Before everyone screams No!!!!

Think about it for a minute:

We tried it at the store in our campaign and it worked very well. Our store owner gave it to everyone for free.

Target Locking Enemies outside of Range 3:

Action: Gain a target lock outside of range 3, if the target is within your front Arc(Still don't like this since in today's modern world F-14 Tomcats can lock on to 6 different targets and track them at the same time in an 180 degree Arc) but for game balance I understand it. You must have an equipped ordnance (Missiles or Torps)

Affects:

- Yes the Shuttle Title would have to be changed

- Instantly Ordnance (Missiles and Torps) become better

- Ships with Target Lock become better

- FCS gets a slight nerf

- Large ships and PWT's will become slightly weaker. Because everyone can lock on to them out of range

Should this be a nerf rule update?

What are the negatives of this, we couldn't really see any at the store, but maybe you can give me some?

Thanks,

My short answer is that it would really, really, dumb the game down. The game doesn't need to be dumbed down any more.

I'm not a rules lawyer but something about this seems off to me. I think the answer may be in canons since they ignore the extra evade dice rule and TL gives a free reroll of all dice. A highly maneuverable ship will stay at range 3 and continue to blast the hell out of any slower ship. I like the idea but I'd much rather see a missle/torp fix that only helps those things and doesn't hinder anything else.

This would make the Tempest with ATC border on OP. Now I don't have to worry about range to grab a TL and I can focus or evade when I get into range.

It also makes TL a default action to take on your first turn. You'd be silly not to move then TL. It also really hurts any ship that can't TL, mainly the humble Tie Fighter.

Dutch becomes useless as well.

I've though this for some time. It would significantly help ordinance, as you could TL before you get into range and set up an alpha strike.

I disagree that it would dumb the game down. It would actually add a bit more complexity to the game. If you TL a ship, you are showing your hand of which ship you are targeting. If you TL a ship too early, it can break off, or hang back, giving you a decision of chasing a ship or making a bad shot.

Better version:

Target Lock range is unlimited as long as you have a missile or torpedo equipped and unspent.

It even makes sense. Missiles have an impressive sensor package to hit an object moving this fast.

This would only require a small edit in the rule book. All cards could stay as is.

First off, I'm not suggesting I'd like to see any changes to Target Lock here - I wouldn't - but to play along...

Seems OP. How about unlimited range, but target has to be in your front arc?

How about unlimited range, but target has to be in your front arc?

You would have to use something to measure the arc. Something like a ruler. With range band increments on it.

No, don't like it one bit, and this is coming from someone who loves bombers

Better version:

Target Lock range is unlimited as long as you have a missile or torpedo equipped and unspent.

It even makes sense. Missiles have an impressive sensor package to hit an object moving this fast.

This would only require a small edit in the rule book. All cards could stay as is.

First off, I'm not suggesting I'd like to see any changes to Target Lock here - I wouldn't - but to play along...

Seems OP. How about unlimited range, but target has to be in your front arc?

I like both idea's. You must have a missiles or torp available, and front arc only.

That would really make it a fun addition. It will help all, but also not as over the top. Although, I don't see how it is over the top. It makes sense. I will suggest this at the store and see if we can play it.

I both ideas alot

I've though this for some time. It would significantly help ordinance, as you could TL before you get into range and set up an alpha strike.

I disagree that it would dumb the game down. It would actually add a bit more complexity to the game. If you TL a ship, you are showing your hand of which ship you are targeting. If you TL a ship too early, it can break off, or hang back, giving you a decision of chasing a ship or making a bad shot.

In the opening rounds, a ship can either engage or not engage. If I have a decimator across the table, I'm going to put every target lock I have on it. If he chooses not to engage, better for me. I'll just focus on his other ship using focus tokens, which are perfectly fine. When his escort is dead, I'll come back to his ship and fire will TL & Focus, since that TL stays on until I use it. I'm going to take the shot of opportunity whether I have a TL on something or not.

The smartest choice is to TL as your first action and have every ship TL the ship that needs to die first. That ship needs to engage at some point.

I've though this for some time. It would significantly help ordinance, as you could TL before you get into range and set up an alpha strike.

I disagree that it would dumb the game down. It would actually add a bit more complexity to the game. If you TL a ship, you are showing your hand of which ship you are targeting. If you TL a ship too early, it can break off, or hang back, giving you a decision of chasing a ship or making a bad shot.

In the opening rounds, a ship can either engage or not engage. If I have a decimator across the table, I'm going to put every target lock I have on it. If he chooses not to engage, better for me. I'll just focus on his other ship using focus tokens, which are perfectly fine. When his escort is dead, I'll come back to his ship and fire will TL & Focus, since that TL stays on until I use it. I'm going to take the shot of opportunity whether I have a TL on something or not.

The smartest choice is to TL as your first action and have every ship TL the ship that needs to die first. That ship needs to engage at some point.

