That's not an extra ship, and it doesn't help me double stress that TIE phantom.

I find your lack of logic disturbing. Also, only Sith deal in absolutes.

You are NOT always better off getting another ship for ordnance, because there are several reasons to take ordnance:

Proton Bombs get critical damage in under shields. Even if you only get off one point of damage on a ship, this is huge because a) it's under shields and b) there's a good chance it'll be Direct Hit. Even if it isn't, there will always be a good perk to hitting another ship with Proton Bombs. Seismic Charges are less of a good thing because they don't go through shields, but for two points you have the perfect weapon to disrupt formations.

Assault Missiles affect the other ships besides the one you attack. If you pair this with Lt. Blount then you don't even have to damage the person you hit.

Homing Missiles not only ignore evade tokens, making them wonderful for attacking TIE Fighters/Interceptors, but they also don't require you to spend your target lock, so you can use it to increase your chances of getting full damage.

Proximity Mines are wonderful for area-denial. You leave them, and if you're fighting ships which are susceptible to 3-dice attacks then it suddenly makes getting through asteroids much less appealing.

Ion Pulse Missiles are hell on large-base ships, because not only are they more vulnerable to ordnance because of their low agility, the IPM will give them two ion tokens immediately, thus ionizing them without needing to hit them more than once.

Proton Rockets are marvelous on A-wings, because you're talking about a five-dice attack that gives no range bonuses at R3 to your target.

Flachette Torpedoes are great because you cause stress regardless of whether you hit.

See, you're not really paying to damage the enemy so much as you are paying to get certain awesome effects with the possibility of dealing damage.

Also:

(I'm just using the Proton Torpedo or the Concussion Missile for these examples.)

Considering there are a HELL of a lot more missiles/torpedoes than these and considering the newer ones are FAR superior to these older ordnance weapons, this is obviously your problem here.

That's not an extra ship, and it doesn't help me double stress that TIE phantom.

As stated above,there is always an exception to the rule. My OP was with ordinance heavy mind set, not about a single ordinance or two.

As stated above,there is always an exception to the rule. My OP was with ordinance heavy mind set, not about a single ordinance or two.

Ordnance.

And if so, then your point is that you're better off with more ships than stacking ordnance. This is usually true, which is why Extra Munitions exists to counteract it. However, it's very different from the broad absolute that titles this thread.

Proton Rockets are marvelous on A-wings, because you're talking about a five-dice attack that gives no range bonuses at R3 to your target.

Please, tell me more about this Range 3 Proton Rocket. I want one.

Here's the thing with ordnance cost.

If it goes off it generally earns its points when used against midcost ships.

Comparing a Z-95 with a concussion missile to a z-95 with a target lock. Firing at a unmodified Bounty Hunter firespray(a mediocre ordnance target.) Against the very very common Millenium Falcon it does even better.

A z-95 with a target lock does, on average, .81 damage.

That's about 2.67 points of damage per attack.

The same ship, firing a 4 point concussion missile, does an average of 1.95 damage. That's 3.762 extra points in damage, making that attack do 6.435 damage.

Frontloading more damage is always better on frail ships as well.

Ordnance's issue is not its Cost. Or even its relative cost. It is its opportunity cost. And the fact it's awful against specific other types of ships.(Cheaper higher agility ships)

But when fired at low agility high cost targets(which are again, very very common) they are worth the cost.

Reliability is a big issue.

Adaptability is a big issue.

Ease of use is a big issue.

But for any two attack ships that can take it, it can make or break games.

So in the end the math does not back up your assertion that cost is the issue.

Especially when you add in harder to quantify missile effects(splash damage, Stress, etc...

That's not an extra ship, and it doesn't help me double stress that TIE phantom.

