We all know from the news article Synced Turrets is just way better than blaster turret.

So since FFG is now no longer squeamish about pen & ink changes to card text. I was thingking maybe it is time to buff Blaster Turret (singe R4 no longer works for them.

It is simple.

3 1-2

Attack [focus]

Spend 1 focus token to perform attack against one ship (even a ship outside your firing arc) If defender is inside your firing arc you may change one <focus> result to a <hit result>

Turret/ 4 points

There blaster turret fixed. Anything else that needs to be changed?

Show old card and then show newer card with better mechanics. No point or values or slot types can be changed.

I think it would be fine just eliminating the spend requirement, keeping the attack-focus header with no new bonus. Attacking with a focus is way easier to pull off than target lock for non-Ace turrets, and for Ace turrets it means you have a token for defense.

Looking another way: If you put Deadeye with Synced Turret you get a Blaster turret costing 1 extra point for rerolls in arc and not spending the token just to use.

Yeah, many ships can have a Turret and Deadeye.

I've been arguing for this change since wave 7.

They seem happy to stick to nerfs in the name of balance, though, unless it's a ship as a whole in question...

1 hour ago, nitrobenz said:

I think it would be fine just eliminating the spend requirement, keeping the attack-focus header with no new bonus. Attacking with a focus is way easier to pull off than target lock for non-Ace turrets, and for Ace turrets it means you have a token for defense.

Looking another way: If you put Deadeye with Synced Turret you get a Blaster turret costing 1 extra point for rerolls in arc and not spending the token just to use.

Just another incentive for keeping defenders in arc. Sure with TL you don't loose it in the end phase where as focus is use it or lose it. If it was just an unspent focus token I think sync will still be used. But you're right TL is easier to get into range 3 out of arc with arc dodgers then it is with a focus token. TL televises your attack so if out of arc at range 3 TL was wasted action. If focus then you could find any ship at range 1-2.

I've never really been one to "demand" things of FFG, they do a good job for the most part but this, this is something so easy and simple that I'm shocked they've not done this. Just remove the **** spend cost.

13 minutes ago, Spaceman91 said:

I've never really been one to "demand" things of FFG, they do a good job for the most part but this, this is something so easy and simple that I'm shocked they've not done this. Just remove the **** spend cost.

It would have soften the nerfpocalypse that was the latest FAQ. If you are going to nerf the top of the meta it might be a good thing to take a look at the bottom of the meta and see if there is a way to bring them up. A great way to counter all the negativity of stuff getting nerfed is by making neat tricks actually better. You know go for net positive instead of all nerf-city negative. But the obvious priority was to stamp out a fire, not singing koombaya around it.

Just make the wording of Blaster Turret identical to Unguided Rockets, except a turret.

13 minutes ago, GreenLantern1138 said:

Just make the wording of Blaster Turret identical to Unguided Rockets, except a turret.

possible, but then again why would the TIE Avenger take Unguided rockets instead of blaster turret if it was the same but turret instead? Maybe a reroll focus (blanks if in arc) would be better.

1 minute ago, Marinealver said:

possible, but then again why would the TIE Avenger take Unguided rockets instead of blaster turret if it was the same but turret instead? Maybe a reroll focus (blanks if in arc) would be better.

For ships that can take turrets but not missiles.

Just now, GreenLantern1138 said:

For ships that can take turrets but not missiles.

but the Avenger can take turrets?

1 minute ago, Sciencius said:

but the Avenger can take turrets?

Yes, but isn't this a thread about fixing the Blaster Turret? My point is that the wording of Unguided Rockets would neatly improve the Blaster Turret, and although that would make the two cards somewhat similar your Aggressor could have its choice of either or both, and it's the only ship that would have to make that choice.

Unguided is still range 1-3 and half the cost, so there's that

On 3/27/2017 at 2:10 AM, Marinealver said:

We all know from the news article Synced Turrets is just way better than blaster turret.

So since FFG is now no longer squeamish about pen & ink changes to card text. I was thingking maybe it is time to buff Blaster Turret (singe R4 no longer works for them.

