Babaganoosh, as I'm sure you've noticed a lot of the submissions here aren't in rules text form. After the 25th I've got a lot of free time on my hands if you need the ones you choose rephrased.

Can I make a request? I for the life of me can't word my droid pilot (the 1v1 guy) in a satisfactory way. I want his ability to work like this:

When a ship attempts to target lock him, he may immediately (prior to the enemy target lock finishing) acquire a target lock on the enemy ship. Then, if he chooses not to take the lock, the enemy is regarded as "not able to acquire the target lock, similar to being out of range. Thus they can try to target lock something else, or do another action.

Is that kind of ability even possible with the given structure of the rules?

Maybe word the ability like this: When an enemy ship acquires a target lock on you, you may acquire a target lock on that ship, or you may remove a red target lock token from your ship.

I'd say that ability is a little OP, since you could permanently deny TLs not only from one ship, but any number of enemy ships. I'd limit it in some way (range restriction, once per turn, stress yourself, etc.)

Export as general purpose rather than printing size.

On the matter of the StealthX, it's both downgunned and downarmoured from the equivalent X-wing.

How's it downgunned? It has the same attack and a second torpedo slot, which means it can get exra munitions. It is downarmored, but the stealthx is SUPPOSED to be less armored than a regular x-wing. On the other hand, it gains barrel roll and cloak, plus the system slot and an extra agility.

I mean the StealthX is meant to be downgunned and downarmoured. Yours isn't downgunned. (Not that it has to be, mechanics over lore and all, but if you're going for accuracy I'd make it attack 2 and give it a title to focus all its attacks or something).

Joruus's current wording allows pilots to reach natural PS12. Given PS12 is reserved for effects that temporarily boost a pilot above all others (that TIE/fo, Roark, Rieekan) I'd recommend adding "to a maximum of 8" or "to a maximum of 9".

Babaganoosh, as I'm sure you've noticed a lot of the submissions here aren't in rules text form. After the 25th I've got a lot of free time on my hands if you need the ones you choose rephrased.

Are the lasers actually reduced in power at all? I know it lost a torpedo launcher, but don't see anything on wookiepedia (or remember anything from the books) about the lasers being any weaker.

Very interesting take on the StealthX. I still think that 4 attack makes more sense as it has flat-out better cannons then the standard X-wing. I like the idea of 2 torpedo slots (I went with a bomb just to be different really) and I chose Tech over Systems just because few ships use tech, but systems fits in as well. I think it would a more interesting ship if it didn't have any repositional abilities aside from cloak, and only 2 agility, but as a bonus had 4 attack. Then it becomes a palpable threat, without becoming another hyper-repositional ace ship. The Shadow bomb is definitely better thought out and worded then mine, but I think it should be a further range then one. One of the characteristics of it was a huge explosion radius, and several times in the book they practically blew themselves up firing them at close range.

For Tech vs Stealth, I made my version up well back before the TFA core set released, so there was no tech upgrade at the time .

For the attack value, I mostly just don't want to see too many 4 attack ships in the game. 2 attack ships are already in a bad place, and the more 4 attack ships we get, the less they become worth (people try to get more defensive a la soontir to protect from the hard shots, which makes it even harder for the 2 attack ships to get any damage through at all). Even 3 attack ships are becoming worth less as it is (HLCs, double tap for defenders, etc).

I went with 3 agility over 2 to reflect them being harder to see/pin down to hit, as opposed to reflecting maneuverability necessarily. One could argue that 3 agility + cloak is a lot of green dice I suppose, but you can already do it with starvipers for scum (with the caveat that it could break at any time), and without ACD like the phantom it's not nearly as scary since you can't be cloaked all the time (if you want to attack).

The barrel roll is just becuase it's something I think x-wings should have had in the first place (I'm pretty sure they get done plenty in the x-wing books, though it's been a while since I read em). I could see that going either way. I'm not super attached to the BR action, so it wouldn't break my heart to lose it, though it might affect the price of the ship.

