Before TLTs came out, the Ion Turret was essentially the go to choice for ships that were filling their turret slots and I don't think that anyone would argue that they were so good that they were broken.

Maybe we can take 1 point from the Ion Turret and give it to the TLT? That's _2_ problems solved!

I look at it this way. Before the Nerf the Phantom was not fun to play against and you always felt no matter how well you fly you have no chance unless you took high PS or turreted ships.

The TLT give players the same feeling, Playing against a 4 TLT ship list or even 3 is just not fun! Yes it can be beat, but only if you build an element in your list to deal with it. See how good 4BZ is versus a TLT list and you will understand.

3 Issues with TLT

--TLT comes down to staying at range 3, which normally applies a bonus to the defender, but in this case it doesn't.

--TLT can be fired with Stress bot and cause 2 stress a turn. Although a good strategy, it really makes the game not that fun to play

--TLT is undercosted for what it does. It costs 1 point less than a Heavy Laser, it does the Average amount of damage a heavy laser does, and strips more tokens, and is 360. All of this for one point less. Lets face it TLT should have been 8-9 points for all the extra bonuses.

So to fix it just like Tactician, nerf it. _{TLT's do not count as secondary weapons.}

What does this do.

--Now it's less effective than a Heavy Laser, because ships get the +1 defense dice bonus (We all know that defense dice suck, however an extra one goes a long way to mediate this weapon)

--It makes the TLT user have to fly better, trying to stay in range 2 for maximum potential.

--Keeps it effective vs 1 or less agility which is why people say it was added to the game, but gives 2 agility or higher ships a chance to not be automatically wiped off the board in a single turn. Due to multiple TLT fire

This simple fix keeps everything the same, and like the Tactician card, makes it less effective without screwing with any other game mechanics.

Make it so FFG, you know you want to:

I am sincerely confused. How are you not having success vs. 4 x TLT using a BBBBZ squad? Point at them, fly at them, shoot them. It would seem ideal to me, though to be fair I haven't used BBBBZ more than a handful of times.

Before the nerf, Phantoms flat out required a hard answer in list building. I could and did beat 100 point lists using a single Phantom regularly. Which might not have been a problem except it wasn't difficult to do, anyone with Echo facing a sub PS 8 list could do exactly the same thing consistently. I also could play with my dial face up, because the reactive nature of the decloak made it so that even with perfect knowledge of maneuvers an opponent couldn't outfly them (Echo vs. sub 8 PS especially). TLTs can be beaten no matter what you bring, if you play to their weaknesses and not their strengths.

TLTs don't require counter builds, only counter play. It is true that if you don't account for them during list building you are at a disadvantage, but isn't that true for everything?

TLTs don't need a nerf.

Sure they're effective, but not ridiculously overpowered. You just have to know how to deal with them.

Guri at Range 1 with APT, a TL, and a focus token says hi....

I look at it this way. Before the Nerf the Phantom was not fun to play against and you always felt no matter how well you fly you have no chance unless you took high PS or turreted ships.

The TLT give players the same feeling, Playing against a 4 TLT ship list or even 3 is just not fun! Yes it can be beat, but only if you build an element in your list to deal with it. See how good 4BZ is versus a TLT list and you will understand.

3 Issues with TLT

--TLT comes down to staying at range 3, which normally applies a bonus to the defender, but in this case it doesn't.

--TLT can be fired with Stress bot and cause 2 stress a turn. Although a good strategy, it really makes the game not that fun to play

--TLT is undercosted for what it does. It costs 1 point less than a Heavy Laser, it does the Average amount of damage a heavy laser does, and strips more tokens, and is 360. All of this for one point less. Lets face it TLT should have been 8-9 points for all the extra bonuses.

So to fix it just like Tactician, nerf it. _{TLT's do not count as secondary weapons.}

What does this do.

--Now it's less effective than a Heavy Laser, because ships get the +1 defense dice bonus (We all know that defense dice suck, however an extra one goes a long way to mediate this weapon)

--It makes the TLT user have to fly better, trying to stay in range 2 for maximum potential.

--Keeps it effective vs 1 or less agility which is why people say it was added to the game, but gives 2 agility or higher ships a chance to not be automatically wiped off the board in a single turn. Due to multiple TLT fire

This simple fix keeps everything the same, and like the Tactician card, makes it less effective without screwing with any other game mechanics.

Make it so FFG, you know you want to:

I am sincerely confused. How are you not having success vs. 4 x TLT using a BBBBZ squad? Point at them, fly at them, shoot them. It would seem ideal to me, though to be fair I haven't used BBBBZ more than a handful of times.

Before the nerf, Phantoms flat out required a hard answer in list building. I could and did beat 100 point lists using a single Phantom regularly. Which might not have been a problem except it wasn't difficult to do, anyone with Echo facing a sub PS 8 list could do exactly the same thing consistently. I also could play with my dial face up, because the reactive nature of the decloak made it so that even with perfect knowledge of maneuvers an opponent couldn't outfly them (Echo vs. sub 8 PS especially). TLTs can be beaten no matter what you bring, if you play to their weaknesses and not their strengths.

