If it's not a balance thread, then really I don't see what are you trying to achieve here. OK, I get it, you don't like Deadeye, you are entitled to have an opinion, and you are free to share it with us. But removing a card from the game, just because you don't like it? Nonsense.

I'm making an argument for why I feel ordnance would be better (and I mean better as in better gameplay rather than more powerful) without Deadeye. I thought that was fairly obvious.

Sorry, but the topic title is deceiving. It mentions removing Deadeye from the game. If the title were something like "I don't like Deadeye" or "My utterly subjective personal opinon on Deadeye" or something similar, than it would be obvious.

I don't really think there's much wrong with it, to be honest.

It removes the target locking element from ordnance entirely, sidesteps every mechanic designed to interact with target locking and thus reduces ordnance, otherwise one of the more tactically complex weapon choices, to a limited shot cannon upgrade.

I don't think it's unbalanced relative to the game as a whole, I think it removes part of the game that's better off not being removed. When Deadeye isn't used there's a lot more to both using ordnance and fighting it.

And what, Palp Aces doesn't side step every limitation to flying a 3 health ship? Boosting at a higher pilot skill doesn't side step maneuver dials and having to predict your opponent and K-Turn?

I find the idea that we'd nerf U-Boats laughable. Palp Aces is even worse for the game. If we were to ban a card in order to fix the game, Palpatine is #1.

You want to know what would happen if Deadeye were to be banned? A half decent Palp Aces player would likely be able to play an entire game without receiving a single torpedo. You'd kill the build completely.

Now that U-Boats are gone from the meta, quad TLT and regen goober builds come back. What fun.

I personal don't like how PtL and EI side steps the rules for only getting one action per turn.

Maybe they should be gone to?

Come to think of it, I also don't like that Intel Agent lets you cheat and look at an opponents Dial, sidestepping the core element of out flying your opponent.

Stay on Target letting you just pick what move you want is also a bit off.

Oh and all Regen.

Wingman/Yorr removing stress should not be a thing either.

So to summarize all thinks that are not core set X-Wings or TIE Fighters should be removed from the game as I don't want to see any growth or deviation from the Core Elements that the game I love was founded on.

PTL and Experimental Interface come at a stress cost, as does Stay On Target. Wingman and Yorr both have limits for their stress management capabilities. As for regen, that's actually in the Core Set. All of these add to the game.

Deadeye however I feel subtracts from it. As I explained at great length getting a firing solution for ordnance is not a simple matter. Deadeye takes that entire element of using ordnance and throws it out: it simplifies it to the level of primary weapons fire and adds nothing in its place.

So you can feel that Deadeye subtracts from the game but are quite happy to tell me that I am wrong about my examples?

So you want some downsides of Deadeye in the same way you dismissed my examples?

Deadeye can't carry over in to the next round if you don't have a shot so is worse than Target Lock.

Deadeye is wasted points after the torps have been fired.

Deadeye forces you in to unmodified shots.

There are just as many things in the game that remove Focus tokens as remove Target Locks (more if you count forcing the enemy to spend it defensively to live)

Deadeye adds to the game in hat it makes Ordinance ALMOST viable.

If you can dismiss my idea that PtL be removed as it comes with the cost of a stress I can dismiss your idea that Deadeye be removed due to the costs I gave.

Thanks for playing the hypocrisy game, better luck next time!

I don't think Deadeye is the problem.

Ordinance is OK I feel. The meta and players have shifted to being able to cope with it.

I think the Uboat threat has died down: you don't see them dominate as much. Plus there was soft nerf to deal with Uboats.

I've noted this before on other threads and in the Reddit thread: the problem is power creep, crew cards that are actually for too cheap for Scum and other mechanics such as stress that are a bit "broken" (I've argued infinite stress on a ship is indicative of a mechanic needing attention).

Deadeye's potency has to do with it's synergy with all the above I mentioned.

The fact is you have a ship with undercosted generic pilots with an EPT - the Jumpmaster- that has a stat line and dial that is very, very strong. Then you have named pilots such as Manaroo and Dengar with powerful abilities on a chassy that is very powerful.

The Jumpmaster is the Phantom of this wave.

It seems the issue is the fact of how Dead-eye works in a game where it should need to have a computer lock on to the target to fire it. While there is several issues on how ordnance works in the game over all on the fluff side of things. I believe, Dead eye works well on that end rather well. the fluff for this card is a pilot shooting from the hip. He loses the guidance the computer would have given him to make the shot. The die roll with a target lock by itself ends the same as one using the focus for the target lock. When you manage to get a target lock and focus is where the main power is. The only thing It really helps with is the lower pilots who can't get a target lock when they move because the ship is just out of range. But the higher PS ship can because when it moves now the other ships is in range.

