In regards to the Awing actions, i would have been fine w/o the TL if they insist on keeping the 4 action limit. Its a 2die ship and if they EVER take missiles they take prockets, so Tlock isnt that important.
Im also surprised nothing lacks a focus action. Too late to do that now, as any ship added w/o a focus would be immediately considered DOA even if it was actually pretty gnarly.
Personally i think the main issue here is the degree stats are given. The numbers are too small. This is something that cant really be addressed without a complicated GW-level of new rules like they had in 6th edition where a TON of units were found in the back of the BRB (Big Rule Book) because so many things changed they had to include those.
The difference between the mid-tier Xwing ship and the holy-crap-its-insanely-good tier Aces is so minimal its laughable, but the gap between the mid-tier ships and the spammable budget ships is huge pricewise for little gain. This is because 2attack die is considered light, 4 is considered crazy nasty, and 3 is BOTH moderate and high powered ships.
We needed a broader range of numbers. The initial TIE should have had 2die attacks, Xwings 4, Interceptors 3, Bwings 5, Awings 3, etc etc and improve the hull/shields ratio to keep the current 1shot potentials between these ships.. Theres no "slightly" more powerful in this game because the difference between 2 and 3 are costed as immense bonuses when in reality its jack squat without the other stuff backing it up. When youre trying to squeeze the budget ship, lightweight ace, medium bruiser, and heavy hitter into the same 2-4 range of offense, something is going to get pushed out as useless. Unfortunately for the xwing, that was the bruiser in this case.