So arc dodgers are pushed out of the meta by bombs (K-Wing, soon the Scurrg and what a surprise, the Jumpmaster), and large based ships like the Shadowcaster and... you guessed it, the jumpmaster. These are strong against the arc dodgers, because they concentrate on their weaknesses. Reliance on PTL and low hull. Bombs are tailor made ace killers. AND THAT IS FINE.

I don't want to see Sabine nerfed, or Miranda, or bombs. It's all part of a game to have counters against certain archetypes. My issue is, that aces have nothing to do against large, turreted ships. Yeah, autothrusters is helpful, but its more of a defense mechanism, delaying the inevitable.

So how bout an offensive answer against these ships, to even the star field.

This would make small ships more viable, and would greatly help out the imperials. It would also be an indirect nerf against most TLT carriers (With the exception of the TIE Aggressor, HWK, and Attack Shuttle)

However, if aces gain a foothold again, due to this card, it will rapidly lose value, because against other aces it is useless... Now you have to choose, and so Balance is restored....


What do you think?

Ridiculous against TIE Bombers though.

4 minutes ago, Procastination said:

Ridiculous against TIE Bombers though.

Sadly, my beloved bomber is not exactly in a place to demand an answer like this.

30 minutes ago, RufusDaMan said:

So arc dodgers are pushed out of the meta by bombs (K-Wing, soon the Scurrg and what a surprise, the Jumpmaster), and large based ships like the Shadowcaster and... you guessed it, the jumpmaster. These are strong against the arc dodgers, because they concentrate on their weaknesses. Reliance on PTL and low hull. Bombs are tailor made ace killers. AND THAT IS FINE.

I don't want to see Sabine nerfed, or Miranda, or bombs. It's all part of a game to have counters against certain archetypes. My issue is, that aces have nothing to do against large, turreted ships. Yeah, autothrusters is helpful, but its more of a defense mechanism, delaying the inevitable.

So how bout an offensive answer against these ships, to even the star field.

This would make small ships more viable, and would greatly help out the imperials. It would also be an indirect nerf against most TLT carriers (With the exception of the TIE Aggressor, HWK, and Attack Shuttle)

However, if aces gain a foothold again, due to this card, it will rapidly lose value, because against other aces it is useless... Now you have to choose, and so Balance is restored....


What do you think?

If it's intended to punish large bases, just make it mention large bases. Why set it to hull value?

2 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

If it's intended to punish large bases, just make it mention large bases. Why set it to hull value?

Not large bases only, ships with a large number of hull points, since now we have small based ships with more health than large based ships

Generally, FFG does not make cards that are useless in certain matchups (exceptions being VI, adaptability and in case you fight 6 naked HWKs- lightweight frame). a 3-point upgrade that would do absolutely nothing in some games wouldn't do.

I can see it being used to great effect in Epic, dropping all Epic ships out of play (imagine a swarm of green squad with this, Calculation, chimps and prockets closing to range 1! in effect 6 hits for 26 points. 3 of them will decimate an epic ship! and using calculation if needed for the Crit!)

limit it to Large based ships (so saves y wings, epics etc) and it could be fun to play with.

As often, we would'nt need this if ordnance had been made correctly from the beginning.
We should have some bonus when firing torpedoes against large or huge targets (and even maybe maluses against AGI 3+ small ships).

Large ships are a sufficiently core bit of the game that it's not unreasonable to have a weapon dedicated to them; in the same way Flechette Torpedoes are tied to ligth fighters by hull value

Ultimately, it is very rare for a squad not to include a large ship (even if it was just an omicron carrying Palpatine) for the last few waves.

Currently, tanky, low agility ships are punished by plasma torps and cluster missiles, but there's nothing that pics out large ships for being large ships - a jumpmaster is just as hard a target as a T-70, for example, and an Aggressor is significantly harder to hit.

Something whose damage scales with size (small ship - 1 damage, large ship -3 damage, epic ship - 5 damage) might work?

6 minutes ago, Magnus Grendel said:

in the same way Flechette Torpedoes are tied to ligth fighters by hull value

And in much the same way, I'd expect and upgrade that only got its best value against a specific subset of ships, and was competing against other very good upgrades (Plasma Torpedoes) for similar points... to do about as well as Flechette Torps. I.e., to see basically no use at all.