If you really have an issue with how the card do to how it interacts with the real world thought process look at how torps and missiles are limited to one shot when an Xwing carried a total of six or how are we target locking on someone behind you. There are other things in the game that make far less sense then how some hit a target in front of them with out a lock isn't really one of them.

Sorry, but the topic title is deceiving. It mentions removing Deadeye from the game. If the title were something like "I don't like Deadeye" or "My utterly subjective personal opinon on Deadeye" or something similar, than it would be obvious.

Removing Deadeye from the game would be the only way to prevent it dumbing down ordnance so yes, that's exactly what I was suggesting.

Note that the title is asking if it's worth removing from the game, not making demands or stating for absolute that it should. I made a case for why I think the mechanic itself of Deadeye is bad for ordnance gameplay regardless of point cost or usage limitation and asked if that were enough to warrant considering removing it. Everyone assumed I was raging over Jumpmasters.

The only argument I can think of in favour of Deadeye is that banning a component people have paid for, even if it is a previously barely used card from the A-wing expansion, isn't something to do likely. What I can't think of is an argument for why Deadeye's existence is a good thing. Every other card adds tactical depth or at least breaks even: Deadeye simply subtracts by simplifying the ordnance mechanics.

And what, Palp Aces doesn't side step every limitation to flying a 3 health ship? Boosting at a higher pilot skill doesn't side step maneuver dials and having to predict your opponent and K-Turn?

Reposition is a core set mechanic. The way it works isn't ideal, granted, but there'd be no easy way to fix that without a total rules overhaul. Even making Boost and Barrel Roll mutually exclusive wouldn't do it. Palpatine being a bad thing I can sort of see the argument for: the TIE interceptor's design is a ship that can dodge easily but if it gets cornered it has the stats of a TIE fighter: Soontir's Wave 7 ability to shrug off four hits after blanking out sort of flies in the face of what was meant to be the TIE interceptor's weakness.

I'm hesitant to discuss the balance effect on U-Boats for fear of turning this into a balance discussion, but I do feel the need to point out that Palpatine was at Worlds in decent numbers and didn't make the final. U-Boats and Palpatine together are what's stagnating the metagame as they cover each other's backs. If U-Boats died we'd probably be back in Wave 7 with Dengaroo thrown into the mix, and if I recall correctly people seemed pretty happy with late Wave 7.

So you can feel that Deadeye subtracts from the game but are quite happy to tell me that I am wrong about my examples?

So you want some downsides of Deadeye in the same way you dismissed my examples?

Deadeye can't carry over in to the next round if you don't have a shot so is worse than Target Lock.

Deadeye is wasted points after the torps have been fired.

Deadeye forces you in to unmodified shots.

There are just as many things in the game that remove Focus tokens as remove Target Locks (more if you count forcing the enemy to spend it defensively to live)

Deadeye adds to the game in hat it makes Ordinance ALMOST viable.

If you can dismiss my idea that PtL be removed as it comes with the cost of a stress I can dismiss your idea that Deadeye be removed due to the costs I gave.

Thanks for playing the hypocrisy game, better luck next time!

Ordnance. There's no i in it.

As for PTL, it grants you a second action at the cost of stress. I fail to see exactly what this is subtracting from. Enhancing action economy over one has been in the game since Wave 1: giving a ship a second action doesn't reduce the strategic depth.

If you think PTL should be removed, by all means make a case for it but I get the impression you're instead trying to draw a parallel to attempt to illustrate removing Deadeye as absurd. I'm not seeing the parallel personally. The case against PTL has always been a balance and diversity one: it's so good it chokes other options out. Balance is easy to address without removing anything by adding new content that interacts unfavourably with what you want to effectively nerf.

My issue with Deadeye isn't one of balance. As I said, I don't think the way it removes the locking mechanic and the challenges associated with it entirely is a good thing: it reduces the tactical element rather than expands it. I feel like Deadeye reduces the depth of the gameplay with regards to ordnance whenever and wherever it's used without adding anything in its place: I can't make the same argument against PTL.

Dead eye works well on that end rather well. the fluff for this card is a pilot shooting from the hip. He loses the guidance the computer would have given him to make the shot. The die roll with a target lock by itself ends the same as one using the focus for the target lock. When you manage to get a target lock and focus is where the main power is. The only thing It really helps with is the lower pilots who can't get a target lock when they move because the ship is just out of range. But the higher PS ship can because when it moves now the other ships is in range.