It is simple.

3 1-2

Attack [focus]

Spend 1 focus token to perform attack against one ship (even a ship outside your firing arc) If defender is inside your firing arc you may change one <focus> result to a <hit result>

Turret/ 4 points

There blaster turret fixed. Anything else that needs to be changed?

Show old card and then show newer card with better mechanics. No point or values or slot types can be changed.

Do you realize that your supposed fix would then make Synced Turret relative garbage? A focus is so much easier to get and so much more flexible when deciding a target during the attack step than a Target Lock, and typically both consume your action, while the offensive output of TL or F is basically equivalent. A focus can also, when necessary, be spent on defense. The fact that you think a Target Lock: Header and a Focus: header are effectively equal is very much a faulty assumption, because if your Blaster Turret existed there'd be almost no reason for any ship to ever run the Synced Turret option since TL < Focus in almost every scenario.

That being said, yes Blaster Turret is garbage that will never see play while TLTs are around. Synced Turret is also garbage that will never see play while TLTs are around, except in those cases where a pilot can stack Synced Turret + Deadeye (to move closer to your suggested "fix" for Blaster Turret, though at the added cost of +1 point and the valuable EPT slot). For instance, Kavil + Deadeye + Synced Turret might be a thing, maybe.

If it were identical to Synced, but with a focus, there is no reason to ever take Synced, so I would propose:

Attack [Focus]

Attack 1 ship (even a ship outside your firing arc). You can not reroll attack dice. If attacking a ship inside your firing arc, you may change a number of blank results equal to your primary weapon value to a focus.

So with synced you get the reroll (better chance for crits) without necessarily spending your TL and you could possibly have a focus to modify as well. Blaster is easier to fire with the focus condition but no rerolls.

Not knowing any of the new pilot abilities, there might be some that give free TL, which would benefit Synced Turrets.

But for 4 points, who doesn't find the extra 2 for a TLT?

For those who say this proposed change to blaster turret would make the synced turret useless don't seem to be reading its text full. The Synced Turret is like Rey and Dengar in the fact that you actually want to be firing out the front arc more than you want to be firing out the sides. It's a jousting aid that can perform turret shots rather then the other way around. I'm personally excited about putting this guy on a BTL Y-Wing with the Agromech.

As for the suggestion to make the Blaster Turret like Unguided Rockets, I think that might work out, but unless testing proved otherwise, I would say it would need a range increase to full work out.

Blaster turret is not worse than Synced Turret. It was obviously designed to work with Moldy Crow.

As a matter of fact, I think the Synced turret is a terrible card. It requires you to have a target lock on the defender, which leaves you basically defenseless against high PS (or at least, higher than yours) flankers- who already make every range 1-2 turret mediocre at best.

As long as TLT exists in it's current form, the only other turret that is going to see play is Autoblaster turret. Especially if they keep refusing to give us a 2-3 range band on another turret, which they keep doing for some reason.

Synch'd Turret can just leave the TL there to keep firing, use Synch'd Targeting from someone, or use Deadeye and also have the in-arc reroll benefit.
Blaster, even if the spend is removed, HAS to do the focus action every turn and if he's forced to burn it defensively he's hosed out of his attack.

Even w/o the focus spend i'd rather have synch'd turret. This is probably the only upgrade card that literally has a better version of itself available that isnt ship/faction specific.

Though i do wish they kept the idea of requiring a focus or targetlock to attack with out-of-arc attacks at all. Would have kept them from running wild like they did, which probably would have kept Autos from appearing. Ignoring your firing arc should have some inherent penalty, and depriving you of boost/barrelroll/special actions would work.

10 minutes ago, Elavion said:

Blaster turret is not worse than Synced Turret. It was obviously designed to work with Moldy Crow.

As a matter of fact, I think the Synced turret is a terrible card. It requires you to have a target lock on the defender, which leaves you basically defenseless against high PS (or at least, higher than yours) flankers- who already make every range 1-2 turret mediocre at best.