I went with torpedo slot for the shadow bomb simply because that's where it was fired from . Again, not a huge difference, though I think I like torpedo a little better thematically since the stealthx didn't drop any other bombs, and the shadow bomb sitll used a torpedo chassis, just didn't have any propulsion. I wouldn't be opposed to making it range 1-2. I like the shorter range option simply becuase the further away the tarte is the more time/harder it is to get the bomb there. Could maybe give it an extra damage to all ships within rnage 1 (within as opposed to at, so only if the entire base is inside range 1) of the target on a hit to reflect the size of the explosion (and make it risky to do it if they're super close). The joy of the shadow bomb is that regardless of which stealthx version gets voted for (if either), since the upgrades are separate we can always work together to come up with the version we like best (The same is true for pilots. Can always modify to transfer pilots from one of our vresions to the other).

For Tech vs Stealth, I made my version up well back before the TFA core set released, so there was no tech upgrade at the time .

Babaganoosh, as I'm sure you've noticed a lot of the submissions here aren't in rules text form. After the 25th I've got a lot of free time on my hands if you need the ones you choose rephrased.

Can I make a request? I for the life of me can't word my droid pilot (the 1v1 guy) in a satisfactory way. I want his ability to work like this:

When a ship attempts to target lock him, he may immediately (prior to the enemy target lock finishing) acquire a target lock on the enemy ship. Then, if he chooses not to take the lock, the enemy is regarded as "not able to acquire the target lock, similar to being out of range. Thus they can try to target lock something else, or do another action.

Is that kind of ability even possible with the given structure of the rules?

Maybe word the ability like this: When an enemy ship acquires a target lock on you, you may acquire a target lock on that ship, or you may remove a red target lock token from your ship.

I'd say that ability is a little OP, since you could permanently deny TLs not only from one ship, but any number of enemy ships. I'd limit it in some way (range restriction, once per turn, stress yourself, etc.)

I agree that hte ability to ignore target locks should definitely have some form of limit (best comparisons I can think of are Kagi, who denies TLs on allies but you still get to TL him, and Black One, which doesn't stop them from TLing you, and requires you to boost or BR to remove one).

#3 entry: TIE Avenger

Dial is something between the TIE Advanced and the TIE Defender.

More upgrade cards to come.

Very good pilots, great images and a sensible title, but I don't think the dial is right.

TIE Avenger was very agile fighter, possibly the most agile in the entire setting.

Sharp, white 1 turn is a must and it should never get straight 1.

In my opinion (also coming from the X-wing/TIE Fighter game series) it should receive red 3 Segnor's Loop either using 3 bank or even 3 sharp turn like with IG-2000. You might even go crazy and give it red 2 Segnor's Loop as well but using 3 turn template should be unique enough.

It definetely deserves something special showing its incredible flying style.

I'd imagine you want to save Tallon Roll only for TIE Hunter and it is fine.

I'd also advise to reduce its shield value to 2 or even (seems more balanced) to 1 - if it should be good for something it should be its mobility not resilence. I've seen ideas to give it 2 hull and 2 shields which I suppose is also a good solution.

I am sure that people will forgive weaker resilence and higher cost as long as the fighter flies the right way and it definetely was no heavy fighter model like TIE Defender but more like expensive TIE Interceptor with benefits.

You might consider giving it a system upgrade instead of a cannon. It was equipped with a tractor beam, but also with jamming and decoy beam and those could work better as system upgrade cards - unless you have a good idea how to represent them with cannons (or using the rocket slot?).

I don't remember how I ended with that dial, but there is something "scientific" about that. Will review if necessary.

Segnor's Loop was in the plans, but in the end I preferred to not step in TIE/fo (and TIE/sf, my #4 entry) territory.

About the hull/shield, I would reduce in any way. The Avenger had the same hull as the Interceptor and shields a little less powerful than the Defender. I changed values a bit (reduced hull and maxed shield) to make it more unique. There is no way the Avenger would get 1 shield in this game.

The ship had System in the earlier versions. Might want to add it back.

The current proposal makes it a heavy fighter and it was never described as one. TIE Defender will always be better in this field.

Shields are a problem, but it helps to define a fighter - 3 shields are usually for less mobile, X-Wing-like models.

Translating shield value from any other source is a problem given that this way Defender could claim as many as 16...

