That's because that's how it's somehow being classified. More often than not in those two builds I described, Corran and Soontir are in the end game more often than the other ship. And usually they are clutch enough to close out the win. I would go as far as to consider the turrets as the support. They are just a big body guard to these aces. Which plays out exactly like it should.

Because the turret's targeted first because if you don't target it first you can't take it down. And it takes so much effort to take down that Gorc that the Pic has an easy job taking down the stragglers that survived the attack.

Pretty sure Corran with non-turret support has as many wins as Corran with turrets. There was a 2B winner and a 2Y winner.

That's because that's how it's somehow being classified. More often than not in those two builds I described, Corran and Soontir are in the end game more often than the other ship. And usually they are clutch enough to close out the win. I would go as far as to consider the turrets as the support. They are just a big body guard to these aces. Which plays out exactly like it should.

Because the turret's targeted first because if you don't target it first you can't take it down. And it takes so much effort to take down that Gorc that the Pic has an easy job taking down the stragglers that survived the attack.

Do your 2 generics really have an easy time hosing down Fel and Corran? LoL

Ok, a second look shows 8/51 winners were dual turrets. So 20 of the other lists had some kind of support. How many of these lists won because of their support?

Dash would be nothing without Corran. RAC would be pulverized without Soontir. Heck, I won my Regionals with Han+3Z and it was 2 Bandits against Corran in the end game. You can't count out the rest of the build just because it included a turret.

The first post was fairly convincing but this comes across as a little desperate.

It's making the assumption that the way you measure how good something is if it works when you run it with itself. That's judging the TIE defender by triple defenders or the even less wise dual defenders, that the TIE interceptor is at its best when run with other TIE interceptors and suggesting the old TIE phantom was better when run with itself.

The point I was trying to make was about the other part of the list that did not include a turret, not about the dual turret lists.

That's because that's how it's somehow being classified. More often than not in those two builds I described, Corran and Soontir are in the end game more often than the other ship. And usually they are clutch enough to close out the win. I would go as far as to consider the turrets as the support. They are just a big body guard to these aces. Which plays out exactly like it should.

Because the turret's targeted first because if you don't target it first you can't take it down. And it takes so much effort to take down that Gorc that the Pic has an easy job taking down the stragglers that survived the attack.

Do your 2 generics really have an easy time hosing down Fel and Corran? LoL

he's saying other way around. By the time the turret tears apart the generics with its unavoidable dice, the remainder can't get fel or corran

unless one of them was a double-tap R3-A2 Y I guess

All my dice are unavoidable.

That's because that's how it's somehow being classified. More often than not in those two builds I described, Corran and Soontir are in the end game more often than the other ship. And usually they are clutch enough to close out the win. I would go as far as to consider the turrets as the support. They are just a big body guard to these aces. Which plays out exactly like it should.

Because the turret's targeted first because if you don't target it first you can't take it down. And it takes so much effort to take down that Gorc that the Pic has an easy job taking down the stragglers that survived the attack.

Do your 2 generics really have an easy time hosing down Fel and Corran? LoL

My two generics?

All my dice are unavoidable.

I believe he's referring to the way R1-3 turrets have no blind spot to try and maneuver into: if you can shoot them they can shoot you, end of.

All my dice are unavoidable.

not if you don't have your opponent in arc

then it's just green dice....good luck!

I love how things keep expanding. "Half of the winners are turrets!"

You say that like it's all one ship that is causing the issue, that it's a total lack of diversity. And yet that catch-all of 'turrets' includes at least seven different pilots across three different ship types. Along with a rather varied assortment of aces and generics to fill out the rest of the list. It's not like last year when 'turrets' was the same as saying Fat Han with triple Zs.

You want a diverse meta in X-wing? Look around, it's already here.

Of the half not fat turrets how many were not brobots or bbbbz?

I love how things keep expanding. "Half of the winners are turrets!"

You say that like it's all one ship that is causing the issue, that it's a total lack of diversity. And yet that catch-all of 'turrets' includes at least seven different pilots across three different ship types. Along with a rather varied assortment of aces and generics to fill out the rest of the list. It's not like last year when 'turrets' was the same as saying Fat Han with triple Zs.

You want a diverse meta in X-wing? Look around, it's already here.

