wouldn't say easy mode and risk glossing over the accomplishments of players taking top places in highly competitive events with them

I would say forgiving and simpler than any other ship in the game for sure since they worry about the same things (obstructions and ships) only to a far lesser degree (facing for shots), but I don't know how much that actually matters at the higher levels of competition where mistakes are assumed to not happen as frequently (?)

I would absolutely say that the idea that we somehow need primary turrets to counter arc-dodgers doesn't seem realistic when so many counters (control, bugzappers, vader, obstructions, just straight blocking) exist and turrets seem to do just fine on their own (including dodging arcs)

Watch the old cloaking mechanics come back.

The TIE Phantom was not the problem. Autothrusting Interceptors are not a problem.

If anything is a problem (which many don't think there is btw ), it is turrets.

Han Shoots First was a thing before CR90. Fat Han was a thing before Wave 4's TIE Phantom.

Super Dash/Corran and Deci/Ace is still a thing even after the TIE Phantom nerf and the release of Scum and Autothrusters.

Turrets are not going away, they are becoming more prevalent.

I do not believe it is going to get better if people continue to point fingers at maneuverable ships that embody the spirit of a dog fighting game and gloss over the 'easy-mode' winning that turrets grant so very many players.

Except that the Phantom most definitely moved people away from the natural Falcon predator, the B-wing. The B-wing was what was keeping double Falcons in check post Wave 3. But the Phantom pretty much change all that. While the B-wing does have some cool maneuver options, you can't equip it for those and still take Veteran Instincts.

And looking at how the Regional results are progressing, it is down right wrong to say that Turrets are increasing, when the top 8 diversity is really getting interesting. Are turrets still winning, sure. But the meta is still evolving. I mean, we essentially got a whole new landscape with the Decloaking change. Time is needed to figure out how everything goes against each again.

I heard you out and still think your assertion is a bit foolish.

Interceptors as a whole are still not a threat to most lists. The one guy who happens to have one of the top 3 abilities in the game happens to be in an interceptor. Is Turr or Jax tearing it up and I'm missing something? Where are the royal guards, Kir, Lorrir... Yah. I think you get the idea.

Brobots are showing but if turrets weren't such a big thing they'd find something better to do with that slot. Star Vipers are fun but to say that star vipers with auto-thrusters are causing more turrets than before, with any amount of seriousness, would be one of the more ridiculous things ever typed here (and that's saying something).

If half the game or more is maneuvering, ships who only care about half of maneuvering will always be strong. When those ships also get to excel at maneuvering the game does indeed become easier for them. When they can also ignore 2 dice guns in any number under 4 things continue to get easier. Oh, and they point fortress... Don't forget that. It's pretty easy to see why they are popular at the most competitive level. You almost are playing at a disadvantage if you're not playing them...almost. Almost.

Well - I think in part, previously, people were running turret + arc dodger - as you have a way to counter other people's arc dodgers - and you have an arc dodger to go after fighters. Now - that arc dodger is less likely to be whisper - as the change in phantoms has scared some people, and Autothrusters helps protect your Arc dodger...

This means that the archetype is more viable than it used to be - so that combination is increasing.

*These are just the results taken from Regional tournaments so far this year, and of those available on listjuggler. I know this isn’t a full representation of what’s being played, but it helps make my point

So, with that comment, you entirely fail. You cannot cherry pick stats and then declare than the resulting selection of some of the data "proves" your point.

Turrets are a thing. People really need to stop crying over this, and learn to deal with them or get someone to show them how to...

Turrets are a thing. People really need to stop crying over this, and learn to deal with them or get someone to show them how to...

Nice strawman there, the issue isn't that people can't kill them it's that it's boring to play against and boring to watch on YouTube, people feel pressured to use the same lists in order to compete and that's not a good thing either.

Actually the issue is that some people don't like turrets in the game. They keep trying to find *any* reason (even less factual ones) to justify their intolerance of turrets to the rest of us. Today it's autothrusters, tomorrow who knows (maybe the Luke crew is too OP). Apparently the designers disagree with this position, in that they keep adding more big turrets to the game. Can't wait to see what happens here when Scum finally gets a big turret. So many sploding heads. Sorry you guys don't like the mechanics of the game.

Competitive players play competitive lists. Competitive lists tend to have an advantage over non-competitive lists. Autothrusters make more lists competitive. They don't make other lists less competitive. So you can expect to see a more varied distribution of lists at competitive events. And we do. Seems like the OP just wants another way to hate turrets, and is trying to find anything that will stick.

That may be your view on it, and fair enough, but sooooo many of the references made to turrets being evilz hinges on the fact people don't like what they can do, and have trouble countering it, not that it is boring. I have played with and vs turrets, and don't find it boring at all, but your mileage may vary.

My point; turrets are a thing, and people whining isn't going to make them go away.

Turrets are a thing. People really need to stop crying over this, and learn to deal with them or get someone to show them how to...

Nice strawman there, the issue isn't that people can't kill them it's that it's boring to play against and boring to watch on YouTube, people feel pressured to use the same lists in order to compete and that's not a good thing either.

Not true devs read the forums that's how we got autothrusters the tie advanced fix etc.

You think the qqing over phantoms had no effect?

People won't stop voicing their objections and ffg will continue to tweak the game trying to get people off turrets sooner or later the balance will tip back to snubfighters.

Not true devs read the forums that's how we got autothrusters the tie advanced fix etc.

You think the qqing over phantoms had no effect?

People won't stop voicing their objections and ffg will continue to tweak the game trying to get people off turrets sooner or later the balance will tip back to snubfighters.

