Do what AW did make primary turrets 1-2 range so they have to get close to fire which will benefit the small ship user.

For the regionals, I flew 2 ion IGs (not a swarm or a turret, but a heavy ship nevertheless) and took down my fair share of turrets and Soontirs (reached the semi-finals). What I noticed in my build when I use it in competitions is that I am allowed 1 or 2 mistakes or really ugly evade dice rolls without losing MOV or firepower. A swarm type build does not have the same luxury: a single mistake will turn the tide.

So how did I factor all of this in? At a tournament, I will face a lot of opponents, some with more experience than others. Against a weaker opponent who will make more mistakes, my odds of winning 100-0 are high. The more games I win with 100 to 0, the better my chances to reach the finals. I'm not sure how many others have shared the same though process, but I suspect that this is the reason why many players have gravitated towards turret builds. They are not necessarily easy to master, but they can forgive a mistake or 2.

Now that the regionals have passed, I'll start working on my next challenge, which will also not be a turret build, but it will take me months to perfect it. I don't mind; I like the challenge

I also think that YT's have some of the best dials in the game. Add in a big base and they move fast. You put Engine Upgrade for boost and these guys are in competition for the most mobile ships in the game. They get hurt and they can just run. Not only that, but they can still fire at you while doing it (and probably limit who can fire at them).

Do what AW did make primary turrets 1-2 range so they have to get close to fire which will benefit the small ship user.

The difference between the Attack Wing turrets and X-Wing turrets is humongous. The Attack Wing ships were the best in every respect before their turrets. The Decimator and YT-1300 already have drawbacks to balance their turrets.

Making primary turrets range 1-2 in XW would just shelf 2 more ships.

not to speak for attack wing (not touching that), but fat primary turrets don't actually have a drawback apart from their cost. I guess they can't get to four dice? Well, expose chiraneau can but he's weird and situational (no EU if going for EI, which he is)

given M.o.v shenanigans, I'm not sure that's much of a weakness

For the regionals, I flew 2 ion IGs (not a swarm or a turret, but a heavy ship nevertheless) and took down my fair share of turrets and Soontirs (reached the semi-finals). What I noticed in my build when I use it in competitions is that I am allowed 1 or 2 mistakes or really ugly evade dice rolls without losing MOV or firepower. A swarm type build does not have the same luxury: a single mistake will turn the tide.

So how did I factor all of this in? At a tournament, I will face a lot of opponents, some with more experience than others. Against a weaker opponent who will make more mistakes, my odds of winning 100-0 are high. The more games I win with 100 to 0, the better my chances to reach the finals. I'm not sure how many others have shared the same though process, but I suspect that this is the reason why many players have gravitated towards turret builds. They are not necessarily easy to master, but they can forgive a mistake or 2.

Now that the regionals have passed, I'll start working on my next challenge, which will also not be a turret build, but it will take me months to perfect it. I don't mind; I like the challenge

Were you in Sherbrooke? If so, I was the guy with the 3 Interceptors you took out in Top 8. That was a deadly build against my Arc Dodgers. Combined with player experience and my lack of practice with my build, I lost the match before it even began. It was a very fun day that ended with a good lesson!

I'm with you on the tournament approach. A bad match up or bad luck will eventually happen. But if you can benefit the most from your good match-up, you should still be able to make it into Top 8 or 4. Some build, like the turret ones, are more generalist and can hold their ground against almost any build. They are more constant than say, a dual IG or triple Interceptor list . Funny thing is, now that turrets are everywhere, I plan so much against them that when I go against another kind of build, I must readapt. Turrets are now generally my good match-up.

Because you can't turn the banks sideways, the best way to change the way boost works for large ships is to increase the cost of engine upgrade when equipping it on a large ship.

I really don't see that happening.

I think FFG could do a lot by simply restricting the engine upgrade to small ships only. As others have pointed out, large ships move much farther than smaller ones with the same dial. That extra boost at the end almost makes them broken with high PS. They would keep the other advantages without fully necessitating nerf warfare to have a prayer.

MOV also needs to be tweaked.

For the regionals, I flew 2 ion IGs (not a swarm or a turret, but a heavy ship nevertheless) and took down my fair share of turrets and Soontirs (reached the semi-finals). What I noticed in my build when I use it in competitions is that I am allowed 1 or 2 mistakes or really ugly evade dice rolls without losing MOV or firepower. A swarm type build does not have the same luxury: a single mistake will turn the tide.