As stated above,there is always an exception to the rule. My OP was with ordinance heavy mind set, not about a single ordinance or two.

devotedknight ... Despite a half dozen attempts to correct you, you continue to insist on using ORDINANCE. Obviously, you must not be focusing too much on what others are saying, the points they are making, etc. You remind me of a good friend who is always thinking of his next argument or retort, rather than actually listening to and actually hearing and assimulating what the current speaker is saying.

The word is ORDNANCE.

ORDNANCE

ORDNANCE

ORDNANCE

There is no effing "i" in ORDNANCE.

Sorry.

The continual misuse and/or misspelling of this word, throughout this forum, tilts the *&^%$ out of me.

Reliability, adaptability, ease of use, damage, point cost, these all factor into the value. Changing any one of them changes the value of the cost. You could "fix" ordnance by making it incredibly easy to fire, you could "fix" it by making it deal more damage relative to primary, you could "fix" it by making you pay less for it. They all have the same effect on its value.

However, I think acquiring a target lock to fire ordnance and how that factors into pilot skill is a good mechanic, and I personally would hate to see it go. I'm happy with everything up to the point where you shoot. I'd rather see the cancelling agility dice rule or the fired in addition to primary rule instead of all this business of adding free deadeye effects and adding Homing Missile and IPM's effect to everything that's currently bouncing around the various threads.

That's not an extra ship, and it doesn't help me double stress that TIE phantom.

As stated above,there is always an exception to the rule. My OP was with ordinance heavy mind set, not about a single ordinance or two.

devotedknight ... Despite a half dozen attempts to correct you, you continue to insist on using ORDINANCE. Obviously, you must not be focusing too much on what others are saying, the points they are making, etc. You remind me of a good friend who is always thinking of his next argument or retort, rather than actually listening to and actually hearing and assimulating what the current speaker is saying.

The word is ORDNANCE.

ORDNANCE

ORDNANCE

ORDNANCE

There is no effing "i" in ORDNANCE.

Sorry.

The continual misuse and/or misspelling of this word, throughout this forum, tilts the *&^%$ out of me.

Someday there will be a be a new meaning behind the word. A slight distinction that writers will use to paint wonderful nuance. Watch the language grow.

Ordinance is a word, derived from Ordain. It's a noun roughly synonymous with Decree.

Here's the thing with ordnance cost.
If it goes off it generally earns its points when used against midcost ships.
Comparing a Z-95 with a concussion missile to a z-95 with a target lock. Firing at a unmodified Bounty Hunter firespray(a mediocre ordnance target.) Against the very very common Millenium Falcon it does even better.
A z-95 with a target lock does, on average, .81 damage.
That's about 2.67 points of damage per attack.
The same ship, firing a 4 point concussion missile, does an average of 1.95 damage. That's 3.762 extra points in damage, making that attack do 6.435 damage.
Frontloading more damage is always better on frail ships as well.
Ordnance's issue is not its Cost. Or even its relative cost. It is its opportunity cost. And the fact it's awful against specific other types of ships.(Cheaper higher agility ships)
But when fired at low agility high cost targets(which are again, very very common) they are worth the cost.
Reliability is a big issue.
Adaptability is a big issue.
Ease of use is a big issue.
But for any two attack ships that can take it, it can make or break games.
So in the end the math does not back up your assertion that cost is the issue.
Especially when you add in harder to quantify missile effects(splash damage, Stress, etc...

But that opportunity cost is part of the cost. Yes, ordnance would definitely be worth it if it lacked the primary attack opportunity cost but that isn't the case. The points you pay for what it does in its current state are too high. Otherwise you'd see it used more, no?

If a weapon is reliable, adaptable or easy to use then it is worth more, and will cost more. The same is true of the inverse and all these factors are reflected or at least meant to be in its point cost. The cost is not soley a metric of how much damage it does.

And if its point cost does not reflect its perceived worth then it will not see use. Ordnance doesn't.

Ordinance is a word, derived from Ordain. It's a noun roughly synonymous with Decree.

Here's the thing with ordnance cost.

If it goes off it generally earns its points when used against midcost ships.

