There is no convenient way in X-Wing to otherwise state that the forward and read arcs of the ship do not match. The ship was intended to fire 3 dice forward and 2 rear so that positioning was more important for the ship. There's no other way to do it but a title.

It's a way to add a special rule to EVERY ship of that type, since they don't print ship abilities on pilot cards.

That said, I wish it WASN'T a 0 point title. As it's clearly an ability that's worth more than 0 points. Which means the base ARC-170 is intentionally overcosted, because it's assumed that you would take this card.

I'd have preferred it if the ship, and the title, were both appropriately costed for their power. Same with the TIE/sf.

Simples

It's a way to add a special rule to EVERY ship of that type, since they don't print ship abilities on pilot cards.

That said, I wish it WASN'T a 0 point title. As it's clearly an ability that's worth more than 0 points. Which means the base ARC-170 is intentionally overcosted, because it's assumed that you would take this card.

I'd have preferred it if the ship, and the title, were both appropriately costed for their power. Same with the TIE/sf.

This just means it will be that much more devastating when Boba Fett runs off with your 0-point upgrade.

That too. And it's overly complicated.

It's a way to add a special rule to EVERY ship of that type, since they don't print ship abilities on pilot cards.

That said, I wish it WASN'T a 0 point title. As it's clearly an ability that's worth more than 0 points. Which means the base ARC-170 is intentionally overcosted, because it's assumed that you would take this card.

I'd have preferred it if the ship, and the title, were both appropriately costed for their power. Same with the TIE/sf.

FINALLY someone that has the same view i do on these titles.

I love the idea of ship abilities, it lets the basic shmucks feel less underwhelming because they can still DO something. But the ships really should NOT have the title price factored in to its base cost. What if i want to run a 20pt ARC because i dont have the 26pts to spare? simple, i dont take the title, it still has a dual arc so its not useless.

Same for the TIE/sf. I seriously question how viable he is at THAT price, even if that title is amazing. Again, i think i'd rather cut 5pts and not take the title.

I'd imagine that there were some balance concerns that came up with players having a choice between higher price or cheaper ships. I can especially see this with the ARC, as that has more options for crazy combos.

It's a way to add a special rule to EVERY ship of that type, since they don't print ship abilities on pilot cards.

That said, I wish it WASN'T a 0 point title. As it's clearly an ability that's worth more than 0 points. Which means the base ARC-170 is intentionally overcosted, because it's assumed that you would take this card.

I'd have preferred it if the ship, and the title, were both appropriately costed for their power. Same with the TIE/sf.

This just means it will be that much more devastating when Boba Fett runs off with your 0-point upgrade.

I hadn't really considered Boba Fett and the deluge of 0 point titles.

Man, Boba is a gorram beast.

pfft if boba takes off with my 0pt title on my tie/sf instead of kicking palpy out the airlock thats fine by me

pfft if boba takes off with my 0pt title on my tie/sf instead of kicking palpy out the airlock thats fine by me

And I'd be equally fine if spending Boba in this way permanently dropped you from a 3-dice primary to a 2-dice primary. It's functionally the same as taking out the Punishing One title, or an Outrider's cannon.

And it would be even better if the crit that triggered Boba was a Weapons Malfunction. Have fun flying your HWK!

I agree, I hate that they are building the cost of these titles into the ship itself. We get it FFG, you couldn't figure out how to make a ship that had a forward and rear firing arcs that had different attack values. But instead of building the cost into the ship, how's about you just let the player decide if they want that ability. Would that be too much to ask? I feel like they could have just wrote this into the rules by having an Auxiliary Firing Arc rule card for the TIE s/f and a separate one for the ARC. Not just one rule card for all Aux arcs. Just print two cards, "Aux Arc TIE" and "Aux Arc ARC" and poof, problem solved without ramming the cost of a title that's *obviously* worth more than 0 points into the ship. And another thing, are these new Aux arc rules going to retroactively affect the Firespray?

