If you made all pwts work this way many would need a significant discount and possibly new upgrades relating to that.

One Question:

Can we be sure that the mobile firing arc is used like a auxiliry firing arc?

Specifically for tactican and autothrusters?

It seems to me that would make the shadowcaster stronger than any PWT.

Even if they where evenly priced

(which they are not).

Now, X-wing 2.0 is still an option. They can reboot the whole game and re balance it all

How would you see that playing out? Would they release a new core set and then booster/upgrade packs to address all the ships, or would this be an entirely new game necessitating repurchasing of everything for a new game?

Now, I'm not really sure, to be honest. I don't know if they would ever do such a thing. I know they released an upgrade boxed set when they bought Talisman. Of course, that's a contained game and could be really different. They might have some sort of boxed set with x number of cards that are reprints.

If you made all pwts work this way many would need a significant discount and possibly new upgrades relating to that.

Considering pwts apart from the occasional deci are dead in the water, this is for the best

Never shy away from improvement just because there's a little effort involved

Hell we can take the opportunity to make ye ole yt1300 abilities not be so **** boring (apart from lando whom NO ONE USED)

One Question:

Can we be sure that the mobile firing arc is used like a auxiliry firing arc?

Specifically for tactican and autothrusters?

It seems to me that would make the shadowcaster stronger than any PWT.

Even if they where evenly priced

(which they are not).

Yes, we are sure that it is like Aux firing arc for Auto Includes.

Does it work with Tail Gunner if it's facing the rear?

No, because Mobile Firing Arc isn't an Aux. Firing arc, even if it works the same. It's worded different.

Played against a fellow prox'ing one on vassal last night. With that things mobility, title, and gyro cannon its very difficult to avoid its 180deg arc.

Played against a fellow prox'ing one on vassal last night. With that things mobility, title, and gyro cannon its very difficult to avoid its 180deg arc.

Oh for sure it's the hardest arc to dodge

But "very difficult" is infinitely preferable to "literally impossible"

It's basically what the PWTs should have been all along. You treat it exactly like the Firespray's Aux arc, but you can change which direction is faces with an action.

It is not what PWT should have been. Ships with pilot controlled turrets are Mobile Arc, ships with additional gunners chairs with turrets are PWT. Those are not the same thing. There is no reason that it should cost the falcon its action to change the firing arc.

What they could have done is made it so ships with a Dedicated Gunner chair (like you mentioned the Falcon) had to use a crew slot for it though 1-2 points you may perform a free mobile arc move action, or you may perform attacks outside of your mobile arc.

In my opinion this would have been preferable because now you have to choose between keeping your turret, taking gunner, or taking 2 defensive crew (and before people start complaining do any of the large ships besides the shuttle and YV-666 really have a bad dial? most have either 1 or 2 white turns or better)

It's basically what the PWTs should have been all along. You treat it exactly like the Firespray's Aux arc, but you can change which direction is faces with an action.

It is not what PWT should have been. Ships with pilot controlled turrets are Mobile Arc, ships with additional gunners chairs with turrets are PWT. Those are not the same thing. There is no reason that it should cost the falcon its action to change the firing arc.

What they could have done is made it so ships with a Dedicated Gunner chair (like you mentioned the Falcon) had to use a crew slot for it though 1-2 points you may perform a free mobile arc move action, or you may perform attacks outside of your mobile arc.

In my opinion this would have been preferable because now you have to choose between keeping your turret, taking gunner, or taking 2 defensive crew (and before people start complaining do any of the large ships besides the shuttle and YV-666 really have a bad dial? most have either 1 or 2 white turns or better)

I don't mind having two different turret mechanism. The original PWTs would only need a penalty when shooting out of arc (cannot modify dice or something similar). So when you choose between two different turret ships, you have a tactical consideration: Shooting 180 degree with full effectiveness, or giving up firepower but be able to shoot 360 degree?

No, because Mobile Firing Arc isn't an Aux. Firing arc, even if it works the same. It's worded different.

Actually the way I read it, the mobile firing arc IS an auxiliary firing arc. It literally plays by all the same rules as the Firespray's aux arc, it just has the ability to move.

So my point is, if two things play by exactly the same rules but have a different name, is there really a difference? The only difference between an Aux arc and a mobile arc is that you can spend an action to change the orientation of the latter. Otherwise, everything else plays the same.

No, because Mobile Firing Arc isn't an Aux. Firing arc, even if it works the same. It's worded different.

Actually the way I read it, the mobile firing arc IS an auxiliary firing arc. It literally plays by all the same rules as the Firespray's aux arc, it just has the ability to move.

So my point is, if two things play by exactly the same rules but have a different name, is there really a difference? The only difference between an Aux arc and a mobile arc is that you can spend an action to change the orientation of the latter. Otherwise, everything else plays the same.

....and the name. That's important. It's not named an Auxiliary Firing Arc. That's enough to prevent it from working.

No, because Mobile Firing Arc isn't an Aux. Firing arc, even if it works the same. It's worded different.

Actually the way I read it, the mobile firing arc IS an auxiliary firing arc. It literally plays by all the same rules as the Firespray's aux arc, it just has the ability to move.

So my point is, if two things play by exactly the same rules but have a different name, is there really a difference? The only difference between an Aux arc and a mobile arc is that you can spend an action to change the orientation of the latter. Otherwise, everything else plays the same.

....and the name. That's important. It's not named an Auxiliary Firing Arc. That's enough to prevent it from working.

Names don't matter, only functionality creates differentiation. A Zebra and a horse are identical to a blind man.

A mobile arc is literally a movable aux arc.