TLTs don't require counter builds, only counter play. It is true that if you don't account for them during list building you are at a disadvantage, but isn't that true for everything?

B's just aren't fast enough to get in and stay close to Y-wings, especially Y-wings with unhinged. TLT's just murder B-wings. I ran 4BZ all the time until TLT hit.

.The Phantom for example would of been nowhere nearly as big of a deal without both ACD and VI. Take away either one of those and the Phantom is good but far from OP'ed. Likewise TLT is potent for sure, but it was TLT, R3-A2 and BTL-4A that makes a Stresshog.

VI was to me always the most powerful upgrade, that really drove up the PS wars. Without it, or at most with a single PS bkkst, the game would be in a very different stage right now.

FFG has done what many people here asked, gave us a reason to use high PS aces and now people want to go back to the day when low PS generics ruled.

My own opinion is that balance is needed. Namely:

(1) Generics should be balanced and costed for their stat-lines.

(2) Non-generics should pay for their pilot abilities ...

... and, most importantly:

(3) The most powerful pilot abilities should go on non-unique ships between PS 3 and 7 (with even more emphasis on PS 3 to 5.

High PS is its own huge reward, and IMO it's been a mistake since the beginning of the game to give those ships the best pilot abilities. If you look at the (few) mid-PS ships that are actually played, they have really good pilot abilities. Take a lesson from that: tone down the abilities of PS 8 and PS 9 ships, bump the abilities of the lower-PS ships, and you get a balance.

VI was to me always the most powerful upgrade, that really drove up the PS wars.

Funny thing is, I remember when VI was never considered much of an option. In the rare corner case sure, but it there was a time when it wasn't the cornerstone of so many builds.

Until the PS war started, it just wasn't that useful but when it did, it really rampped it up a lot.

But that was during the days when generic pilots ruled the earth and high PS aces were used for fluff reasons.

Honestly, I worry more about Tractor beams potentially harming the game more than what TLT did. Being able to move your opponent's ships is a completely new mechanic and it may turn people off.

This is something I agree with. I'm honestly not sure how I feel about the ability to move my opponent's ships around (and I'm very excited to play TIE/D Defenders because I love flying defenders).

FFG has done what many people here asked, gave us a reason to use high PS aces and now people want to go back to the day when low PS generics ruled.

My own opinion is that balance is needed. Namely:

(1) Generics should be balanced and costed for their stat-lines.

(2) Non-generics should pay for their pilot abilities ...

... and, most importantly:

(3) The most powerful pilot abilities should go on non-unique ships between PS 3 and 7 (with even more emphasis on PS 3 to 5.

High PS is its own huge reward, and IMO it's been a mistake since the beginning of the game to give those ships the best pilot abilities. If you look at the (few) mid-PS ships that are actually played, they have really good pilot abilities. Take a lesson from that: tone down the abilities of PS 8 and PS 9 ships, bump the abilities of the lower-PS ships, and you get a balance.

I think the problem is that there's a more-or-less flat cost for PS, even though the value of (for example) going from PS6 to PS7 is a lot less than the value of going from PS8 to PS9. So the mid-PS pilots end up paying too much for their comparative advantage, and the aces end up paying too little.

The other problem is, short of X-Wing 2.0 we're way past the point where the cost of PS can be changed.

Somebody please help a poor dumb noob out here. I've only played a few games, and one of the ships I've flown is a K-wing with a TLT. I'm not understanding how something that can only do 1, maybe 2 damage per turn can be considered by some to be borderline too powerful for the game. With the K-wing's single evade die, an Academy pilot can put that same number of hits on it every turn. I understand that the TLT gets 6 dice to get that 2 damage, but I don't understand how that makes it so much better than some of the Imperial aces that it should be outlawed?

Somebody please help a poor dumb noob out here. I've only played a few games, and one of the ships I've flown is a K-wing with a TLT. I'm not understanding how something that can only do 1, maybe 2 damage per turn can be considered by some to be borderline too powerful for the game. With the K-wing's single evade die, an Academy pilot can put that same number of hits on it every turn. I understand that the TLT gets 6 dice to get that 2 damage, but I don't understand how that makes it so much better than some of the Imperial aces that it should be outlawed?

It's about consistency. You strip a lot of tokens with those attacks and green dice fail eventually.

The other problem is, short of X-Wing 2.0 we're way past the point where the cost of PS can be changed.

That's exactly why we need to incentivize with pilot abilities.

Somebody please help a poor dumb noob out here. I've only played a few games, and one of the ships I've flown is a K-wing with a TLT. I'm not understanding how something that can only do 1, maybe 2 damage per turn can be considered by some to be borderline too powerful for the game. With the K-wing's single evade die, an Academy pilot can put that same number of hits on it every turn. I understand that the TLT gets 6 dice to get that 2 damage, but I don't understand how that makes it so much better than some of the Imperial aces that it should be outlawed?

