Elusiveness:

When defending, you may receive 1 stress token to cancel 1 attack die.

If you have at least 1 stress token, you cannot use this ability.

34 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

lol, Nope, you are not reading the rules right.

The reinforce actions specifies fore section or aft section. Not in arc or out of arc as huge ships have multiple arcs. With the 180 aux you can easily specify which is fore or aft section.

When writing and reading rules you should think of them as analog algorithms. There has to be clear instructions on which line, symbol, or value is which or else it could be misinterpreted or just down right fail. Firing arcs are not sections, and all non-huge ships that don't have 180 aux arcs don't have a fore or aft section.

As I said if you want reinforce to work in and out of arc you need to rewrite the rules. The current supplement simply does not support it.

Are you sure he is not reading the rules right?

4 minutes ago, Azrapse said:

Are you sure he is not reading the rules right?

Fore and Aft sides, not inside or outside of arc.

Just now, Marinealver said:

Fore and Aft sides, not inside or outside of arc.

Fore and Aft sides of the token, not of the ship.

18 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

Fore and Aft sides, not inside or outside of arc.

You didn't even read the card where you use the fore or aft side of the TOKEN and it uses your firing arc to determine whether you get the reinforce or not.

5 minutes ago, VanderLegion said:

You didn't even read the card where you use the fore or aft side of the TOKEN and it uses your firing arc to determine whether you get the reinforce or not.

Reading page 2 of huge ship rules, currently the only official ruling we have on reinforce actions. As for the card well you got one saying one thing and another saying the other thing. So yeah, an FAQ is still required.

However given the card written the way it is, there is clearly an intention not to give reinforce actions to any ship that doesn't have 180 aux firing arc. So the B-wing doesn't fit the profile. Then we can go on and on about how will it work with rear arcs and MFAs.

8 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

Reading page 2 of huge ship rules, currently the only official ruling we have on reinforce actions. As for the card well you got one saying one thing and another saying the other thing. So yeah, an FAQ is still required.

However given the card written the way it is, there is clearly an intention not to give reinforce actions to any ship that doesn't have 180 aux firing arc. So the B-wing doesn't fit the profile. Then we can go on and on about how will it work with rear arcs and MFAs.

The only "official" rule we have for reinforce because reinforce is currently huge ship only. The card linked above was the one that comes included in the small base ship that gets reinforce. Which makes it the "official ruling" for how it works on non-huge ships. And odds are good that it'll probably only be used for 180 degree firing arcs, but the way the rules are written, it COULD be used just fine with any arcs, it just affects the size and coverage different sections.

If they gave a reinforce to a fire spray for instance, the "fore" side of the token would cover both front and rear arcs and the "aft" side of the token would be the sides of the ship.

The epic version of reinforce works with what section of the ship is being attacked. The small/large base version couldn't care less what part of the ship you're attacking, only your relative location to that ship.

11 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

Reading page 2 of huge ship rules, currently the only official ruling we have on reinforce actions. As for the card well you got one saying one thing and another saying the other thing. So yeah, an FAQ is still required.

However given the card written the way it is, there is clearly an intention not to give reinforce actions to any ship that doesn't have 180 aux firing arc. So the B-wing doesn't fit the profile. Then we can go on and on about how will it work with rear arcs and MFAs.

Oh, come on... The huge ship rules describe how Reinforce affects huge ships, while the card rules reference specifies rules for small and large ships. It says so at the very top of the card.
And the spoiled card not official? Sure, it's not published yet, but at this point you are just in denial.

What clear intentions you might see are purely subjective.
Reinforce works most balanced (not in terms of gameplay, but in terms of arc size being covered) in ships with 180 firing arc, or with frontal and rear arc, or even mobile arc.
In these cases (YV-666, the wookie ship, ARC-170, firespray, lancer, TIE/SF) the reinforce token still covers 50% of the ship, while the other half is uncovered. That the "shape" of the covered area is not contiguous isn't critical. (You could argue these ships just project a shield reinforcement in a weird shape, or in a 3D shape that reflects weirdly in 2D).

In the case of ships with just usual frontal firing arc, it still works, although it doesn't cover a balanced % of the ship. Most likely, they will not allow the Reinforce action in all ships indiscriminately (Fat Han could abuse this), but I think it could be perfectly okay to allow jousters like the B-wing to reinforce to increase their survivability, both during a joust, or while avoiding a turreted ship. There is plenty of control in the hands of the designers to make this work fine.

1 minute ago, VanderLegion said:

The only "official" rule we have for reinforce because reinforce is currently huge ship only. The card linked above was the one that comes included in the small base ship that gets reinforce. Which makes it the "official ruling" for how it works on non-huge ships. And odds are good that it'll probably only be used for 180 degree firing arcs, but the way the rules are written, it COULD be used just fine with any arcs, it just affects the size and coverage different sections.

If they gave a reinforce to a fire spray for instance, the "fore" side of the token would cover both front and rear arcs and the "aft" side of the token would be the sides of the ship.

please continue discussion HERE.

Best fix for K6 IMO is just to remove the roll. Make him essentially similar to FCS for the same points. Mildly more difficult to trigger, but in a more flexible slot.

20 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

Best fix for K6 IMO is just to remove the roll. Make him essentially similar to FCS for the same points. Mildly more difficult to trigger, but in a more flexible slot.

Yeah but I wan't to avoid making another FCS. That seems like something that should stay on systems. 3 out of 8 chance to be a Col Vesery. Also it should fit with the timing which R4-Agro no longer does. But you got a point, the unreliability does keep it in the lower tiers of upgrades.

