2 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

The only reason people have to lean so heavily on the turbolaser slot right now is they know the only shots they're getting in are long range. Remove that as a certainty, 3 red/3 blue even without a turbo upgrade, is still mean, I'd fly the hell out of Vics if they could do this. They still have the Ion slot, they're still both gunners and carriers.... speed 3 makes a big difference.

Sure... but at what cost?

The ship function just fine as is, just not ideal for tournament play but not everything need to be.

6 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

The only reason people have to lean so heavily on the turbolaser slot right now is they know the only shots they're getting in are long range. Remove that as a certainty, 3 red/3 blue even without a turbo upgrade, is still mean, I'd fly the hell out of Vics if they could do this. They still have the Ion slot, they're still both gunners and carriers.... speed 3 makes a big difference.

Here's where we're getting into Design Space:


So you'd have a 8 Hull, 3 / 3 / 1 shield speed 3 (after a Nav) beast, that throws 3 Reds and 3 Blues... (at 93)

Versus, for 17 points more...

A 11 Hull, 4 / 3 / 2, No-Nav-Needed, Higher-Squadron, Contain Token-Toting Monster that throws 3 Reds, 2 Blues and three blacks... Adds a Black to Anti-Squadron, Still has the Ion Slot, keeps its Turbolaser Slot and doubles the Offensive retrofit capability?

How badly do you really need those 17 points, mate? Especially when we're still talking about Naked ships here...

Even in today's market - you're still getting really good value for those 17 points.

Just now, jorgen_cab said:

Sure... but at what cost?

The ship function just fine as is, just not ideal for tournament play but not everything need to be.

Well, I don't particularly disagree.... but I believe the Imps need a medium size gunner.... I've been posting about it for a while, I think the Vic could be patched (properly) to fit this roll, but I'd be willing to hear other ideas too...

IE my design:

1 minute ago, Drasnighta said:

Here's where we're getting into Design Space:


So you'd have a 8 Hull, 3 / 3 / 1 shield speed 3 (after a Nav) beast, that throws 3 Reds and 3 Blues...

Versus, for 17 points more...

A 11 Hull, 4 / 3 / 2, No-Nav-Needed, Higher-Squadron, Contain Token-Toting Monster that throws 3 Reds, 2 Blues and three blacks... Adds a Black to Anti-Squadron, Still has the Ion Slot, keeps its Turbolaser Slot and doubles the Offensive retrofit capability?

How badly do you really need those 17 points, mate? Especially when we're still talking about Naked ships here...

17 points is 2x ties I couldn't have run before... Which, as the people of this forum have made abundantly clear every time I denounce squadrons, can make all the difference.

Agree that 17 points is a lot. Thats cienna ree!

11 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Well, I don't particularly disagree.... but I believe the Imps need a medium size gunner.... I've been posting about it for a while, I think the Vic could be patched (properly) to fit this roll, but I'd be willing to hear other ideas too...

IE my design:

From a thematic point of view I would not be against a Speed 3 Victory II ship. Any new ship they come up with still have to be in theme of what they represent and are there actually that many gunship type cruiser that would fit these profiles?

Just now, jorgen_cab said:

From a thematic point of view I would not be against a Speed 3 Victory II ship. Any new ship they come up with still have to be in them of what they represent and are there actually that many gunship type cruiser that would fit these profiles?

I really don't know, in the current canon, I don't believe they have one, but I'm so far behind on the new EU canon it's painful.

3 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

17 points is 2x ties I couldn't have run before... Which, as the people of this forum have made abundantly clear every time I denounce squadrons, can make all the difference.

To each their own.

Personally, I find the upgraded Anti-Squadron to be worth more than what 2 more Ties'll bring me - but then again, I'm already on the upper-end of Squadrons as is Both in Use and Opposition.

I think, overall - the Vic's speed is a hefty design consideration. I don't begruge a moment the fact you believe Speed 2 is Crippling. You certainly do, and you're looking for something else... That's a truth, indeed.

I don't think its Crippling. In fact, when I'm using them, I quite enjoy them with their limitations.

15 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Here's where we're getting into Design Space:


So you'd have a 8 Hull, 3 / 3 / 1 shield speed 3 (after a Nav) beast, that throws 3 Reds and 3 Blues... (at 93)

Versus, for 17 points more...