If you really have an issue with how the card do to how it interacts with the real world thought process look at how torps and missiles are limited to one shot when an Xwing carried a total of six or how are we target locking on someone behind you. There are other things in the game that make far less sense then how some hit a target in front of them with out a lock isn't really one of them.

It's not a thematic issue, it's a gameplay one. The lower PS pilots who struggle with locks makes for more complex gameplay: they have to fly to compensate for their disadvantage getting range or be handed a lock in another way which then has to be set up.

LRS is an example of a card that can assist a ship with locking a higher PS target without sacrificing the target locking gameplay: it telegraphs its target somewhat and it can't lock at close range which hampers its ability to switch targets. You trade one tactical problem to solve (getting a lock in the initial engagement) for another (keeping your LRSed target in arc in the initial engagement and relocking later on once the furball's started). Deadeye just removes the problem entirely.

Sorry, but the topic title is deceiving. It mentions removing Deadeye from the game. If the title were something like "I don't like Deadeye" or "My utterly subjective personal opinon on Deadeye" or something similar, than it would be obvious.

Removing Deadeye from the game would be the only way to prevent it dumbing down ordnance so yes, that's exactly what I was suggesting.

Alternate solution: Don't use Deadeye, than it will not dumb down the ordnance for you. If your opponent uses it, it will dumb down his ordnance, but that is not your business.

Alternate solution: Don't use Deadeye, than it will not dumb down the ordnance for you. If your opponent uses it, it will dumb down his ordnance, but that is not your business.

It affects both players. Attempting to acquire a target lock at the right time and get into the right position is something the attacking player is attempting to do and the defending player is attempting to avoid. Trying to get yourself into an ideal position and prevent your opponent from doing the same is the core of the maneuvering gameplay that is X-Wing's heart. Deadeye doesn't remove maneuvering but it removes some considerations from maneuvering: if all you need to do is get your opponent in arc and spend a focus token then there's less you need to do to ensure your shot and less the opponent can do to avoid it: there's less thinking all round. I think that's a bad thing, you might disagree.

I think I see what you're saying. The problem I have is that without Long Range Sensors (which only 4 ships can take, and one of those needs to use a title), it's unrealistically difficult for the ship that moves first to acquire a target lock because ships are taking turns moving instead of moving simultaneously.

Let me use an example. Two players have set up a joust between their ordnance carriers. The player who moves first ends his move out of range and doesn't get a target lock, but the second player's ship does, even though both ships came into range at the same time. Deadeye makes an effort to stop this particular versimilitude breaking issue.

From a fluff perspective, it represents pilots dumb firing their munitions, which was a viable if tricky option in the flight Sims the game draws from (And the way Luke took down the Death Star).

I would like to point out that your arguments that repositioning, regen, anD PtL have all been in the game since wave 1 or 2 are not valid.

Regen on a T-65 or Y-Wing? Moderately powerful, but not invincible.

If a PtL Saber Squadron boosts and barrel rolls, it now has unmodified dice with TIE Fighter Health. If Soontir did that same thing, he now is as strong defensively as a TIE Fighter with focus. He doesn't get Palpatine and Autothrusters or even a second mod slot. There are actual costs and limitations to arc dodging.

If a PS 9 TIE Fighter rolls up in front of me and then dodges my arc with a BR, then that's fine. Wave 2 Soontir or Luke with R2-D2 is clearly not on the level of modern regen or Palp Aces crap, it's not what we're complaining about.

I'm even okay with turrets sometimes. 2 dice turrets or Patrol Leader Decimators or a WSF with an HLC or Mangler and the Outrider title slapped on it I'm okay with. It's when these mechanics get pushed to the extreme that it's the problem.

And you could argue that U-Boats and Deadeye push ordnance to an extreme. I agree with that, but they HAVE to be at this level in order to stand a chance against Palp Aces.

Alternate solution: Don't use Deadeye, than it will not dumb down the ordnance for you. If your opponent uses it, it will dumb down his ordnance, but that is not your business.

It affects both players. Attempting to acquire a target lock at the right time and get into the right position is something the attacking player is attempting to do and the defending player is attempting to avoid. Trying to get yourself into an ideal position and prevent your opponent from doing the same is the core of the maneuvering gameplay that is X-Wing's heart. Deadeye doesn't remove maneuvering but it removes some considerations from maneuvering: if all you need to do is get your opponent in arc and spend a focus token then there's less you need to do to ensure your shot and less the opponent can do to avoid it: there's less thinking all round. I think that's a bad thing, you might disagree.

