Sorry just had to pull this out as the latest FAQ made this article inaccurate. Well FFG news articles haven't been the best at current proofreading so I guess future-proofreading would be a little too much.

So as we know the whole timing and nerf to R4 Agromech makes this build function-less. But with a whole FAQ dedicating to removal of a development FFG had intended why is FFG seeming to backpedal? Does the FAQ seem like backpedaling to you, or is it a different way of moving lateral or forward. Also how do you think Wave 9 and later waves will be handled if FFG feels the need to FAQ something that will reverse/remove intended functions from past waves? Will FFG become more or less aggressive with changes, and will they continue with aggressive FAQs?

No. Making the timing of the steps involved in making an attack explicit, and so clarifying the extremely muddy waters surrounding the timing of effects that trigger off those steps, is something that's been needed for a while. This is in no way a step back, it's an entirely necessary foundation for the future development of the game.

Timing steps agreed are good, but the way FFG segmented them you can tell they were directly targeting U-boats with Deadeye+R4 combo. Again the image taken directly from an FFG news article tells you that R4-Agromech was designed with Dead-eye and Blaster Turret in mind as both upgrades were never seen. Now you can see that FFG has decided to alter the rules to reduce the way R4 Agromech functions technically undoing the concept for the Wave 6 upgrade.

This wasn't a coincidence of timing steps and the image above proves it.This was intentional and it went against one of FFG's earlier concepts.

No look in the new tfa core set rules. The timing windows have changed and in the new rules that combo of r4 and dead eye wouldn't have worked. It obviously worked in the original core set rules. I even took my rule book to Regionals and showed them that r4 and deadeye wouldn't grant them the lock but unfortunately they didn't rule it that way in my favor.

1 sec OP, just let me find that picture where you can drop a bomb with a SLAM

It worked in Wave 6 because the main rules supported it. The TFA core rules update changed some steps of the attack sequence. Agromech was sort of grandfathered in to maintain that functionality with a FAQ entry that violated the new rules. They have now corrected that.

I am leery of attributing motives. Blaster turret is less useful than before. But so is Dark Curse. No one was screaming to nerf either one. They are collateral damage.

It means we wont have ships that arent playtested much (like the obviously didnt do well with Jumpmaster). They didnt think its ordnance capabilites and dial fully through with all the cards available. Especially not with its points cost. I hope this means we'll not have triple or quad anything-large being the meta in the future.

This wasn't a coincidence of timing steps and the image above proves it.This was intentional and it went against one of FFG's earlier concepts.

R4 Aggro probably wasn't intended to make Blaster Turret a Thing, that was just a cute little interaction of its old timing window. It was probably intended to make double-modified shots easier and more common, which is probably why it shares a cost with FCS. It still works fine in that role.

1 sec OP, just let me find that picture where you can drop a bomb with a SLAM

I know FFG hasn't been the best at rule checking with their articles but this was the ruling and intent back in Wave 6.

It worked in Wave 6 because the main rules supported it. The TFA core rules update changed some steps of the attack sequence. Agromech was sort of grandfathered in to maintain that functionality with a FAQ entry that violated the new rules. They have now corrected that.

I am leery of attributing motives. Blaster turret is less useful than before. But so is Dark Curse. No one was screaming to nerf either one. They are collateral damage.

Yeah blaster turret is collateral damage. But do you think this was a direct target to R4-Agromech and not just update to TFA rules? IMHO R4-Agromech was made for Blaster turrets on Y-wings. As the one of two ships that would carry them Blaster Turrets were the worst ones and needed all the help they could get. Y-wings would just take Ions instead.

This change nerfed a heck of a lot more than just r4/deadeye. It opens the design space a lot. When a TLT threw two stress with tactician it was in constant threat of going overboard. Now it's not.

This change nerfed a heck of a lot more than just r4/deadeye. It opens the design space a lot. When a TLT threw two stress with tactician it was in constant threat of going overboard. Now it's not.

Well speaking of TLTs Hey everyone guess who's back? Thug Life is back guys

R4 Aggro probably wasn't intended to make Blaster Turret a Thing, that was just a cute little interaction of its old timing window.

I suspect that they actually were intended to make Blaster Turrets a viable choice as well as give BTL-A4s a way to modify both of their shots. They were included in an expansion that included Y-Wings and it seemed like the Y-Wing was going to be filling the roles that Y-Wings, X-Wings, and B-Wings were filling in Rebel lists until Scum got a deeper roster.

