So why not just print the rules for the Aux arc in the booklet that comes with these ships?

Small ships don't get booklets, they get reference cards, in this case a reference card for how Aux Arc's work.

I'm still confused why the Firespray didn't need a rule card for it's Aux arc, but these ships do.

Because the Firespray box was big enough to include a booklet that had the special rules for it, which included the rules for the aux arc.

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.

FFG includes the special rules in every pack that uses them. The reason they included that card is because not everyone who buys one of these ships will own a Firespray and have access to the booklet with the rules written in it.

so I don't see why a ship specific rule card would be so far off base.

Because a reference card won't take up a slot, or cost points.

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.

The devastation is the same. Whether the title is 0 pts and the ship is 29, or the title is 3 and ship is 26, you are still paying the 29 points in the squad building phase to that complete ship package, and spending 61 points elsewhere. Whether Boba takes the upgrade a 0 pts or 3pts, its the same ship and its power level is the same.

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.

Because, again, FFG does not assume that new players have access to special rules from previous releases. Every small ship with special mechanics, whether those are firing arcs, actions, or anything else that was not covered in the original Core Rulebook from the original core set, has included rule cards to describe how they work.

While they have included all sorts of rulecards in the past, they're all for general mechanical things that can apply to a range of ships. This way, when a future release uses the same mechanic, like the Cloaking Device for Scum or the SLAM action coming for large ships, they're able to keep the general rules for that mechanic consistent. Then they'll include upgrades which allow ships to use that mechanic in different ways, like the Focus token discard on the Cloaking Device.

However, they don't put out specific rulecards that only apply to one type of ship. Those are the sorts of things that they prefer to address with Upgrade cards. It's why the IG-2000 was released as a 0-point title card instead of a special description in the rulebook that came with that ship, even though there were no generics for that ship.

Yeah this is literally the exact same thing as IG-2000

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.

Without an Alliance Refit it's an antiquated design that hasn't been updated for 20 years.

0 cost titles with no setback are meant as additional rules text.

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?

There's a rules card because the old Core Set is still manufactured and sold.

As for why they did this way, the reason is because it's much simpler.

They've got two options:

• Use the existing Auxilary Firing Arc and use a zero-cost title on each of the two ships to add their additional effects, a title card that players will have to hand in every game.
• Design two new firing arc types you'll never use again for two new ships, find a way to clearly graphically differentiate them on the pilot cards and bases and require all players to remember them.

The titles are the most elegant way of doing it. I don't understand this bizarre phobia of upgrade cards multiple people have in favour of making things way more complicated for no purpose other than not using upgrade cards.

Give it a 2 dice primary and the cannon upgrade icon.

Was that so hard?

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.

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.

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 insane how much difficulty people are having understanding this. It is very simple.

People have understood it easily since Krassis Trelix.

These extra dice but not extra on the card titles and upgrades are so they don't make combos with things like Guidance Chips really awful.

Well, the original discussion was why couldn't they make this a title that had a point value in case someone wanted to run a cheap version of the ship that didn't have the cost of the title baked into it.

My guess is they didn't trust their playtesters and were worried they'd miss some obnoxious upgrade combination that took advantage of *not* taking the title and making the ship a lot cheaper.

Well, the original discussion was why couldn't they make this a title that had a point value in case someone wanted to run a cheap version of the ship that didn't have the cost of the title baked into it.

My guess is they didn't trust their playtesters and were worried they'd miss some obnoxious upgrade combination that took advantage of *not* taking the title and making the ship a lot cheaper.

I'm willing to bet they trust there play testers but ita more along the lines of this is how ffg wanted the ship to play and not be used as a cheap fighter. They designed it how they wanted it to fit into the game not how most people want it to fit. Me I love the titles being 0 pts it's a great way to give each ship there own flavor and 2 ships that have the same stat line can have titles like this and play completely different.

Way to go ffg love what your doing keep it up

Give it a 2 dice primary and the cannon upgrade icon.

Was that so hard?

With HLCs in the game?

Yes.

Yeah, I find the idea that FFG doesn't trust their testers to be hilarious. They knew that Jumpmasters would have a strong effect. There's no way to say otherwise. However, to say that Jumpmasters are dominating the meta to the extent that the TIE Phantom did is just ridiculous. Palp Aces has had a much stronger impact on the meta, especially with the Inquisitor and Wampa on the board.

I don't understand this bizarre phobia of upgrade cards multiple people have in favour of making things way more complicated for no purpose other than not using upgrade cards.

See also: the weird bee some people seem to have in their bonnet about "auto-include" upgrade cards.

Yes, most upgrade cards are there to offer choice and variety in list-building. However, a few are there to introduce ship- or faction-specific abilities. That's not "a huge missed opportunity" or "lazy design" or whatever. It's getting a result the designers want within the framework of the rules as already set up without introducing more needless card types or complication.

The devastation is the same. Whether the title is 0 pts and the ship is 29, or the title is 3 and ship is 26, you are still paying the 29 points in the squad building phase to that complete ship package

But the latter gives you another option: Not taking the complete package, and only paying 26 points.

That's not really an option with the former(or just a pointless one), because at 29 points, the ship is 3 points overcosted without it's title. You're paying for the upgrade, whether you take it or not.

That's taking choice out of the hands of the player.

People have understood it easily since Krassis Trelix.