So how did I factor all of this in? At a tournament, I will face a lot of opponents, some with more experience than others. Against a weaker opponent who will make more mistakes, my odds of winning 100-0 are high. The more games I win with 100 to 0, the better my chances to reach the finals. I'm not sure how many others have shared the same though process, but I suspect that this is the reason why many players have gravitated towards turret builds. They are not necessarily easy to master, but they can forgive a mistake or 2.

Now that the regionals have passed, I'll start working on my next challenge, which will also not be a turret build, but it will take me months to perfect it. I don't mind; I like the challenge

Were you in Sherbrooke? If so, I was the guy with the 3 Interceptors you took out in Top 8. That was a deadly build against my Arc Dodgers. Combined with player experience and my lack of practice with my build, I lost the match before it even began. It was a very fun day that ended with a good lesson!

I'm with you on the tournament approach. A bad match up or bad luck will eventually happen. But if you can benefit the most from your good match-up, you should still be able to make it into Top 8 or 4. Some build, like the turret ones, are more generalist and can hold their ground against almost any build. They are more constant than say, a dual IG or triple Interceptor list . Funny thing is, now that turrets are everywhere, I plan so much against them that when I go against another kind of build, I must readapt. Turrets are now generally my good match-up.

Yep, that was me You were actually the first opponent that was not part of my group, all of whoom had experience or had witnessed my squad in action.

I was actually quite impressed with how you managed to keep turr at range 2+ to constantly activate lone wolf (not an easy feat with 3 interceptors moving around). If the games were somehow recorded then I would have been happy watching your replays leading up to that point

not to speak for attack wing (not touching that), but fat primary turrets don't actually have a drawback apart from their cost. I guess they can't get to four dice? Well, expose chiraneau can but he's weird and situational (no EU if going for EI, which he is)

given M.o.v shenanigans, I'm not sure that's much of a weakness

They have poor Agility, are easy to block or catch in arc because they are big, aren't firing 4 dice (the ships in AW had a ton of dice) and are usually half your list.

restricting the Falcon or Decimator to range 1-2 would just mean nobody played them anymore.

not to speak for attack wing (not touching that), but fat primary turrets don't actually have a drawback apart from their cost.

Actually, their drawback is that they are all their eggs in one basket. So, if you can take them out fast, it's a solid win. I've played my 4 Tie Bomber list vs. big turrets and they **** them. The problem comes in that the 4 Tie Bomber list has weaknesses vs other lists. I would've risked the occasional Phantom and all the Soontir Fels for Regionals with this list, but bro bots are a nasty counter to the 4 Tie Bomber list. Their high agility can just avoid the damage.

Also, blocking the big ships helps take them down, as well. That is a weakness. One cheap blocker can help bring it down.

not to speak for attack wing (not touching that), but fat primary turrets don't actually have a drawback apart from their cost. I guess they can't get to four dice? Well, expose chiraneau can but he's weird and situational (no EU if going for EI, which he is)

given M.o.v shenanigans, I'm not sure that's much of a weakness

They have poor Agility, are easy to block or catch in arc because they are big, aren't firing 4 dice (the ships in AW had a ton of dice) and are usually half your list.

restricting the Falcon or Decimator to range 1-2 would just mean nobody played them anymore.

Now your getting the idea.

not to speak for attack wing (not touching that), but fat primary turrets don't actually have a drawback apart from their cost. I guess they can't get to four dice? Well, expose chiraneau can but he's weird and situational (no EU if going for EI, which he is)

given M.o.v shenanigans, I'm not sure that's much of a weakness

They have poor Agility, are easy to block or catch in arc because they are big, aren't firing 4 dice (the ships in AW had a ton of dice) and are usually half your list.

restricting the Falcon or Decimator to range 1-2 would just mean nobody played them anymore.

Now your getting the idea.

Taking ships from 100% to 0% isn't an ideal goal. They should still get play but not be the only thing in top tier.

I also think that YT's have some of the best dials in the game. Add in a big base and they move fast. You put Engine Upgrade for boost and these guys are in competition for the most mobile ships in the game. They get hurt and they can just run. Not only that, but they can still fire at you while doing it (and probably limit who can fire at them).

I can see wanting to limit their speed. No real problem on my end. They still have all the other upgrades/stats. The only thing to remember is their ship base is so large. Maybe Fantasy Flight let them take EU because of that. Who knows.

Just for the record, I am not for or against any ideas for nerfing big, turreted ships. I merely point out that they are crazy maneuverable. To be honest, it kind of makes them predictable. Draw you through the asteroid fields. Bait with a ship. That ship then zips hard and fast out of there and leaves you firing at nothing. You chase it as it fires from behind at you and dodges your arcs (or outruns most of them). So.....don't fall for their traps. Or block them and they will get screwed. Easier said than done, but just expect what it's going to do.

