"Heavy Bomber"

You may treat ' ATTACK (TARGET LOCK): ' header as ' ATTACK: '.

If a secondary weapon instructs you to spend a target lock, you may ignore it.

Once per turn, after an attack with a secondary weapon, you may make an attack with a secondary weapon

When you would use a 1 straight to deploy a (bomb icon), instead deploy the bomb twice, using both the (1bank left) and (1bank right) templates.

I use the boost all the time with advanced sensors to a boost followed by manuever dropping a bomb the is on reveal.

"Heavy Bomber"

You may treat ' ATTACK (TARGET LOCK): ' header as ' ATTACK: '.

If a secondary weapon instructs you to spend a target lock, you may ignore it.

Once per turn, after an attack with a secondary weapon, you may make an attack with a secondary weapon

When you would use a 1 straight to deploy a (bomb icon), instead deploy the bomb twice, using both the (1bank left) and (1bank right) templates.

I think just the ability to 'dumb fire' your ordnance is pretty powerful all on its own.

It's not just the fact that you don't have to spend an extra turn or two mucking about trying to get a TL with a low PS ship ( which is always at a disadvantage in that regard) but you remove the target selection penalty that the TL locks you into. Being able to shoot any target of opportunity and not just the ship you have a TL on is a huge buff in its own right.

And - assuming you've taken a focus action - you get to keep your token to mod the dice on ordnance that would normally ( with a couple of exceptions) require you to spend it if you were using Deadeye.

If you were going to go down the double tap route I'd maybe consider a 1 round cool down

The problem with having a title that doesn't require the need for TL is that the Tie Punisher can get Long Range Scanners that lets you get the TL at longer range. Personally, I think you should still have the TL ability in the game, but allow for easier uses of it. You should always be able to have shenanigans to be able to take away someone's TL. Maybe something for the Tie Punisher that lets you grab a TL at R5 with no restrictions for close range?

I have to admit that I haven't seen Tie Punishers in Epic games. Well, I did do my crazy Punisher mission that was 300 pts, but it would be super cool to see them in large numbers on an Epic game. Have them with LRS to attack a capital ship. That would be pretty cool.

To me, it seems the only logical reason to make a Tie Punisher is to give it sub-light drives. The Tie Bomber is cheap and you can make lots of them, but they require the Gozanti or large craft to support them. The idea of the Tie Punisher is to be more self sufficient. What better way than to be able to jump to where you want? It would completely justify the reason for making the Tie Punisher. They can jump towards the target and start blasting away without endangering a Gozanti. Also, it would explain what takes up all the room in the ship.

What better thing to add to a ship with jump drives, than SLAM? I think it would add the mechanic to the Imperial faction. I mean, why wouldn't they have it? I think it was a mistake to not add it to the Tie Punisher.

Once per round, when you acquire a target lock, you may immediately make an attack with an equipped [missile or torpedo] or use an equipped [bomb] upgrade as a free action.

The reason is because the Rebel K-wing had slam and they didn't want to give Slam to the Imps. So boost.

It needs a title:

Title: Heavy Bomber

Tie Punisher Only

0 Pts

When the Extra munitions upgrade card is placed on this ship it's costs 0 pts. In Addition count this ship as large for any effects which hit it. (Tractor Beams, Ions, etc)

Now it follows the old Lore and makes the ship much more playable.

A missile upgrade that would add a crew slot? I think the Punisher would absolutely adore Weapons Engineer. Or even a title that just gave it the ability to maintain 2 locks?

The Punisher's problem is that its chassis was never worth five points more than a TIE bomber: its health upgrade was offset by its agility downgrade. Loaded up with weapons and upgrades it becomes fearsome but it also becomes a glass cannon.

Its generics never had any real potential given their pricing against the bombers so whatever competitive strength lies in Redline and Deathrain. Of those two, probably in Deathrain. Redline doesn't boast that much more extra kill over his bomber equivalent Tomax Bren so until a new way to use him is found I think Tomax has the edge on him. Deathrain versus Deathfire is a much more favourable matchup for the Punisher: Deathfire has price on his side but Deathrain's ability has way more potential to it.

I think that the Tie Punisher would do better in Epic as it would be able to get closer to the capital ships better with the shields. It would be victim to Single Turbo Lasers, though. Still, it's more hull/shield to chew through while it moves along to unload it's ordnance.

You can get Sensor Jammer for way too many points to help keep it alive.

I think that the Tie Punisher would do better in Epic as it would be able to get closer to the capital ships better with the shields.

The problem with that is that the same ship that makes the Punisher look a bit sad in Standard also makes it look sorry for itself in Epic: the TIE bomber.

I think that the Tie Punisher would do better in Epic as it would be able to get closer to the capital ships better with the shields.

The problem with that is that the same ship that makes the Punisher look a bit sad in Standard also makes it look sorry for itself in Epic: the TIE bomber.

