13 hours ago, LordBlades said:

How so ? Just curious as I don't play armada.

It's an inside joke in the Armada forum.

On 3/29/2017 at 7:26 AM, Marinealver said:

That moment you realize, those on the forums calling for nerfs... are Ewoks!

This sir is funny

What if any ship with a mod slot could equip Autothrusters without the "must have boost" requirement?

Okay I'm only halfway through this thread so I don't know if this has been said.

What about this. Instead of nerfing TLT why don't they fix the blaster turret. Then there would be the chance to do more damage at a cheaper price. Now there is a decision needing to be made do you trade lower points cost for consistent damage?

1 minute ago, Purple Orc said:

What about this. Instead of nerfing TLT why don't the fix the blaster turret. Then there would be the chance to do more damage at a cheaper price. Now there is a decision needing to be made do you trade lower points cost for consistent damage?

Please don't take this as an attack, because it really isn't. It's just that your suggestion provides a perfect illustration for why power creep happens.

If we assume that the TLT is on the high side of balanced (which I think it is), or broken (which many people think it is, though I don't), then nudging things upward to match it is dangerous in terms of risking power creep. If the Blaster Turret could be perfectly matched somehow, in desirability, to the TLT, then we'd be fine. The problem is, that's nearly impossible to do. If we fail to do so, and it falls short, well, we're still fine. But if we fail to do so and it exceeds the desirability of the TLT, then we experience power creep, and the revised Blaster Turret is the new "broken."

It would really be much better to nudge the TLT downward, if it's judged to be just too good. (I personally like saying that if it hits twice it 2 damage, but if it hits once it does 0 damage (but hits), and if it misses both times, it misses. But that's very complex to fit as an errata.)

2 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Please don't take this as an attack, because it really isn't. It's just that your suggestion provides a perfect illustration for why power creep happens.

Don't worry about it, it's all good, and I understand the reasons why you say this.

What I should of said in my original post was to fix the blaster turrets usability and leave it's damage and range alone. Just getting rid of the cost of spending the focus would get people to use this card more.

6 minutes ago, Purple Orc said:

Don't worry about it, it's all good, and I understand the reasons why you say this.

What I should of said in my original post was to fix the blaster turrets usability and leave it's damage and range alone. Just getting rid of the cost of spending the focus would get people to use this card more.

I personally like the idea someone had of making it ATTACK: Focus, instead of spending a focus to attack. In keeping with Synced Turret, you could even add a bonus; something like, "You may choose to spend all Focus tokens to attack at Range 3."

Every day, every hour, there are so many casualties because of the existance of the TLT ... the game can't bear this any longer! Friendships broken! Tournaments lost! Why does FFG not see? The agony! The destruction! The end is coming!

21 hours ago, jocke01 said:

We have this topic once every two weeks and the point is lost on alot of players.

It's not that quad TLT can be countered (anything can be countered). It's the thing that TLT is too powerful when compared to other turrets. It's not an external balance problem it's and internal. TLT is pushing all other turrets since they aren't as effective with maybe the exception on autoblaster on a large base thanks to the bigger ring and the cheaper price.

Then it's the fact that TLT doesn't do much vs 3 agilit with auto and stacks and 1 or less agility ships get's hammered by whatever is shooting at them. 2 agility small ships suffer however since their hull/shield values are balanced for 2 agility but double 3 red dice shots that ignores range 3 bonus.e

I disagree with the premise. Yes, TLT is better than other turrets, but for good reason. Blaster turret is trash, dorsal is only marginally better when it only does 2 dice at range 2, but at least it's cheap. Ion is semi-useful depending on the build, but is limited to 1 damage max. Autoblaster can be good against aces if you catch them in range, but is trash against high agility targets. And above all of that, TLT is the only range 2-3 turret. That alone is what makes it so good, even if you change the cost as a lot of people have suggested. What we need is another turret option that isn't limited to range 2 max. Then you might see something besides tlt.

17 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Please don't take this as an attack, because it really isn't. It's just that your suggestion provides a perfect illustration for why power creep happens.