I just do not see what it is supposed to be and given the background (and game experience from the PC simulation series) feels overweight with shields draining power from engine.

The TIE Avenger was always a "semi-TIE Defender".

What do you propose to make it lore accurate and unique at the same time?

As a precursor to TIE Defender certainly, but in the miniature game we cannot have that - even TIE Defender is toned down a lot and was finally given some battle niche (1 Koio).

TIE Avenger should have very good dial - 1 white turns are a must given how agile it was. I know that Defender was also very agile in the games, but was given red 1 and 2 turns in its dial, but it was turned into a heavy fighter and with Veteran expansion it finally behaves like one, like something unique.

I am a strong supporter to turn TIE Avenger into a sort of super-Interceptor with similar dial (less greens should make it different), but one, new move it could use.

While your TIE Hunter is similar to X-Wing, TIE Avenger could find its own space as a sort of Imperial StarViper, but more expensive and with 2 shields.

Upgrades and the title would still make it different.

For a special move I'd go for red 3 Segnor's Loop but using turn instead of bank. I thought about it seems to reflect its capability to dance out of target pretty well, makes it quite unique in the game and doesn't break the balance.

It certainly needs something crazy screaming 'I want to fly this thing' and I think this could be it.

It also needs to lose straight 1.

This TIE was known for rapid acceleration, but keeping this move could make it too much like a semi-stationary platform and if anything should act this way it should be Assault Gunboat.

I think that your title works very nicely with those changes - straight 2-5 to use boost is all right even with less greens in the dial. Red 3 sharp Segnor's Loop for more risky moves. White 1 turns for close range dogfight.

I guess Vassal players would discover if it works.

TIE Interceptors would always be either cheaper or better thanks to the whole bunch of interesting pilots so I think that they are not in danger of being forced into extinction by this Avenger.

Fixed the text to reflect that it works for all enemy ships. Hvaen't entirely decided on cost yet.

Anyone have any ideas for a Talon Karrde crew card? I wanna make one, but can't decide on a bility for him. Intel Agent's ability would be perfect, but it's already taken...

Also thinking about a scum z95 mara pilot...

Anyone have any ideas for a Talon Karrde crew card? I wanna make one, but can't decide on a bility for him. Intel Agent's ability would be perfect, but it's already taken...

Also thinking about a scum z95 mara pilot...

Why not make a better intel agent style card?

I've toyed around in the past with maneuver guessing mechanics, you might try something like:

Once per round, before an enemy ship reveals its maneuver dial for the first time that round, you may guess aloud the chosen maneuver. If you are correct, up to three friendly ships may acquire a target lock on that ship, ignoring range restrictions. If you are incorrect, assign yourself one stress token.

Very interesting take on the StealthX. I still think that 4 attack makes more sense as it has flat-out better cannons then the standard X-wing. I like the idea of 2 torpedo slots (I went with a bomb just to be different really) and I chose Tech over Systems just because few ships use tech, but systems fits in as well. I think it would a more interesting ship if it didn't have any repositional abilities aside from cloak, and only 2 agility, but as a bonus had 4 attack. Then it becomes a palpable threat, without becoming another hyper-repositional ace ship. The Shadow bomb is definitely better thought out and worded then mine, but I think it should be a further range then one. One of the characteristics of it was a huge explosion radius, and several times in the book they practically blew themselves up firing them at close range.

For Tech vs Stealth, I made my version up well back before the TFA core set released, so there was no tech upgrade at the time .

For the attack value, I mostly just don't want to see too many 4 attack ships in the game. 2 attack ships are already in a bad place, and the more 4 attack ships we get, the less they become worth (people try to get more defensive a la soontir to protect from the hard shots, which makes it even harder for the 2 attack ships to get any damage through at all). Even 3 attack ships are becoming worth less as it is (HLCs, double tap for defenders, etc).

I went with 3 agility over 2 to reflect them being harder to see/pin down to hit, as opposed to reflecting maneuverability necessarily. One could argue that 3 agility + cloak is a lot of green dice I suppose, but you can already do it with starvipers for scum (with the caveat that it could break at any time), and without ACD like the phantom it's not nearly as scary since you can't be cloaked all the time (if you want to attack).