Yup, it's the pointless RNG that stops people using it, not the effect. Junking the pointless RNG would instantly make it usable. Making it usable on the same attack would make it even better and be fantastic for ordnance.

I'll start with astromechs...

Astromechs

• R5-D8 = is -1 pt (would love -2 pt, but that might be too much)
• R5-K6 = change it to Evade and/or Eyeball lets you keep the TL.
• R3 = Change it to cancel a Blank for an Evade. Kind of powerful then, but would see use.
• R2-D6 = give -1 pt to the EPT put on
• R5-X3 = No idea how to help this guy....

X-wing pilots

• Garven Dreis = -1 pt
• Porkins = -1 pt

Cannons

• Flechette Cannon = remove the "if the defender is not stressed" so that it always causes stress.
• Autoblaster Cannon = -1 or -2 pts

Illicits

• Hot Shot Blaster = -1 pt

Modifications

• Integrated Astromech = should be a title or still allow another Modification.
• Advanced Cloaking Device = should be removed from game.

26 minutes ago, heychadwick said:

Astromechs

• R5-X3 = No idea how to help this guy....

For him you could change his text to "Once per round you may ignore an obstacle".
My assumption would be that you could apply that to flying or shooting. Then he would be as powerful as the emperor had foreseen.

3 minutes ago, AngryAlbatross said:

For him you could change his text to "Once per round you may ignore an obstacle".
My assumption would be that you could apply that to flying or shooting. Then he would be as powerful as the emperor had foreseen.

Sure, but increase his cost by 2 pts.

Salvaged Astromechs

• Salvaged Astromech = -1 pt. Why do Rebels get a 1 pt version and Scum doesn't?

Systems

• Reinforced Defelctors = No one ever uses these. Why? Too expensive? Better options? Maybe -1 pt? Making it 2 hits or more would be a little too much.
• Sensor Jammer = I almost think it's too expensive. -1 pt?

Tech

• Weapons Guidance = -1 pt? It is close to being really good.
• Sensor Cluster = No one takes these? Not sure why. Maybe -1 pt?

Title

• Hound's Tooth = needs point reduction, but how much? Maybe down to only 2-3 pts?
• Dodonna's Pride = I say increase the range for the Co-ordinate action. Also, one of the CR-90 titles should give more Energy.
• Tantive IV = More energy?
• Jaina's Light = This is actually pretty good, but I never see it.
• Slave 1 = throw in a free Barrel Roll action on bar.
• Andrasta = Needs to reduce points of all Bombs on ship by -1 pt. Or re-worked so that you get a 2nd Bomb slot but Extra Munitions tokens on all Bombs.

Turrets

• Ion Cannon Turret = -1 pt
• Blaster Turret = You just need the Focus, but don't have to spend it.

On 3/29/2017 at 0:00 AM, Herowannabe said:

Elusiveness:

When defending, you may receive 1 stress token to cancel 1 attack die.

If you have at least 1 stress token, you cannot use this ability.

Wow. I love this. Not sure why I had never considered a change like this before.

Crew

• Toryn Farr = R1-3
• Jan Dodonna = -3 pts
• Raymus Antilles = -3 pts
• Flight Instructor = change re-roll to turn into Evade. So, one Eyeball turns into Evade, or one Blank if under PS 2.
• Leia Organa = change to 1 ship per turn and no discard.
• Ysanne Isard = -1 or -2 pts
• Carlist Rieekan = change to one ship per turn instead of all and discard.
• Construction Droid = turn it into an action as otherwise the only time you can use this is with Shield Technician or Raider title.
• Mercenary Co-pilot = think R 2-3 is better.
• Saboteur = change to R 1-3
• "Leebo" = -1 pt
• Systems Officer = make it R 1-2

Elusiveness cancelling a dice would be awesome. As it is, getting a stress for a REROLL (which if he has a focus means you have low odds of reducing the damage anyway) is terrible. Either cancel a die for a stress or dont even take a stress, everyone that hits you has 1 die getting rerolled.

What about Calculation?

Maybe it should be "blank" instead of "focus"?

P.s. I think the OP is intending to not change point cost of cards, only the text. For now at least FFG hasn't changed the cost of anything, only the text (and most of those wording changes are small).

6 hours ago, heychadwick said:

I'll start with astromechs...

Astromechs

• R5-D8 = is -1 pt (would love -2 pt, but that might be too much)
• R5-K6 = change it to Evade and/or Eyeball lets you keep the TL.
• R3 = Change it to cancel a Blank for an Evade. Kind of powerful then, but would see use.
• R2-D6 = give -1 pt to the EPT put on
• R5-X3 = No idea how to help this guy....

X-wing pilots

• Garven Dreis = -1 pt
• Porkins = -1 pt

Keep in mind these are supposed to be changes via FAQ. As of now there is no precedent for changing point values on any cards via Pen & Ink Changes. The only thing that can be errata is the text. So if you can't fix the card without knocking off a point, then there is no way to fix it.

Moldy Crow: Increase your attack value by 1 to a maximum of 2.

With the amount of crits going out nowadays i think Sensor Jammer should allow you to mod a hit OR crit to a focus, instead of just a hit.

Especially since now we got Hotshot Copilot to basically do the same job (eat focus tokens) and do it better, make it actually work on defense even if they have a focus by nerfing a crit to a hit.

Or better yet, change it entirely to: "When defending, before comparing results, change all the attacker's crit results to hits" - 4pts to be uncritable unless you got a "cant mod" clause.