1 hour ago, StevenO said:

If you were looking for a rock/paper/scissors type of comparison I'd want turrets to defeat arc-dodgers who in turn eat up jousters which could make short work of turrets. An issue with that is that while turrets may be somewhat specific everything can fall into an arc-dodger or jouster classification to some extent.

Alpha strikes could eat up turrets which tends to be higher in hit points but less in damage output. But most alpha strike has been well nerfed and haven't been given a suitable substitute. Also it didn't help that the best alpha strikers were also turrets in their own right.

21 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

Alpha strikes could eat up turrets which tends to be higher in hit points but less in damage output. But most alpha strike has been well nerfed and haven't been given a suitable substitute. Also it didn't help that the best alpha strikers were also turrets in their own right.

The proper alpha strike IS the ultimate in Jousting effectiveness. Get your shots off and the enemy is dead; don't and you're in for a long day.

Just now, StevenO said:

The proper alpha strike IS the ultimate in Jousting effectiveness. Get your shots off and the enemy is dead; don't and you're in for a long day.

now the next question is, which list is that, and does it have to be rigid enough to be balanced or does it actually need to cross over into the other say turret or arc dodging?

When thinking of Rigid that would be a TIE Bomber/Punisher list for alpha strike, flexible would be the U-boat alpha strike. If you gave the TIE Bombers the old pre timing dead eye focus into TL token that can be spent to mod for <torpedo> weapons would it still have been effective in the meta or did Jumpmasters needed that Turret and maneuverability to go with it as well?

7 hours ago, Marinealver said:

now the next question is, which list is that, and does it have to be rigid enough to be balanced or does it actually need to cross over into the other say turret or arc dodging?

When thinking of Rigid that would be a TIE Bomber/Punisher list for alpha strike, flexible would be the U-boat alpha strike. If you gave the TIE Bombers the old pre timing dead eye focus into TL token that can be spent to mod for <torpedo> weapons would it still have been effective in the meta or did Jumpmasters needed that Turret and maneuverability to go with it as well?

If bombers could get the pre-clarification Deadeye/R4 agromech combo they'd be better, but probably still not as effective as the Scouts because they're SO much less tough; 4 shields means the Scouts can weather a round of range 3 fire pretty reliably whereas the bombers are not unlikely to lose a ship entirely, or have it crippled by crits before it can shoot, and will almost certainly lose one, possibly two, before they can shoot again, and because they lack a white turnaround meaning they are only firing every other round with their torps/homing missiles (probably, unless they keep the TL from R4). lacking the turret also makes them a lot more vulnerable to arc dodgers, and lacking a large base means the whole list occupies as much board space as ONE Scout, so their blocking potential is a lot lower.

Or, to put it another way, you can already get double mods on them (LRS and Deadeye, Jonus and Deadeye, LRS and Crack, etc etc) and people don't use them. Because they're just not efficient enough.

Itano Circus (100)

Scimitar Squadron Pilot (22) - TIE Bomber
Concussion Missiles (4), Extra Munitions (2), Long-Range Scanners (0)

Gamma Squadron Veteran (26) - TIE Bomber
Deadeye (1), Extra Munitions (2), Proton Torpedoes (4), Guidance Chips (0)

Gamma Squadron Veteran (26) - TIE Bomber
Deadeye (1), Extra Munitions (2), Proton Torpedoes (4), Guidance Chips (0)

"Omega Leader" (26) - TIE/FO Fighter
Juke (2), Comm Relay (3)

On 4/4/2017 at 8:28 AM, Shadow345 said:

Perhaps even a ban?

No. It doesn't need saving. It's fine as it is.

If you don't enjoy flying against TLT squads then don't fly against them in casual play. This is a simple process in casual play as you agree with your opponent (hopefully friend) what to fly so that you both have fun. If you face them in tournament play and don't enjoy it then get over it. There is no requirement for anyone to let their opponent enjoy a game in a tournament.

If you think the TLT is overpowered in tournament play then you are wrong. Please provide evidence to support your theory.

On 4/4/2017 at 11:29 AM, Lampyridae said:

That's not a nerf, that's how the rule for shield regeneration works. Some Rebel (or Scum) player has been cheating you if that's the case.