Just for the record, I am not for or against any ideas for nerfing big, turreted ships. I merely point out that they are crazy maneuverable. To be honest, it kind of makes them predictable. Draw you through the asteroid fields. Bait with a ship. That ship then zips hard and fast out of there and leaves you firing at nothing. You chase it as it fires from behind at you and dodges your arcs (or outruns most of them). So.....don't fall for their traps. Or block them and they will get screwed. Easier said than done, but just expect what it's going to do.

Precisely this. I think the biggest strength of turrets is a purely psychological one. Turrets under the control of good players draw you into playing their game of chasing them around the board while they offset their inferior numbers by limiting your shots and ranges. The best success I've had vs. turrets came when I realized this and every time I fight a turret I check to see if I'm chasing and should instead regroup and reengage.

The game needs tractor beams. There, I've said it

(In all seriousness, however, an upgrade that would allow you to reduce an opponent's speed by 1 could be a huge thing, forcing him to use his action to use his engine upgrade or accidentally colliding with asteroids. It seems like a wicked upgrade that could be fun on a shuttle, IG-88 or something)

For the regionals, I flew 2 ion IGs (not a swarm or a turret, but a heavy ship nevertheless) and took down my fair share of turrets and Soontirs (reached the semi-finals). What I noticed in my build when I use it in competitions is that I am allowed 1 or 2 mistakes or really ugly evade dice rolls without losing MOV or firepower. A swarm type build does not have the same luxury: a single mistake will turn the tide.

So how did I factor all of this in? At a tournament, I will face a lot of opponents, some with more experience than others. Against a weaker opponent who will make more mistakes, my odds of winning 100-0 are high. The more games I win with 100 to 0, the better my chances to reach the finals. I'm not sure how many others have shared the same though process, but I suspect that this is the reason why many players have gravitated towards turret builds. They are not necessarily easy to master, but they can forgive a mistake or 2.

Now that the regionals have passed, I'll start working on my next challenge, which will also not be a turret build, but it will take me months to perfect it. I don't mind; I like the challenge

Were you in Sherbrooke? If so, I was the guy with the 3 Interceptors you took out in Top 8. That was a deadly build against my Arc Dodgers. Combined with player experience and my lack of practice with my build, I lost the match before it even began. It was a very fun day that ended with a good lesson!

I'm with you on the tournament approach. A bad match up or bad luck will eventually happen. But if you can benefit the most from your good match-up, you should still be able to make it into Top 8 or 4. Some build, like the turret ones, are more generalist and can hold their ground against almost any build. They are more constant than say, a dual IG or triple Interceptor list . Funny thing is, now that turrets are everywhere, I plan so much against them that when I go against another kind of build, I must readapt. Turrets are now generally my good match-up.

Yep, that was me You were actually the first opponent that was not part of my group, all of whoom had experience or had witnessed my squad in action.

I was actually quite impressed with how you managed to keep turr at range 2+ to constantly activate lone wolf (not an easy feat with 3 interceptors moving around). If the games were somehow recorded then I would have been happy watching your replays leading up to that point

Your build was actually the worst match-up I could end up with. I never played against a Dual IG list.

During all the Regional, my strategy was to control the range and engagement, keep it at range 3 so that I can benefit from the range dice and Autothrusters to keep me alive or dodge the arc if not possible. But your build was playing on the same strength (only better because I could not benefit from the range bonus dice) and it took me the first engagement to realise it, it was already too late. A big base Range 3 arc is much harder to dodge. If I were to do it again, I think I would try to be more aggressive and close the distance... and I would give PtL to Jax instead of Predator... **** it didn't work out in the tournament!

As for Turr, he was definetly my MVP of the day. I would not have made top 8 without him. During one match-up, he effectively cleared the table when I lost Fel and Jax early. Tie Fighters don't have much chance to hit a Tie Interceptor with 4-5 dice with a reroll and Autothursters in range 3.

Just for the record, I am not for or against any ideas for nerfing big, turreted ships. I merely point out that they are crazy maneuverable. To be honest, it kind of makes them predictable. Draw you through the asteroid fields. Bait with a ship. That ship then zips hard and fast out of there and leaves you firing at nothing. You chase it as it fires from behind at you and dodges your arcs (or outruns most of them). So.....don't fall for their traps. Or block them and they will get screwed. Easier said than done, but just expect what it's going to do.

Precisely this. I think the biggest strength of turrets is a purely psychological one. Turrets under the control of good players draw you into playing their game of chasing them around the board while they offset their inferior numbers by limiting your shots and ranges. The best success I've had vs. turrets came when I realized this and every time I fight a turret I check to see if I'm chasing and should instead regroup and reengage.