Not necessarily true. While you're right that they do listen to feedback, there's (to my knowledge) no clear correlation between our comments and their activities. The AT and TIE-A fixes didn't necessarily happen because people were unhappy with them, but because they were poorly balanced. It is possible to independently observe that without listening to us whine on the boards.

I'm not saying they don't listen, just that it's not as if whining here is a heroic method of fixing the game. Further, while I do expect a turret debuff at some point in the future, it's not as if non-turrets don't show up. I don't see why a turretless environment is any healthier than our current mix of turrets and non-turrets. They want all ships played and, except for the (turret) HWK, TIE Bomber, and X-Wing, most seem to at least make an appearance right now. That's pretty cool.

The problem is not the turret per se, but turrets on fat ships, and only during tournament setting games. I don't hear people complaining about Y-Wings or HWK running turrets.

There's time limit during tournament, so you have to hurry up to kill the fatty, while his partner (an arcdogder) is picking at you from behind. That really reduces the available tactics, the fat turret player kills a few of your ships and retreats, preferrably to an area where he has an advantage.

Just yesterday I beat the usual Deci Soontir list with a new swarm list (new as in I've never played it before, used to play the 8 TIE swarm); I lost only 2 ships in the process, and it took me 69 minutes to kill the deci. My opponent knows what he's doing, he plays the deci list on regular basis; he's no super pro, I'd say good mid level gamer, I consider me to be a bit better but not much. Dice rolls where normal on both sides, only one freak roll (a single hit against Soontir, and he rolled all blanks and received one damage - the first attack against him).

Not true devs read the forums that's how we got autothrusters the tie advanced fix etc.

You think the qqing over phantoms had no effect?

People won't stop voicing their objections and ffg will continue to tweak the game trying to get people off turrets sooner or later the balance will tip back to snubfighters.

Just because the designers seem to have a lot of my beliefs, doesn't mean that they got their ideas from me.

Well, at least turrets don't completely dominate the game anymore.

Is all this talk just because we are talking competative play. There are some very strong builds against some less effective builds and some very strong builds against some very strong builds depending on match ups.

The choice is obviously ours to take what we want, but is it realy any surprise that people are running certain builds to win.

Maybe the idea of Xwing being balanced at 100pts is gone. I don't want any of these ships to be nurfed as right now for the most part we know what they can do and how to deal with them, we just chose to go about list construction our own way.

Have autothrusters made turrets more desirable, yes as we all know how strong fell was and now is and know in a tournament we are likely to see him on the board. The y wing got a great buff with scum but trying to lock down fel even with all the new toys to deal with hi agility targets has not become any easyer.

So what's the answer, I'm not convinced that continually trying to buff/debuff ships is the answer. I'm starting to believe that a points increase or side bar interchange of say 10pts might be the way to go.

Is all this talk just because we are talking competative play. There are some very strong builds against some less effective builds and some very strong builds against some very strong builds depending on match ups.

The choice is obviously ours to take what we want, but is it realy any surprise that people are running certain builds to win.

Maybe the idea of Xwing being balanced at 100pts is gone. I don't want any of these ships to be nurfed as right now for the most part we know what they can do and how to deal with them, we just chose to go about list construction our own way.

Have autothrusters made turrets more desirable, yes as we all know how strong fell was and now is and know in a tournament we are likely to see him on the board. The y wing got a great buff with scum but trying to lock down fel even with all the new toys to deal with hi agility targets has not become any easyer.

So what's the answer, I'm not convinced that continually trying to buff/debuff ships is the answer. I'm starting to believe that a points increase or side bar interchange of say 10pts might be the way to go.

Some ships are simply in need of a buff. In the course of that buff, they can be made to fill niches that are currently unfilled. That's a very good thing. Ideally, this game would be balanced such that players can show up with 1 list that can be played in a couple different ways depending on what their opponent shows up with. As a small example: if someone brings AutoFel, but their opponent has no turrets, the player with Fel can start sniping at Range 3. That's a very different playstyle from how one would run Fel against a turret. If we can expand that to a full list, ships that are brought out with 1 build, but different tactics depending on their opponent, then we'll be in shape.

One of the neat things about the current design thinking is the way a lot of cards have a greater and lesser effect, depending on what the opponent has brought. Autothrusters is _always_ useful, but it's _really_ useful against turrets. Predator is _always_ useful, but it's _really_ useful against PS 1 and PS 2 ships. I hope the next batch of missiles and torpedoes will have similar design elements.

Those sorts of design elements are, I think, what will make a sideboard unnecessary. I look forward to seeing more.

A sideboard system could help alot to deter so many clone builds, being able to swap in a stress causer when you see fel or a ship with outmaneuver to counter a fat Han.

You overestimate the value of a sideboard in this game. This isn't Attack Wing, where all ships can have a wide variety of powerful upgrades.

I think the problem with adding a side board in this game is that you only play one round and not a best out of three. In most games that have a side board you start with the main deck and have options on the side to swap out of your current deck for round two and three after you see what they have during the first round.

It might end up being too much of having every answer available to you to counter whatever the other squad is.

Every 100 point list in this game should be given a free 10 points to spend on any consumable upgrades they want. So bombs, ordnance, Chewbacca, Leia, and Moff Jerrjerrod crews, Adrenaline Rush, Countermeasures, Hot Shot Blasters, etc.

Ordnance might still suck but it'd be free. *shrugs*

Every 100 point list in this game should be given a free 10 points to spend on any consumable upgrades they want. So bombs, ordnance, Chewbacca, Leia, and Moff Jerrjerrod crews, Adrenaline Rush, Countermeasures, Hot Shot Blasters, etc.

Ordnance might still suck but it'd be free. *shrugs*

I'd be down for that

At least it may make ordinance used a little more