You still have problems justifying ordnance on a lot of other ships. You still have problems with low pilot rating ships beeing able to even shoot their ordnance at all. I think your fix rather fixes a special case that you are looking for to be honest.

I have no special cases in mind. I am trying to find a means to:

a: make ordnance worth taking.

b: give it an advantage over primary weapons without being a go-to option - keeping true to real life and source material.

c: make specific ordnance carrying vehicles unique in their roles (TIE Bombers, Y-Wing, etc).

I'm not saying that my proposed fix is THE fix and flawless in the current game, but it does address these issues. There are no FAQs required and no changing of the cards/rules.

The suggested fix (with some tweaking) gives players a choice to take ordnance platforms or not .. and still permits them to use ordnance in its current form. It opens up new play styles and list building theory.

All i tried to say is that you do c) with your suggestion and not really a).

I also gave an example where you rules lead to an over the top situation (in my opinion) that completely changes the intent of an existing torpedo. Even though i think it is too expensive Advanced Proton Torpedoes have a reason to be range 1. I think your range incease mechanic doesnt solve the problems that are tehre for all potential ordnance carriers but creates new ones instead.

OK, I see your point. Particularly with Adv Proton Torps.

What if there were restrictions placed. Eg. Only applies to missiles/torps 4pts or less OR doubles the range up to a maximum of 5?

I'd like to make clear, I'm not trying to make a fix for ALL ordnance carriers. X-Wing has a torp slot, I don't want an X-Wing to have access to these kind of improvements. Carrying munitions wasn't the X-Wing's primary function. I am trying to create a way for ships whose primary purpose was as a munitions platform .. a way to bring them back into the game in their own unique capacity.

I believe that this fix will help A) as it gives some ships a reason to be carrying ordnance.

Admittedly, the idea isn't perfect. I am appreciating all the feedback and will make changes accordingly. I'd like to think that at the conclusion of this discussion we can have a neat little house-rule that might inject a new and enjoyable element into the game.

Let's do this again. Any real fix needs to address:

1. Cost: this **** is way too expensive.

2. Action Econ: Let me spend my TL to re-roll dice - I earned it!

3. Range: It's a friggin' missile, IN SPACE - you tellin' me that 100 kilometers is too close to engage?

4. Efficiency: HLC's don't need TL and fire every turn for 7 points - an AdvTorp gets used once if you're really lucky, spends his TL for the privilege to attack and is 6 points

5. Slots: What slot is the fix going to use? Who get's left out?

The last one is the real elephant in the room. Everyone seems to think a title is a good fix, but titles are restricted to ship type. So is every ordinance carrier going to get a title fix? I think they've screwed the pooch so bad that there can't be a fix without a major re-design with new cards and costs.

Why not just take out the discard this card to use and allow ships with multi slots, tie bomber is the only one I can think of, to fire both barrels. IE if you have 2 target locks (or focus with deadeye) you can shoot 2 ships a shot or with one lock you send 2 boomers up the tail pipe. Prolly overpowered but it would end large base dominance with a pair of bombers.

Why not just take out the discard this card to use and allow ships with multi slots, tie bomber is the only one I can think of, to fire both barrels. IE if you have 2 target locks (or focus with deadeye) you can shoot 2 ships a shot or with one lock you send 2 boomers up the tail pipe. Prolly overpowered but it would end large base dominance with a pair of bombers.

Maybe fire two torps/missiles/both during the same turn with only one target lock, maybe with attack dice reduced by one. (Obviously going to same target) No attack next turn. Maybe keep one missile/torp, discard the other. Call it battery attack? Sounds like an EPT more than a title or upgrade tho. Or a mod.

5. Slots: What slot is the fix going to use? Who get's left out?

We could use the missile and torpedo slots themselves. FFG have already done this with Extra Munitions, so why not Torpedo and Missile upgrade cards that add a Torpedo or Missile slot as part of the upgrade? Effectively using the slot without using the slot. Make them limited if you want to prevent stacking.

