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.

Even with Engine Upgrade instead of Kagi, the alpha strike occurs in round two at the latest. In round one you can neither blow up even one large ship nor touch the bombers. Same difference.

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?

I actually quite like this. The whole point of most the missiles and torps in the old xwing game was that once you had a lock they homed in (i know homing missiles represent this), you just had to have them in your sights long enough to get a lock.

I think ordnance would be better represented if the TL had to be aquired in the arc but they could then be fired at any time later on the locked ship.

Its never going to happen like that as it requires a fundamental change to the rules and negates Nera totally, you could change her ability to allow her to do 360 TLs but again thats never going to happen.

But missiles and torpedoes? I'm not sure what their role in a dogfight is supposed to be.

Ah well you've not seen 'Top Gun' then?

I think its a case of when Star Wars was made it was the post Vietnam War era and most fighter aircraft carried missiles and rockets, some had no guns.

I think torpedoes were a neccesary plot device (the bouncing bomb) for the fighters to be able to take out the death star (ruhr valley dam) but everything else written about the fighters in star wars around that time unconsciously took into account that in aerial combat of the 70s and 80s it was really all about getting a missile lock on something before it was even visible to the naked eye.

The guided missile was relatively 'hi tech' so fitted with a sci fi universe. This was then welded to the WWII fighter cam style used to recreate early scenes to give us a 'used future' where fighters carried lasers, blasters and ordnance.

But missiles and torpedoes? I'm not sure what their role in a dogfight is supposed to be.

Ah well you've not seen 'Top Gun' then?

But honestly, I know next to nothing about dogfighting aircraft in the real world. But maybe you thought my question was retorical: it wasn't. I really think that before looking at fixes, it should be clear what ordnance is supposed to do. That is why I compared it to the X-Wing fixes, because when that spaceship is concerned, I think we all have a fairly good idea about what place it had in the rebel alliance. I know I could rarely shoot TIE fighters with proton torpedoes in the X-Wing computer game, so maybe that is how we want this miniatures game to function. Or maybe not. There doesn't seem to be a guiding thought behind the fixes other than 'make them more useful'. Useful for what?

Well they work pretty well on low AG big ships, or at least i've had good luck with them.

I also play a lot of epic games where bomber flights actually have a role.

The top gun reference was that the entire premise of the film is that after Korea the US air force and the navy aviators stopped using planes with guns/cannons and relied entirely on missiles. The top gun school in the film is about teaching pilots to dogfight with both guns and missiles.

For example the f4 phantom was a inteceptor/fighter bomber /EW fighter and had no integral cannon and relied on gun pods being retro fitted later and eventually having a internal gun fitted on later models.

The point being that missiles clearly have a part in dogfighting but its daft to rely on them entirely in a real world setting

With Star Wars using footage from real world dogfights to base the model dogfights around you can understand why the ethos of the time was 'fighters get missile locks and use orddance' , something that carried through to the game.

I think ordnance would be better represented if the TL had to be aquired in the arc but they could then be fired at any time later on the locked ship.

Ordnance would be better represented if the TL had to be acquired in the arc, and you lost it if the ship ever left your arc, BUT both the target lock and the ordnance range was much greater than range 3.

Be quite harsh if you had to keep it in arc but you're right it might be more accurate. Maybe you could say keep it in arc fro some types but others like homing missile stayed locked?

Be quite harsh if you had to keep it in arc

Not with the extended range it wouldn't be. Keep in mind that at range, like, 5, your arc can take up a quarter of the table.

If the goal is to make the ordnance accurate to it's portrayal in most of the games and books then you have most target locks occurring well outside gun range, generally at incoming ships that can't avoid the lock because of the range.

Then, at extreme range, it becomes a question of "can I dodge or shoot down this missile before it hits me", which is where the ship's agility comes in. If missiles have a lot of hit dice to hit, while torpedoes have only a few, it makes missiles harder to dodge, and torpedoes only good for hitting large or huge ships with no agility.

If the ship evades, it takes no damage. If even a single hit is score on the hit roll, then the ship takes a separate full damage roll from the warhead. Moderate for missiles, or high for torpedoes.

Speculation for Kwing/Punisher:

Advanced homing torpedo (3 points)

3 dice, cancel up to 3 of the defeners Evade results (including evade tokens)

Like the original homing torpedo, only affordable and actually effective, I's obvously intended to take out evasion based "Fat" builds, like Corran, or swarms of Tie fighters. It's effectiveness against Bwings and fat turrets is decidely limited.

Plasma Torpedo: 4 points, range 1-2

5 dice, Turn all hits into crits

An anti- hull missile. If the target's shields are still up, this thing is a weaker, longer ranged Proton Rocket for an extra point. If the shields are DOWN, however.... lets see how that Decimator, Ywing swarm or Fat Han like to have to deal with an average of about 3 crits

Thoughts?

But missiles and torpedoes? I'm not sure what their role in a dogfight is supposed to be.