You say that like it's all one ship that is causing the issue, that it's a total lack of diversity. And yet that catch-all of 'turrets' includes at least seven different pilots across three different ship types. Along with a rather varied assortment of aces and generics to fill out the rest of the list. It's not like last year when 'turrets' was the same as saying Fat Han with triple Zs.

You want a diverse meta in X-wing? Look around, it's already here.

Three ships out of 24. Seven pilots across 122.

I agree the turret problem is at least in part one the community has created rather than one inherent to the game design, but please don't wildly misrepresent data.

I did some exhaustive research, going all the way back to 2013. After running some numbers I believe I found the root of the problem. Roughly 100% of all lists flown have been spaceships. This meta must end. Recently I have heard of a "pancake" showing up in lists, specifically "pancake with turret". This sounds delicious. I'm hungry and need to eat breakfast. Pancakes with maple turret sounds delightful.

Just an observation. I hate fat turrets as much as anyone. However, it seems to me you cannot swing a dead cat on any of these regions without hitting IG-88's, Fireaprays, Corin Horn or Soonter Fel. Auto thrusters helped a lot (except those without boost like ties and M3-A's). I still think engine upgrades with large ships are a problem.

I guess I do not see the current environment as "broken" ( I refuse to use the term "meta"), but there does seem to be a slight imbalance towards certain ships and combinations. This ebb and flow is healthy in my opinion. First, it means the wave introduction of new ships/patches are relevant. Secondly, some of the popular lists seem to develop in reaction to the other lists (BBBBZ as an example), but then other lists are starting to show up to counter this.

I love how things keep expanding. "Half of the winners are turrets!"

You say that like it's all one ship that is causing the issue, that it's a total lack of diversity. And yet that catch-all of 'turrets' includes at least seven different pilots across three different ship types. Along with a rather varied assortment of aces and generics to fill out the rest of the list. It's not like last year when 'turrets' was the same as saying Fat Han with triple Zs.

You want a diverse meta in X-wing? Look around, it's already here.

You say that like it's all one ship that is causing the issue, that it's a total lack of diversity. And yet that catch-all of 'turrets' includes at least seven different pilots across three different ship types. Along with a rather varied assortment of aces and generics to fill out the rest of the list. It's not like last year when 'turrets' was the same as saying Fat Han with triple Zs.

You want a diverse meta in X-wing? Look around, it's already here.

Three ships out of 24. Seven pilots across 122.

I agree the turret problem is at least in part one the community has created rather than one inherent to the game design, but please don't wildly misrepresent data.

There will be gems and duds for each ship type. They're not all meant for competitive play. Your argument of 7 pilots out of 122 having success and being turrets is also wildly misrepresenting data.

That's because that's how it's somehow being classified. More often than not in those two builds I described, Corran and Soontir are in the end game more often than the other ship. And usually they are clutch enough to close out the win. I would go as far as to consider the turrets as the support. They are just a big body guard to these aces. Which plays out exactly like it should.

Because the turret's targeted first because if you don't target it first you can't take it down. And it takes so much effort to take down that Gorc that the Pic has an easy job taking down the stragglers that survived the attack.

Out of curiosity, who is our metaphorical Sariss? Because that's the ship I want to use.

I don't think they're OP, I just think they're ungodly boring and poorly designed

I'm also not sold on the self-fulfilling prophecy on any level apart from local. While playing against PWT is little more than a dice-fest, a poor opponent will stack the odds in your favor by doing inexperienced things (such as jousting ). If the list isn't a double turret, then it's also very possible that inexperience will cost him/her the far more difficult to utilize arced wingman (especially soontir)

there is skill required in outplaying your opponent, even if your opponent is not allowed to outplay you, in that you still have to do that work. The stupid catch all mechanic + hot dice + mov skews will save a poor player, but I'm not sure it could hold across the number of games and players that attend at a regional level.

Basically, I'm not sold that the strength of turret is all in our heads even if they're not op. What is all in our head is the occasional occurrence of the baffling idea that turrets are somehow needed to counter arc dodgers. If the only way to counter a mechanic is to scrub it out of existence entirely, then the game's got a problem that we're not properly addressing .

Poorly designed as opposed to what, exactly?

A movable turret arc would have needed to be introduced with the y-wing, and for that matter would hurt turret secondaries far more than turret primaries, since the primaries would have two arcs (since, you know, two guns). If you can't catch someone in two movable 90 degree arcs, well, you're clearly doing something wrong, especially since setting the arcs would have been done at PS. Also, including extra plastic in the various turreted ships would up production costs, which might have made the y-wing more expensive than other Wave 1 ships (Which might have been too early for "medium ships" to be accepted), and would make the Millennium Falcon even less profitable (It already had a tighter profit margin than most of the other expansions).