Focus fire, focus fire, focus fire. Oh and focus fire.

And you know... Twin Laser Turrets.

Game design 101: don't make expensive upgrades that absolutely murder certain lists while being totally useless against others. This doesn't end well either for the upgrade's popularity or for the meta and tends to result in large swings in win/loss ratio depending on luck of draw rather than player's skill.

27 minutes ago, Lightrock said:

Game design 101: don't make expensive upgrades that absolutely murder certain lists while being totally useless against others. This doesn't end well either for the upgrade's popularity or for the meta and tends to result in large swings in win/loss ratio depending on luck of draw rather than player's skill.

Agreed. The question is whether "one or more large based ships" is a common enough thing to expect to see, or otherwise how you can draw a box around a large enough tactical space that happens to include large ships that the card is worth it.

Autothrusters are a good example. They were primarily "screw you, turrets". But their second string of working at range 3, even in arc, gave some value (even if often minimal) against most squads.

5 minutes ago, Magnus Grendel said:

Agreed. The question is whether "one or more large based ships" is a common enough thing to expect to see, or otherwise how you can draw a box around a large enough tactical space that happens to include large ships that the card is worth it.

Autothrusters are a good example. They were primarily "screw you, turrets". But their second string of working at range 3, even in arc, gave some value (even if often minimal) against most squads.

I believe ships with 5 or more HP are common enough, and powerful enough so this card doesn't shut them down.

This should have been what Torpedoes and Missiles are for - smashing down big ships.

Instead they're what drives out everything BUT big ships because your small stuff gets one-shotted.

3 minutes ago, SOTL said:

This should have been what Torpedoes and Missiles are for - smashing down big ships.

Instead they're what drives out everything BUT big ships because your small stuff gets one-shotted.

That is unlikely to be fixed until 2nd edition, so we have to find solution before that, because the problem persists, and soon everything will be large based.

Making aces more survivable against bombs and turrets is no solution because if it becomes too powerful, aces will rule supreme and will be unhittable, again. Plus bombs were designed to destroy small ships, taking that away doesn't make too much sense. If the fix is too weak, nothing will come of it. Plus making anything more survivable makes the game longer. However, making aces hit hard against clumsy, big *** ships, will make them come back i think, as with it both of these ships can hurt each other. Turret carriers and bombers hurt aces, and aces hurt (most) turret carriers and bombers.

Or do something similar to expertise...

4 pts, small ship only.

If you are not stressed, when attacking large base ships, you may change all eyes to hits. When attacking small base ships, you can reroll all blanks.

12 minutes ago, migs6000 said:

Or do something similar to expertise...

4 pts, small ship only.

If you are not stressed, when attacking large base ships, you may change all eyes to hits. When attacking small base ships, you can reroll all blanks.

That is just a better expertise

31 minutes ago, SOTL said:

This should have been what Torpedoes and Missiles are for - smashing down big ships.

Instead they're what drives out everything BUT big ships because your small stuff gets one-shotted.

Torpedoes yes. Missiles should have been for punching small ships. Giving them different functional roles rather than just being different slots with broadly the same functionality would have been so much better.

But with damage almost always linked directly to the dice, 'twas not to be.

20 minutes ago, RufusDaMan said:

That is unlikely to be fixed until 2nd edition, so we have to find solution before that, because the problem persists, and soon everything will be large based.

Agreed it's a 2nd Ed issue. But also the 'solution before then' is unlikely to materialise anyway. Large bases are here to stay.

Keep telling people that you dont want matchup specific counters or else youll just turn the game into matchup wing

This aint MTG with a sideboard or warmachine with multiple lists brought to competitive events

Why do big ships need special treatment, in competitive play they already suffer from the terrible half point rule. They generally (not scum) have poor evasion dice so damage racks up fast anyway. I ruin Nora & Rey and 9/10 times its Nora left alive with all her hull and shields and shield regen and no half points.

The card serves no purpose and is not needed.

What if large (and huge) ships, being inherently easier to hit being larger than a broadside of the barn, just automatically granted +1 red dice to those shooting at it?

Maybe this should only be for Missiles and Torpedos?

Errata for secondary weapons: Secondary weapons gain +1 red dice vs large ships, +2 vs huge.

This upgrade makes middle-of-the-pack large base ships cry. Firespray-31, for example.