Ah well you've not seen 'Top Gun' then?

I think its a case of when Star Wars was made it was the post Vietnam War era and most fighter aircraft carried missiles and rockets, some had no guns.

I think torpedoes were a neccesary plot device (the bouncing bomb) for the fighters to be able to take out the death star (ruhr valley dam) but everything else written about the fighters in star wars around that time unconsciously took into account that in aerial combat of the 70s and 80s it was really all about getting a missile lock on something before it was even visible to the naked eye.

The guided missile was relatively 'hi tech' so fitted with a sci fi universe. This was then welded to the WWII fighter cam style used to recreate early scenes to give us a 'used future' where fighters carried lasers, blasters and ordnance.

Well, the TIE Fighter and Interceptor don't need missiles because they are short range space superiority fighters. X-wings and Y-wings carry torpedoes because they are assault fighters (and in case of the Y a light bomber) meaning they need to pack a bigger punch for slower, hard targets like small capital ships. The torps do not play a role in dog fighting. Missiles may serve a similar role, but are generally faster in the lore and may be used during opening engagement in dogfights.

Good observations though. A lot of people forget the time period in which SW was being written, and the numerous cinimatic influences that George used.

Here is my try for a fix..

Modification: Advanced Tracking Device.

cost: 0 P.

Action: at the start of the combat phase you may get up to two target locks on one enemy ship that is within range three and your firing arc.

This would help low PS pilots to acquire target locks. High PS pilots are helped to a lesser degree. You get an extra target lock so it helps with dice modification when using ordnance but not really when using other weapons. You can use one of the target locks for an attack and save the second so it is somewhat useful also when you don´t use ordnance.

Why not just make ordnance more attractive? How about this?

FAQ rule change:

When attacking with either missles or torpedoes if, after both attack and defense dice are rolled and modified, there is at least one uncanceled hit or crit then cancel all defense dice and deal all hits and crits remaining.

But missiles and torpedoes? I'm not sure what their role in a dogfight is supposed to be.

Ah well you've not seen 'Top Gun' then?

I think its a case of when Star Wars was made it was the post Vietnam War era and most fighter aircraft carried missiles and rockets, some had no guns.

I think torpedoes were a neccesary plot device (the bouncing bomb) for the fighters to be able to take out the death star (ruhr valley dam) but everything else written about the fighters in star wars around that time unconsciously took into account that in aerial combat of the 70s and 80s it was really all about getting a missile lock on something before it was even visible to the naked eye.

The guided missile was relatively 'hi tech' so fitted with a sci fi universe. This was then welded to the WWII fighter cam style used to recreate early scenes to give us a 'used future' where fighters carried lasers, blasters and ordnance.

Well, the TIE Fighter and Interceptor don't need missiles because they are short range space superiority fighters. X-wings and Y-wings carry torpedoes because they are assault fighters (and in case of the Y a light bomber) meaning they need to pack a bigger punch for slower, hard targets like small capital ships. The torps do not play a role in dog fighting. Missiles may serve a similar role, but are generally faster in the lore and may be used during opening engagement in dogfights.

Good observations though. A lot of people forget the time period in which SW was being written, and the numerous cinimatic influences that George used.

If we go back to the F4 phantom on being an example of one of the most numerous fighter aircraft produced during the 1960s and early 70s.

The phantom was an interceptor, it had no guns.

Like i say it wasnt until the late 70s that fighters started 'dogfighting' again so I'm pretty sure the 'vision' of future dogfighting in sci fi at the time was all about missiles and rockets (certainly seems to be from reading sci fi fiction from the time).

Lucas brough in a retro touch as he did rough cuts/story boards of 'star wars' space combat scenes using wwii movie and figher gun cam footage. Its why we have 'sounds in space' and its also why some of the trench run dialogue is the same as 'dambusters'.

'Can you see the towers?'

'How many guns?'

'I dont now about ten i think'

Interesting discussion this is.

It seems there are plenty of options available to us and each has their own merit. I refuse to sit back and let munitions sit on the shelf gathering dust. I have amended the cards. I will play test over the next few weeks and see how it plays.

Large ship is required to gain TL. Bomber class ships can fire at maximum range of 5. I don't think it is OP but certainly requires a change to your play style.

Thoughts, suggestions?

Interesting discussion this is.

It seems there are plenty of options available to us and each has their own merit. I refuse to sit back and let munitions sit on the shelf gathering dust. I have amended the cards. I will play test over the next few weeks and see how it plays.

Large ship is required to gain TL. Bomber class ships can fire at maximum range of 5. I don't think it is OP but certainly requires a change to your play style.

Thoughts, suggestions?

If you do this then you must also extend the range for acquiring a TL out to at least 5. And of course you will need something to measure out to range 5. To me that's the biggest handicap. It's hard to gain approval if non-standard equipment is needed.

