The weird thing about facing TLT lists, is I find the more there are the easier it is to face. When there's 3 or 4 it's harder for them to focus fire and also easier to get in the range 1 bubble of some of them.

I find one large ship plus two TLT y's to be the scariest matchup by far when it comes to facing TLT's. Go for the TLT's and the 50 point large ship is pounding away at you uncontested. Go for the large ship and you're taking 4 damage a round from the TLT's potentially while trying to whittle down the large ship as quick as possible.

Amazing how tough a balanced list can be.

8 hours ago, markcsoul said:

When there's 3 or 4 it's harder for them to focus fire

This has not been my experience

On 4/4/2017 at 9:47 AM, Stay On The Leader said:

Twin Laser Turret : " You cannot modify your attack dice. "

Attani Mindlink : "each other unstressed friendly ship"

Extra Munitions : " place 1 Ordnance token on this card. When you are instructed to discard a Torpedo, Missile or Bomb upgrade card you may discard 1 Ordnance token from this card instead. "

Why do you need to change extra munitions? Or is that simply aimed at reducing the number of bombs carried on certain ships?

As for Mindlink.... that should do it.

And TLT...... "Attack 3, range 2-3. If this attack does not hit you may perform a second attack against the same target". Same points cost.

In effect making it a single shot attack doing upto 3 damage with an inbuilt gunner effect instead of 2 guaranteed attacks per round.

The only real squad I hate seeing across from with TLT is Kanan Biggs. I don't think there is a big problem with it aside from that list.

Good grief, this still going? Lolz...

On 4/7/2017 at 10:08 AM, SabineKey said:

Why should FFG spend time and money on fixing a upgrade that is maybe undercosted when it is not presenting the problems at tournaments and could possibly retire several ships?

Because it has retired many more ships. If any upgrade is forcing more expansions off the table than it is keeping on, it needs a correction. Again, it's why I think no dice modification if the turret is firing out of arc would be a good fix. I'm all for any change that makes the game more thoughtful... and Kanan/Biggs or TLT spamm is not doing that.

I also think that's why Maneroo should not have had such a harsh correction, but Mindlink should have received one too.

38 minutes ago, Lobokai said:

Because it has retired many more ships. If any upgrade is forcing more expansions off the table than it is keeping on, it needs a correction. Again, it's why I think no dice modification if the turret is firing out of arc would be a good fix. I'm all for any change that makes the game more thoughtful... and Kanan/Biggs or TLT spamm is not doing that.

I also think that's why Maneroo should not have had such a harsh correction, but Mindlink should have received one too.

This is where a hierarchy of what is fielded comes into play. In my mind, a diversity of pilots and ships is more important than other upgrade cards. Poor adjustment of the TLT (which I personally think describes half or more of the recently nerfed items) means it could drop off the table entirely. And with the other turret options being crap or situational, you will see a sharp decline in Y-Wing and HWK use. K-Wings might see a dip, but not a big one. The Ghost will find some other thing to use and still hammer people from behind Biggs.

So, we are potential losing two ships types over an upgrade that isn't forcing ships out of the meta as bad as other things. The only thing that I believe the TLT pushed out was B-Wings, and considering they didn't make a big come back when TLTs were on the low end tells me they aren't the B-Wing's only problem.

All in all, I have yet to be convinced that a TLT nerf is worth the potential cost. Every time I hear someone argue for its nerfing, it comes down to a feeling based arguement rather than a facts based one. And feeling based arguments are highly subjective and based on opinions. Your opinion is that TLTs should be nerfed. My opinion is that it is fine as is. What makes one opinion better than the other? No telling, which is why sticking to facts is better, and the facts I've been seeing is that while TLTs have a strong presence in top tables, they are by no means dominating.

31 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

which is why sticking to facts is better, and the facts I've been seeing is that while TLTs have a strong presence in top tables, they are by no means dominating.

