According to schematic, they have cannons pointed backwards.

12 hours ago, devotedknight said:

According to schematic, they have cannons pointed backwards.

Yes, they do. Instead FFG added an awful anti-pursue mod.

FFG was very... "orthodox" in the first waves.

EDIT: this could be fixed by a title, but the lack of auxiliary firing arc in the original ship insert kind of ruins it.

Maybe if they ever come out with a Theta-class, they could include some cards, tokens, and rules for the Lambda, kinda like an aces pack.

But more likely is just and errata.

But then again, even more likely is it'll never happen.

Would be cool though!

It would be awesome if it did... Im still flying it at my SC.

Because they wanted to make it different from the Firespray, which was released one wave earlier. The anti-pursuit lasers exist to represent it.

1 hour ago, devotedknight said:

According to schematic, they have cannons pointed backwards.

Same reason why Interceptors cant Talon Roll or S Loop probably. But most likely because APL where seen as these lasers and it's forward arc weapons were the pew pew cannons.

As an aside I really wish they would update some of the earlier ship dials to represent the updated thinking from later waves.

It has 4 forward-firing double-laser cannons, which are represented by three dice, or one fewer than the amount of cannons. Kind of like an X-Wing. It has one rear-firing double-laser cannon (which is mostly used to clear a landing zone when performing its role as a troop transport), but which is also represented by one fewer dice than cannons, or zero.

If you happen to be landing troops and need to clear out some infantry in the LZ, you'll be glad you have it. Otherwise, get your escort to cover your six.

in the X-Wing PC games the Lambda also didn't have aft-facing cannons. Go figure.

It was before Wave 9.

Or because it would be considered OP according to the forum

Because a rear firing arc allows you to use your primary weapons in this arc. Totally fitting for the Firespray but unfitting for the Lambda which only has light armament on its rear. So they included the Anti-Pursuit Lasers in the Expansion.

Also because it costs a basic 21 points. You could add an extra 10 points to that if it was to have a rear arc. Maybe more.

5 hours ago, Marinealver said:

It was before Wave 9.

Yes, you are right. Before Wave 9 ruined the game there were no non-standard arcs

5 hours ago, Arkanta974 said:

Or because it would be considered OP according to the forum

What wouldn't these days?

5 minutes ago, FTS Gecko said:

Also because it costs a basic 21 points. You could add an extra 10 points to that if it was to have a rear arc. Maybe more.

Naaah, with that dial, lack of evade action and 1 less agility it would probably end up a lot cheaper than the Firespray.

Do you want the Watsonian or the Doylist interpretation?

The Watsonian is that those are low powered guns which aren't enough to actually shoot with in game terms, and are represented by Anti Pursuit Lasers or Ion Projectors if you choose to equip them, and/or simply by the bumping mechanics.

The Doylist is that the ship was designed much earlier in the game than it could have been, and maybe if it had come out now, it might have had a rear arc, a 1 primary, and a TIE/SF or ARC-170 style title (or indeed, a Lambda-only cannon) which enhanced its primary out the front, but not out the back. If it had come out now, it would also probably have had white 2 turns at the very least, too...

Some of those guns in the front might represent the cannon slot that can be equipped.

I have thought about making a Lambda-only cannon that you can equip to give you a low-powered short range run that can fire out of arc. It does seem silly that the Lambda can't represent that gun outside of Anti-Pursuit Lasers.

Well, pretty much FFG determined that Imperial Shuttles need to suck at maneuvering and protecting themselves out of arc. Why? Well, at one point they wanted all the factions to have unique strengths and weaknesses. Now that that all the strengths have been given the Scum with scraps to the poor Rebels, we're left with some ships pre-Wave 8 that just have weaknesses.

Salt aside (kinda, OK, not at all), sure rear arc guns would have been nice; either that or an ability to turn the slow space freighter around. Oh, wait, if it were a space freighter, then FFG would have designed it to easily spin around with a S-loop; but alas, it's simply a specialized military ship designed to transport troops in hot zones or commanders through hostile environments, not designed to transport moisture converter parts to desert planets...ah well.

25 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

Well, pretty much FFG determined that Imperial Shuttles need to suck at maneuvering and protecting themselves out of arc. Why? Well, at one point they wanted all the factions to have unique strengths and weaknesses. Now that that all the strengths have been given the Scum with scraps to the poor Rebels, we're left with some ships pre-Wave 8 that just have weaknesses.

Salt aside (kinda, OK, not at all), sure rear arc guns would have been nice; either that or an ability to turn the slow space freighter around. Oh, wait, if it were a space freighter, then FFG would have designed it to easily spin around with a S-loop; but alas, it's simply a specialized military ship designed to transport troops in hot zones or commanders through hostile environments, not designed to transport moisture converter parts to desert planets...ah well.

16 hours ago, devotedknight said:

According to schematic, they have cannons pointed backwards.

16 hours ago, Odanan said:

Yes, they do. Instead FFG added an awful anti-pursue mod.

FFG was very... "orthodox" in the first waves.

EDIT: this could be fixed by a title, but the lack of auxiliary firing arc in the original ship insert kind of ruins it.

Not a problem for House Rules!! I'm planning on giving them a title that gives them a 2ATT rear arc for the lambda shuttle. The lambda shuttle jousting efficiency has always been just a little too low given its dial, and a 2ATT rear arc would alleviate that to an extent.

6 minutes ago, MajorJuggler said:

Not a problem for House Rules!! I'm planning on giving them a title that gives them a 2ATT rear arc for the lambda shuttle. The lambda shuttle jousting efficiency has always been just a little too low given its dial, and a 2ATT rear arc would alleviate that to an extent.

When you work out the specifics --if you're OCD in the least-- please share, there will be a lot of people interested in such a Title . Thanks!

19 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

When you work out the specifics --if you're OCD in the least-- please share, there will be a lot of people interested in such a Title . Thanks!

The entire set of house rules will be published, I'm gathering that at least a few people would be interested. Eventually I would like to get squad builder support as well.

Custom cards, you say?

Why just one card if you can have 3?

PS: all based on Legends (like most of this game, anyway). The cloaking would need an errata with it's rules for Large Ships.

My changes are far more 'boring' -- they're intended as technical 'fixes' for the most part, rather than introducing new mechanisms. Also makes it easier to balance, there's already hundreds of cards to tweak.

Doylist every time. Which does mean that earlier ships, from the humble X-wing, to the more advanced Defender and B-wing, to primary turret ships, to the shuttle probably if released now would have different dials/stats/special rules.

Insert generic x-wing 2.0 wishlist here.

13 hours ago, FTS Gecko said:

Also because it costs a basic 21 points. You could add an extra 10 points to that if it was to have a rear arc. Maybe more.

Much worse dial than a firespray, 1 point less agi, a lot less upgrade slots. The merc is 33 points and, so 31 points for an rear arc lambda would be overcost by a lot, mainly because the lambda itself is overcost by a lot already.

5 hours ago, Odanan said:

Custom cards, you say?

Why just one card if you can have 3?

PS: all based on Legends (like most of this game, anyway). The cloaking would need an errata with it's rules for Large Ships.

Your cards are visually very good. Well done.