Well, the Tie Punisher can take just a little bit more damage than the Tie Bomber. Yes, it's down 1 green die, but it could take Sensor Jammer, which the Epic ships can't really counter. I dunno....it's a bit of a toss up.

system mod

Tie punisher only

-2 pts

You may treat ' ATTACK (TARGET LOCK): ' header as ' ATTACK: '.

Once per turn, If a game effect instructs you to spend a target lock, you may ignore it.

Once per turn, after an attack, you may make another attack with a secondary weapon or you may perform a bomb Upgrade card action as a free action.

Keep the generic punisher more expensive the tie bombers and aces roughly equal to their PS counter parts (deathrain to jonus and redline to tomax) which is offset by having no EPT while giving the punisher more flexibility during combat as well as gives the punisher a much more agressive style of fighting rather than the bomber. The punisher will like using boost and getting in close about to fire at 1 target with a secondary weapon without a TL or if it does decide to TL can fire two secondary weapons a turn and there is something for deathfire and bomb style punishers. Bombers on the other hand like to keep to range and use LRS, punishers get in close with chips.

Would this fix the punisher without making the Tie bomber obsolete or replacing the tie bomber's use as a cheap ordance?

I like that idea. A few comments:

I dont think negative point costs are appropiate, the effect is incredibly strong.

Shooting the same target with 2 cluster missiles are potentially 12 damage in one turn. I`d suggest that you may only shoot another target than the first one.

And dropping a proton bomb without the enemy being able to react to it might be pretty overpowered.

What I don't like is that is doesnt use the things only the punisher can do, the boost and the systems slot. Your solution probably is functional, but not elegant.

The punisher is a bit overcost, all the system slot does is give them a "free" extra munitions. Would 0 pts be better?

Shooting the same target with 2 clusters for potential 12 damage is pretty nice but that is a lot of if's attached to it such as rolling all hits/crits and the target has either 0 agi or no tokens/poor evade dice. You also still will need to get a TL on the target as well, if you use LRS you won't have chips for the better damage and you couldn't spent the TL on the target if you wanna get your 2nd shot off so there won't be any re-rolls either. 12 damage is highly HIGHLY unlikely. Quickdraw can fire 20 dice and no one is crying op.

A proton bomb isn't an action and even if it was those types of bombs detonate at the end of the activation phase which wouldn't be til next turn.

Also it is a system upgrade and lets the punisher be able to boost instead of needing to take a TL(The first line) but can only fire once without the TL(The 2nd line) or twice with a TL (the 3rd line since you can only ignore the discard TL ability only once). Treating the ' ATTACK (TARGET LOCK): ' header as ' ATTACK: still doesn't get rid of the spend the TL cost of the card

You might be right. The point cost thing is a matter of testing. I don't wanna argue about it or say -2 points is wrong or 0 is better.

The 12 damage example is unlikely, but imagine such a Punisher with the new Upsilon Shuttle with Hux or Fleet Officer, Weapons Engineer and Target Synchronizer. You can modify with a TL you might have, with the focus Hux gave you, with Guidance Chips. 10 damage on a single target is not that much of a matter of luck anymore against 0 or 1 agility ships. Still costs a lot of points, but it can be useful.

You can almost freely choose any target or 2 targets in range with any missile/torpedo combination you want.

system mod

Tie punisher only

-2 pts

You may treat ' ATTACK (TARGET LOCK): ' header as ' ATTACK: '.

Once per turn, If a game effect instructs you to spend a target lock, you may ignore it.

Once per turn, after an attack, you may make another attack with a secondary weapon or you may perform a bomb Upgrade card action as a free action.

Keep the generic punisher more expensive the tie bombers and aces roughly equal to their PS counter parts (deathrain to jonus and redline to tomax) which is offset by having no EPT while giving the punisher more flexibility during combat as well as gives the punisher a much more agressive style of fighting rather than the bomber. The punisher will like using boost and getting in close about to fire at 1 target with a secondary weapon without a TL or if it does decide to TL can fire two secondary weapons a turn and there is something for deathfire and bomb style punishers. Bombers on the other hand like to keep to range and use LRS, punishers get in close with chips.

Would this fix the punisher without making the Tie bomber obsolete or replacing the tie bomber's use as a cheap ordance?

I like that idea. A few comments:

I dont think negative point costs are appropiate, the effect is incredibly strong.

Shooting the same target with 2 cluster missiles are potentially 12 damage in one turn. I`d suggest that you may only shoot another target than the first one.

And dropping a proton bomb without the enemy being able to react to it might be pretty overpowered.

What I don't like is that is doesnt use the things only the punisher can do, the boost and the systems slot. Your solution probably is functional, but not elegant.

The punisher is a bit overcost, all the system slot does is give them a "free" extra munitions. Would 0 pts be better?