Different weapon values for firing arcs ala armada? The problem is the ships are fundametally different in design. Cruisers like Star destroyers are large enough that they physically cannot bring all their guns to bear on a single spot, much like combat during the age of sail that Armada and fleet engagements in most science fiction draw their inspiration from.

The falcon is an oversized fighter craft, and turrets on those craft were designed to have large coverage since the ship could only mount a handful of guns. In the YT-series ships and the Decimators case, the guns cover almost an entire sphere around the ship, apart from a small blind spot when you're practically right next to them (And at this distance, the ships bases would be overlapping).

I understand that you opinion that turrets in this game don't have a meaningful form of counterplay, and I actually kind of agree with that since aside from a few corner cases involving asteroids* and autothrusters, you can't avoid fire from them, but the two most commonly proposed mechanics either don't fix that issue, or don't make any sense.

*For turrets, whether or not the shot is obstructed is determined simply from closest point to closest point, but arced ships have to draw from within their arc, meaning that you can potentially avoid the asteroid that is blocking the turrets shot. Of course, that might also mean you're at a different range than the turret, so like I said, corner case.

Heck, I won my Regionals with Han+3Z

Some constructive criticism for FFG since I don't think there are huge issues, just small nudges to improve the game:

1. Take a break from large base upgrades and focus more on small ship options. I want more aces packs! Give me more options for combating the big guys. Autothrusters were great, even though they could have been 1 point and still worked fine.

2. Limit Vader crew to attacks in the primary arc just like the doom shuttle, which was fair. 360 Vader with gunner is beyond broken on the decimator. C3P0 is ok, Han reroll only once per round wouldn't bother me, but Vader has to go!!!

I spent so much time prepping and countering turrets with my regional build

Saw one decimator all day.

Poorly designed as opposed to what, exactly?

A movable turret arc would have needed to be introduced with the y-wing, and for that matter would hurt turret secondaries far more than turret primaries, since the primaries would have two arcs (since, you know, two guns). If you can't catch someone in two movable 90 degree arcs, well, you're clearly doing something wrong, especially since setting the arcs would have been done at PS.

Different weapon values for firing arcs ala armada? The problem is the ships are fundametally different in design. Cruisers like Star destroyers are large enough that they physically cannot bring all their guns to bear on a single spot, much like combat during the age of sail that Armada and fleet engagements in most science fiction draw their inspiration from.

The falcon is an oversized fighter craft, and turrets on those craft were designed to have large coverage since the ship could only mount a handful of guns. In the YT-series ships and the Decimators case, the guns cover almost an entire sphere around the ship, apart from a small blind spot when you're practically right next to them (And at this distance, the ships bases would be overlapping).

I understand that you opinion that turrets in this game don't have a meaningful form of counterplay, and I actually kind of agree with that since aside from a few corner cases involving asteroids* and autothrusters, you can't avoid fire from them, but the two most commonly proposed mechanics either don't fix that issue, or don't make any sense.

*For turrets, whether or not the shot is obstructed is determined simply from closest point to closest point, but arced ships have to draw from within their arc, meaning that you can potentially avoid the asteroid that is blocking the turrets shot. Of course, that might also mean you're at a different range than the turret, so like I said, corner case.

you don't do that fix on small bases, which don't have enough room and already come with enough restrictions as is (aside from the K-wing, but it is definitely priced horribly if you're planning on using its PWT)

you could set the arc during activation, before dials are revealed ala de-cloaking

restrict to one arc at a time only, not turret + primary (**** fluff, gameplay takes priority over the falcon's two turrets unless X-wings get their torps and B-wings get their absurd armaments) and if necessary limit to rotating only to adjacent arcs so there are some actual choice and forethought involved.

adjust costs if necessary

that's the dream scenario which will never happen due to cruel logistical realities, but really anything giving an opponent something for outmanuevering a PWT would be appreciated. ATs are a start, but they're very restricted to a very small sub-set of ships (all of which need them because of how ridiculous the PWT mechanic is against them)