If you do this then you must also extend the range for acquiring a TL out to at least 5. And of course you will need something to measure out to range 5. To me that's the biggest handicap. It's hard to gain approval if non-standard equipment is needed.

No. You require the Large Ship to obtain a TL the regular way. The large ships then pass the data to the bombers. It removes a crazy alpha strike and kinda stops people from loading up bombers and camping.

It means that playlists have to consider this. A large ship, a bomber or 2 and an escort or 2 could make for a fun game for both opponents. Your opponent must prioritise their targets effectively, a bomber can live up to its unique role and it still means munitions are not an auto include - just a different option/play style to consider.

As for the range rule .. granted, an R5 would be perfect but as this is just a house rule .. a simple double measure fo the R3 would suffice. If by chance FFG considered this, I'm sure they could include a little attachment to the standard R3 that had an addition R2.

Tracking Device (missile upgrade)

Discard this card to place a Tracking Device token on ship in your arc range 1-3.

Tracking Device allows all friendly ships to satisfy [Target Lock] requirements for secondary weapons without need for TL tokens. Tracking device is not spent.

This would come with the never-to-be-released TIE Advanced V1 with Inquisitor pilot.

Dunno how much it would cost. 3? Put it on a high PS missile carrier and load up everyone else with big alpha strike torps. Bye bye PWT!

Oh I forgot, that would have to be a Unique upgrade card, gotta balance it a little.

Interesting discussion this is.

It seems there are plenty of options available to us and each has their own merit. I refuse to sit back and let munitions sit on the shelf gathering dust. I have amended the cards. I will play test over the next few weeks and see how it plays.

Large ship is required to gain TL. Bomber class ships can fire at maximum range of 5. I don't think it is OP but certainly requires a change to your play style.

Thoughts, suggestions?

I like the rewording you've done from the original post and that you changed the "mod" to a double torp slot that gives 2 more torp slots. It limits it to only a few true ordnance ships without sacrificing another useful upgrade slot.

I assume that when you say double the range, you mean double the 'maximum' range. Adv Protons become 1 or 2, not just 2. Clusters become 1-4, not 2-4, etc.

Looking forward to read how things play out.

You need to add a Limited keyword to the second card. Otherwise I could take it 3 times and release Proton rockets at range 5 for 3 points.

You need to add a Limited keyword to the second card. Otherwise I could take it 3 times and release Proton rockets at range 5 for 3 points.

Not Really. The Large Base support ship is the only one that can pass the target locks and these cards do nothing to the range limits for target locks. You can also only pass one lock per turn during the end phase.

In order to get target locks for all your bombers to use, either they need to get into range 3 or your support ship has to go in there by itself to pass locks off. By doing this, it risks engaging a whole fleet while his bombers hang back. Keep in mind it is doing this with no actions to help itself attack or defend since it is taking target locks and not even using them. If anything, with some luck and smart flying, you might get 1 or 2 shots off outside of range 3 before the enemy gets into position to take out the bombers or support ship.

The OP also edited the original card idea to give ordnance "double" range so that means those prockets can only be fired at range 1 or 2.

He's talking about the 2nd card though. The one that increases weapon ranges.

What he's describing is taking that card, Proton Rockets range increases from 1 to 2. But because the weapon adds the same number of slots that it uses, you can take it a second time. Increasing the range from 2 to 4. Then a third time increasing it to 8(which stops at 5).

Tracking Device (missile upgrade)

Discard this card to place a Tracking Device token on ship in your arc range 1-3.

Tracking Device allows all friendly ships to satisfy [Target Lock] requirements for secondary weapons without need for TL tokens. Tracking device is not spent.

This would come with the never-to-be-released TIE Advanced V1 with Inquisitor pilot.

Dunno how much it would cost. 3? Put it on a high PS missile carrier and load up everyone else with big alpha strike torps. Bye bye PWT!

Two tie bombers with ordinance and a range doubler, and the shuttle pilot who can transfer 1 Lock a turn, your lock transfer crew, weapons engineer for 2 locks per action, ant the shuttle title to override the target lock range limit. 2 ordinance per turn (at different targets) at basically any range.

Bundle the cards with an epic ship and you dont need to worry about a range 5 ruler- just use the one that comes with the huge ship.

He's talking about the 2nd card though. The one that increases weapon ranges.

What he's describing is taking that card, Proton Rockets range increases from 1 to 2. But because the weapon adds the same number of slots that it uses, you can take it a second time. Increasing the range from 2 to 4. Then a third time increasing it to 8(which stops at 5).

Oops, I confused limited with unique. Yes, make it Limited.

Here's my ordinance fix

Proximity Fused Missiles

Limited, Missile slot

Gain a Missile slot

Your missiles lose 1 red die. Cancel 2 of the defenders Evade results

Impact fused Torpedo

Limited, Torpedo slot

Gain a Torpedo slot

Your torpedos loses 1 red die. If the attack hits, cancel all defence dice before dealing damage.