So what is wrong with this? Get counter measures on your large ship. Or just take fire.

What you stated is exactly how I would expect it to happen in real combat. As everyone else says to quote an annoying phrase. Guess well all just have to fly better.

This instantly boosts ordnance, and weakens PWT large ships, as well as boosts swarms.

Also as for Ranar and the front arc. F14 Tomcats have a 180 degress Radar Cone and can lock onto 6 or more targets at the same time. So Technologically, this should not be an issue.

Yes they should be

(if you paid 3 points for the shuttle title)

otherwise, **** no. Jockeying for target-locks is one of the many tactical/strategic decisions one has to make in this game. It's something that you really have to pay attention to, especially with low PS generics that generally can't fully modify their attacks and especially (in my experience) with generic A-wings. Buggers are fast as hell but hit like a wet noddle; setting up target-locks on a fly-by are essential to getting through the chunckier enemies in the game. Having unlimited range would trivialize this aspect.

Well this is something I'm nearly 100% certian isn't going to happen.

It would render some abilities/upgrades completely useles.

Really we can debate it until the cows come home, but isn't going to make it happen.

There are other ways to fix ordnance.

Also it doesn't make sense

In order to target lock, there has to be a range restriction.

You can't target lock something light years away from ya.

At least you can target lock if it's not in your firing arc.

Feel free to make it house rule, but I feel it ruins a part of the game by taking away a strategic element away

You want free range target lock? Then use a shuttle with the title

No need to dumb down the game any more.

Negative...

I would upgrade the range on ordnance by 1, going out to range 4, and allow for target locking at that distance too. Going unlimited on the TL range without boosting ordnance wouldn't be all too useful.

It would certainly boost the value of Expert Handling and Kagi.

nope because then your first round of shooting will have tl+focus and that totally throws things out of whack high ps builds would disappear and all you'd ever see is bbbbz as people sought to max out the amount of ships with a target lock action.

nope because then your first round of shooting will have tl+focus and that totally throws things out of whack high ps builds would disappear and all you'd ever see is bbbbz as people sought to max out the amount of ships with a target lock action.

True, but they would have to buy at least one missile or torp. to use it.

Why not just allow target locks out to the range of 'huge' ship rulers if the ship is in your forward arc? (IE., range 5?) Standard range (3) otherwise?

Seems to solve the OP's suggestion about wanting to see target locks being more capable of setting up secondary weapon attacks (after all, you start the game FACING the enemy).

It addresses the issue with the Shuttle's title (it doesn't need replacing, as it's still flat-out better than this ability...maybe a price reduction would be in order, MAYBE, but that's all)

Even serves as a slight nerf to PWTs, in that they aren't getting anything special for out-of-arc shots, while anyone FACING them actually does see a big range boost.

Also doesn't require any new parts that we don't have - both factions have a ship with range-5 rules, now.

nope because then your first round of shooting will have tl+focus and that totally throws things out of whack high ps builds would disappear and all you'd ever see is bbbbz as people sought to max out the amount of ships with a target lock action.

True, but they would have to buy at least one missile or torp. to use it.

Just like mentioned above, bbbbz would be sick if they could target lock first round, and by time engagement rolls around they all have target locks and focus

Seems pretty broken to me

I say yes.

From a fluff standpoint, the standard 3x3 board puts the ships in close enough range to TL from across the board. I take this from the classic PC games, obviously.

From a game mechanics standpoint, I think it still works. I can't imagine a time in which it would break anything, as typically after the first two or three rounds of combat you typically see all ships within range anyway.

I like the idea of getting a target lock at range 4 if you have a secondary weapon with the target lock header on it. But still can only shoot at the printed ranges on the card. It would mimic the pc games. First you would get the initial lock at long range and you would need a solid tone before firing, which at that point would be a closer range from closing distance.

So the new update:

Target Locking Enemies outside of Range 3:

Action: Gain a target lock outside of range 3, if the target is within your front Arc(Still don't like this since in today's modern world F-14 Tomcats can lock on to 6 different targets and track them at the same time in an 180 degree Arc) but for game balance I understand it. You must have an equipped ordnance (Missiles or Torps)

The big difference is that for a campaign it's fine if it's a bonus you earned such as getting intel for what targets you need to strike in the next mission for a raid.

It's not fine for the main game it's not because you can turtle the first turn gaining your target lock that you keep until you decide you use it.

No, don't like it one bit, and this is coming from someone who loves bombers

My thoughts exactly.

I'm not a rules lawyer but something about this seems off to me. I think the answer may be in canons since they ignore the extra evade dice rule and TL gives a free reroll of all dice. A highly maneuverable ship will stay outside of range 3 then close to range 1 to blast the hell out of any slower ship. I like the idea but I'd much rather see a missle/torp fix that only helps those things and doesn't hinder anything else.

fixed it for ya