But at least they got something right with the Shadow Caster. I really like the fact that you have to take an action to move your firing arc instead of having it be 360 deg all the time. So I won't mind that autothrusters won't work against it. If they made all turret weapons like this we probably would have never needed autothrusters as an upgrade in the first place.

I feel like a lot of these ships are built to address complaints.
"Imp Aces are OP!" Ok, here's your Fang.
"Autothrusters are OP!" Ok, here's three ships with Aux arcs that don't trigger autothrusters.

I'd agree the reason it's 0 points is because yes they do expect you to always take the title, they didn't want 2 different ships to play test and try and balance and the likelihood would be no one would ever take the title if the base ship with those upgrade slots existed.

They are saying Rebels in the Civil War era Didn't fly around ARC-170's unless they were retrofitted. It's a cool mechanic and it's a way to introduce that mechanic that existing players can understand because it's done in a similar way to other ships that have ship wide abilities.

And another thing, are these new Aux arc rules going to retroactively affect the Firespray?

What Aux arc rules? That's the entire point. There aren't new aux arc rules are there? The new ships just have titles that use them funkily.

The new ships just have titles that use them funkily.

Yeah that's the whole point, they don't want to make up new rules so they made titles so they could have a given effect only for these ships.

I'd agree the reason it's 0 points is because yes they do expect you to always take the title, they didn't want 2 different ships to play test and try and balance and the likelihood would be no one would ever take the title if the base ship with those upgrade slots existed.

They are saying Rebels in the Civil War era Didn't fly around ARC-170's unless they were retrofitted. It's a cool mechanic and it's a way to introduce that mechanic that existing players can understand because it's done in a similar way to other ships that have ship wide abilities.

I feel like they could have costed them out based on the HWK pretty easily, then made the title 4-5 points. Not doing so just seems slothy. That or maybe FFG doesn't have faith in it's playtesters after the whole contracted scout release where they failed to spot an OBVIOUS combination of addons when assigning a point value to the ship, so they want to reduce the amount you can modify a cheap version of the ship.

Which is annoying, because coming up with inventive ways to combine mods for ships is like half the intrigue of this game.

I agree, I hate that they are building the cost of these titles into the ship itself. We get it FFG, you couldn't figure out how to make a ship that had a forward and rear firing arcs that had different attack values. But instead of building the cost into the ship, how's about you just let the player decide if they want that ability. Would that be too much to ask? I feel like they could have just wrote this into the rules by having an Auxiliary Firing Arc rule card for the TIE s/f and a separate one for the ARC. Not just one rule card for all Aux arcs. Just print two cards, "Aux Arc TIE" and "Aux Arc ARC" and poof, problem solved without ramming the cost of a title that's *obviously* worth more than 0 points into the ship. And another thing, are these new Aux arc rules going to retroactively affect the Firespray?

But at least they got something right with the Shadow Caster. I really like the fact that you have to take an action to move your firing arc instead of having it be 360 deg all the time. So I won't mind that autothrusters won't work against it. If they made all turret weapons like this we probably would have never needed autothrusters as an upgrade in the first place.

I feel like a lot of these ships are built to address complaints.

"Imp Aces are OP!" Ok, here's your Fang.

"Autothrusters are OP!" Ok, here's three ships with Aux arcs that don't trigger autothrusters.

So instead of having the same rules for auxiliary arcs for all ships, and then adding titles for these new ships that let them do different things with them and keep things easily referenced at the table, you'd rather we have basically have special rulebook entries for each ship with an auxiliary firing arc?

And another thing, are these new Aux arc rules going to retroactively affect the Firespray?

What Aux arc rules? That's the entire point. There aren't new aux arc rules are there? The new ships just have titles that use them funkily.

There's clearly a card that defines the Auxiliary Arc rules:

So my point is that since the Firespray never needed one of these cards because it's attack was the same front and back, why couldn't this NEW card just define the different rules for the Aux arcs on these new ships? And if the title covers the new rules for the Aux arc, then why is there a new rule card for the Aux arc since the Firespray's rules were in the main ruleset?