The barrel roll is just becuase it's something I think x-wings should have had in the first place (I'm pretty sure they get done plenty in the x-wing books, though it's been a while since I read em). I could see that going either way. I'm not super attached to the BR action, so it wouldn't break my heart to lose it, though it might affect the price of the ship.

I went with torpedo slot for the shadow bomb simply because that's where it was fired from . Again, not a huge difference, though I think I like torpedo a little better thematically since the stealthx didn't drop any other bombs, and the shadow bomb sitll used a torpedo chassis, just didn't have any propulsion. I wouldn't be opposed to making it range 1-2. I like the shorter range option simply becuase the further away the tarte is the more time/harder it is to get the bomb there. Could maybe give it an extra damage to all ships within rnage 1 (within as opposed to at, so only if the entire base is inside range 1) of the target on a hit to reflect the size of the explosion (and make it risky to do it if they're super close). The joy of the shadow bomb is that regardless of which stealthx version gets voted for (if either), since the upgrades are separate we can always work together to come up with the version we like best (The same is true for pilots. Can always modify to transfer pilots from one of our vresions to the other).

For Tech vs Stealth, I made my version up well back before the TFA core set released, so there was no tech upgrade at the time .

Yup, completely understandable. Although apparently the Jedi used Glop bombs (don't ask I have know idea what they are), and Bunker-buster bombs as well. I figured 4 attack because they have the same cannons as XJ3s which have Stutter-Fire HLCs apparently, although I can see why one wouldn't want a third 4 attack ship (and a 2nd one that can cloak). It would be interesting to make the StealthX a cloaking ordnance ship. Fly around in cloak, decloak, plop a shadow bomb, and just be a little nuisance.

Very interesting take on the StealthX. I still think that 4 attack makes more sense as it has flat-out better cannons then the standard X-wing. I like the idea of 2 torpedo slots (I went with a bomb just to be different really) and I chose Tech over Systems just because few ships use tech, but systems fits in as well. I think it would a more interesting ship if it didn't have any repositional abilities aside from cloak, and only 2 agility, but as a bonus had 4 attack. Then it becomes a palpable threat, without becoming another hyper-repositional ace ship. The Shadow bomb is definitely better thought out and worded then mine, but I think it should be a further range then one. One of the characteristics of it was a huge explosion radius, and several times in the book they practically blew themselves up firing them at close range.

For Tech vs Stealth, I made my version up well back before the TFA core set released, so there was no tech upgrade at the time .

For the attack value, I mostly just don't want to see too many 4 attack ships in the game. 2 attack ships are already in a bad place, and the more 4 attack ships we get, the less they become worth (people try to get more defensive a la soontir to protect from the hard shots, which makes it even harder for the 2 attack ships to get any damage through at all). Even 3 attack ships are becoming worth less as it is (HLCs, double tap for defenders, etc).

I went with 3 agility over 2 to reflect them being harder to see/pin down to hit, as opposed to reflecting maneuverability necessarily. One could argue that 3 agility + cloak is a lot of green dice I suppose, but you can already do it with starvipers for scum (with the caveat that it could break at any time), and without ACD like the phantom it's not nearly as scary since you can't be cloaked all the time (if you want to attack).

The barrel roll is just becuase it's something I think x-wings should have had in the first place (I'm pretty sure they get done plenty in the x-wing books, though it's been a while since I read em). I could see that going either way. I'm not super attached to the BR action, so it wouldn't break my heart to lose it, though it might affect the price of the ship.

I went with torpedo slot for the shadow bomb simply because that's where it was fired from . Again, not a huge difference, though I think I like torpedo a little better thematically since the stealthx didn't drop any other bombs, and the shadow bomb sitll used a torpedo chassis, just didn't have any propulsion. I wouldn't be opposed to making it range 1-2. I like the shorter range option simply becuase the further away the tarte is the more time/harder it is to get the bomb there. Could maybe give it an extra damage to all ships within rnage 1 (within as opposed to at, so only if the entire base is inside range 1) of the target on a hit to reflect the size of the explosion (and make it risky to do it if they're super close). The joy of the shadow bomb is that regardless of which stealthx version gets voted for (if either), since the upgrades are separate we can always work together to come up with the version we like best (The same is true for pilots. Can always modify to transfer pilots from one of our vresions to the other).