It actually deals 2 damage rather consistently and often at least 1 and strip tokens defending against the other. The game's dice math runs at a narrow enough band that its actually fairly unlikely to do more than 2 damage from a single model, so the TLT's damage output ends up being higher than average.

Anonymous online reports peg developers at FFG in the low to mid $30,000s. A Ph.D. can reasonably expect to be employed at somewhere between half again and four times as much, depending on the field and whether you want to work for a university or private industry.

Granted: I have only ever lived in cities which routinely rank as "most expensive in the world to live in", but low to mid US$30,000 is what you make when you're a senior in college and need a paying internship. That's... that's not a real salary.

Not sure how they're going to errata TLT. It does one thing and one thing only and there's no way of changing it without effectively ruining it.

I can only think of rewording the title to the limitations set by the Defender title and add a max cost to the turret you may use, thereby nerfing the stresshog by reducing its range band.

I think the stress hog least of all needs a nerf. Every squad you'll face currently has 1 or 2 indestructible, hyper action economy Acewing ships in it and the stress hog is something that can actually deal with those. Please no.

The Grandmaster himself told that a stresshog would be an auto-include in his lists. We want to avoid auto-includes.

It would be better if the stressbot would be 'Once per round...' only.

I think he might have a tendency towards hyperbole, given that he also said he would never run a B-wing without Advanced Sensors.

Somebody please help a poor dumb noob out here. I've only played a few games, and one of the ships I've flown is a K-wing with a TLT. I'm not understanding how something that can only do 1, maybe 2 damage per turn can be considered by some to be borderline too powerful for the game. With the K-wing's single evade die, an Academy pilot can put that same number of hits on it every turn. I understand that the TLT gets 6 dice to get that 2 damage, but I don't understand how that makes it so much better than some of the Imperial aces that it should be outlawed?

Beyond what everyone else has said, it's also the threat envelope of TLTs that makes them effective. They're actually better than 3-dice PWTs at range 3, which normally you pay 50-60 points for.

About their only saving grace is that they don't crit, which ironically makes decimators not horrible against them, whereas the Falcon is pretty much gone right now.

I think one of the unintended consequences of TLT is that it makes 2-agility a very undesirable place to be. I've had games against TLT lists with Boba and other 2-agility ships like all X-wing lists where I might as well have not had green dice. Which is a problem because those ships are costed such that they are assumed to get some use out of them. TLT would have been much better at two dice attacking twice for say, three points.

This is not a complain thread and/or a nerf idea thread.

Last year the Phantom was thought to be overpowered and it became relevant from World's results. It was then nerfed with the changes going into effect at the start of Regional season.

This year World's - Post Worlds, tournament results have demonstrated evidence that TLT has caused some power creep, and I'm sure FFG is well aware of it.

Just wondering if those that play other competitive games have seen this before and if it's relatively easy to predict when an errata/nerf is coming.

Thoughts?

Reasons... that about sums it up.

Somebody please help a poor dumb noob out here. I've only played a few games, and one of the ships I've flown is a K-wing with a TLT. I'm not understanding how something that can only do 1, maybe 2 damage per turn can be considered by some to be borderline too powerful for the game. With the K-wing's single evade die, an Academy pilot can put that same number of hits on it every turn. I understand that the TLT gets 6 dice to get that 2 damage, but I don't understand how that makes it so much better than some of the Imperial aces that it should be outlawed?

*Even on a K-wing, there's a donut hole, because 3 dice at range one is only as good as a Tie Fighter... And unless you are out of arc, your opponent will be far better off than you are in such a situation.

Anonymous online reports peg developers at FFG in the low to mid $30,000s. A Ph.D. can reasonably expect to be employed at somewhere between half again and four times as much, depending on the field and whether you want to work for a university or private industry.

Granted: I have only ever lived in cities which routinely rank as "most expensive in the world to live in", but low to mid US$30,000 is what you make when you're a senior in college and need a paying internship. That's... that's not a real salary.

That's pretty decent money for the Midwest. Not super great but defiantly not bad. I fall in that range myself and i have been working a professional job for almost 10 years now.

Anonymous online reports peg developers at FFG in the low to mid $30,000s. A Ph.D. can reasonably expect to be employed at somewhere between half again and four times as much, depending on the field and whether you want to work for a university or private industry.

Granted: I have only ever lived in cities which routinely rank as "most expensive in the world to live in", but low to mid US$30,000 is what you make when you're a senior in college and need a paying internship. That's... that's not a real salary.

I don't know about the Twin Cities, but in general, the Midwest is a very cheap place to live. I know as a grad student I made significantly less than that as a stipend, and was able to live pretty decently (caveats that I was single with no kids), while my cohorts on the coasts with similar incomes were were practically vagrants.

I'm firmly in the cost adjustment camp I can't use TLT without feeling dirty every time I use it it's a steamroller crushing everything before it.

I don't think the mechanics need a nerf but it's too good at 6 points.

Double regen is worse than tlt in my opinion.

Double regen is worse than tlt in my opinion.

So how do you feel about triple regen?

Double regen is worse than tlt in my opinion.

So how do you feel about triple regen?