I'd agree the reason it's 0 points is because yes they do expect you to always take the title, they didn't want 2 different ships to play test and try and balance and the likelihood would be no one would ever take the title if the base ship with those upgrade slots existed.

They are saying Rebels in the Civil War era Didn't fly around ARC-170's unless they were retrofitted. It's a cool mechanic and it's a way to introduce that mechanic that existing players can understand because it's done in a similar way to other ships that have ship wide abilities.

I feel like they could have costed them out based on the HWK pretty easily, then made the title 4-5 points. Not doing so just seems slothy. That or maybe FFG doesn't have faith in it's playtesters after the whole contracted scout release where they failed to spot an OBVIOUS combination of addons when assigning a point value to the ship, so they want to reduce the amount you can modify a cheap version of the ship.

Which is annoying, because coming up with inventive ways to combine mods for ships is like half the intrigue of this game.

Or perhaps they DID test them where you had the option to run the ships for less, and decided that it would do bad things to the game because of the combinations that it would allow. Plus, every future combination of Rebel Astromech/Crew and Imperial Tech/System would need to be designed with what was effectively two different ships in mind: a pricy dogfighter and a cheaper utility ship.

You can't complain about them messing up with pricing the Jumpmaster in the same breath as you complain that they didn't risk messing these ships up in the same way.

EDIT: the Firespray, Ghost and Hound's Tooth didn't need a card that defined the auxiliary firing arc rules because those rules were printed in the actual booklet that came with the ships instead. FFG doesn't print rule cards for stuff that comes with a booklet. These are the first small ships to have an auxiliary arc, so they get their special rules printed on a card for the benefit of those players who only bought an original Core set and then this expansion. It's the same as the rule card for the Turreted Primary Arc that came with the K-Wing.

There's clearly a card that defines the Auxiliary Arc rules:

Yes and that card contains the same rules that every ship that has an aux arc uses.

So my point is that since the Firespray never needed one of these cards

It didn't need that card, because those rules were in the booklet that came with the Firespray.

why couldn't this NEW card just define the different rules for the Aux arcs on these new ships?

Because then you have rules for something that many ships share, but act differently on different ships. In theory you could, but apparently that's not the route that FFG wanted to go with.

then why is there a new rule card for the Aux arc since the Firespray's rules were in the main ruleset?

Because again, the rules for the Aux arc weren't in the main rules when the Firespray came out, they were in the booklet that came with the Firespray.

I'd imagine that there were some balance concerns that came up with players having a choice between higher price or cheaper ships. I can especially see this with the ARC, as that has more options for crazy combos.

cheap arc carrying kanan, tactician + stressbot, etc.

So why not just print the rules for the Aux arc in the booklet that comes with these ships? I'm still confused why the Firespray didn't need a rule card for it's Aux arc, but these ships do. Unless the rules are different.

I'd imagine that there were some balance concerns that came up with players having a choice between higher price or cheaper ships. I can especially see this with the ARC, as that has more options for crazy combos.

cheap arc carrying kanan, tactician + stressbot, etc.

Yep. Or just sacrificing the 4-5 point title to go with a Gunner/R3-A2 combo for double-stress at all ranges and with two firing arcs. Why would you ever run a stresshog again if you could run this thing, get an extra hull point, more green maneuvers, works at range 1-3 AND have two different firing arcs to choose from? The only thing that would prevent the target from taking a second stress is if you hit on the first attack, which is a trade most players would accept against an ace.

Because again, the rules for the Aux arc weren't in the main rules when the Firespray came out, they were in the booklet that came with the Firespray.

So why not just print the rules for the Aux arc in the booklet that comes with these ships? I'm still confused why the Firespray didn't need a rule card for it's Aux arc, but these ships do. Unless the rules are different.

Because there's no room for a booklet in the small ship packaging. There's only room for cards, and players who only bought the original Core set and then this expansion would not have the Rules Reference guide that details how auxiliary firing arcs work.