Comparing a Z-95 with a concussion missile to a z-95 with a target lock. Firing at a unmodified Bounty Hunter firespray(a mediocre ordnance target.) Against the very very common Millenium Falcon it does even better.

A z-95 with a target lock does, on average, .81 damage.

That's about 2.67 points of damage per attack.

The same ship, firing a 4 point concussion missile, does an average of 1.95 damage. That's 3.762 extra points in damage, making that attack do 6.435 damage.

Frontloading more damage is always better on frail ships as well.

Ordnance's issue is not its Cost. Or even its relative cost. It is its opportunity cost. And the fact it's awful against specific other types of ships.(Cheaper higher agility ships)

But when fired at low agility high cost targets(which are again, very very common) they are worth the cost.

Reliability is a big issue.

Adaptability is a big issue.

Ease of use is a big issue.

But for any two attack ships that can take it, it can make or break games.

So in the end the math does not back up your assertion that cost is the issue.

Especially when you add in harder to quantify missile effects(splash damage, Stress, etc...

But that opportunity cost is part of the cost. Yes, ordnance would definitely be worth it if it lacked the primary attack opportunity cost but that isn't the case. The points you pay for what it does in its current state are too high. Otherwise you'd see it used more, no?

If a weapon is reliable, adaptable or easy to use then it is worth more, and will cost more. The same is true of the inverse and all these factors are reflected or at least meant to be in its point cost. The cost is not soley a metric of how much damage it does.

And if its point cost does not reflect its perceived worth then it will not see use. Ordnance doesn't.

A firespray is not a good target for ordnance. It's among the most durable targets in the game. I picked it because it's on the median line of effectiveness.

Against an X-Wing the damage increase is over 4 points.

Against a B-wing the lowered agility makes the damage higher.

Against any ship with upgrades or against named pilots the spread gets better. And better. Which is to say, Ordnance earns its points when you fire it.

But if you run one ship with ordnance it becomes a target. And when you run lots of ships with ordnance it's a hassle.

No list is good 100% of the time.

But my calculation, Ordnance is good (on two attack dice ships)against any two agility ship that pays more than 3.75 points per point of durability.

Any 1 agility ship that pays more than 3.5 points per point of durability.

And bizzarely enough any 3 point ship paying more than 4 points per point of hull.

That's most ships in the game. It's not B-wings. It's not Tie Bombers. It's not Z-95s. But it is Aggressors. It is X-wings. It is every turret ship in the game that isn't a Y-Wing.

It's Interceptors. And the list goes on.

Is it Ordinary Ordnance or Ordnary Ordinance?

That's not an extra ship, and it doesn't help me double stress that TIE phantom.

As stated above,there is always an exception to the rule. My OP was with ordinance heavy mind set, not about a single ordinance or two.

devotedknight ... Despite a half dozen attempts to correct you, you continue to insist on using ORDINANCE. Obviously, you must not be focusing too much on what others are saying, the points they are making, etc. You remind me of a good friend who is always thinking of his next argument or retort, rather than actually listening to and actually hearing and assimulating what the current speaker is saying.

The word is ORDNANCE.

ORDNANCE

ORDNANCE

ORDNANCE

There is no effing "i" in ORDNANCE.

Sorry.

The continual misuse and/or misspelling of this word, throughout this forum, tilts the *&^%$ out of me.

OH, Well thank you for being straight forward! Now some of the posts actually make sense! LOL

There IS an entire Archetype dedicated to disproving the "Always" part of your thesis: the Alpha-Strike.

In an Alpha-Strike fleet, every ship has one missile or torpedo, with the goal of using all of them in one devastating attack, preferably the first full round of combat.

This means that you are making the following gamble:

"If I am able to kill more points of my opponents fleet with my ordnance than it cost me to equip, then in every turn following that expenditure, my fleet should be at a drastic advantage."

They typically follow this initial barrage with one of two strategies, decided at the table rather than in the list-build.