I think he was referring to the number of times in the game you can regenerate. Currently you cannot regenerate more shields than you have, as in;

I can currently regenerate as many times as I like in the game as long as the number of shield tokens I have isn't more than my shield number on the ship reference card. For instance, my X-wing can only have 2 shield tokens, but it could regenerate a shield every round as long as it has less than 2 shield tokens when I regenerate.

9 hours ago, thespaceinvader said:

If bombers could get the pre-clarification Deadeye/R4 agromech combo they'd be better, but probably still not as effective as the Scouts because they're SO much less tough; 4 shields means the Scouts can weather a round of range 3 fire pretty reliably whereas the bombers are not unlikely to lose a ship entirely, or have it crippled by crits before it can shoot, and will almost certainly lose one, possibly two, before they can shoot again, and because they lack a white turnaround meaning they are only firing every other round with their torps/homing missiles (probably, unless they keep the TL from R4). lacking the turret also makes them a lot more vulnerable to arc dodgers, and lacking a large base means the whole list occupies as much board space as ONE Scout, so their blocking potential is a lot lower.

Or, to put it another way, you can already get double mods on them (LRS and Deadeye, Jonus and Deadeye, LRS and Crack, etc etc) and people don't use them. Because they're just not efficient enough.

Jonus and Dead Eye would be the more accurate one. LRS while might have the probability as dead eye to TL it doesn't have the functionality as LRS still requires you catching that ship in arc that your opponent is also aware of instead of just any opposing ship in arc.

Yeah they would be more vulnerable but if a Bomber or Punisher had said way of copying the U-boat dead eye R4 Agro (pre-timing), I believe your point is for a Bomber it is too fragile and a Punisher it will be too expensive.

16 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

Jonus and Dead Eye would be the more accurate one. LRS while might have the probability as dead eye to TL it doesn't have the functionality as LRS still requires you catching that ship in arc that your opponent is also aware of instead of just any opposing ship in arc.

Yeah they would be more vulnerable but if a Bomber or Punisher had said way of copying the U-boat dead eye R4 Agro (pre-timing), I believe your point is for a Bomber it is too fragile and a Punisher it will be too expensive.

Eh, both of them are too fragile AND the Punisher is too expensive.

Redline is probably the best ordnance platform in the game in terms of getting results. But he dies too quickly to be worth his points. If he was tougher or could shoot more often in the rounds he was alive or cost A LOT less, he could be amazing.

Autotrustered repositioning Aces eat TLT for dinner all the time. It is a rock paper scissor game. If TLT are eating you up, try to include a rock, a paper and a scissor in your list. Use the appropriate ship to take care of the TLT.

On 04/04/2017 at 3:22 AM, GrimmyV said:

Half witted, scruffy looking nerf herders.

Yes! All of them!

Disclaimer: Vitriol not actually caustic.

Yes, I think that making all T-65 X-Wings come equipped with a Twin Laser Turret would definitely bring them back into the forefront of the meta.

Kwings have a primary turret, not sure why they need a turret upgrade. That is dumb. They should only be allowed to equip turrets of 4pts or less. Keep them in check like TIE Shuttle for imps.

TLTs should just cost 9pts. That solves the 4 in a squad shenanigans unless you really want to run 4 HWKs. 27pts for a Ywing TLT is still good value. Puts the stresshog at 29pts which is still good.

Ordnance is fine. I think EM is good. But Kwings slam is the major problem. I think slamming should stress the ship. That way it has to do a green to slam again or drop a mine, or take damage with chopper.

Regen is easy fix. Use it just like Rey crew. For instance, R2-D2 can do a green to either add a shield to it's card, or remove a shield from its card to add a shield to the ship, up to its shield max. So now, it they regen three times in a row and are out of shields on artoo card, they need to go a green to load it up, then next round can do a green to regen. This makes it an every-other round thing in the end game. R5-P9 is same. Spend a focus at end phase to either adda shield to r5 card or take a shield from r5 card and add to ship.

Mirandas regen will be fine with kwing turret fix mentioned above as well as the slam stress fix.

3 hours ago, JohnWE said:

Yes, I think that making all T-65 X-Wings come equipped with a Twin Laser Turret would definitely bring them back into the forefront of the meta.

I know that's tongue-in-cheek, but what if the X-wing had a title for its fix..."Dual Linked Fire", for free, with the TLT effect on their primary weapon so it's only in-arc?

