons definitely do not need a nerf on non-turret platforms (anything that is not the outrider). Doing so would only hurt ships like the TIE Defender and the scyk that rely heavily on the cannon upgrade slot

Any attempted "turret nerf" aimed at the outrider/falcon/decimator would need to somehow nerf both primary 3 attack turrets and the outrider's unique cannon-based turret, while not overly nerfing 2-attack primary turrets like the K-wing, YT2400, and outer rim smuggler. Considering all that, I don't expect to see a significant turret nerf in the future

The Outrider doesn't need a nerf either...

It's a good ship. And annoying to fly against. But not all that broken. Especially with Autothrusters(Does nobody realize how gooooood those are?)

The Outrider doesn't need a nerf either...

It's a good ship. And annoying to fly against. But not all that broken. Especially with Autothrusters(Does nobody realize how gooooood those are?)

not as good as 360 degree "**** your tactical game, have some dice!" turrets

but agreed, I don't see Dash as being at all broken. I can understand how utterly terrifying he would be in the hands of a skilled player (shouldn't a skilled player always be terrifying, though?), but his terrifying offense and maneuverability are off-set by an incredibly average stat-line, the limitations set by PTL's stress (or the limitation of V.I not allowing fully modified attacks), and a potentially huge draw-back (the doughnut hole, in the case of HLC). Building and playing the YT-2400 involves a lot of choices, which is why I hold it to be a balanced ship and far lower on the "turret hate" chart than the deci or yt-1300.

speaking of choices, it is sad that the poor, forgotten missile slot goes unused but again that has nothing to do with the cannon or even the cannon + title

Ordinance is not ignored because there are better options, they are ignored because the better option is not using them

Sad but true. Hopefully, the yet unspoiled Wave 7 cards will breathe back some life into this forlorn type of upgrade

The Outrider doesn't need a nerf either...

It's a good ship. And annoying to fly against. But not all that broken. Especially with Autothrusters(Does nobody realize how gooooood those are?)

not as good as 360 degree "**** your tactical game, have some dice!" turrets

but agreed, I don't see Dash as being at all broken. I can understand how utterly terrifying he would be in the hands of a skilled player (shouldn't a skilled player always be terrifying, though?), but his terrifying offense and maneuverability are off-set by an incredibly average stat-line, the limitations set by PTL's stress (or the limitation of V.I not allowing fully modified attacks), and a potentially huge draw-back (the doughnut hole, in the case of HLC)

It is sad that the poor, forgotten missile slot goes unused , but again that has nothing to do with the cannon or even the cannon + title

Ordinance is not ignored because there are better options, they are ignored because the better option is not using them

Sad but true. Hopefully, the yet unspoiled Wave 7 cards will breathe back some life into this forlorn type of upgrade

Ordnance is not being so widely shelved because cannons are a better value for the cost. Ordnance is being so widely shelved because virtually anything else you could put in your list for the points is a better value for the cost.

Frankly, one of the perks of cannons is that they don't give an extra defense die at range 3. You don't (generally) use ion or flechette cannons at range 1 anyway, so the extra damage die wouldn't balance out the loss of the better range 3 potential.

Missiles and torps aren't competing with HLC. They're competing with primary attacks. And they are losing.

This might be the worst "fix" suggestion I've seen to date. Cannons are fine they are not broken in the least bit. The fix in my opinion is to make torps and the like work more like cannons. I was hoping for something like a modification that cost 2 points that gave you infinite torps

This might be the worst "fix" suggestion I've seen to date. Cannons are fine they are not broken in the least bit. The fix in my opinion is to make torps and the like work more like cannons. I was hoping for something like a modification that cost 2 points that gave you infinite torps

Getting more than two proton torpedo shots off is a considerable accomplishment- I don't think just removing the discard clause would help.

This might be the worst "fix" suggestion I've seen to date. Cannons are fine they are not broken in the least bit. The fix in my opinion is to make torps and the like work more like cannons. I was hoping for something like a modification that cost 2 points that gave you infinite torps

I think it narrowly loses to the "use clocks to fix MoV" idea.

So far the best ordnance fix I've seen might be the "all or nothing" idea some guy was suggesting. You roll your attack as normal, but they work like ion weapons and all have "if this attack hits, do X damage and cancel all dice results". That one was cool, since that way you either dodge the missile or find out what happens when a weapon intended for killing capital ships hits a starfighter.

This might be the worst "fix" suggestion I've seen to date. Cannons are fine they are not broken in the least bit. The fix in my opinion is to make torps and the like work more like cannons. I was hoping for something like a modification that cost 2 points that gave you infinite torps

Getting more than two proton torpedo shots off is a considerable accomplishment- I don't think just removing the discard clause would help.