• Swarm: When flying with Z-95 Headhunters, you will have 6-5 ships after loosing your missiles. Only the Assault Missile is worth considering for the 5 ship variety, but it's an excellent counter-pick to fellow-swarms.
  The gamble here is that your 28 point expenditure will remove more than 28 points from your opponents' hull, and in the following rounds of the game, your 72 point swarm will outperform their remnants.
  
• Dodge: When flying with TIE Bombers or A-Wings, you'll not have much offensive power after loosing your ordnance... but you'll be incredibly hard to kill in your own right. You focus down on defense, preferring to avoid combat altogether after you've launched the barrage, and play for time. You've earned a lead, after all, you might as well abuse it.
  
• Clean-Up: When flying with... anything, sometimes you opt to wound with the missiles, and trusting that your following rounds of combat will be able to polish off the damage you started. Assault Missiles are particularly potent in this method, and will practically guarantee a victory vs a Swarm.
  

Now, there are some poor match-ups for this archetype.

• Flying against a Swarm list typically forces the Clean-Up style, irrespective of which launchable you choose, as there is no target that requires all of the guns to kill.
  
• Flying against supreme arc-dodgers is problematic, as the ship you've concentrated Target Locks on is the only one that really needs to concentrate on arc-dodging. If it manages to get out of the way, your action economy and ordnance are negated, and you're at a disadvantage.
  Moreover, they tend to be the ships fast enough to close the gap from Range 4 at the start of one round to Range 1 in the firing of the second, putting a severe damper on the missiles and torpedoes requiring Range 2-3 shots.
  
• Phantoms. Once you've loosed your initial barrage, Phantoms counterplay all three of your remaining strategies, so your only hope is to kill this thing with the chosen upgrades.
  However, with the Decloak mobility, they are monsters at closing the gap, making it almost impossible for you to kill en-masse at Range 2-3.

As I have mentioned there, Range Control is vital to making this archetype work for you.

Range 2-3 is the most common sight for ordnance, having only 3 exceptions.
For the varieties requiring Range 2-3, there is the issue of being unable to Target Lock an opponent when you move, but being able to shoot at them once they have, missing the best turn for your alpha-strike, and potentially losing the ability all together if they close the gap too swiftly. The only way around this is to practice maneuvering, and keeping the theories in mind for it... but we've not actually codified Maneuver Theory yet. I ought to get on that...

Cluster Missiles do not have to study the Maneuver Theory, as with them, if your opponent is in-range to acquire a Target Lock, you will be able to move so that they are in the required range of 1-2. If you are flying alongside Captain Jonus, or are flying against enemy ships with 1 or fewer agility, Cluster Missiles expect a high amount of damage.

Prockets do not have to study the Maneuver Theory either, as with them, you only need to have a Focus to fire. However, being Range 1 only, they should primarily be used by particularly mobile ships, whereby they also benefit from high agility. For an Alpha-Strike fleet, this should be A-Wings only.

Advanced Proton Torpedoes do not have to study the Maneuver Theory, as they are the least likely to make up their price in an Alpha-Strike scenario, and therefore should not be played.
No, not even if you have Push the Limit, or a Recon Specialist + Deadeye.

Not win my extra ship dies in the 2nd round... I feel its situational. It also depends on the ships you use as well.

or•di•nance (ôrˈdn-əns)

n. An authoritative command or order.
n. A custom or practice established by long usage.
n. A Christian rite, especially the Eucharist.

ord•nance (ôrdˈnəns)

n. Military materiel, such as weapons, ammunition, combat vehicles, and equipment.
n. The branch of an armed force that procures, maintains, and issues weapons, ammunition, and combat vehicles.
n. Cannon; artillery.

A Heavy Laser Cannon does not equate to 24 dice over six rounds for 7 points as put forth by the OP.

All ships that can take an HLC at only 7 points already have 3 attack dice. An HLC adds 6 dice over six rounds for 7 points, assuming you can always use it.