Your argument was, that using Deadeye "dumbs down" the game. It dumbs down the fame for the Deadeye user only. The opponent now has to be smarter, to avoid the ordnance range or block to prevent getting a focus: more thinking.

Edit: I just recall one of my most exciting game I played a few weeks ago. My double U-boot + Palob vs trible U-boot. The game was extremely good, lots of tactics and maneuvering to avoid getting a torpedo in our face. Definitely did not dumb down.

I would like to point out that your arguments that repositioning, regen, anD PtL have all been in the game since wave 1 or 2 are not valid.

Regen on a T-65 or Y-Wing? Moderately powerful, but not invincible.

If a PtL Saber Squadron boosts and barrel rolls, it now has unmodified dice with TIE Fighter Health. If Soontir did that same thing, he now is as strong defensively as a TIE Fighter with focus. He doesn't get Palpatine and Autothrusters or even a second mod slot. There are actual costs and limitations to arc dodging.

If a PS 9 TIE Fighter rolls up in front of me and then dodges my arc with a BR, then that's fine. Wave 2 Soontir or Luke with R2-D2 is clearly not on the level of modern regen or Palp Aces crap, it's not what we're complaining about.

I'm even okay with turrets sometimes. 2 dice turrets or Patrol Leader Decimators or a WSF with an HLC or Mangler and the Outrider title slapped on it I'm okay with. It's when these mechanics get pushed to the extreme that it's the problem.

And you could argue that U-Boats and Deadeye push ordnance to an extreme. I agree with that, but they HAVE to be at this level in order to stand a chance against Palp Aces.

Although I'm OT...for what it's worth, I think this is the best and most moderate post I've seen you make re Palp Aces

Further to my previous post, on the thematic nature of Deadeye... the only change I'd consider (if not making it unique), would be to prevent the spending of Target Locks - probably a completely moot point (I haven't contemplated the stat's on 'Attack:Focus with re-rolls' vs 'Attack:TL converting eyes'), I'm only suggesting it since Luke pushed the targeter away.

I would like to point out that your arguments that repositioning, regen, anD PtL have all been in the game since wave 1 or 2 are not valid.

Regen on a T-65 or Y-Wing? Moderately powerful, but not invincible.

If a PtL Saber Squadron boosts and barrel rolls, it now has unmodified dice with TIE Fighter Health. If Soontir did that same thing, he now is as strong defensively as a TIE Fighter with focus. He doesn't get Palpatine and Autothrusters or even a second mod slot. There are actual costs and limitations to arc dodging.

If a PS 9 TIE Fighter rolls up in front of me and then dodges my arc with a BR, then that's fine. Wave 2 Soontir or Luke with R2-D2 is clearly not on the level of modern regen or Palp Aces crap, it's not what we're complaining about.

I'm even okay with turrets sometimes. 2 dice turrets or Patrol Leader Decimators or a WSF with an HLC or Mangler and the Outrider title slapped on it I'm okay with. It's when these mechanics get pushed to the extreme that it's the problem.

And you could argue that U-Boats and Deadeye push ordnance to an extreme. I agree with that, but they HAVE to be at this level in order to stand a chance against Palp Aces.

So why do only Scum get a Deadeye ordnance ship? Why don't, say, the K-Wing and TIE Punisher also get PS3-4 generics that can use the Elite slot? Keep in mind that those two ships are very close in cost and stats to the larger base JumpMaster?

Don't mistake this for a balance thread: I couldn't really care less about TorpScout effectiveness. Kill it off and something will take its place.

Deadeyes been out since wave 2. Wave 2.

No.

3 reasons why not.

It is thematic as instead of relying on your target lock you eyeball your rocket into its target.

It an elite ability, priced fairly and taking it comes with it's own downsides.

It makes scout and some other low PS ships competitive and this is actually a good thing.

It is one of many legitimate ways to "do" torpedos and that is fine. It would be fine to introduce some heavier torpedos which can not be used with deadeye and while we are at it, some more ways to get rid of target locks.

I don't know actually why no one was playing Deadeye before U boats.

There's this really cool B-wing pilot no one's ever heard of called Nera Dantells that loves it.

Other than that, VI and PTL have been all the rage *no pun intended* until a couple waves ago.

I would like to point out that your arguments that repositioning, regen, anD PtL have all been in the game since wave 1 or 2 are not valid.

Regen on a T-65 or Y-Wing? Moderately powerful, but not invincible.