Then for one shot ships like the Tie Advanced, X-wing, E-wing and so forth we can add once off abilities that boost the attack or add a free action for that one turn.

For multi-shot ships like the Tie Bomber and Y-wing you'd go for less potent abilities that have a longer term impact such as keeping the target lock when performing an attack or duplicating the Deadeye EPT.

Or just release the Scimitar bomber like they should have! Would it really have looked worse than the Punisher?

Scimitar can suck it. It's not a real TIE.

Honestly the TIE Glans is still somewhat better looking than the Punisher. Both look super dumb though.

The TIE Heavy Bomber is okay looking, they could have just gone with that.

5. Slots: What slot is the fix going to use? Who get's left out?

We could use the missile and torpedo slots themselves. FFG have already done this with Extra Munitions, so why not Torpedo and Missile upgrade cards that add a Torpedo or Missile slot as part of the upgrade? Effectively using the slot without using the slot. Make them limited if you want to prevent stacking.

Then for one shot ships like the Tie Advanced, X-wing, E-wing and so forth we can add once off abilities that boost the attack or add a free action for that one turn.

For multi-shot ships like the Tie Bomber and Y-wing you'd go for less potent abilities that have a longer term impact such as keeping the target lock when performing an attack or duplicating the Deadeye EPT.

I love the idea of an upgrade that brings its own munitions slot as well as a munitions fix. Who doesn't like a double dip?

Let's do this again. Any real fix needs to address:

1. Cost: this **** is way too expensive.

2. Action Econ: Let me spend my TL to re-roll dice - I earned it!

3. Range: It's a friggin' missile, IN SPACE - you tellin' me that 100 kilometers is too close to engage?

4. Efficiency: HLC's don't need TL and fire every turn for 7 points - an AdvTorp gets used once if you're really lucky, spends his TL for the privilege to attack and is 6 points

5. Slots: What slot is the fix going to use? Who get's left out?

The last one is the real elephant in the room. Everyone seems to think a title is a good fix, but titles are restricted to ship type. So is every ordinance carrier going to get a title fix? I think they've screwed the pooch so bad that there can't be a fix without a major re-design with new cards and costs.

Right but lets not change their cost, instead lets find a few cheap upgrades that can stack to make your 1 or 2 shots that you are ever gonna get in a game worth as much as the many shots the HLC can give. As far as which slot to use, well the Chardaan Reift and B-Wing/E2 upgrades have shown us that you can put a title type card in any slot that is not getting use without burning the title slot. The options are nearly endless.

Torpedo, -2pts

Your upgrade bar gains 2 torpedo icons.

Modification 2pt

After performing a torpedo attack that misses deal the defender one face up damage card.

Modification 1pt

When attacking with Torpedoes roll one additional die.

Astromech 1pt

When attacking with a Missile or Torpedo, you may attack ships outside your firing arc.

System

When attacking with a Missile or Torpedo, you may increase or decrease its range by 1 to a Range of 1-3

EPT 1pt

When attacking with a Missile at Range 1, reduce the defender's agility by 1 to a minimum of 0.

EPT 1pt

When attacking with a Torpedo at Range 3, reduce the defender's agility by 1 to a minimum of 0.

EPT 2pt

When a friendly ship at Range 1-2 is attacking with a missile or torpedo, it may reroll up to 2 attack dice.

Ion turrets cost 5 and you can use them more fun once out of arc. One damage and one ion per successful attack. Y-wings can now shoot primary and ion in arc for 2 extra points, same as HLC.

Advanced Protons cost 6 and give 5 dice in arc at limited range with some dice mod, once. Twice if you use extra munitions for 2 points. Regular prot torps and extra mun give you two shots at 4 dice with slight mod at HLC range for one less point, but HLC doesn't go way after two shots. Is one extra point worth giving up crits so you can fire past the second engagement? Probably. Especially with no need for target locks. Even Nera can't make torps attractive enough to take her in most lists. That being said, scum players gladly spend 3 points for a one shot 3 attack furret.