14 out of 17 Regionals being won by big, turreted ships is more than just psychological.

Just for the record, I am not for or against any ideas for nerfing big, turreted ships. I merely point out that they are crazy maneuverable. To be honest, it kind of makes them predictable. Draw you through the asteroid fields. Bait with a ship. That ship then zips hard and fast out of there and leaves you firing at nothing. You chase it as it fires from behind at you and dodges your arcs (or outruns most of them). So.....don't fall for their traps. Or block them and they will get screwed. Easier said than done, but just expect what it's going to do.

Precisely this. I think the biggest strength of turrets is a purely psychological one. Turrets under the control of good players draw you into playing their game of chasing them around the board while they offset their inferior numbers by limiting your shots and ranges. The best success I've had vs. turrets came when I realized this and every time I fight a turret I check to see if I'm chasing and should instead regroup and reengage.

14 out of 17 Regionals being won by big, turreted ships is more than just psychological.

Huh. Looking through the results, I counted 16.

Summary

Faction breakdown

Rebel Wins: 8

Imperial Wins: 8

Scum and Villainy Wins: 1

Winning Lists

Imperials

• (1) Dual VT-49
• (4) Chiraneau / Fel
• (1) Chiraneau / Whisper
• (1) Oicunn / Fel
• (1) Triple Interceptors (Fel / Jax / Royal Guard)

Rebels

• (2) Han / Wild Space Fringer + Mangler + Outrider
• (1) Han / 3 Bandits
• (1) Chewie / Vrill (no Outrider)
• (1) Dash + HLC + Outrider / Chewbacca
• (1) Dash + HLC + Outrider / Corran
• (1) Dash + HLC + Outrider / 3 A-wings
• (1) Chewbacca / 3 Z-95's
• (1) Corran Horn + 2 B-wings w/ FCS + Ion

Scum

• (1) IG88 B&C

Overall archetype

Turrets

• (5) Dual Turrets
• (5) VT-49 + Fel
• (1) VT-49 + Whisper
• (2) YT-1300 + support
• (2) HLC Outrider + support

Non-Turrets

• (1) Corran Horn + 2 low PS control ships
• (1) BroBots
• (1) Triple Interceptors*

* Only winning list that is NOT Fat or Moderately Obese

Going through the winners posted, I counted 16 big ship turrets.

I see 15 in the list you posted there.

not to speak for attack wing (not touching that), but fat primary turrets don't actually have a drawback apart from their cost. I guess they can't get to four dice? Well, expose chiraneau can but he's weird and situational (no EU if going for EI, which he is)

given M.o.v shenanigans, I'm not sure that's much of a weakness

They have poor Agility, are easy to block or catch in arc because they are big, aren't firing 4 dice (the ships in AW had a ton of dice) and are usually half your list.

restricting the Falcon or Decimator to range 1-2 would just mean nobody played them anymore.

Now your getting the idea.

Taking ships from 100% to 0% isn't an ideal goal. They should still get play but not be the only thing in top tier.

It wouldn't drop them to 0% but it would raise the skill threshold needed to make them viable, at the moment it's way to easy to just slap down a turret ship and do well.

Going through the winners posted, I counted 16 big ship turrets.

I see 15 in the list you posted there.

OK...I just looked at the top. 15 out of 18 are big, turreted ships. MJ didn't get the totals correct, probably b/c there are a number of updates he's waiting on.

not to speak for attack wing (not touching that), but fat primary turrets don't actually have a drawback apart from their cost. I guess they can't get to four dice? Well, expose chiraneau can but he's weird and situational (no EU if going for EI, which he is)

given M.o.v shenanigans, I'm not sure that's much of a weakness

They have poor Agility, are easy to block or catch in arc because they are big, aren't firing 4 dice (the ships in AW had a ton of dice) and are usually half your list.

restricting the Falcon or Decimator to range 1-2 would just mean nobody played them anymore.

Now your getting the idea.

Taking ships from 100% to 0% isn't an ideal goal. They should still get play but not be the only thing in top tier.

It wouldn't drop them to 0% but it would raise the skill threshold needed to make them viable, at the moment it's way to easy to just slap down a turret ship and do well.

You think people would win major tournaments by handicapping themselves with overcosted ships that can't fire as far as other ships? You don't think people would just move onto Vader/Fel/Whisper once they have no counters?

edit: I would love to see how many swarms each fat * list beat on their way to the final table

I think the current meta is extremely boring to watch and it'll do more harm letting things stay stagnant than it will doing something to change things up.

It's also bad for business if new players come in see people only using two ships and copy them it drives down sales if people really think there's no other option.