This might be the worst "fix" suggestion I've seen to date. Cannons are fine they are not broken in the least bit. The fix in my opinion is to make torps and the like work more like cannons. I was hoping for something like a modification that cost 2 points that gave you infinite torps

Getting more than two proton torpedo shots off is a considerable accomplishment- I don't think just removing the discard clause would help.

Fire Control System ships would love it. Too much maybe.

Hmmm...

Blue Squadron Pilot -30

-Proton Torpedoes, FCS, "Hypothetical Mod"

Blue Squadron Pilot -29

-Heavy Laser Cannon

Given the limitations of FCS (It has to lock onto the ship you shot, so if said ship flies past you or gets blown up, it isn't going to help), I'd go with the HLC, honestly.

This might be the worst "fix" suggestion I've seen to date. Cannons are fine they are not broken in the least bit. The fix in my opinion is to make torps and the like work more like cannons. I was hoping for something like a modification that cost 2 points that gave you infinite torps

Getting more than two proton torpedo shots off is a considerable accomplishment- I don't think just removing the discard clause would help.

Fire Control System ships would love it. Too much maybe.

Hmmm...

Blue Squadron Pilot -30

-Proton Torpedoes, FCS, "Hypothetical Mod"

Blue Squadron Pilot -29

-Heavy Laser Cannon

Given the limitations of FCS (It has to lock onto the ship you shot, so if said ship flies past you or gets blown up, it isn't going to help), I'd go with the HLC, honestly.

Put Ion Torps.

This might be the worst "fix" suggestion I've seen to date. Cannons are fine they are not broken in the least bit. The fix in my opinion is to make torps and the like work more like cannons. I was hoping for something like a modification that cost 2 points that gave you infinite torps

I think it narrowly loses to the "use clocks to fix MoV" idea.

So far the best ordnance fix I've seen might be the "all or nothing" idea some guy was suggesting. You roll your attack as normal, but they work like ion weapons and all have "if this attack hits, do X damage and cancel all dice results". That one was cool, since that way you either dodge the missile or find out what happens when a weapon intended for killing capital ships hits a starfighter.

Maybe another option here is to also put an "inverted range bonus" on missiles and torpedoes.

Give the attacker an extra red at Range 3 (fluff: the missiles/torpedoes are faster than the ships they are locked into, so they have enough room at range 3 to correct for their initial trajectory), and the defender an extra green at Range 1.

Tossing an extra red die doesn't solve action economy, but it does better than nothing.

I agree that it doesn't make a ton of sense that a B-wing's standard weapon can be aimed better at Range 1 than his ion cannon.

Or that at Range 3, his target has a better chance of dodging that but not the ion shot.

And, to everyone saying that cannons work fine as is and that OP's suggestion is terrible, I submit the counterpoint that they compete too well as secondary weapons. If you want to encourage ordnance use, one way to do that for them is to nerf the competition.

Giving standard range bonuses to cannons won't even nerf them hard at all- HLC is still the best attack outside of Range 1 most ships can throw (Expose+EI prices the same with equal action economy, so no-- 4 attack dice plus no extra die at Range 3 are absolutely not counted in the cost of the weapon), ion cannons will always be useful, the autoblaster cannon actually just gets buffed by 1 attack, turrets are exclusively buffed since they are all Range 2 or less, and all the new cannons get the attack bonus along with the defense bonus, so it's hard to call that a nerf.

I think cannons should have been affected by range modifiers but it's too late now to go about implementing it. The autoblaster, for example, would need it's base reduced to two and the HLC would need a point adjustment. It's just too late in the game.

Maybe another option here is to also put an "inverted range bonus" on missiles and torpedoes.

Give the attacker an extra red at Range 3 (fluff: the missiles/torpedoes are faster than the ships they are locked into, so they have enough room at range 3 to correct for their initial trajectory), and the defender an extra green at Range 1.

Tossing an extra red die doesn't solve action economy, but it does better than nothing.

I agree that it doesn't make a ton of sense that a B-wing's standard weapon can be aimed better at Range 1 than his ion cannon.

Or that at Range 3, his target has a better chance of dodging that but not the ion shot.

And, to everyone saying that cannons work fine as is and that OP's suggestion is terrible, I submit the counterpoint that they compete too well as secondary weapons. If you want to encourage ordnance use, one way to do that for them is to nerf the competition.

Giving standard range bonuses to cannons won't even nerf them hard at all- HLC is still the best attack outside of Range 1 most ships can throw (Expose+EI prices the same with equal action economy, so no-- 4 attack dice plus no extra die at Range 3 are absolutely not counted in the cost of the weapon), ion cannons will always be useful, the autoblaster cannon actually just gets buffed by 1 attack, turrets are exclusively buffed since they are all Range 2 or less, and all the new cannons get the attack bonus along with the defense bonus, so it's hard to call that a nerf.

The only place that choice would come from is if a ship had 2 attack, a cannon slot, and an ordnance slot.

Cannon would win that competition. But as is ordnance sucks compared to primaries on most ships.