Cost and action economy have always been the problem, and it's across the board for torps and missiles. At this point only a faq can save them, and I don't see a rule change that being made that won't seem extremely clunky. The next best thing would be EPTs that give Rhymer's and Nera's abilities. Even deadeye has been a wash since generics can't normally take it without spending even more points.

Maybe a generic Bomber title that can go on any ship with torp or missile slots that reduces costs by one or two. Maybe.

Call me crazy, but I would love that Missiles and Torpedoes bypasses the Shields and go directly to the Hull. Makes sense for me

Ion turrets cost 5 and you can use them more fun once out of arc. One damage and one ion per successful attack. Y-wings can now shoot primary and ion in arc for 2 extra points, same as HLC.

Advanced Protons cost 6 and give 5 dice in arc at limited range with some dice mod, once. Twice if you use extra munitions for 2 points. Regular prot torps and extra mun give you two shots at 4 dice with slight mod at HLC range for one less point, but HLC doesn't go way after two shots. Is one extra point worth giving up crits so you can fire past the second engagement? Probably. Especially with no need for target locks. Even Nera can't make torps attractive enough to take her in most lists. That being said, scum players gladly spend 3 points for a one shot 3 attack furret.

Cost and action economy have always been the problem, and it's across the board for torps and missiles. At this point only a faq can save them, and I don't see a rule change that being made that won't seem extremely clunky. The next best thing would be EPTs that give Rhymer's and Nera's abilities. Even deadeye has been a wash since generics can't normally take it without spending even more points.

Maybe a generic Bomber title that can go on any ship with torp or missile slots that reduces costs by one or two. Maybe.

Most people here would quickly agree, with virtually no debate at all, that the guys on charge of the design of the game aren't precisely clueless idiots. Right?

What intrigues me most is why, after all this time, they have not come out with an effective "fix" to ordnance.

They did fix other things like the Y-Wing, the TIE Interceptor, the TIE Phantom, the TIE Advanced, the A-Wing... By themselves, each of these ships had problems that affected a smaller part of the whole game, and still they FAQ'd the Phantom, gave the Interceptor its much needed kneecaps, and put the other two on steroids and cheapened the last.

Why don't they fix ordnance, being it a thing that affects most of the ships in the game?

I am starting to think that they don't want to. Because they have tried several things in their testing environments, and effective ordnance has somehow led the game to a worse state than it is now in their tests.

How? I don't know. What if they made ordnance as effective as Heavy Laser Cannon? Let's say a "Impact Missile Magazine" (missile) 7 points, range 2-3, attack 4, change all (crits) to (hits).

No target lock requirement, no discard requirement. We have something that is as effective and efficient as HLC. Is the game in a better place now? I don't think so. Suddenly the 4 dice attack prevalence increases across the board, as many more ships can carry this kind of attack. 2 and 3 Attack ships see their value decreased. The value of having a Cannon upgrade slot decreases, etc. The consequences can be catastrophic for the game balance. Who knows.

Still, they cannot just leave it as is, because the forums claim for the much needed "fix". But then they release sugar pills like Munitions Failsafe or Extended Munnitions, or pilot abilities that limit themselves to a single ship or a single pilot in order not to affect the most of the game.

I am pretty sure that they know that MF or EM don't solve the problem. But by now I am pretty sure they know the problem is better left unsolved, because it opens a can of worms we don't want to open.

Am I being conspiranoic here?

Another fresh fixing idea:

A modification that removes the Target Lock prerequisite.

Ion turrets cost 5 and you can use them more fun once out of arc. One damage and one ion per successful attack. Y-wings can now shoot primary and ion in arc for 2 extra points, same as HLC.