For Tech vs Stealth, I made my version up well back before the TFA core set released, so there was no tech upgrade at the time .

Yup, completely understandable. Although apparently the Jedi used Glop bombs (don't ask I have know idea what they are), and Bunker-buster bombs as well. I figured 4 attack because they have the same cannons as XJ3s which have Stutter-Fire HLCs apparently, although I can see why one wouldn't want a third 4 attack ship (and a 2nd one that can cloak). It would be interesting to make the StealthX a cloaking ordnance ship. Fly around in cloak, decloak, plop a shadow bomb, and just be a little nuisance.

Hmm. Speaking of which, I wonder if the shadow bomb should have a line allowing you to fire it while cloaked...(for fluff reasons).

Final Submission:

Tie Striker!

*Note: ISB Patrol is not a unique, I just wanted Eons to remove the flavour text style.

I had very limited art to use for this! But I really wanted it out there for this league, because I think the idea is exciting. I imagine this thing being a prototype and only flown by the best. It's a small profile with extended engines, so It's 4 natural defence, with an amazing dial! However, it can't take Autothrusters, or any modifaction due to it being in such small production. So it's at the will of it's impressive spread of dice to keep it alive. However, I think the title is where it shines. Mr. Director only chose the best and most talented pilots to fly his new toys and ones not afraid to take action when the enemy is near. SO, you could equip Expose on your Striker and wait to see if the enemy falls in your arc to then activation Expose, and still have 3 agility and a focus!
Or you could wait and see if the enemy outsmarted your and has you in arc... TO Expertly handle a roll out of arc and remove a TL!
Same goes with Daredevil, a quick turn for a better angle post movement.

Hope you all like it.

*** Final Submission ****

edit : made a correction on the TX-65 "tandem" cockpit who was supposed to be a 0pt title.

*** Final Submission ****

TX-65 "tandem" cockpit : I created this card to bring more option to the T-65 instead of a pure fix.The astromech cost restriction is to avoid a potential build like : Luke + R2D2 (astromech)/IA + Chewbacca … which is a too ****’ powerful regen monster. Yeah, because without R2D2, any T-65 with just crewbacca + any astromech/ IA is a virtual 8HP small ship with 2 greens who can avoid 2 crit card. It's just enough.

Rebel wingmate : I created this card to be paired with the T-65 cockpit card. That’s way we can get interesting generics pilots likes an offensive rookie+R2 astro/integrated+Reb'mate at the same price of a Blue+FCS.

Hidden stash : Vipers gonna love. It's my "Starviper fix" : read free inertial dampers for non-virago Starvip ... or 1pt glitterstim. Also, the heavy scyk title can now allow illicit for scyk (with an overcost of 1). with a reduction of only 1point we don't open the pandora's hatch : quadTLT can get a inertial dampers but they will need to remove their astromechs for glitterstims.

Interesting; what's the rationale behind the cost limit on the astromechs for the tandem cockpit?

Interesting; what's the rationale behind the cost limit on the astromechs for the tandem cockpit?

1- I like to imagine the rebels engineers modified an original T-65, taking on the astromech parts to make enough space for the copilot. it's to reflect the idea of wingmate who take in charge some fonctions of the droids.

2- R5-P9 and R2D2. I found any T-65 Named + R2-D2/R5-P9 + Chewbacca/R2-D2 (crew) + integrated astromech + TX-65 cockpit too powerfull so I had to cut somewhere... I chose to let the possibility of Wes Janson + Gunner

edit : and I made an error on the TX-65 "tandem" card, it's not 2pts but 0 ^^.

Babaganoosh, as I'm sure you've noticed a lot of the submissions here aren't in rules text form. After the 25th I've got a lot of free time on my hands if you need the ones you choose rephrased.

