I have a few questions in my mind that i would like to share with the community.

When a ship does not say it has gunner seats, but it has turret mounted weapons, does it mean that you cant say "on those guns, now!" to your other crew members? Or when its turret mounted it comes with a gunner seat?

From my readings, most of ships (starfighters and cruisers) dont have gunner seats.

The YT-1300 for instance, has "One Pilot, One Co-Pilot, One Engineer" and two turret mounted weapons, meaning that one of those three people has to operate those guns?

We have been using the YT-1300 as if it had two gunner seats to operate the two turrets, but on a fifth (?) read, it really doesn't sound like those seats exists.

What about non-turret mounted weapons? It does make sense that either the pilot or co-pilot has to operate them. But what really means when a weapon is turret mounted? Is it just so it can have a "Fire Arc: All"? What about turret-mounted weapons that does not have "Fire Arc: All".

The Seltiss-2 Caravel from Lords of Nal Hutta, or the YV-929 from Age of Rebellion, both have turred mounted weaponry without "Fire Arc: All" though,

How do we add gunner seats to a ship? Or how do we add any crew seat to a ship?

A ship without "Engineer" seat cannot use those mechanics-only actions, such as "Boost Shields"?

How about "Sensors Operator" seat, without one we cannot have someone other than the pilot operate the scanners?

You are being too literal about the crew requirements. Don't get hung up on requiring seats or a position to be listed to be used.

YT-1300 has only 2 crew listed: Pilot and Co-Pilot/Engineer. What do we see in the movies? I recall 4 seats in the cockpit even though only 2 crew are listed that might sit up there (Pilot and Co-Pilot). I recall 2 gunner seats even though no gunner crew are listed. I recall Han sitting in what could be called an Engineering station even though the Co-Pilot/Engineer already has a "seat" up front. I also recall Han doing ship repairs down in a hole with no "seat". If you count all of those "seats" that could be considered crew stations, that's at least 5, possibly 7. Yet, we only see 2 crew.

Yes you can require anyone wishing to gun to run to the gun pit just like we saw in Ep. IV. Yes you can require someone to run to the back to make repairs. No you don't need to have a specific position listed in order for someone to make the related actions. Yes you can have extra people on board to fill other positions not listed such as engineer or gunner.

Don't over think it.

I agree with you Sturn but you have to admit, in a fight - Han and Chewie could do better with a couple gunners on the roster. The best pilot in the galaxy having to hand over the stick to his co-pilot so he can man a turret isn't terrible efficient. Not to mention counting on some 'crop dusting kid' to man the other turret. Seems to me that a ship outfitted like the Falcon should be set up for at least 3 or 4 crew... perhaps having to make do with less certainly but it does seem a little odd. Unless those turrets can be put on automatic or at least fired indirectly from the cockpit.

Of course they could do better with dedicated gunners but then he would have to pay them. Han was a smuggler that picked up a couple of passengers not a soldier flying combat missions with a full crew.

Everytime you drive somewhere do you bring along a navigator, entertainment system technician, and refreshment specialist? Of course not, but you would be a more efficient driver if you did.

edit: Stupid phone...

Laugh, Im not expecting Tie fighters on my trip to the beach but if I was.... yeah, Id bring a couple buddies to man the guns!

Not to beleaguer this as I agree, two crew is all that is required in the stock YT-1300 for normal freight hauling operations, but as an aside, we do see General Calrissian has more than two crew in the Millennium Falcon during the Battle of Endor: Pilot, co-pilot, navigator, sensor/comms, and two gunners (maybe even a dedicated engineer).

Of course they could do better with dedicated gunners but then he would have to pay them. Han was a smuggler that picked up a couple of passengers not a soldier flying combat missions with a full crew.

Everytime you drive somewhere do you bring along a navigator, entertainment system technician, and refreshment specialist? Of course not, but you would be a more efficient driver if you did.

edit: Stupid phone...

Not gonna lie, I wanna drive like that everywhere now...

Of course they could do better with dedicated gunners but then he would have to pay them. Han was a smuggler that picked up a couple of passengers not a soldier flying combat missions with a full crew.

Everytime you drive somewhere do you bring along a navigator, entertainment system technician, and refreshment specialist? Of course not, but you would be a more efficient driver if you did.

edit: Stupid phone...

Not gonna lie, I wanna drive like that everywhere now...

I recall in college having dedicated positions with titles and descriptions eerily similar during road trips. Driver, Navigator, Steward, and Runner (I had 3 room mates). The first three positions are self-explanatory. The Runner was a decision maker. When there was a 2-2 tie on what to do next during one of our excursions, the "Tie always goes to the runner", which by default had to chose the most entertaining option even if not the smartest.

It made sense over half a life time ago.

The best pilot in the galaxy having to hand over the stick to his co-pilot so he can man a turret isn't terrible efficient.

Actually I think many people are better pilots, probably Chewie included, Luke, Vader, and Wedge foremost in my mind. since TFA add Poe and Rey to that list.