Unfortunately, now you're paying 6 points to take a Blaster Turret and if you get stressed or bump you can't use your turret.

But do you think this was a direct target to R4-Agromech and not just update to TFA rules?

I don't think it's really a change to the TFA rules. The timing flow chart and timing elaboration is new, but the rules were already clear about when the target became the defender. They just chose to specifically FAQ the Agromech to work as it did under the old rules. Now they've decided to make it comply like everything else.

The first FAQs after TFA still had Dark Curse immune to weapons fired with a focus, but that was caught and corrected relatively quickly. Agromech was allowed to slide longer, probably to enable the scout menace we've been fussing about for months now. So the exception was revoked. I guess you can consider that targeting, but only because Agromech was given special status in the first place.

Sorry just had to pull this out as the latest FAQ made this article inaccurate. Well FFG news articles haven't been the best at current proofreading so I guess future-proofreading would be a little too much.

So as we know the whole timing and nerf to R4 Agromech makes this build function-less. But with a whole FAQ dedicating to removal of a development FFG had intended why is FFG seeming to backpedal? Does the FAQ seem like backpedaling to you, or is it a different way of moving lateral or forward. Also how do you think Wave 9 and later waves will be handled if FFG feels the need to FAQ something that will reverse/remove intended functions from past waves? Will FFG become more or less aggressive with changes, and will they continue with aggressive FAQs?

Because as we all know, the articles that they post are completely in line with the rules and designer intent.

Look, things change. To be frank, this was essentially going to happen due to the Dark Curse change. This is really an outlet from that. Was the Agromech a consideration, sure. And when it came time to finally lay out some concrete timing windows and not muddle through the waters on a card by card basis, yes, the Agromech got hit. But was it because of the current meta, or because it is in line with the Dark Curse ruling?

Look, this timing window is 100% good for the game. Period. This will make things much, much easier in the future. With everything codified, we no longer have to by designer intent (hopefully).

This change nerfed a heck of a lot more than just r4/deadeye. It opens the design space a lot. When a TLT threw two stress with tactician it was in constant threat of going overboard. Now it's not.

Of course, let's cater to training wheels players. Can't have precious Soontir get too stressed and fall off his bicycle!

That's what pisses me off about this FAQ. U-Boats need to be nerfed because of Imperial player greed. Double Tactician is too powerful because it actually poses a threat to Soontir. Last wave they complained that the stresshog was an /autoinclude/, was /too good for its points/, and /too easy to utilize/.

No one actually cares that U-Boats kill off traditional jousters, no one was playing them already. Anyone mad about U-Boats is a Rebel regen 1 straight to victory goober mad that he can no longer just out-mitigate your damage when he flies like an idiot and jousts an entire list, OR they're mad that something can actually pose a threat to Soontir once.

Either way, they completely deserved U-Boats. When a list can get 3 evades out of a completely blank roll, you /need/ something that can match or exceed that. It's a real shame FFG is listening to them, if there was a Palp Aces nerf instead we'd simply be able to bid to PS 4 and U-Boats would no longer be very dominant.

Also, jokes on them, I run Overclocked on them anyways, ahahahahaha.

If only FFG had released some Crew upgrades that really, really screws around with the opponent's green dice and tokens...

Seriously tired the b.s. whiners that come with every FAQ. Listen, dimwits, this is FFGs stated plan: make releases aggressively competitive and FAQ overpowered items back in line. Get over the lame, weaksauce triple J-Master netlist getting tweaked (but not eliminated). We'll care what you have to say when you stop running unimaginative netlists and acting hurt when they get taken away.

I just think that FFG saw another ship or build that was pushing the meta like old Phantomwing and Turretwing did, and they didn't want it to happen again so they headed it off before it got too problematic. Good for them.

First of all this post was not saying Yay or Nay to U-boat nerf. So if you want to build a rainbow wall go ahead but the negativity is something you brought.

I was just pointing out that in previous waves FFG made X upgrade card to go with Y ship and Z weapon. Thing is X card happens to work a little bit too good with brand new C ship equipped with A weapon & B upgrades that were never really used before. So with some rules changing (be it TFA or last FAQ it doesn't matter) X upgrades was targeted in a way that XYZ combo will never work again.

