A large number of voices seem to believe that the Manaroo nerf was excessively harsh. IIRC the Gold Squadron Podcast even suggested that the recent success dominance of Parattani pushed FFG to institute a harsher range limitation than what they may have initially considered. My personal feeling is that a range 1-2 limitation would not severely impact the Parattani list so the range 1 limitation was warranted.

But what if we take a look at another integral part of the Parattani squad; Latts Razi.

Latts strikes me as a kind of Bizarro-Zuckuss. Instead of taking on stress to hurt opponent defense, you remove stress from your opponent to boost your own defense. In both cases (Latts and Zuckuss) the game designers seem to have over-estimated the penalty imposed by stress tokens. Zuckuss (in certain builds) became a non-choice. Reroll all the dices and give me all the stresses! Latts is similar. Avoiding a damage is pretty much always worth removing a stress from an opponent's ship. Zuckuss had a much greater impact on the game for a point less and deservedly received a hard nerf. Latts is probably much closer to being balanced but her ability provides (arguably) too much benefit for her cost.

I'm not qualified to tell you what the cost for Latts "should" be but let me point out a couple design issues I have with the card:

Without a "once per turn" limitation, Latts becomes stronger against larger number of (stressed) attacks. We don't need more cards that punish swarms. Granted a swarm is not likely to end up with stress on every ship, every turn but the point remains.

A simple change to the timing makes Latts more fun for both players. I contend that the card should have always read "When you are declared the target of an attack, you may remove 1 stress token from the attacker. If you do, you must add 1 [evade] result to your roll." Why is this better? You make the decision before dice are rolled and may end up removing a stress when it wasn't needed. You need to make a choice. You also potentially allow your opponent to use Zuckuss or Expertise. In other words, there are actual repercussions to using the ability.

If Latts gets reined in with either a "once per turn" (harsh) or "when declared" (gentle) nerf, maybe Manaroo could get a range 1-2 limitation and Parattani still takes a bit of a hit.

(Yes, I'm jumping back on the "whine train" and "crying" to get FFG to change more cards. "omg, too op, nerf plz!" Actually just wanted to point out that another timing change can make a card more interesting to play with and against (Palp and Decloak are two other good examples) and wondering if FFG hit the wrong button while trying to bring some squads back in to balance.)

Well, your proposal definitely seems more in-line with the Palpatine nerf, so there is a sense of consistency there.

I'd be perfectly happy with that timing change to Latts.

I'd also like to see a timing change to Kanan and/or the FA millennium falcon title, regardless of whether or not Rey is breaking the Meta. Being able to do dial in 3 banks, then decide to make it an S-loop if you want to, and end with no stress is just silly.

If Latts needs to be changed, the "when targeted" change is a good way to go.

I came into this thread expecting to knee-jerk hate the idea of yet more nerfs (and I don't even use Latts!), but I actually really like that "When declared" change.

She's a very niche card that was probably put in place because of Ace Wing, don't thing she needs a change, but if they do that would be the best way to do it.

33 minutes ago, gamblertuba said:

Lengthy statement about needing to nerf a card before newest FAQ that is filled with nerfs has even been made effective.

No.

Let the meta breathe and see where these changes take us.

Does Latts (crew) need a nerf?

She's situational (defence only), she requires your attacker to be stressed, she only removes a stress to add a result (which is powerful). Unless you can hand out stress (which scum can with the right builds) your reliant on your opponent creating their own stress to use her ability. That she can be used multiple times in a round is probably the corner to the case, as long as you've stressed multiple opponents. But is there a counter argument that a control list removing it's applied stress is handing the initiative back to the opponent?

While she has certainly had a positive effect on the Paratani style lists and scum in general, I'd say wait out and see what Nationals bring and even wait for Worlds. She'll likely appear in lists there but the key will be how the top players fly with and against her. If (and it's a large IF) they FAQ her to be "once per round" I wouldn't see it as overtly "nerf bat" heavy but it will also force you to choose the largest threat to her ship to in turn apply stress to.... which is why I'd adopt the wait and see meta....

No.