If we assume that the TLT is on the high side of balanced (which I think it is), or broken (which many people think it is, though I don't), then nudging things upward to match it is dangerous in terms of risking power creep. If the Blaster Turret could be perfectly matched somehow, in desirability, to the TLT, then we'd be fine. The problem is, that's nearly impossible to do. If we fail to do so, and it falls short, well, we're still fine. But if we fail to do so and it exceeds the desirability of the TLT, then we experience power creep, and the revised Blaster Turret is the new "broken."

It would really be much better to nudge the TLT downward, if it's judged to be just too good. (I personally like saying that if it hits twice it 2 damage, but if it hits once it does 0 damage (but hits), and if it misses both times, it misses. But that's very complex to fit as an errata.)

The problem is "power creep" is only really a thing if you're upping the power of something that was already in use. Turrets before TLT just weren't good. You could take blaster, but you were severely limited by the "spend a focus" requirement on it. Or you could take ion, but then you could never do one damage in a shot. It's not that TLT is overpowered so much as that they others were severely underpowered for the cost. In this case, I absolutely agree that the better answer is to have more actually useful turret options as opposed o just nerfing TLT in the hope it'll bring other turrets back (it won't).

3 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

I personally like the idea someone had of making it ATTACK: Focus, instead of spending a focus to attack. In keeping with Synced Turret, you could even add a bonus; something like, "You may choose to spend your Focus token to attack at Range 3."

Now that would be cool. Small change that still leaves risk and decision making into you gameplay raises usability and doesn't make it OP. With it being 2 points cheaper, TLT becomes less of an auto include.

10 minutes ago, VanderLegion said:

The problem is "power creep" is only really a thing if you're upping the power of something that was already in use.

So, Colt Revolver + Silencer + High Capacity Mag is power creep but Colt Revolver-->M16-->Bazooka-->Tank isn't??

1 minute ago, Darth Meanie said:

So, Colt Revolver + Silencer + High Capacity Mag is power creep but Colt Revolver--M16--Bazooka--Tank isn't??

If no one is using the revolver in the first place, adding a silencer and mag isn't "power creep" if they still don't use it. If the revolver is being used in the first place (and is fairly balanced), then either of those cases could be argued to be power creep (the second one more so)

I would argue that even if you made a new turret that was range 1-3, 2 dice attack and an extra die at range 1 for 3 points, it's not really "power creep" compared to the dorsal turret because the DT is already underpowered and no one uses it. And it probably wouldn't get used over TLT anyway unless you needed the extra 3 points. If you make new turret for 6 points that's range 1-3 and throws 2 3-die attacks to only do one damage, then that's power creep because it's a better TLT for the same price, and TLT is actually used.

4 hours ago, FatherTurin said:

It's an inside joke in the Armada forum.

Why bring it up outside the Armada forum then, if you're not going to explain it ?

Something to add to the Blaster Turret vs TLT debate is that the TLT provides consistent shots. To get close to consistent shotswith the Blaster Turret, you need a steady supply of focus, for both firing and modding the weapon. Currently, that means a HWK with the moldy crow title and recon spec, making the whole three card combo cost 10 points. Rebels could use Rey to work around this for 6 points total, but there are still dangers with this and it costs the same points as a TLT plus an additional slot. Even the Synced Turret is a bit better off because you can target lock someone and leave it until one of the ships involved goes boom.

In all, I am in the camp that says the TLT is dominate because the others are kinda crap. Tweak the others and we might get something worth while for the turret slot other than the TLT.

My idea for a fix:

Add "Your attack dice cannot be modified" to the card.

Thematically (if anyone cares about such things), that would also give a "spray and pray" feel to the weapon.

1 hour ago, MrAndersson said:

My idea for a fix:

Add "Your attack dice cannot be modified" to the card.

Thematically (if anyone cares about such things), that would also give a "spray and pray" feel to the weapon.

I'd prefer "your attack dice cannot be modified if the target is out of arc"

Rewards good flying on both parties' part... Which is why I dislike the TLT... Dumbs down the game

2 hours ago, MrAndersson said:

My idea for a fix:

Add "Your attack dice cannot be modified" to the card.

Thematically (if anyone cares about such things), that would also give a "spray and pray" feel to the weapon.

And you came up with it only 10 pages after me!