I agree, I hate that they are building the cost of these titles into the ship itself. We get it FFG, you couldn't figure out how to make a ship that had a forward and rear firing arcs that had different attack values. But instead of building the cost into the ship, how's about you just let the player decide if they want that ability. Would that be too much to ask? I feel like they could have just wrote this into the rules by having an Auxiliary Firing Arc rule card for the TIE s/f and a separate one for the ARC. Not just one rule card for all Aux arcs. Just print two cards, "Aux Arc TIE" and "Aux Arc ARC" and poof, problem solved without ramming the cost of a title that's *obviously* worth more than 0 points into the ship. And another thing, are these new Aux arc rules going to retroactively affect the Firespray?

But at least they got something right with the Shadow Caster. I really like the fact that you have to take an action to move your firing arc instead of having it be 360 deg all the time. So I won't mind that autothrusters won't work against it. If they made all turret weapons like this we probably would have never needed autothrusters as an upgrade in the first place.

I feel like a lot of these ships are built to address complaints.

"Imp Aces are OP!" Ok, here's your Fang.

"Autothrusters are OP!" Ok, here's three ships with Aux arcs that don't trigger autothrusters.

So instead of having the same rules for auxiliary arcs for all ships, and then adding titles for these new ships that let them do different things with them and keep things easily referenced at the table, you'd rather we have basically have special rulebook entries for each ship with an auxiliary firing arc?

My question is that since the new rule are basically embedded in the title card, and they cost out the ship so that you'd be crazy not to take a 0 point title card, why do you even need a new rule card for the Aux arc? Maybe I need to go back and re-read my Firespray book, but I'm confused about what wouldn't be covered in the paperwork that comes with these ships and the title card that necessitated a new rule card.

And FFG has put out loads of ship specific upgrades and titles, so I don't see why a ship specific rule card would be so far off base.

And my point about the faith in the playtesters was exactly that since they failed to price out the Contracted Scout properly, FFG might want to dial back the flexibility of the new ships they come out with so something they didn't intend doesn't start wrecking everything.

If you're going to use a title card as a backdoor rule card that someone would be crazy not to take for 0 points, why not just make it a rule card instead? It just seems like an incredibly awkward way of going about this.

I agree, I hate that they are building the cost of these titles into the ship itself. We get it FFG, you couldn't figure out how to make a ship that had a forward and rear firing arcs that had different attack values. But instead of building the cost into the ship, how's about you just let the player decide if they want that ability. Would that be too much to ask? I feel like they could have just wrote this into the rules by having an Auxiliary Firing Arc rule card for the TIE s/f and a separate one for the ARC. Not just one rule card for all Aux arcs. Just print two cards, "Aux Arc TIE" and "Aux Arc ARC" and poof, problem solved without ramming the cost of a title that's *obviously* worth more than 0 points into the ship. And another thing, are these new Aux arc rules going to retroactively affect the Firespray?

But at least they got something right with the Shadow Caster. I really like the fact that you have to take an action to move your firing arc instead of having it be 360 deg all the time. So I won't mind that autothrusters won't work against it. If they made all turret weapons like this we probably would have never needed autothrusters as an upgrade in the first place.

I feel like a lot of these ships are built to address complaints.

"Imp Aces are OP!" Ok, here's your Fang.

"Autothrusters are OP!" Ok, here's three ships with Aux arcs that don't trigger autothrusters.

So instead of having the same rules for auxiliary arcs for all ships, and then adding titles for these new ships that let them do different things with them and keep things easily referenced at the table, you'd rather we have basically have special rulebook entries for each ship with an auxiliary firing arc?

This. I believe that they went with simplicity here. While looking at or remembering what an auxiliary arc card specifically says for the arc-170 only may not be that big of a hassle to some like me who plays a lot, but to some casual players or players new to the game it can be a turn off trying to remember different rules for ships that are other wise similar.