Advanced Protons cost 6 and give 5 dice in arc at limited range with some dice mod, once. Twice if you use extra munitions for 2 points. Regular prot torps and extra mun give you two shots at 4 dice with slight mod at HLC range for one less point, but HLC doesn't go way after two shots. Is one extra point worth giving up crits so you can fire past the second engagement? Probably. Especially with no need for target locks. Even Nera can't make torps attractive enough to take her in most lists. That being said, scum players gladly spend 3 points for a one shot 3 attack furret.

Cost and action economy have always been the problem, and it's across the board for torps and missiles. At this point only a faq can save them, and I don't see a rule change that being made that won't seem extremely clunky. The next best thing would be EPTs that give Rhymer's and Nera's abilities. Even deadeye has been a wash since generics can't normally take it without spending even more points.

Maybe a generic Bomber title that can go on any ship with torp or missile slots that reduces costs by one or two. Maybe.

Most people here would quickly agree, with virtually no debate at all, that the guys on charge of the design of the game aren't precisely clueless idiots. Right?

What intrigues me most is why, after all this time, they have not come out with an effective "fix" to ordnance.

They did fix other things like the Y-Wing, the TIE Interceptor, the TIE Phantom, the TIE Advanced, the A-Wing... By themselves, each of these ships had problems that affected a smaller part of the whole game, and still they FAQ'd the Phantom, gave the Interceptor its much needed kneecaps, and put the other two on steroids and cheapened the last.

Why don't they fix ordnance, being it a thing that affects most of the ships in the game?

I am starting to think that they don't want to. Because they have tried several things in their testing environments, and effective ordnance has somehow led the game to a worse state than it is now in their tests.

How? I don't know. What if they made ordnance as effective as Heavy Laser Cannon? Let's say a "Impact Missile Magazine" (missile) 7 points, range 2-3, attack 4, change all (crits) to (hits).

No target lock requirement, no discard requirement. We have something that is as effective and efficient as HLC. Is the game in a better place now? I don't think so. Suddenly the 4 dice attack prevalence increases across the board, as many more ships can carry this kind of attack. 2 and 3 Attack ships see their value decreased. The value of having a Cannon upgrade slot decreases, etc. The consequences can be catastrophic for the game balance. Who knows.

Still, they cannot just leave it as is, because the forums claim for the much needed "fix". But then they release sugar pills like Munitions Failsafe or Extended Munnitions, or pilot abilities that limit themselves to a single ship or a single pilot in order not to affect the most of the game.

I am pretty sure that they know that MF or EM don't solve the problem. But by now I am pretty sure they know the problem is better left unsolved, because it opens a can of worms we don't want to open.

Am I being conspiranoic here?

if true, it also leaves them open to using a title-based munition fix as a balance to existing craft. Consider an Xwing tite that gives a free 4 point torpedo and the action to target lock -after- everyone moves. Range three, every Xwing drops their torp, and suddenly mathwing hates everyone hit just as bad as it hates the Xwing.

Most people here would quickly agree, with virtually no debate at all, that the guys on charge of the design of the game aren't precisely clueless idiots. Right?

What intrigues me most is why, after all this time, they have not come out with an effective "fix" to ordnance.

One detail I would mention here is that criticals for huge ships are quite bad, which makes a Heavy Laser Cannon less attractive.

Any improvement should be implemented for a specific goal. I can imagine some improvement that aims to make the X-Wing more popular, because it's an iconic ship and there are good reasons to make it attractive as the backbone for a rebel squadron. But missiles and torpedoes? I'm not sure what their role in a dogfight is supposed to be.

What dogfights do you mean?

We have those pans we move and boost across the board that fire in any direction.

It's possible that most fixes for ordnance make these weapons too powerful in epic play. A single torpedo run with two or three ships might be impossible to stop and take out any huge ship in one or two turns. If this is the case, then ordnance would mainly be effective against those ships, which is not disastrous for the game.

