Jamming Device
modification
0 point
Torpedo and Missile attacks made by ships within Range 2-3 of this ship cannot modify dice rolls.
"Mmm, marmalade."
Link to relevant discussion on "modifying dice rolls aka Omega Leader"
https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/196425-quick-psa-regarding-omega-leaders-ability/
Too stronk? Or too weaksauce? Also does nothing against APT and Potong Rockets.
Probably too cheap and in way too in-demand a slot, but it's roughly the sort of thing I've been considering, and I could fit it into at least some of my lists which are vulnerable to torps.
It still wouldn't do a vast amount for Rebels though because they almost all want their mod slot for other things.
Here, I've fixed Ordnance.
Good luck, FFG has tried to fix it for 7 waves and it currently only really work on one ship, a ship that isn't a Bomber.
So this is anti-ordnance tech? Or am I reading it wrong.
Not sure if you understand what "fix" means. Most people understand it to be something that would put ordnance in a good spot. Not too powerful, not too weak, not too pricey, not too cheap. Originally ordnance was clearly meant to be balanced around the concept that it's limited use and difficult to fire (due to the need to lock the target and catch it in arc and in correct range) but powerful if it does fire. This approach proved to be ineffective. It was too difficult to use, too easy to arc-dodge (and range-dodge), too expensive and too unreliable. Now on JM5K you can equip an upgrade combo that largely nullifies those problems and guess what - it seems it's too powerful (though after the nerf I'm not sure this is the case any longer).
Your "fix" is an upgrade that would make ordnance wildly unreliable and probably wipe it off the tables once more. That's not a good game design. Either way IMO ordnance strength was never what made triple u-boats so OP. It was ordnance coupled with their excellent endurance, maneuverability and way stronger primary weapons (pre-nerf) than their 2 red dice would suggest. Now that the latter is out of the way I think u-boats are in a pretty good spot. Other ordnance carriers - not so much, which makes me believe that weakening them further is the last thing we need.
Edited by LightrockX-wing jargon is broken, plz fix
Silver bullet design is bad design in a squad building game.
No, just no. Please no!
You did not fix ordinance alt all! You nerfed ordinance to a point where it is a waste of points, and that after SEVERAL attempts by FFG to boost ordinance to a point where it becomes attractive.
Sadly, in the same wave where they introduced GC, they also made the squad-cost of the Contracted Scout 2-3 points to low (or it should not have had an EPT).
All comments aside (though such a card without be terrible at 1pt and broken at 0pts, which rather suggested a problem right there), I do find it endlessly amusing that ordinance 'fixes' appear to have now lept from buffs to nerfs...
So... FFG finally make ordnance a useful mechanic after 7 waves of trying, and you propose it be immediately nerfed into oblivion because... salt?
No, just no. Please no!
You did not fix ordinance alt all! You nerfed ordinance to a point where it is a waste of points, and that after SEVERAL attempts by FFG to boost ordinance to a point where it becomes attractive.
Sadly, in the same wave where they introduced GC, they also made the squad-cost of the Contracted Scout 2-3 points to low (or it should not have had an EPT).
I get it. People misspell ordnance a lot.
But it appears correctly spelled in the title here, then a further eight times. so I can't let you off the hook without directing you to the game's ordinance.
Yeaaaahhhhhhno
As was already pointed out it's taken several years and 7 waves for ordnance to be truly viable.
Let's not piss it away with one bad idea.
Edited by DariusAPBI'd prefer something like a team munitions card - similar to ordinance experts, where a single ship's extra munitions card can be applied to other ships in the same fleet. It'd have to be more pricey, and perhaps have some restrictions (choose only one type of munition when you load the card, or something like that), but it might be the way to bring ordnance into a less costly endeavor.
game design 101, hyper specific hardcounters that don't do **** to ANYTHIG apart from the cards they specifically counter are bad ideas
even auto-thrusters work v everything at range 3
if you want to counter ordnance, you want Wes Jenson's ability on different triggers than just "after attacking"
Edited by ficklegreendiceGood luck, FFG has tried to fix it for 7 waves and it currently only really work on one ship, a ship that isn't a Bomber.Here, I've fixed Ordnance.
Top 4'ed a strong local tournament with gamma squad vets, top 16'ed the Atlanta regionals with z-95's and a Y-wing. Never lost to scouts.
If you don't think ordnance works now, it's because you don't want it to.
It occurs to me that the answer to dakka should always be "more dakka" . There can never be "enuff dakka".
Why not just introduce a modification that allows you to re-roll a defense die against non-unique ships with an ept slot?
That specifically takes Scoutmasters into account without being solely useful against them.
Why not just introduce a modification that allows you to re-roll a defense die against non-unique ships with an ept slot?
That specifically takes Scoutmasters into account without being solely useful against them.
but that's so **** corner-case and situational and with such an arbitrary restriction.
also re-rolling a single defense die doesn't exactly matter all that much when you're staring down 4 hits