Really though, any kind of restriction would be perfect. Dash's doughnut-hole makes him a very skill intensive pilot that demands a lot of planning ahead to balance action efficiency (which unlike the yt-1300 is predicated on getting actions--not buying c3po--which makes him very vulnerable to blocking), maneuverability, and the fact that you can't fire at anyone within range 1. Sure, you could take mangler but then you're not getting a range 1 bonus like a PWT and you're trading a lot of damage away from that 1 extra die per shot.

you don't do that fix on small bases, which don't have enough room and already come with enough restrictions as is (aside from the K-wing, but it is definitely priced horribly if you're planning on using its PWT)

Uhh, why? Seriously, why on earth would primary weapons somehow be harder to control than secondary weapons? Game design has to have internal consistency, and this, well, doesn't. Breaking verisimilitude is not healthy for a game.

you could set the arc during activation, before dials are revealed ala de-cloaking

I suppose had such a mechanic been implemented, it could be errata'd to do so, but this definately wouldn't have been the case in wave 1 or wave 2. Plus, like I said, there's no way this would effect only PWTs. Think of the poor Y-wings and HWKs.

restrict to one arc (**** fluff, gameplay takes priority over the falcon's two turrets) and if necessary limit to moving only to adjacent arcs so there's some actual choices involved.

Limit to moving one arc per turn might work. I'm not sold on whether or not the falcon would have been accepted with only one moving arc. Perhaps if it had the primary arc always on as well? Hmm... Maybe we should playtest this just for the sake of the argument.

adjust costs if necessary

Well, yeah, but that kind of goes without saying

that's the dream scenario which will never happen due to cruel logistical realities, but really anything giving an opponent something for outmanuevering a PWT would be appreciated. ATs are a start, but they're very restricted to a very small sub-set of ships (all of which needs them because of how ridiculous the PWT mechanic is)

Comments in green.

Some constructive criticism for FFG since I don't think there are huge issues, just small nudges to improve the game:

1. Take a break from large base upgrades and focus more on small ship options. I want more aces packs! Give me more options for combating the big guys. Autothrusters were great, even though they could have been 1 point and still worked fine.

2. Limit Vader crew to attacks in the primary arc just like the doom shuttle, which was fair. 360 Vader with gunner is beyond broken on the decimator. C3P0 is ok, Han reroll only once per round wouldn't bother me, but Vader has to go!!!

1. Pretty sure the new medium ships are designed to do just that, actually. Also, the Hound's tooth lacks a turret, and if we see the punishing one, it will probably only have a turret upgrade slot instead of a PWT since that was an after market modification on Dengar's part. I doubt we're going to stop seeing large based ships- FFG wouldn't keep making them if it wasn't a sound marketing decision, but medium ships and the scum large bases seem to be trying to find a middle ground.

2. First off, are you aware that using Vader doesn't "Hit" the target, so stealth device stays on (This also applies to Feedback arrays, Assault missile splash damage, and obstacles)? I know I've had to explain that a few times, so it bears pointing out. Also, I'm not sure deci-vader is all it's cracked up to be. It does improve the matchup against glass cannons (But that was already pretty favorable), but Vader is a liability against other turrets and other ships with high hull+shields (I.E. Panic Attack and BBBBZ, two matchups you're actually concerned about). It might not be bad on Kenkirk, but once Palpatine hits I think he's going to be taking up too much space for Vader to fit on the Decimator.

Here's an upgrade idea that would help the small base ships without upsetting game balance:

Speed Sensitive Stick (2 points, small base ship upgrade only) - When defending you may reroll one defense dice. If you do not have the boost action, assign a stress token at then end of combat phase.

Works similar to defensive predator, which is an option we don't have, and it would help counter the gunner ability so prevalent on Falcons and Decimators.

[/quot

2. First off, are you aware that using Vader doesn't "Hit" the target, so stealth device stays on (This also applies to Feedback arrays, Assault missile splash damage, and obstacles)? I know I've had to explain that a few times, so it bears pointing out. Also, I'm not sure deci-vader is all it's cracked up to be. It does improve the matchup against glass cannons (But that was already pretty favorable), but Vader is a liability against other turrets and other ships with high hull+shields (I.E. Panic Attack and BBBBZ, two matchups you're actually concerned about). It might not be bad on Kenkirk, but once Palpatine hits I think he's going to be taking up too much space for Vader to fit on the Decimator.

Oh I am painfully aware of Vader. I lost a store tournament and have been knocked out of contention several times by him with stealth still active. It is crap being destroyed when you have never been hit!