As long as TLT exists in it's current form, the only other turret that is going to see play is Autoblaster turret. Especially if they keep refusing to give us a 2-3 range band on another turret, which they keep doing for some reason.

That is a fair point about the Blaster Turret. But now the turret costs 7 points to get close to efficiency. 10 to add recon spec, which really helps ensure consistent shots. When you poor ten points and three slots into making something combat effective, it is no wonder that you would go with an upgrade that is 6 points, takes one slot, and can work no matter your action (barring range limits, which the Blaster Turret had anyway).

I think a lot of people have the misconception that by toning down TLTs, we would suddenly see more of the other turrets. As a long time HWK flyer and Turret user, that wouldn't be the case, as far as my experience goes. The auto turrets range is a factor, dorsal just doesn't have the damage out put, the Blaster Turret requires too many points to get efficient, and the ion Turret doesn't do enough against big based ships that are prevalent in the meta. To me, the better option is to bring some of the other turrets up, rather then pushing the TLT down.

I'll agree that the synced turret is niche, but I think it will shine in that niche.

All FFG needs to do to fix turret secondary's are make range bonuses apply. TLT becomes a bit worse and all the range 1-2 turrets become much better. They would probably have to errata Autoblaster to say that you don't get the range bonus though. The biggest problem with all non TLT turrets is that 3 attack is just not reliable anymore so paying extra for it does not make much sense.

2 hours ago, MenaceNsobriety said:

All FFG needs to do to fix turret secondary's are make range bonuses apply. TLT becomes a bit worse and all the range 1-2 turrets become much better. They would probably have to errata Autoblaster to say that you don't get the range bonus though. The biggest problem with all non TLT turrets is that 3 attack is just not reliable anymore so paying extra for it does not make much sense.

There would be the question of would the dorsal turret need to be reworded, or else have 2 dice at range 2 and 4 dice at range 1. Plus the blaster turret still needs a lot to even be efficient.

Palob was the BT fix. Kavil used to love it till the new timing nerf for attacking screwed Aggro. So it does have a place, just not on every turret slot. That's ok. ICT feels like that as well.

Remember HSCP is a thing now so having that focus to use is still a hard thing to do in certain matchups. There are many TL and Focus gaining options from pilots and upgrades that I would almost say they are even in this regard. I think that an errata for blaster turret is overdue and that to make it simply:

" Attack (focus) : Spend 1 focus token to P erform this attack against 1 ship (even a ship outside your firing arc)."

4 hours ago, GrimmyV said:

Palob was the BT fix. Kavil used to love it till the new timing nerf for attacking screwed Aggro. So it does have a place, just not on every turret slot. That's ok. ICT feels like that as well.

Not seeing Palob as the Blaster Turret fix. Once again, it does have consistency. I've played with Palob plenty, and only triggered his ability a fraction of the time. Not because I can't get in range, but because my opponents knows not to feed Palob. This does have value as well, but Palob is not the salvation of the the blaster turret.

10 hours ago, Mrk1984 said:

If it were identical to Synced, but with a focus, there is no reason to ever take Synced, so I would propose:

Attack [Focus]

Attack 1 ship (even a ship outside your firing arc). You can not reroll attack dice. If attacking a ship inside your firing arc, you may change a number of blank results equal to your primary weapon value to a focus.

So with synced you get the reroll (better chance for crits) without necessarily spending your TL and you could possibly have a focus to modify as well. Blaster is easier to fire with the focus condition but no rerolls.

Not knowing any of the new pilot abilities, there might be some that give free TL, which would benefit Synced Turrets.

But for 4 points, who doesn't find the extra 2 for a TLT?

I like this idea, but I'd probably restrict it further to where you cannot modify your dice at all unless they are in your firing arc. Also, lose the "change blank results to a focus" text completely. That part is way too strong, as it essentially lets you guarantee three hit results when equipped on an Attack Shuttle, VCX, or Skurrg. Even Y-Wings and Aggressors would have pretty good odds at getting three hits, as you'd only need to roll one hit naturally and get the other two through modifiers.