/randomthoughts

On 4/4/2017 at 6:07 AM, Lampyridae said:

Hmm. I never thought of TLT as keeping Fat Hans/Reys in check but I guess it is a necessary evil as you say.

TLT is what ended the Fat Han reign. That and Autothrusters. The devs usually have a good reason for making the things they have. Sure there have been some cards that have been more powerful and a little overboard but none of it was gamebreaking. Plus TLTs have always had a built in 'nerf'. It is called Range 2-3 only. If you play well TLTs can be hilariously easy to beat.

Quote

Sure there have been some cards that have been more powerful and a little overboard but none of it was gamebreaking.

Gamebreaking? no, unbalanced/overpowered - yes.

10 hours ago, wurms said:

Kwings have a primary turret, not sure why they need a turret upgrade. That is dumb. They should only be allowed to equip turrets of 4pts or less. Keep them in check like TIE Shuttle for imps.

In order to do that, K-Wings would need a title. This title would have to be worth it, or nobody is going to use it. So presumably, a K-Wing with said title would be more powerful than a K-Wing with a TLT (being very cheap, having a 'double tap', free actions/tokens, you name it). I don't think the game needs that.

In any case, if K-Wings can no longer equip TLTs, then the K-Wing expansion comes with upgrades that are illegal for the ship itself. Just like the often heard 'make Engine Upgrade small ship only' suggestion. I think the likelihood for this to happen is zero.

Tlt's are fine but limit the quantity, maybe two tlt's per 100 point list.

13 minutes ago, Verlaine said:

In order to do that, K-Wings would need a title. This title would have to be worth it, or nobody is going to use it. So presumably, a K-Wing with said title would be more powerful than a K-Wing with a TLT (being very cheap, having a 'double tap', free actions/tokens, you name it). I don't think the game needs that.

In any case, if K-Wings can no longer equip TLTs, then the K-Wing expansion comes with upgrades that are illegal for the ship itself. Just like the often heard 'make Engine Upgrade small ship only' suggestion. I think the likelihood for this to happen is zero.

Change TLT to say 'whilst this is equipped, you cannot fire your primary weapon outside your primary firing arc'.

Done.

12 hours ago, 4fox100 said:

TLT is what ended the Fat Han reign. That and Autothrusters. The devs usually have a good reason for making the things they have. Sure there have been some cards that have been more powerful and a little overboard but none of it was gamebreaking. Plus TLTs have always had a built in 'nerf'. It is called Range 2-3 only. If you play well TLTs can be hilariously easy to beat .

I agree, but it's when they're spammed on Y's (especially Scum) that it's really akin to mental drudgery after the first three times. It is very beatable yes, but getting them broken up and keeping as few of them at 2-3 as you can, as you get in the doughnuts is really tiring for me. It reminds me of SAT tests; can they be taken? Yes. Do you want too? No.

As always the answer to 'I think this is a bad game experience' is 'you can beat it now shut up'.

It's not about if we can beat it, it's about whether the experience of playing to beat it makes smashing your brains out with a shovel seem like a more interesting way of spending an hour.

46 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

As always the answer to 'I think this is a bad game experience' is 'you can beat it now shut up'.

It's not about if we can beat it, it's about whether the experience of playing to beat it makes smashing your brains out with a shovel seem like a more interesting way of spending an hour.

But as it has been demonstrated throughout this forum and even this very thread, it is a personal problem. If someone has a problem with a play style, it is on them to reduce the power that kind of play style has on them. The example I use is the Stressbot. I hate it and its two power forms. But, I recognize that it is on me to limit its affect on me. So, I build some stress resistant lists and keep going.

there are ways to build lists to limit a TLT's impact, such as Autothrusters, or quick removal tactics, such as alpha strike. If that's not how you want to play, then try finding like minded players and agree amongst yourselves to limit or even not use TLTs when facing each other. Nothing wrong with that.

And while I doubt people will care to here this, if you have a problem with something, you are better off trying to deal with it yourself then expecting FFG to fix it for you.

2 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

And while I doubt people will care to here this, if you have a problem with something, you are better off trying to deal with it yourself then expecting FFG to fix it for you.

Yes. But why limit yourself to just progressing on one of the two fronts?

6 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

Yes. But why limit yourself to just progressing on one of the two fronts?

Meaning?

I can play something that doesn't lose to TLT and complain that I still don't like TLT's impact on the game and that I'm being steered towards playing something that's good against it