So, I'll go ahead and copy the episode description in here and the link to it, but this thread is mostly to contain a discussion I'd like to have about synced turret, and by proxy TLT.

Also, standard language/content disclaimers here.

http://carolinakrayts.libsyn.com/episode-15-trespass

Ben, Chris, Tyler, THE Zack Mathews, and Travis "The Johnson" Johnson join long time fans of the show Paul Heaver and Ricky White of Scum and Villainy who call in to talk shop, including:

• Just how bad is Synced Turret? (Spoiler Alert, really, really, really bad)
• Tyler losing to a Firespray
• Is XWing over? Should we all pack up and go home?
• Why are the forums so bad?
• How should we analyze the worlds meta?
• Seriously, just how bad is Synced Turret?
• And a whole lot more...

"Actual content" starts at about 45 minutes!

Carolina KRAYTS Facebook community:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/carolinakrayts

Notes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i9_TDs91p_enynaPBpiJ6O2LQK2oDq_PDX6cgNf5YBA

Stats: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GslirLswQPdjT9hPmmFJ_5LEBR1A7QcoOLeDdbO60RM/

Now, for the actual discussion I'm so down on Synced Turret being such unbelievable garbage that I would love to be convinced otherwise. Actually, I'd like to be convinced that FFG could ever print a turret that is moderately fair and compete with TLT. In the show I mentioned just making up a range 1-2 turret that we would even consider playing over TLT, which we arbitrarily decided on this as an "overpowered" turret:

Very-Synced Turret

When attacking, you may reroll all attack dice.

3 attack dice, range 1-2.  4 points.

Way better than synced turret, right? I might even consider taking it over TLT! No target lock requirement, no arc reroll requirement! 2 points cheaper than TLT! My question is, would you even play this over TLT? Here's the quick breakdown for what damage you should expect against different 0-3 agility ships with a focus, and a focus/evade. This is assuming the turret has a focus to spend on offense. (All done with http://xwingcalculator.x10host.com/diceuilm.html )

Very-Synced Turret

Attacker, Defender focus
0 agility 2.8 damage
1 agility 2.18 damage
2 agility 1.56 damage
3 agility 0.98 damage

Attacker focus, Defender focus/evade
0 agility 1.81 damage
1 agility 1.19 damage
2 agility .64 damage
3 agility .31 damage

Twin Laser Turret

Attacker, Defender focus
0 agi 1.9 damage
1 agi 1.6 damage
2 agi 1.3 damage
3 agi .90 damage

Attacker focus, Defender focus/evade
0 agi 1.76 damage
1 agi 1.31 damage
2 agi .81 damage
3 agi .45 damage

You'll notice those numbers are... not very different. You might be thinking you're getting a bargain getting a turret that does slightly more damage than TLT for 2 points cheaper!

Except, TLT is range 2-3, and this turret is range 1-2. This doesn't seem like a massive difference, but range 1-2 is about 98.5 ship bases, and range 2-3 is about 177.1 ship bases. The TLT firing area is almost twice the size of every other turret.

I did the math for these by hand, so my apologies if they're a little off! Any corrections would be appreciated. I was lazy, so the area of the arc calculations include the part of the arc on the ship base for the small/large base arcs, which is not area you could actually shoot at.

Turrets
Range 1 Band: 29.63 Ship Bases
Range 2 Band: 68.91 Ship Bases
Range 3 Band: 108.17 Ship Bases
Range 1-2 Turret: 98.5 ship bases
Range 2-3 Turret: 177.08 ship bases

Standard Arcs
Range 1-3 standard small base arc: 40.6 ship bases
Range 1-3 standard large base arc: 57.3 ship bases

Don't forget, TLT has the advantage that for the largest range band, 3, it gets a defensive bonus, while when something with a range 1-2 turret is trading shots it is at best equal at range 2 for combat bonuses, but often at range 1 where it has no bonus but has an additional die being rolled at it.

Also, while our new turret may look much cheaper than TLT as it's 50% more for the actual upgrade card, it's not like you can take the thing by itself. The cheapest platform would be a HWK, so running at 20 points (16 base, 4 turret). A TLT HWK is 22, so in actuality the largest possible difference in price for a TLT is 10%. I honestly don't think this fabricated turret would see competitive play at 4 points - the most obvious abuse would be 5 HWKs with it which wouldn't stand a chance in the current meta.