The fact that Latts has to grant your opponent a benefit if they already meet a condition to do anything is kind of self balancing. She's a solid card competing for a precious upgrade slot against a lot of other good cards. Outside of Ventress, she has to rely either on an opponent that stresses themselves or some sort of weaponized stress elsewhere in your squad. Rebels and Imperials have a lot more options when it comes to dealing stress than Scum does.

With Scum you've got Ventress and 4-LOM pilot abilities, Tactician, Flechette Torpedoes, Flechette Cannon, and Thermal Detonators as options for dealing stress. The timing on 4-LOM gives the ship he stresses and opportunity to shed it before they can attack the ship with Latts. Flechette Torpedoes, Flechette Cannon, and Tactician all need to be used by ships with a higher PS than your opponent or they also give your opponent a chance to clear stress before they'll get an opportunity to attack the ship with Latts. Ships that get an extra attack in the round outside of their combat phase activation can be an exception to this. Only Ventress and Thermal Detonators have a timing that will let stress be dealt without your opponent being able to shed it before Latts can use it.

I still think Latts could use a once per turn designation. But, when I played against it, it wouldn't;t have made much of a difference. I kind of like the when declared a little better, but how about BOTH? =D (At that point I think Gonk starts becoming increasingly viable).

Also, I'm really against the Phantom nerf. The Phantom can have its niche now that Ints have auto thruster. Unnerf cloak!

2 hours ago, Herowannabe said:

I'd be perfectly happy with that timing change to Latts.

I'd also like to see a timing change to Kanan and/or the FA millennium falcon title, regardless of whether or not Rey is breaking the Meta. Being able to do dial in 3 banks, then decide to make it an S-loop if you want to, and end with no stress is just silly.

cough cough Ryad cough cough

Would make for a better card for sure. I don't think it warrants errata, though, they should be kept at a minimum.

When Latts shapes the game like Palpatine did, then you can even begin to compare the two cards. She's fine.

3 hours ago, gamblertuba said:

You also potentially allow your opponent to use Zuckuss or Expertise. In other words, there are actual repercussions to using the ability.

A lot of people seem to want Expertise to be unstoppable. I personally like the idea that there are a few things out there that make people think twice about taking Expertise. Expertise works around enough abilities and upgrades that it kind of needs an Achilles heel of its own.

I'd be happy to make Lats once per turn, to put her more in line with Palp and C3P0.

5 hours ago, FangedChicken said:

No.

Let the meta breathe and see where these changes take us.

Did you in fact read the "lengthy statement"? I never said it needs a nerf. Pointing out that FFG made a less interesting card by screwing up the timing window.

1 hour ago, gamblertuba said:

Did you in fact read the "lengthy statement"? I never said it needs a nerf. Pointing out that FFG made a less interesting card by screwing up the timing window.

I read it... twice. When you posted on your first thread, and then again here. Even if you didn't use the word need, it clearly is what you want. You also just said they screwed up, which usually implies that you think a fix is needed. I sat here for about 20 minutes typing out a longer response, but it just felt mean, so I'm not really going to dig into this much further.

I guess just know that not everyone thinks that adding additional elements of chance is "more fun" or "more interesting" (person with "gambler" in your name). I also firmly believe that Latts is not an unbalanced card, that it doesn't need a fix, and that it's not the card to focus on when it comes to Parattanni. The issue with Parattanni is Mindlink, if anything. After all, the FAQ isn't even effective until the 17th. We should probably see if the balance changes alter the meta, right?

8 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

I still think Latts could use a once per turn designation. But, when I played against it, it wouldn't;t have made much of a difference. I kind of like the when declared a little better, but how about BOTH? =D (At that point I think Gonk starts becoming increasingly viable).

Also, I'm really against the Phantom nerf. The Phantom can have its niche now that Ints have auto thruster. Unnerf cloak!

Are you ok with all scum small ships with an illicit device having that same cloaking timing? Do you _want_ a return to the PS wars? *Shudder*

8 hours ago, FangedChicken said:

I read it... twice. When you posted on your first thread, and then again here. Even if you didn't use the word need, it clearly is what you want. You also just said they screwed up, which usually implies that you think a fix is needed. I sat here for about 20 minutes typing out a longer response, but it just felt mean, so I'm not really going to dig into this much further.