Can I make a request? I for the life of me can't word my droid pilot (the 1v1 guy) in a satisfactory way. I want his ability to work like this:

When a ship attempts to target lock him, he may immediately (prior to the enemy target lock finishing) acquire a target lock on the enemy ship. Then, if he chooses not to take the lock, the enemy is regarded as "not able to acquire the target lock, similar to being out of range. Thus they can try to target lock something else, or do another action.

Is that kind of ability even possible with the given structure of the rules?

Yes, although there isn't any phrasing I know of that refers to the ship performing an action.

It's a bit of an odd ability though: why would anyone ever try to lock you? Personally I'd ditch the illegal target part and just have him be able to lock anyone who locks him.

That'd be:

"When you are assigned a red target lock token you may immediately acquire a target lock on the ship with the corresponding blue target lock token."

Babaganoosh, as I'm sure you've noticed a lot of the submissions here aren't in rules text form. After the 25th I've got a lot of free time on my hands if you need the ones you choose rephrased.

Can I make a request? I for the life of me can't word my droid pilot (the 1v1 guy) in a satisfactory way. I want his ability to work like this:

When a ship attempts to target lock him, he may immediately (prior to the enemy target lock finishing) acquire a target lock on the enemy ship. Then, if he chooses not to take the lock, the enemy is regarded as "not able to acquire the target lock, similar to being out of range. Thus they can try to target lock something else, or do another action.

Is that kind of ability even possible with the given structure of the rules?

Yes, although there isn't any phrasing I know of that refers to the ship performing an action.

It's a bit of an odd ability though: why would anyone ever try to lock you? Personally I'd ditch the illegal target part and just have him be able to lock anyone who locks him.

That'd be:

"When you are assigned a red target lock token you may immediately acquire a target lock on the ship with the corresponding blue target lock token."

True that nobody would ever try to target lock you. Might as well have an ability that reads "you may not be target locked".

True that nobody would ever try to target lock you. Might as well have an ability that reads "you may not be target locked".

Well, strictly speaking you don't lose anything by target locking them, but if you have anything to gain really the opponent will deny the lock and if they have something to gain (they want the free lock to ordnance you) you can just focus instead.

Personally I'd go one way or the other. OPR target lock denial or automatic locking of ships that lock you.

That, or take the action mimic concept and turn it up to 11. "When a ship at Range 1-2 performs an action on your action bar you may immediately perform that action as as a free action."

Action bar restriction because mimicing SLAM and Cloak would be a bit thematically jarring.

Anyway, off for now but I think I'll take a crack at my take on the TIE avenger tomorrow.

#3.5 entry:

Assorted titles * FINAL VERSION *

#4 entry: * FINAL VERSION *

TIE Special Forces

#4.5 entry: * FINAL VERSION *

Assorted ships

#3.5 entry:

Assorted titles

The last thing the interceptor needs is a buff...

#3.5 entry:

Assorted titles

The last thing the interceptor needs is a buff...

Well, maybe that's true, but you can add a card and not increase the power level of a ship, but instead broaden its use.

This title competes with the royal guard title, which is very popular on the top interceptor builds. It costs the same as a shield upgrade (which is not usually taken), and adds a missile slot (missiles typically need guidance chip in the mod slot to be effective, competing with autothrusters) and the target lock action.

I wouldn't say that it is a power increase over the current builds. Maybe a lateral move into different roles (ordnance carrier?), though.

#4.5 entry:

Assorted ships

Got dials for these?

#3.5 entry:

Assorted titles

The last thing the interceptor needs is a buff...

Well, maybe that's true, but you can add a card and not increase the power level of a ship, but instead broaden its use.

This title competes with the royal guard title, which is very popular on the top interceptor builds. It costs the same as a shield upgrade (which is not usually taken), and adds a missile slot (missiles typically need guidance chip in the mod slot to be effective, competing with autothrusters) and the target lock action.

I wouldn't say that it is a power increase over the current builds. Maybe a lateral move into different roles (ordnance carrier?), though.

Some people already use targeting computer (or occasionally hull upgrade, not not a lot) on soontir. Id give up stealth device and pay 1 point more for a shield and target lock in a heartbeat.

Some time ago I thought about something similar, but not as a title -

Power consumption should be reflected so I went for this, but I am not sure if red 1 turns is enough.