What fact? The fact that arc dodgers are all but dead? The fact that Interceptors, Awings, TIE Fighters, and almost anything else is dead in the meta except... K-Wings, VCXs, JM5ks, Y-Wings, Don't Dodge Biggs, etc. Even the Imperial Ships that are in.. SFs, Decimators, Defenders, Shuttles... they don't arc dodge... I wonder, what could be making being out of arc irrelevant? There's all kinds of top 8 lists posted from the most recent stuff... Even if the top lists don't use TLTs, the predominance of them at mid round play means that nothing susceptible to them can advance beyond elimination rounds. Those are facts. There's data to back it up. TLTs are removing ships from second day play in big events and putting tons of ships out of commission. Not dominating beyond late play is not the issue... not even what we're talking about... not what you were talking about when I posted. You said keeping TLTs as is, is keeping ships on the table. That is empirically false. TLTs are keeping ships off the table and therefore the slight softening of a single upgrade is completely justified since it would put an entire class of ships back into play.

5 minutes ago, Lobokai said:

What fact? The fact that arc dodgers are all but dead? The fact that Interceptors, Awings, TIE Fighters, and almost anything else is dead in the meta except... K-Wings, VCXs, JM5ks, Y-Wings, Don't Dodge Biggs, etc. Even the Imperial Ships that are in.. SFs, Decimators, Defenders, Shuttles... they don't arc dodge... I wonder, what could be making being out of arc irrelevant? There's all kinds of top 8 lists posted from the most recent stuff... Even if the top lists don't use TLTs, the predominance of them at mid round play means that nothing susceptible to them can advance beyond elimination rounds. Those are facts. There's data to back it up. TLTs are removing ships from second day play in big events and putting tons of ships out of commission. Not dominating beyond late play is not the issue... not even what we're talking about... not what you were talking about when I posted. You said keeping TLTs as is, is keeping ships on the table. That is empirically false. TLTs are keeping ships off the table and therefore the slight softening of a single upgrade is completely justified since it would put an entire class of ships back into play.

It's bombs and cards like Sabine and Advanced Slam that are keeping Aces off the table. TLTs were around when Aces were at their height and weren't much bothered thanks to stuff like Autothrusters and being repositional enough to easily get into the TLT donut holes. Heck, PWTs have done more damage to the meta than TLTs, and Aces are fine with both. Imperial players I know might not like TLTs, but it never stopped them from flying what they wanted, which was arc dodging aces.

If you would please link to the results that you are using to support your argument that TLTs are suppressing ships, I would like to take a look at it. Because from the data I've seen, they do no such thing. When it comes to the plight of Arc Dodgers, the TLT is not a major contributor from my experience, if at all.

57 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

All in all, I have yet to be convinced that a TLT nerf is worth the potential cost. Every time I hear someone argue for its nerfing, it comes down to a feeling based arguement rather than a facts based one. And feeling based arguments are highly subjective and based on opinions. Your opinion is that TLTs should be nerfed. My opinion is that it is fine as is. What makes one opinion better than the other? No telling, which is why sticking to facts is better, and the facts I've been seeing is that while TLTs have a strong presence in top tables, they are by no means dominating.

The problem here is that there is no identifiable boundary beyond which a card should be adjusted. I remember the calculations for old version Palpatine and those didn't convince people either, but the only reason the same arguments seem more convincing now is that Palpatine actually did get a nerf. There is no accepted criterion to use before the fact.

The 'hardest' fact that might be convincing is that TLT is clearly the best turret weapon upgrade. It's pushing out the others. Is that a good argument? See above. However, I can imagine that the designers want to add new turrets to the game but don't want them to be redundant the moment they're published because there already is a better upgrade for that slot. That might lead to a TLT nerf. And what is played at the 'top tables' would not be the only consideration in that case.

As a long time Dash fan, (Shadows of the Empire! Represent!) Both YT ships should have their 1-turn maneuver errata to red. And throw out secondary weapon rule. It is not needed and actually getting rid of it puts a crimp on TLT, Dash, and mildly on ordnance.