No, because Mobile Firing Arc isn't an Aux. Firing arc, even if it works the same. It's worded different.

Actually the way I read it, the mobile firing arc IS an auxiliary firing arc. It literally plays by all the same rules as the Firespray's aux arc, it just has the ability to move.

So my point is, if two things play by exactly the same rules but have a different name, is there really a difference? The only difference between an Aux arc and a mobile arc is that you can spend an action to change the orientation of the latter. Otherwise, everything else plays the same.

....and the name. That's important. It's not named an Auxiliary Firing Arc. That's enough to prevent it from working.

Names don't matter, only functionality creates differentiation. A Zebra and a horse are identical to a blind man.

A mobile arc is literally a movable aux arc.

Names do matter, though, especially for rules. I agree that the mobile firing arc is near identical to how an aux. firing arc plays, but it is different.

Someone has to have the card from GenCon that can let us know for sure, though.

EDIT: If it is the same, then that's fine. I'm just thinking we can't go around thinking it actually does work until we see otherwise.

It's basically what the PWTs should have been all along. You treat it exactly like the Firespray's Aux arc, but you can change which direction is faces with an action.

It is not what PWT should have been. Ships with pilot controlled turrets are Mobile Arc, ships with additional gunners chairs with turrets are PWT. Those are not the same thing. There is no reason that it should cost the falcon its action to change the firing arc.

Except PWTs go against the fundamental mechanics of the game - using your manoeuvres to get your arcs onto your opponent whilst preventing them doing the same.

They had to bring out upgrades like Autothrusters just to help negate the bellends who don't care where you go because they can shoot you anyway.

If Turrets behaved this way from the beginning it would have been so much better for gameplay in my opinion.

Even when I know I can negate an out of arc shot with Autothrusters, a lot of the fun of trying to predict movements and plan accordingly is taken out of the game for me.

All round attack Turrets are boring. Mobile firing Arcs are interesting.

Unless the rules explicitly say that the mobile arc is an aux arc, it's as eligible for tailgunner as the YV's foward-facing "rear facing aux arc"

I don't own the caster do I can't tell you for certain

Unlike the ghost, where I can say that the special firing arc ain't an aux arc no matter how awesome that'd be with phantom or TLt or a TLt + phantom

Remember, just because it's a firing arc and it ain't the primary, it doesn't automaticallany become an auxiliary arc

Names don't matter, only functionality creates differentiation. A Zebra and a horse are identical to a blind man.

A mobile arc is literally a movable aux arc.

The correct definition of different abilities in the game is very important. You cannot just say that name does not matter, because with this thinking you will introduce a ton of ambiguity. It is not an auxiliary arc so Tail Gunner does not work, unless the mobile arc rules specifically says that it counts as an auxiliary arc.

Actually, the Ghost's special firing arc is a special auxiliary firing arc.

Actually, the Ghost's special firing arc is a special auxiliary firing arc.

**** me, no kidding?

You know what this means, right?

Tailgunner AC TLT with phantom is GUARANTEED four damage if your target rolls less than two evades (ie all unobstructed agi 2 or lower ships)

Well need wording confirmatiin of what "attacking from your...arc" means relative to TLTs

The ghost is weird cause it's the only apparently aux arc ship that can fire secondary weapons at ships caught in its n arc

Actually, the Ghost's special firing arc is a special auxiliary firing arc.

**** me, no kidding?

You know what this means, right?

Tailgunner AC TLT with phantom is GUARANTEED four damage if your target rolls less than two evades (ie all unobstructed agi 2 or lower ships)

Thank God no. Ghost's rear firing arc is a "special arc".

"While you are docked, the Ghost can perform primary weapon attacks from its special firing arc and, at the end of the Combat phase, it may perform an additional attack with an equipped Turret. If it performs this attack, it cannot attack again this round."

And the tail gunner cards wording looks like it can only apply to three ships: Firespray, ARC, and the TIE s/f. Because it says "rear-facing aux arc". So you can't use it on things called special arcs or mobile arcs (even if they are rear facing). Honestly, this card is probably the only reason they called the Shadow Caster's arc a mobile arc, not a movable aux arc. But they could have accomplished the same thing by saying "fixed rear aux arc" in the Tail Gunner card.

Actually, the Ghost's special firing arc is a special auxiliary firing arc.

Are you sure about that? It has the dotted arc printed on the token, but no unique primary weapon icon on the pilot card.

It's basically what the PWTs should have been all along. You treat it exactly like the Firespray's Aux arc, but you can change which direction is faces with an action.

It is not what PWT should have been. Ships with pilot controlled turrets are Mobile Arc, ships with additional gunners chairs with turrets are PWT. Those are not the same thing. There is no reason that it should cost the falcon its action to change the firing arc.

This works for me. For example, if the Volt Cobra ever gets implemented, it should be a mobile arc since the turrets are unmanned. But with a title that allows for moving the arc once per turn without using an action, to simulate voice-activated auto-targeting since that's kind of Sana Starros' gimmick in the comics.

It's basically what the PWTs should have been all along. You treat it exactly like the Firespray's Aux arc, but you can change which direction is faces with an action.

It is not what PWT should have been. Ships with pilot controlled turrets are Mobile Arc, ships with additional gunners chairs with turrets are PWT. Those are not the same thing. There is no reason that it should cost the falcon its action to change the firing arc.

This works for me. For example, if the Volt Cobra ever gets implemented, it should be a mobile arc since the turrets are unmanned. But with a title that allows for moving the arc once per turn without using an action, to simulate voice-activated auto-targeting since that's kind of Sana Starros' gimmick in the comics.