Shooting the same target with 2 clusters for potential 12 damage is pretty nice but that is a lot of if's attached to it such as rolling all hits/crits and the target has either 0 agi or no tokens/poor evade dice. You also still will need to get a TL on the target as well, if you use LRS you won't have chips for the better damage and you couldn't spent the TL on the target if you wanna get your 2nd shot off so there won't be any re-rolls either. 12 damage is highly HIGHLY unlikely. Quickdraw can fire 20 dice and no one is crying op.

A proton bomb isn't an action and even if it was those types of bombs detonate at the end of the activation phase which wouldn't be til next turn.

Also it is a system upgrade and lets the punisher be able to boost instead of needing to take a TL(The first line) but can only fire once without the TL(The 2nd line) or twice with a TL (the 3rd line since you can only ignore the discard TL ability only once). Treating the ' ATTACK (TARGET LOCK): ' header as ' ATTACK: still doesn't get rid of the spend the TL cost of the card

You might be right. The point cost thing is a matter of testing. I don't wanna argue about it or say -2 points is wrong or 0 is better.

The 12 damage example is unlikely, but imagine such a Punisher with the new Upsilon Shuttle with Hux or Fleet Officer, Weapons Engineer and Target Synchronizer. You can modify with a TL you might have, with the focus Hux gave you, with Guidance Chips. 10 damage on a single target is not that much of a matter of luck anymore against 0 or 1 agility ships. Still costs a lot of points, but it can be useful.

You can almost freely choose any target or 2 targets in range with any missile/torpedo combination you want.

And you are using 70+ pts for a one shot wonder that can easily be shut down. I'm not seeing the problem with this? It makes the punisher do exactly what it was suppose to do

[...]

In the game, obviously, there's not a great way to model having a longer operational range[...]

That does seem to be part of the issue. In X-Wing everything is played on a 3x3 mat.

If there was a 'balanced' mechanism that allowed for actual escorts. Then you would either encounter the escorts first or the bombers and escorts, depending on the deployment. The idea is that you had to deal with, or take fire from the escorts. If you ignored the escorts and went after the bombers the escort were basically taking free shots on you. On a 3x3 mat and a 100 point game there isn't a way to properly represent this that I know of.

The punishers seem situational, which I love, but in a standard 100/6 game of a straight on Epic game they appear limited. I wonder if playing three mats, or just two, and starting at the narrow edges would help represent that?

I mean, if the Punisher was really meant to be able to fire ordinance without Target Locks, all it needs is an EPT. It's a small ship, so it still counts for Deadeye. The fact that it does NOT have an EPT is probably intentional (though obviously the card has space limitations).

A mod or title to double tap could probably be worded with the ability to perform a secondary weapon attack "twice" (I/E just gives you two shots with one torp/missile), but I'm not sure about any technical aspect to that with like how TLT works. If you want to be able to say, throw two different torps or missiles at a target (or torp missile one-two), it might be a little wordy but you could probably phrase it at treating the second attack as ATTACK and say if you spent a target lock on the first attack, you do not have to on the second, with basically the justification being that theoretically you're all locked at the same target, and only in the game do the attacks technically resolve 1 after the other.

[...]

In the game, obviously, there's not a great way to model having a longer operational range[...]

That does seem to be part of the issue. In X-Wing everything is played on a 3x3 mat.

If there was a 'balanced' mechanism that allowed for actual escorts. Then you would either encounter the escorts first or the bombers and escorts, depending on the deployment. The idea is that you had to deal with, or take fire from the escorts. If you ignored the escorts and went after the bombers the escort were basically taking free shots on you. On a 3x3 mat and a 100 point game there isn't a way to properly represent this that I know of.

The punishers seem situational, which I love, but in a standard 100/6 game of a straight on Epic game they appear limited. I wonder if playing three mats, or just two, and starting at the narrow edges would help represent that?

The poor Punisher is probably better suited to say, Armada where they could easily have this longer operational range modeled one way or another to strike enemy ships, but in dogfighting it's a little weird. That said, despite the visual design, they're pretty neat. Make a hell of a variant game.

[...]

In the game, obviously, there's not a great way to model having a longer operational range[...]

That does seem to be part of the issue. In X-Wing everything is played on a 3x3 mat.

Umm....not everything is on a 3x3 mat. 100/6 is played that way, but Epic is played on a bigger mat. Also, various missions and such are on bigger maps.

[...]

In the game, obviously, there's not a great way to model having a longer operational range[...]

That does seem to be part of the issue. In X-Wing everything is played on a 3x3 mat.

Umm....not everything is on a 3x3 mat. 100/6 is played that way, but Epic is played on a bigger mat. Also, various missions and such are on bigger maps.

Yep, I know that. But I was trying to focus on narrow edge setup like one of your scenarios as possibly a way of making non-fighters ships more survivable with escorts.

Saw an interesting build yesterday: Vader with ATC and Squad leader, accompanied by a loaded Deathrain and Deathfire, Vader ensuring them to get modded ordnance off.