Quite frankly, I don't think the TLT damage output and firing area is reasonable, and FFG is clearly unable to print a turret that isn't complete *** ever again because of it. What madness would they have to make to even compete with TLT? Honestly, I think the only reason TLT didn't complete end the game was autothrusters existing, but you shouldn't be required to hard counter a single upgrade to be able to have a competitive list! Also, TLTs are currently being suppressed by all the torp scouts out there, but if they were ever nerfed or fell out of favor, let's not pretend there isn't another boogeyman right behind them...

Please, if you disagree or have corrections, or ideas for turrets that are moderately fair and good FFG could make, let's start a conversation! I'll consolidate the best of the arguments for/against for next week and let's see if anyone can talk me off the cliff

Oh, for anyone who might want the visuals, here's a full 3x3 board with a TLT firing area on it, and a small base firing arc.

And here's a 1-2 compared to that same arc

But now we can claim X-wing has everything, including the kitchen... sync.

eh?

If you are just running a turret ship, then TLT is the only way to go. I think on something like the aggressor, it can have missiles as its range 3 damage dealer, and then fall back on synced turret for range 1-2. Not sure why they felt the need to require a TL to fire it though but TLT is free rein. That is the main thing I dislike about it that could make it DOA.

Thanks. I get static every time I dare suggest that TLT is unbalanced. Your turn!

My opinion about TLTs is that it may or may not be overpowered... But it certainly dominates the turret market, practically excluding any other option.

A similar precedent of an 'overused card' happened with Palpatine. The emperor may or may not had been overpowered.... But it got nerfed because it was totally dominating imperial builds. Or at least, that was FFG's justification for the nerf.

If FFG wish to be consistent (yeah I know), then they should apply the 'overusing' principle for TLT as well.

TLT may not be overpowered, but it is definitely overused.

Can you do the math with Synced Turret and Deadeye?

I love the illustrations. They really show that a viable turret needs range 2-3. Just imagine if the ion turret had that? Would definitely see more play. Or the reverse, if TLT was range 1-2. I'm sure it would be played less.

If you math TLT properly it should probably cost ~9pts. It's critically undercosted and people don't see that because 'it only deals 1 damage'. No, it deals 2 damage A LOT. About as often as anything else deals 2 damage, but in a 360 arc.

The closest comparitive is the Ourider's 360 degree HLC, which costs 12pts.

I really cannot comprehend what led to the creation of synced turret. it's essentially unusable.

Low PS carriers suffer from the ordnance syndrome- you need to get close to get the TL, so higher PS ships are likely to get a round of fire on you before you can even use your turret.

For high PS pilots it's really hard to justify not paying 2 extra points for a TLT. And pilots like Miranda carry ordnance to benefit from said TL anyway.

You theorethically could use deadeye to avoid the TL requirement, but then you're only 1 point away from TLT.

2 hours ago, Jehan Menasis said:

My opinion about TLTs is that it may or may not be overpowered... But it certainly dominates the turret market, practically excluding any other option.

IMO that's not a problem that would be solved by nerfing TLT.

Other turrets are pretty bad IMO so,if you nerf TLT, what's going to make people run other turrets instead of no longer running turrets altogether?

Dorsal, Synced and Ion Turrets are actually all pretty well costed, they only look 'pretty bad' by comparison to the benchmark of TLT.

3 minutes ago, SOTL said:

Dorsal, Synced and Ion Turrets are actually all pretty well costed, they only look 'pretty bad' by comparison to the benchmark of TLT.

Pretty much.

I'd concur with my understanding of the OP's core hypothesis, which seems to be that the TLT being range 2-3 is what makes it SO unbalanced compared to the others. Just having a bigger range is a huge deal, let alone having no firing requirements AND better average damage than all of the others.

Just now, thespaceinvader said:

Pretty much.

I'd concur with my understanding of the OP's core hypothesis, which seems to be that the TLT being range 2-3 is what makes it SO unbalanced compared to the others. Just having a bigger range is a huge deal, let alone having no firing requirements AND better average damage than all of the others.

There's also synergies in how 360 arcs and range 3 works together in how it lets you fly. On top of that Range 3 isn't just more firing arc it's often an extra defense dice you get that the opponent doesn't benefit from. That's not factored into the cost either.