Take out native dice and it begins to look more favorable, at least on 2 attack ships.

Still, ordnance is terrible. But haven't we known this for like 3 years?

Still, ordnance is terrible. But haven't we known this for like 3 years?

Yeah, it's not exactly a new concept. But it's cute when someone newer tries to let us know!

Simple put, ordinance is NOT worth the points! You are always better just getting an extra ship!

For example;

For 7 points I can to equip a HLC and have a 4 dice attack, I don’t need a Target Lock, or focus, (And I can even be stressed) and still attack. And I will be able to use either a Target Lock or a Focus to modify the dice during the attack.

So if I use the heavy Laser cannon over 6 rounds I get 24 dice of damage for 7 points. Not hassle to use and with dice modifies!

If I use 8 points to purchase either two torpedoes or two missiles, I only get 8 dice of damage over 6 rounds (And if I miss those points were really wasted). There are a lot of hoops you have to set up just to be able to attack with ordinance, and the lower your pilot skill the harder that becomes. And you won’t have any dice modifiers, (95% of the time). Even with EM and MFS, which brings the point cost to 11 points, I will still get 8 dice over 6 rounds, With no dice modifies!

If you were to purchase a Tie Fighter or a Z-95 for 12 points, you get 24 attack dice over 6 turns, you also get for hit points to add to your build, and other really useful things like getting in peoples way, (Blocking)

Everyone just has to face facts. Ordinance is Never going to be effective nor worth the points. FFG is Never going to fix it so called “Problem”, to the satisfaction of every one. They just seem to want to clutter up the play with more useless cards.

I wish FFG would throw ordinance out the window and allow every to mount HLC!

I say just duct tape the Heavy Laser Cannon to your Tie Fighter and have fun!! Talks about a good dogfight! Here the one who maneuvers the best survives!

Nah your overreacting. Ordnance has their place if you know how to use it correctly, Ha my Vadar was one shotted by Proton Rockets by an A Wing. In the right hands they are utterly game changing.

I'm just curious: when you run HLC, do you actually get to use it every round, with dice modification? That hasn't been my experience at all.

Respectfully, not really the point. The point is that it is possible to fire your heavy laser cannon every round and that is the damage potential over a six round period. If you use a longer time period, you will find that ordinance becomes worst over time. Conclussion is that ordinance, no matter how you slice it, is not point effective. ( What I need is a Spock like person to calculate statistics.) Every one is trying to "Fix" ordinance, and it will NEVER happen. And I find that really sad, for many reasons.

It does seem to me that it's the point. Whether or not something passes a test depends greatly on the standard for comparison, and if the standard is "must do more damage than the theoretical maximum for an HLC", then nothing is ever going to qualify.

There are a lot of problems with ordnance right now, and I don't think anyone would argue that general point. But you're making sweeping statements that are actually very hard to justify: some ordnance is worth it, sometimes. So if you're saying that all ordnance is permanently broken for every ship and you should never take it under any circumstances, then there are more than just one or two exceptions to worry about.

Yea... Being so limited in only getting one attack off with them is a serious drawback. Honestly none of them are cheap enough on points to merit it. It's too bad too. Imagine if you could get enough shots off to make it worth your while. I wouldn't mind running a Y-wing with an Autoblaster Turret and some torpedoes if I just had more shots with them. The Autoblaster Turret would function more as a defensive upgrade in my build acting as a deterrent against my opponent going for range 1 attacks. My opponent getting an extra attack die isn't something I want to see when I have only 1 agility. Not only does it force my opponent to avoid range 1, but to even sometimes be overly cautious and stick to the outside of range 2 and often end up at range 3 by trying to keep his distance. This is where I want him if I am using torpedoes. At range 3 I get my second defence die if they fire their primary weapon and with my torpedoes being secondary weapons My opponent does not get an extra die. However, 2 shots is not enough to make this strategy viable. Instead I find myself using two Y-wings one with an ion cannon and the other with Auto blaster Turret so that I can Ionize people and then move in on them with the Auto blaster.