If a PtL Saber Squadron boosts and barrel rolls, it now has unmodified dice with TIE Fighter Health. If Soontir did that same thing, he now is as strong defensively as a TIE Fighter with focus. He doesn't get Palpatine and Autothrusters or even a second mod slot. There are actual costs and limitations to arc dodging.

If a PS 9 TIE Fighter rolls up in front of me and then dodges my arc with a BR, then that's fine. Wave 2 Soontir or Luke with R2-D2 is clearly not on the level of modern regen or Palp Aces crap, it's not what we're complaining about.

I'm even okay with turrets sometimes. 2 dice turrets or Patrol Leader Decimators or a WSF with an HLC or Mangler and the Outrider title slapped on it I'm okay with. It's when these mechanics get pushed to the extreme that it's the problem.

And you could argue that U-Boats and Deadeye push ordnance to an extreme. I agree with that, but they HAVE to be at this level in order to stand a chance against Palp Aces.

So why do only Scum get a Deadeye ordnance ship? Why don't, say, the K-Wing and TIE Punisher also get PS3-4 generics that can use the Elite slot? Keep in mind that those two ships are very close in cost and stats to the larger base JumpMaster?

No room on the cards, honestly. Also, Wave VIII was the first wave where FFG gave every ship that had a generic a generic with an EPT. Probably because they finally realized that it was dragging the PS 3-4 Generics down.

Deadeye is a useless EPT outside of Contracted Scouts - I say remove the EPT slot from the Scouts and cost them -2 points.

I think I see what you're saying. The problem I have is that without Long Range Sensors (which only 4 ships can take, and one of those needs to use a title), it's unrealistically difficult for the ship that moves first to acquire a target lock because ships are taking turns moving instead of moving simultaneously.

Let me use an example. Two players have set up a joust between their ordnance carriers. The player who moves first ends his move out of range and doesn't get a target lock, but the second player's ship does, even though both ships came into range at the same time. Deadeye makes an effort to stop this particular versimilitude breaking issue.

From a fluff perspective, it represents pilots dumb firing their munitions, which was a viable if tricky option in the flight Sims the game draws from (And the way Luke took down the Death Star).

Deadeye however achieves this by removing target locking entirely. That situation between the lower and higher pilot skill pilot you describe is exactly what I'm talking about: the lower pilot skill pilot has to fly in a manner such that they can acquire a target lock on that first engagement or somehow be handed a lock. Getting that lock on the right ship is not as easy as taking focus. Thread Tracers, Jendon, LRS, Deadeye and Shara Bey to name a few can all achieve this but all of them but Deadeye have some limitations you need to compensate for: they add strategic depth. Deadeye just removes the target locking entirely and I don't think that's a good thing for gameplay depth.

The weakness of a PWT is that it costs so much that when it has a whole list of conventional ships pointed at it it dies: it has to dodge fire because it can't stand up to a non-turret list if it doesn't work that turret.

If a PWT doesn't die under those circumstances then it isn't expressing its weakness and I'd again agree that that's a bad thing.

And you could argue that U-Boats and Deadeye push ordnance to an extreme. I agree with that, but they HAVE to be at this level in order to stand a chance against Palp Aces.

That's then a balance discussion and I'm trying to make a case against Deadeye from fundamental design rather than balance.

Pretend for a moment that we have a perfectly balanced metagame where just about any sensible build stands a chance and FFG can correct anything that gets out of hand on the fly. In that situation is Deadeye's existence a good thing or a bad thing for the gameplay itself?

I don't know actually why no one was playing Deadeye before U boats.

There's this really cool B-wing pilot no one's ever heard of called Nera Dantells that loves it.

Other than that, VI and PTL have been all the rage *no pun intended* until a couple waves ago.

Nera + Dead Eye + Fletchette + Munition Fail Safe is my favorite stress inducing combo thus far.

Don't mistake this for a balance thread: I couldn't really care less about TorpScout effectiveness. Kill it off and something will take its place.

Deadeyes been out since wave 2. Wave 2.

I was responding to someone who assumed I was complaining about U-Boats.

I don't know actually why no one was playing Deadeye before U boats.

There's this really cool B-wing pilot no one's ever heard of called Nera Dantells that loves it.

Other than that, VI and PTL have been all the rage *no pun intended* until a couple waves ago.

Nera + Dead Eye + Fletchette + Munition Fail Safe is my favorite stress inducing combo thus far.

I took something similar to the NC Regionals and got creamed, but I do agree it's a great stress inducer build.

The interesting thing about Nera with Deadeye: She's a Unique. What if Deadeye was only equippable on Unique Pilots?