1 hour ago, ForceSensitive said:

As a long time Dash fan, (Shadows of the Empire! Represent!) Both YT ships should have their 1-turn maneuver errata to red. And throw out secondary weapon rule. It is not needed and actually getting rid of it puts a crimp on TLT, Dash, and mildly on ordnance.

I like this change. Maybe it gets weird with Dorsal Turret and makes Autoblaster OP, but is that a problem?

1 hour ago, Verlaine said:

The problem here is that there is no identifiable boundary beyond which a card should be adjusted. I remember the calculations for old version Palpatine and those didn't convince people either, but the only reason the same arguments seem more convincing now is that Palpatine actually did get a nerf. There is no accepted criterion to use before the fact.

The 'hardest' fact that might be convincing is that TLT is clearly the best turret weapon upgrade. It's pushing out the others. Is that a good argument? See above. However, I can imagine that the designers want to add new turrets to the game but don't want them to be redundant the moment they're published because there already is a better upgrade for that slot. That might lead to a TLT nerf. And what is played at the 'top tables' would not be the only consideration in that case.

There is a faction of this game's community that is never willing to consider something overpowered.

They say things like, "Not liking something isn't a reason to nerf it." This way every possible argument for a nerf of something can be conveniently defined away as just subjective opinion.

Meanwhile they're using their argument to force their PWT or Phantom dominated meta or whatever on you.

They'll then argue that X isn't overpowered because X didn't win Worlds. The Phantom isn't overpowered, it didn't win Worlds.

The whole point of this game is to have fun and enjoy it. The idea that subjective opinions about what constitutes negative play experiences are invalid arguments in discussions about having fun is ridiculous.

50 minutes ago, Verlaine said:

The problem here is that there is no identifiable boundary beyond which a card should be adjusted. I remember the calculations for old version Palpatine and those didn't convince people either, but the only reason the same arguments seem more convincing now is that Palpatine actually did get a nerf. There is no accepted criterion to use before the fact.

The 'hardest' fact that might be convincing is that TLT is clearly the best turret weapon upgrade. It's pushing out the others. Is that a good argument? See above. However, I can imagine that the designers want to add new turrets to the game but don't want them to be redundant the moment they're published because there already is a better upgrade for that slot. That might lead to a TLT nerf. And what is played at the 'top tables' would not be the only consideration in that case.

The problem with using the other turrets as a reason to nerf the TLT is that all the other turrets are either crap or too situational.

Auto Blaster Turret: Nice and cheap, but it's short range makes it very situational.

Dorsal Turret: Crap. It's combo of poor damage output and range limitations means it's just not worth it.

Blaster Turret: Oh, my poor Blaster Turret. With the cost of firing it, it is too much of a gamble to justify bringing it along. Sadly, crap.

Synched Turret: I'm actually fairly optimistic about this one. While many seem to view the TL requirement as a weakness, I see it as an advantages. It can bypass Biggs and the TL can be placed and left for continual fire, unlike it it needed a focus to fire. Also, if you just want the target flexibility that a focus attack, for one extra point (and a EPT slot), you can turn it into an actually good Blaster Turret plus bonuses for firing in arc. That said, it is still more situational than the TLT for the action requirement and another point I will cover later.

Ion Turret: The main thing I see keeping this guy down is the prevalence of big based ships in the meta. The Ion Turret doesn't do enough fast enough to make it worthwhile against big bases. Against small based, I think it is worthwhile. So, situational.

the final point in favor of the TLT is its range. As a HWK flyer, I prefer the longer range of the TLT and deal with the donut hole than have to worry about getting closer with my ship that has a hard time keeping up and is kinda fragile. If the TLT was one shot that behaved regularly and had its current range requirements, I would take that over the current version in a heart beat. To me, it is the range that makes the TLT so useful, not necessarily its ability.