Chewie is definitely the best shot in all Eps 1-6 with small arms.

Why did Han leave the driving the Chewie? Either Chewies a better Pilot or Han is a better Gunner (Given the rest of his shooting, i think this is unlikely). Han, on the other hand, is a good Captain.

The best pilot in the galaxy having to hand over the stick to his co-pilot so he can man a turret isn't terrible efficient.

Actually I think many people are better pilots, probably Chewie included, Luke, Vader, and Wedge foremost in my mind. since TFA add Poe and Rey to that list.

Chewie is definitely the best shot in all Eps 1-6 with small arms.

Why did Han leave the driving the Chewie? Either Chewies a better Pilot or Han is a better Gunner (Given the rest of his shooting, i think this is unlikely). Han, on the other hand, is a good Captain.

I would say Han is a better pilot. Or at least he believes he is a better pilot, or else he would let Chewie fly the asteroid field. I would guess Han is a better gunner, and left Chewie to pilot in Episode 4 because it was simple flying through open space. He knew he couldn't outrun or outfly the TIE's so Chewie just held a course, and maybe did Evasive Maneuvers. I don't think Han ever let Chewie fly other than that, just co-pilot/assisting.

As a rough approximation (Im not building these, just thinking about the general discussion)

Chewy = Modder + Bodyguard

Han = Hotshot + Scoundrel (according to Leia and Lando)

So realy they are probably both just as good as each other, Han just wanted to be able to tell Luke to not get too cocky...

And the guns can always be controlled from the cockpit, if you don’t have dedicated gunners to operate the turrets.

But dedicated gunners in the turrets is usually a better choice, if you have that option.

A good setup of 5 PC's in a YT involves:

Co-Pilot: Co-pilot action + Assist Maneuver + Angle deflector Shields

Pilot: Gain the Advantage (With a downgrade and a Boost) + Evasive Maneuvers + Stay on Target

2 Gunners: Shoot the buggers... with an Upgrade and Choice of defence zones

Tech: Damage Control + Assist

And the guns can always be controlled from the cockpit, if you don’t have dedicated gunners to operate the turrets.But dedicated gunners in the turrets is usually a better choice, if you have that option.

Controlling turret-mounted guns from the cockpit is at the GM's discretion. For some ships and weapons, it just doesn't seem reasonable, especially of the weapon isn't locked to a fixed arc.

Controlling turret-mounted guns from the cockpit is at the GM's discretion. For some ships and weapons, it just doesn't seem reasonable, especially of the weapon isn't locked to a fixed arc.

I’m not sure where I saw this, and it might have been intended to be specific to only one example, but I did see a mention somewhere that the turret-mounted guns could be locked to the forward arc and then fired by the pilot.

But they are pretty much always controlled “remotely”, even if that is “remote” from the chair that is mounted right under them, because they are controlled electronically and not mechanically. And therefore, it should be possible to control them remotely from the cockpit.

In fact, in some cases, there might not be any local gunner at all, and all weapons are controlled remotely from a weapons control station somewhere else on the ship — probably but not necessarily the cockpit.

Good question. Can you do this? Use a monitor to fire the guns from the cockpit or do you need the "chair rig"? I'm leaning towards the latter.

Up to the GM, plenty of big ships have a Gunnery station on the bridge, small ships can easily have "Lock Forward" function for the pilot to use them, or co-pilot for that matter. An Astro-mec droid plugged in could do it for sure.

I didn't comment previously on turret aspects since there is no right answer. It's up to personal preference. My personal is it varies by the vehicle. You need a picture of the turrets upon the vehicle. Some turrets could do a 360 but others may only be able to view one side, rear, etc. If your ship has a side or rear facing turret that can't look forward at all, then I'm not letting the Pilot fire it normally. In an extreme emergency I may allow something like, "I'm the only one left up here in the pilot seat. So, I'm going to lock the port turret in place and do a fly by of the missile platform keeping it on my port side and pull the trigger right when my monitor shows I'm passing it!".....with a couple upgrades.

Locking a turret forward (that can view forward) is a much better option if you want the Pilot to fire it. But, I would impose a penalty of some sort since it wasn't designed to do it that way. A Pilot of an X-wing firing his 4 always-locked-forward laser cannons (built for that purpose) should have an advantage to accuracy over a Pilot in a YT-1300 with a turreted cannon locked forward (not best way to shoot it). A single setback?

Brand new and just reading through a few of the threads.

I have wondered about the topic of this one since my first viewing of Star Wars way back when.

Han and Chewie the only crew on a ship equipped with two turrets. Hmmm

My assumption has always been that given the technology of the time, of course they could patch in the targeting scope of either gun to a monitor in the cockpit (or is it a bridge?) and use a joy stick to control the thing but would likely not be as accurate.

I also wondered about a semi-intelligent computer (automatic gunner) program that would simply track and fire on anything coming within a certain range. It would probably be pretty inaccurate too, even worse than remote gunnery, but at least the bad guys are getting shot at while the crew is doing their pilot/co pilot thing.

just my $.02