A 11 Hull, 4 / 3 / 2, No-Nav-Needed, Higher-Squadron, Contain Token-Toting Monster that throws 3 Reds, 2 Blues and three blacks... Adds a Black to Anti-Squadron, Still has the Ion Slot, keeps its Turbolaser Slot and doubles the Offensive retrofit capability?

How badly do you really need those 17 points, mate? Especially when we're still talking about Naked ships here...

Even in today's market - you're still getting really good value for those 17 points.

But we arent talking about naked ships.

To get to 17 you had to throw (theoretical) upgrades on the vic. And I'm guessing that was a two.

What about a vic one at speed three? That thing would be a monster, and you could make workable for under 90 points, easy. Thats a 20 pt savings on a naked ISD-1.

Brokeded.

Just now, Madaghmire said:

But we arent talking about naked ships.

To get to 17 you had to throw (theoretical) upgrades on the vic. And I'm guessing that was a two.

What about a vic one at speed three? That thing would be a monster, and you could make workable for under 90 points, easy. Thats a 30 pt savings on a naked ISD-1.

Brokeded.

You are correct, I meant to say, "Naked at that capability level", in regards to the other upgrade slots. A technical wording misstep that I will wholly own

20 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Well, I don't particularly disagree.... but I believe the Imps need a medium size gunner.... I've been posting about it for a while, I think the Vic could be patched (properly) to fit this roll, but I'd be willing to hear other ideas too...

IE my design:

LOL

2 hours ago, Darth Sanguis said:

(Turbolaser)
Engine Power Reroute

(nav) After you execute a speed-2 maneuver, you may exhaust this card to execute a speed-1 maneuver.

8 points

Brilliant, a double yawing speed 4 ET EPR CR90B! Dont even need Madine anymore for the rams OUTTA NOWHERE.

And also, there is that one guy who runs sensor teams MC30s thats interested in this...

30 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

Brilliant, a double yawing speed 4 ET EPR CR90B! Dont even need Madine anymore for the rams OUTTA NOWHERE.

And also, there is that one guy who runs sensor teams MC30s thats interested in this...

Let me try to work out what you're saying:



Firstly, the CR90 B would be unable to take both ETs and my hypothetical EPRs as EPRs require a Turbolaser slot, not ion.

So I'm not sure if that's what you meant?

With that in mind, I'm looking at the CR 90 A:


Looking closer I see what you're saying so to prevent usage of ETs after EPRs I'll add a clause to the hypothetical.

(Turbolaser)
Engine Power Reroute

(nav) After you execute a speed-2 maneuver, you may exhaust this card to execute a speed-1 maneuver. (add) You cannot perform another maneuver this activation.

8 points

Just now, Darth Sanguis said:

With this in mind, to prevent usage of ETs after EPRs I'll add a clause to the hypothetical.

(Turbolaser)
Engine Power Reroute

(nav) After you execute a speed-2 maneuver, you may exhaust this card to execute a speed-1 maneuver. (add) You cannot perform another maneuver this activation.

8 points

And now its becoming mouthful as you make concessions. Have you made concessions for all future ships as well? I really dont see what is so wrong with a speed 2 ship.

13 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

*snip*

The easiest way to accomplish what you're trying to do is a Minister Tua for support slots.

Edit: in my mind that implied "medium-ship-only Minister Tua for support slots". Editing to make that clear- in hindsight it's not. Maybe some people see ET on Quasars as a major problem, but I don't, really.

I echo this, however:

12 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

Have you made concessions for all future ships as well? I really dont see what is so wrong with a speed 2 ship.

2 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

And now its becoming mouthful as you make concessions. Have you made concessions for all future ships as well? I really dont see what is so wrong with a speed 2 ship.

I don't think this is any more a mouthful than many of the official FFG upgrades, and it's certainly not the only card to state specific conditions with the effect.

-Leia(commander)
-Admiral Chiraneau
-Admiral Montferrat
-Gunnery team
-Fire control team
-Rapid launch bays
-Grav shift reroutes
-Independence
-Insidious
-Task force Antilles
-Task force Organa


There may be ship designs that speed 2 is good for, for the VIC, it's a severe limitation.

1 hour ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Looking closer I see what you're saying so to prevent usage of ETs after EPRs I'll add a clause to the hypothetical.

(Turbolaser)
Engine Power Reroute

(nav) After you execute a speed-2 maneuver, you may exhaust this card to execute a speed-1 maneuver. (add) You cannot perform another maneuver this activation.