If I could get 4 shots off with torpedoes on a Y-wing the other strategy would be more reasonable as at least that would be enough to reasonably take down another ship if I use Munitions failsafe. Unfortunately with Extra Munitions being a torpedo upgrade it will only cut the cost of my torpedoes not serve to get me more use out of them.

The Tie Bomber will get much more benefit from it as it has 2 Torpedo slots 2 Missile slots and 1 bomb so it will get 2 shots with torpedoes 4 with missiles and 2 with bombs. That is 3 more attacks with ordinance than it would have otherwise. If only there was a comparable card to enhance toroedos in this manner and give my Y-wings more shots with them I might use them more often.

Hind sight is 20-20. I should have started this post asking a question?

Like;

"I seems to me that it is better to purchase a extra ship than to use ORDNANCE of the same value."

Hind sight is 20-20. I should have started this post asking a question?

Like;

"I seems to me that it is better to purchase a extra ship than to use ORDNANCE of the same value."

That's not a question...

I'm just curious: when you run HLC, do you actually get to use it every round, with dice modification? That hasn't been my experience at all.

Respectfully, not really the point. The point is that it is possible to fire your heavy laser cannon every round and that is the damage potential over a six round period. If you use a longer time period, you will find that ordinance becomes worst over time. Conclussion is that ordinance, no matter how you slice it, is not point effective. ( What I need is a Spock like person to calculate statistics.) Every one is trying to "Fix" ordinance, and it will NEVER happen. And I find that really sad, for many reasons.

There are some logic flaws here.

First, an increase from 2-4 attack dice is more significant than 3-4. This means 2 attack ships make better use of ordnance.

Second. Ships with low durability do not last 6 turns so in an environment where all that matters is the win low cost ordnance carriers can have a bigger impact due to their ordnance.

There are ways to make ordnance points effective.

The issue is that ordnance is very difficult to use at the best time. But the point cost is not the big issue.

Respectfully there is no flawed logic here, this is pure statistics. Your first point isn't logical, The higher the pilot skill has more to do with efficiency than whether your ship primary weapon is 2 attack dice or 3 attack dice. And for the record, I have seen low durability ship last over 20 turns. For you last point, there are many who would totally disagree with you on that one, (Ordinance cost too much for a one shot item, and it is very difficult to use!) It is always better to get another ship than to use ordinance.

You say you are using pure statistics but then you state how you have seen low durability ships last 20 rounds. That is switching to anecdotal evidence which goes completely against the pure statistics you are using in your previous argument.

For the last point I'm on the fence about that. But I'm leaning toward agreeing that being hard to use at the right time is indeed the biggest issue since you really want to be able to Fire and modify dice. I will say ordnance is getting better though since they have started making more ordnance that doesn't force you to spend your lock or focus.

I just played in a tournament where I saw a player use Flèchette torps on two bombers in the list to really mess with aggressors. It rarely did damage but double stressing an aggressor two turns in a row does a pretty good job of messing with it's jousting ability.

Edit: ah did not see this had progressed past the first page. Just super ninja'd myself xD

Second edit: Chris R ordnance CAN be worth it's points or more even for one shot in a game. As a couple people have shown with math it is very possible to make up more than the points it costs. Also as anecdotal evidence I always take prockets when I fly Vader. I used him in my SC and placed second and his procket shot changed or sealed every game for me... In fact I lost in the finals in part due to using my procket at the wrong time. Fatigue and the lateness set in and I rushed instead of biding my time and paid the price for it.

Depends. I don't think the Jonus squads would be nearly as effective.

Especially cluster missiles. That build gets scary. I've seen them kill a decimator in one turn.

Also see proton rockets. They kill things good when you plan it out.

Cluster Missile are just plain scary against the low agility ships.