Krassis Trelix's primary attack is the same out of each arc. Scum Kath's ability is the closest thing but that needs to take up the pilot text box. If you had to squeeze the text of another ability in there for the named pilots it would be cramped.

Lambda Shuttle = Sad Panda

The devastation is the same. Whether the title is 0 pts and the ship is 29, or the title is 3 and ship is 26, you are still paying the 29 points in the squad building phase to that complete ship package

But the latter gives you another option: Not taking the complete package, and only paying 26 points.

That's not really an option with the former(or just a pointless one), because at 29 points, the ship is 3 points overcosted without it's title. You're paying for the upgrade, whether you take it or not.

That's taking choice out of the hands of the player.

It's taking the choice out of the player's hands because for whatever reason FFG didn't want that choice to exist. Just looking at the ship without the title we've got what is essentially a Y-Wing that trades out their turret slot for a modifed dorsal turret. It doesn't shoot 360 but it can reach out to range 3 and counts as being in arc. It gives up a Torpedo slot for a crew slot and gets an extra point of hull. Based on the price of the pilots we've seen the cheapest ship should be around 22 points.

How cheap do you go with the ship without the title? If you don't reduce the price enough it will just annoy people that they need to factor in the cost of an upgrade anytime they take the ship because it's still so cheap as to make it an auto-include. If you drop it by too much you dip below some point threshold where FFG may have decided some particular combo becomes too cheap. Just look at how people lose their minds over the U-Boat being cheap enough to run three of.

Look at the advanced title, it could have very easily dropped the cost of the Advanced by 3 or 4 points and granted a system slot. That would have given players more choice. Instead they set a minimum cost for a TIE Advanced and just discounted an upgrade.

the only reason i can think of ffg not giving us the option to not have a title for a cheaper ship is out of fear of making another uboat.

None of these ships, least right now, look overly amazing without the title primarily because of the cost. Not sure about the scum ships or the tie/sf but the arc-170 could easily be an ordnance shenanigan boat if he was say 3-5pts cheaper w/o the title. Which would be spammable.

I think the problem is the illusion of choice.

If FFG went to the extra effort of making new aux firing arcs for these ships there wouldn't be as much fuss. But really it would be a bit more messy rules wise.

Going with a title looks like a choice. But if given a choice people want to be able to take that choice.

Think of the ARC-170 and TIE/sf as Whopper combo meals and the titles as the chips and drink.

You can ask for a combo meal but with no chips or drink. They will still charge you combo meal price because that's what you ordered.

With all of this concern about taste... The ship was clearly intended to have a 3 dice forward 2 rear. Titles are ship exclusive and only a few ships have more than one. The truth is there was never meant to be a choice. The X- wing with an integrated Astromech is a modification, that is a choice. The X-Wing was not originally intended to fly like that. You don't need to take the title. The Arc is different. They were meant to fly in the way they can be titled. The choice for a cheaper ship that some have mentioned never were planned to exist. They didn't want you flying a 2 dice both arc ship, they wanted you in the title ship. There is no reason not to take it, as it is free and nothing else could ever (and likely would ever) fill it. The title is the true arc of X-wing, no cheaper variant was ever meant to be playable. I'm sorry for those that want otherwise

If you don't reduce the price enough it will just annoy people that they need to factor in the cost of an upgrade anytime they take the ship because it's still so cheap as to make it an auto-include. If you drop it by too much you dip below some point threshold where FFG may have decided some particular combo becomes too cheap. Just look at how people lose their minds over the U-Boat being cheap enough to run three of.

Yes, there are dangers with charging too much, or too little, for the base ship and it's upgrade. Just like for every other ship and upgrade in the entire game. Just like there's a danger that the ARC-170 already costs too much or too little. If these are reasons not to do something, then there's no game.

Look at the advanced title, it could have very easily dropped the cost of the Advanced by 3 or 4 points and granted a system slot. That would have given players more choice. Instead they set a minimum cost for a TIE Advanced and just discounted an upgrade.

The difference with the Advanced title is...it's a fix for a ship that was unintentionally overcosted.

This is a ship that is INTENTIONALLY being overcosted out of the gate.

My fan design, and I think some other peoples, all had the split firepower represented on the base card and tile by a slash or colon that read like 4/2 or 3:2 to tell you what firepower came out of what arc.

If you don't reduce the price enough it will just annoy people that they need to factor in the cost of an upgrade anytime they take the ship because it's still so cheap as to make it an auto-include. If you drop it by too much you dip below some point threshold where FFG may have decided some particular combo becomes too cheap. Just look at how people lose their minds over the U-Boat being cheap enough to run three of.

Yes, there are dangers with charging too much, or too little, for the base ship and it's upgrade. Just like for every other ship and upgrade in the entire game. Just like there's a danger that the ARC-170 already costs too much or too little. If these are reasons not to do something, then there's no game.

Look at the advanced title, it could have very easily dropped the cost of the Advanced by 3 or 4 points and granted a system slot. That would have given players more choice. Instead they set a minimum cost for a TIE Advanced and just discounted an upgrade.

The difference with the Advanced title is...it's a fix for a ship that was unintentionally overcosted.

This is a ship that is INTENTIONALLY being overcosted out of the gate.

Clearly they want this ship to be this ship - the real gamble is whether they got it right or not, because they've spent one of their best slots for correcting it later.