8 points

That's fine. I will do a speed 2 maneuver and both effects trigger after it. So i will first resolve the ET and after this the EPR .

32 minutes ago, Tokra said:

That's fine. I will do a speed 2 maneuver and both effects trigger after it. So i will first resolve the ET and after this the EPR .

TRIPLE RAM

20 minutes ago, Tokra said:

That's fine. I will do a speed 2 maneuver and both effects trigger after it. So i will first resolve the ET and after this the EPR .

Nice.... I guess we're doing this...



(Turbolaser)
Engine Power Reroute

(nav) Before the determine course step of your first maneuver, if you are speed-2 or lower, you may temporarily increase your speed by one, if you do, you cannot perform another maneuver this activation.

8 points



I suppose I shouldn't be as annoyed as I am.

Why would it be surprising that, instead of recognizing the core concept and accepting that it could be worded properly if given enough attention, people decide to nit-pick at the mechanical functionality of the specific example I provided?

16 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Nice.... I guess we're doing this...



(Turbolaser)
Engine Power Reroute

(nav) Before the determine course step of your first maneuver, if you are speed-2 or lower, you may temporarily increase your speed by one, if you do, you cannot perform another maneuver this activation.

8 points



I suppose I shouldn't be as annoyed as I am.

Why would it be surprising that, instead of recognizing the core concept and accepting that it could be worded properly if given enough attention, people decide to nit-pick at the mechanical functionality of the specific example I provided?

I think because you're the only one in the thread who seems to find issue with the Vic going speed 2. With all the new upgrades it's getting, speed 2 is fine. Yes you have to pay for dcaps and leading shots, but that's 6 dice per ship at long range, which will HURT a lot of small bases, especially if you can get an accuracy against their main important defense tokens (brace or scatter, say).

Instead of focusing on what the Vic is NOT, why not focus on the fact that it's a great long range artillery piece that can hold together if it ends up in the middle of the fight? Put it as the anvil of a hammer and anvil list (with a glad or ISD as the hammer) and it'll be great for it's role.

27 minutes ago, geek19 said:

I think because you're the only one in the thread who seems to find issue with the Vic going speed 2.

Qualified immediately by this:

27 minutes ago, geek19 said:

With all the new upgrades it's getting, speed 2 is fine.

That's exactly my point.

I'm not the only one, folks just qualify the VSDs sluggishness with the patches they've made.

The problem is still there, "but they've added this and that and now they can get rerolls and 6 dice at long range and so on and so on..."

The issue isn't the VSD's guns.... it has a great guns... it's not the hull value, squad value, engineering, shields or size either...

Everything wrong with the VSD is in the speed chart.

Turning ability wasn't great, they patched with JJ.

That was a good idea, JJ is awesome and is fairly effective.

But they never fixed the other issue, which is, it's the slowest ship in the game, and is forced into the role of "artillery" despite having perfect stats for mid-close range combat.

These new upgrades, D-caps and Quads, give blue at long range, offering rerolls and extra damage because they know it's not likely to keep up...

Which is fine, but why are they putting bandaids on parts of the ship that aren't flawed when they can patch it and be done by bumping the speed?

Do I like the new upgrades, sure, they're neat, they do neat things, I'm sure I'll use them (though not likely on the VSD), but this could have easily been circumvented by just finding a way to give the VIC a speed boost.

Not to mention, as I've said above, and in other threads, the empire needs a medium size ship that can keep up with the fight....

Just now, Darth Sanguis said:

Which is fine, but why are they putting bandaids on parts of the ship that aren't flawed when when can patch it and be done by bumping the speed?

Because that right there is the assumption that these fixes are specifically for and only useful and used on the Victory.

Which they aren't.

Just now, Drasnighta said:

Because that right there is the assumption that these fixes are specifically for and only useful and used on the Victory.

Which they aren't.

Eh, I have to give you that. It's true they do a wide variety of functions across both factions... to which my argument immediately changes to...

FFG PLS FIX THE VSD...

To which I'm normally hit with a list of new upgrades that "fix" the VSD and I go round and round.

3 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Not to mention, as I've said above, and in other threads, the empire needs a medium size ship that can keep up with the fight....

Why?

1 minute ago, Ginkapo said:

Why?

Konstantine.