That's actually probably about accurate considering that ships only go up to corvettes and transports in this game.

A flight of TIE Bombers generally can destroy such ships in a single concentrated bombing run.

Posted Today, 02:39 PM

No point cost solution for ordinance:

Allow all ships to fire missiles and torps at one greater/lesser range (no greater than range 3) at one less die. Also fire out of arc at one less die, combined 2 less for out of arc and out of range. Nera keeps her skill to fire out of arc at full strength, as well as Rymer keeping full dice out of range. Advanced Protons at range 2 at 4 dice, still changing 3 blanks to focus, maybe still too expensive. Regular protons wouldn't benefit at range except maybe on 2 dice ships, because they still get that focus to crit.

Well, out of range anyway. Out of arc on all ships with ordanance could mean a very different game. I think regarding the TL require fm on most ord justifies this kind of FAQ change.

Too OP, or not enough to justify points?

Neither fresh nor working. Aren't turrets bad enough? Now missiles with range 5? Don't bother to maneuver, I'll have you in my arc anyway, and from round one. The possibility of an alpha strike reduces the game to a coin flip.

Neither fresh nor working. Aren't turrets bad enough? Now missiles with range 5? Don't bother to maneuver, I'll have you in my arc anyway, and from round one. The possibility of an alpha strike reduces the game to a coin flip.

As the OP's cards are worded, at least one large ship still has to get into range 3 of an enemy to get the initial target locks and then has to pass them off at the end of the round for the other ships to use. So getting some ridiculous 3 torpedo range 5 shot off would be rare at best. My issue with it has more to do with the fact that there is no range 5 ruler in the core set.

Neither fresh nor working. Aren't turrets bad enough? Now missiles with range 5? Don't bother to maneuver, I'll have you in my arc anyway, and from round one. The possibility of an alpha strike reduces the game to a coin flip.

That why I like my solution.

You can balance out extreme ranges by giving more evade dice for ranges beyond 3, making it unlikely that a ship with any agility will actually be hit.

Neither fresh nor working. Aren't turrets bad enough? Now missiles with range 5? Don't bother to maneuver, I'll have you in my arc anyway, and from round one. The possibility of an alpha strike reduces the game to a coin flip.

As the OP's cards are worded, at least one large ship still has to get into range 3 of an enemy to get the initial target locks and then has to pass them off at the end of the round for the other ships to use. So getting some ridiculous 3 torpedo range 5 shot off would be rare at best. My issue with it has more to do with the fact that there is no range 5 ruler in the core set.

thats "fixed" by bundlung the card with an epic ship. Get the ruler at the same time as the card, and screw over people just printing cards for casual play.

Yeah, cause nobody can make their own range 5 stick...

Neither fresh nor working. Aren't turrets bad enough? Now missiles with range 5? Don't bother to maneuver, I'll have you in my arc anyway, and from round one. The possibility of an alpha strike reduces the game to a coin flip.

As the OP's cards are worded, at least one large ship still has to get into range 3 of an enemy to get the initial target locks and then has to pass them off at the end of the round for the other ships to use. So getting some ridiculous 3 torpedo range 5 shot off would be rare at best. My issue with it has more to do with the fact that there is no range 5 ruler in the core set.

Exactly. A consideration was that I wanted to create a different play style, giving ordnance and bombers their own place in the game .. Whilst not encouraging 'camping'.

If you create a list loaded with bombers and 1 shuttle, it is going to get torn up before it can be effective. Therefore, players have to provide escorts, consider particular upgrades, etc. It changes how we think when making lists. On top of that, opponents have to think about their lists and target priority.

Range 5 rulers could be easily made, or use a R3 and measure twice.

I like the freshness

But you need to change it that way so that its useful for Jonus and 3 Scimitars.

Meaning Jonus coordinates the attacks and the Scimitars blast enemy ships.

Could you arrange this?