Interesting question for the purposes of random musing:

If TLT were range 1-2, would it be balanced?

What if it were just range 3 only?

2 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

Interesting question for the purposes of random musing:

If TLT were range 1-2, would it be balanced?

What if it were just range 3 only?

If it were 1-2 and cost 6pts it might be slightly overcosted. That range 3 bands adds so much.

I've actually played some 4x Ion Turret recently. It was surprisingly good. And then I've ran into 3 TIE interceptors and cried

2 hours ago, SOTL said:

If you math TLT properly it should probably cost ~9pts. It's critically undercosted and people don't see that because 'it only deals 1 damage'. No, it deals 2 damage A LOT. About as often as anything else deals 2 damage, but in a 360 arc.

The closest comparitive is the Ourider's 360 degree HLC, which costs 12pts.

It's undercosted for the same reason that TIE/x7 costs -2 and TIE/D costs 0. It is obvious that the abilities in these cards shouldn't cost -2 and 0, right? However, they are costed like that because the ships that can equip those cards is overcosted by 5 points. So really, TIE/x7 would be a 3 points card, and TIE/D a 5 points card on a ship that were perfectly costed.

TLT should cost 9 probably, but it costs 6 because the Y-wing, HWK and K-wing are overcosted by 3-4 points. And all ships with the turret slot will be overcosted by 3-4 points from now on accounting for the rebalancing factor of TLT costing 3 points less than it should.

3 minutes ago, Azrapse said:

TLT should cost 9 probably, but it costs 6 because the Y-wing, HWK and K-wing are overcosted by 3-4 points.

I think you're really going to struggle to prove that. The basic HWK may be a couple of points overcosted.

7 minutes ago, SOTL said:

I think you're really going to struggle to prove that. The HWK maybe a couple of points undercosted.

A ship with attack 1, agility 2, 5 hitpoints and one of the worse dials in the game is not overcosted at 16 points? The TIE Fighter is better for 4 points less. The Quadjumper has better stats, much better dial, better slots, and costs 1 point less. Other than the turret and pilot abilities, there is no reason to bring an HWK instead of a Quadjumper or a Sabine's Masterpiece TIE Fighter.

The original HWK costing is unredeemable unless you crazily undercost some upgrades that it can equip. So, TLT.

As much as I think TLT is one of the most boring and overused things ever, it wouldn't be right to nerf it now when the Imperials are finally getting it.

If you put out a reference card that stated that equipped turrets replaced your primary weapon and therefore counted as a primary weapon for attacks, but keeping the range restrictions per weapon, would that hurt or heal turrets?

Seems all turrets would gain an extra attack dice except for TLT which would actually give out a defense dice at range 3.

That being said, a four dice ion cannon turret would be a little bit deadly.

12 minutes ago, Pretty Green said:

As much as I think TLT is one of the most boring and overused things ever, it wouldn't be right to nerf it now when the Imperials are finally getting it.

That's a really terrible bit of reasoning. If anything it's the perfect time to nerf it, because we'll be seeing it used even more often.

31 minutes ago, Azrapse said:

It's undercosted for the same reason that TIE/x7 costs -2 and TIE/D costs 0. It is obvious that the abilities in these cards shouldn't cost -2 and 0, right? However, they are costed like that because the ships that can equip those cards is overcosted by 5 points. So really, TIE/x7 would be a 3 points card, and TIE/D a 5 points card on a ship that were perfectly costed.

TLT should cost 9 probably, but it costs 6 because the Y-wing, HWK and K-wing are overcosted by 3-4 points. And all ships with the turret slot will be overcosted by 3-4 points from now on accounting for the rebalancing factor of TLT costing 3 points less than it should.

Y wing and HWK sure, but the K Wing? The K wing is fine.

The Synced Turret has been doing fairly well for me so far, but it's really important to not think of it as a competitor to TLT. It fulfils a very different and more niche role IMO.

It's pretty solid on a BTL-A4 Syndicate Thug with R4 Agromech. Spend your focus on the primary weapon shot, get a target lock for the Synced Turret, shoot again. You get mods on both shots, and should be able to put some serious hurt on low agility targets. It's not bad value at 24 point either. It's much more of an in close ship though, so probably better if you want something to use as a punchy blocker.