Sure future designs will always replace previous designs but this seems like a reversal of a previous design and not by any new mechanics. After all they didn't push for this change post TFA or wave 8.1 launch.

As for timing Yes it is a good thing. (Time to make a post about "Crackshot's unique timing window and if there will be other modifiers/effects for that same window in the future). Anyone can tell you that the classic attacker/defender alternating modification was getting obsolete (again thanks to Crackshot). Also U-boats are not down for good there could be another upgrade that has a similar effect to the R4-Agromech that could pair with Blaster Turret and Deadeye just not as potent. However, for the current meta they are gone (like whisper post cloak nerf).

Seriously tired the b.s. whiners that come with every FAQ. Listen, dimwits, this is FFGs stated plan: make releases aggressively competitive and FAQ overpowered items back in line. Get over the lame, weaksauce triple J-Master netlist getting tweaked (but not eliminated). We'll care what you have to say when you stop running unimaginative netlists and acting hurt when they get taken away.

The hell? This is the second time it happened, that hardly makes a pattern.

I just think that FFG saw another ship or build that was pushing the meta like old Phantomwing and Turretwing did, and they didn't want it to happen again so they headed it off before it got too problematic. Good for them.

That's what pisses me off about this FAQ. U-Boats need to be nerfed because of Imperial player greed. Double Tactician is too powerful because it actually poses a threat to Soontir.

You're letting your prejudice blind you. Soontir's not remotely scared of U-Boats (unless he properly ****s up and lets a couple of them catch him in-arc inside R2 at the same time). The thing that U-Boats properly murder, and the thing this little tweak might help back into the game? Your beloved JoustWing ships, including the StressHog.

This change nerfed a heck of a lot more than just r4/deadeye. It opens the design space a lot. When a TLT threw two stress with tactician it was in constant threat of going overboard. Now it's not.

Of course, let's cater to training wheels players. Can't have precious Soontir get too stressed and fall off his bicycle!

That's what pisses me off about this FAQ. U-Boats need to be nerfed because of Imperial player greed. Double Tactician is too powerful because it actually poses a threat to Soontir. Last wave they complained that the stresshog was an /autoinclude/, was /too good for its points/, and /too easy to utilize/.

No one actually cares that U-Boats kill off traditional jousters, no one was playing them already. Anyone mad about U-Boats is a Rebel regen 1 straight to victory goober mad that he can no longer just out-mitigate your damage when he flies like an idiot and jousts an entire list, OR they're mad that something can actually pose a threat to Soontir once.

Either way, they completely deserved U-Boats. When a list can get 3 evades out of a completely blank roll, you /need/ something that can match or exceed that. It's a real shame FFG is listening to them, if there was a Palp Aces nerf instead we'd simply be able to bid to PS 4 and U-Boats would no longer be very dominant.

Also, jokes on them, I run Overclocked on them anyways, ahahahahaha.

This change nerfed a heck of a lot more than just r4/deadeye. It opens the design space a lot. When a TLT threw two stress with tactician it was in constant threat of going overboard. Now it's not.

Of course, let's cater to training wheels players. Can't have precious Soontir get too stressed and fall off his bicycle!

That's what pisses me off about this FAQ. U-Boats need to be nerfed because of Imperial player greed. Double Tactician is too powerful because it actually poses a threat to Soontir. Last wave they complained that the stresshog was an /autoinclude/, was /too good for its points/, and /too easy to utilize/.

No one actually cares that U-Boats kill off traditional jousters, no one was playing them already. Anyone mad about U-Boats is a Rebel regen 1 straight to victory goober mad that he can no longer just out-mitigate your damage when he flies like an idiot and jousts an entire list, OR they're mad that something can actually pose a threat to Soontir once.

Either way, they completely deserved U-Boats. When a list can get 3 evades out of a completely blank roll, you /need/ something that can match or exceed that. It's a real shame FFG is listening to them, if there was a Palp Aces nerf instead we'd simply be able to bid to PS 4 and U-Boats would no longer be very dominant.

Also, jokes on them, I run Overclocked on them anyways, ahahahahaha.

There is a palp aces nerf.

And what would that be?

This nerf has nothing to do with Imperial players and everything to do with clarifying the least intuitive part of the game. It's like when magic introduced the stack, it wasn't about nerfing Lotus Veil and Mox Diamond, it was about making interactions behave consistently.

At least they didn't shut down my Ig-88 the crew triple tap combo.