I guess just know that not everyone thinks that adding additional elements of chance is "more fun" or "more interesting" (person with "gambler" in your name). I also firmly believe that Latts is not an unbalanced card, that it doesn't need a fix, and that it's not the card to focus on when it comes to Parattanni. The issue with Parattanni is Mindlink, if anything. After all, the FAQ isn't even effective until the 17th. We should probably see if the balance changes alter the meta, right?

Civil discussion on the internet? Well done sir. Absolutely no sarcasm implied. Your initial post was also a legitimate and well-reasoned response. I was probably a bit too riled up by your "quoting" text.

I should have been more clear that the whole point of the discussion was actually the nerf on Manaroo. Consensus seems to be that range 1 restriction was overkill. I tend to agree. But if you don't give Manaroo the heavy end of the hammer, I don't think Parattani notices. If you are OK with Manaroo going down to range 1, leave Latts alone. If you think Parattani is fine as is, leave Latts alone. I'm not arguing for what I think the next change should be. I'm expressing my opinion that the nerf on Manaroo was more heavy-handed than it needed to be because of concerns over Parattani. I think Manaroo could have been range 1-2 if (and only if) some other portion of Parattani gets attention. Attani Mindlink is a difficult card to adjust and Latts is a bit simpler.

Off topic prediction: Paratanni players start replacing Manaroo with a Contracted Scout and two points used to flavor to taste. So at least we will see some variety in those lists... Yay?

Proper article is here! https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2017/3/15/independent-operations/

Edit: Oh well, that was not the right thread...

7 hours ago, gamblertuba said:

Civil discussion on the internet? Well done sir. Absolutely no sarcasm implied. Your initial post was also a legitimate and well-reasoned response. I was probably a bit too riled up by your "quoting" text.

I should have been more clear that the whole point of the discussion was actually the nerf on Manaroo. Consensus seems to be that range 1 restriction was overkill. I tend to agree. But if you don't give Manaroo the heavy end of the hammer, I don't think Parattani notices. If you are OK with Manaroo going down to range 1, leave Latts alone. If you think Parattani is fine as is, leave Latts alone. I'm not arguing for what I think the next change should be. I'm expressing my opinion that the nerf on Manaroo was more heavy-handed than it needed to be because of concerns over Parattani. I think Manaroo could have been range 1-2 if (and only if) some other portion of Parattani gets attention. Attani Mindlink is a difficult card to adjust and Latts is a bit simpler.

Off topic prediction: Paratanni players start replacing Manaroo with a Contracted Scout and two points used to flavor to taste. So at least we will see some variety in those lists... Yay?

Sorry if the quoted text seemed harsh. You're absolutely right that Attanni Mindlink is a difficult card to adjust. I've heard a few solutions but none of them seem quite right. You could go "small ship only", but then what about Manaroo? Fluff-wise that doesn't make sense. You could change it to "whenever you're assigned a focus token, each other ship with AM may perform a free focus action", but that might actually hit it too hard. I think we will see Intel Agent scouts mixed in with Manaroo now. Should be interesting to see if the list stays at the top in the future.

8 minutes ago, FangedChicken said:

Sorry if the quoted text seemed harsh. You're absolutely right that Attanni Mindlink is a difficult card to adjust. I've heard a few solutions but none of them seem quite right. You could go "small ship only", but then what about Manaroo? Fluff-wise that doesn't make sense. You could change it to "whenever you're assigned a focus token, each other ship with AM may perform a free focus action", but that might actually hit it too hard. I think we will see Intel Agent scouts mixed in with Manaroo now. Should be interesting to see if the list stays at the top in the future.

"Small ship only" is nonsense fluff-wise as you said and only seems like a fix because the scum small ships have always been terrible. Could add "You cannot have more than one focus token"? Honestly, the focus action change would probably be OK. Right now, Mindlink just about ignores stress.

Palp or Manny Treatment?

Really think Latts is fine the way she is, we already only really see her on Assagi and any real change would limit her even further.