26 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:Its like theres been an elephant in the room for sooooo long that the community just got used to it and eventually accepted a broken thing.
Over the years, the community learned how to kick the elephants *** after it got nerfed a bit. PWTs aren't the best game mechanic, but its not ruining the game.
There are worse things in X-Wing: TMG than them right now.
16 minutes ago, ObiWonka said:More or less correct. They play a different game, yes. But is it a broken game? No. Until they start winning everything everywhere, just play a different game against them and you'll be fine.
My lack of experience comes in to play here for sure.
Wasnt around for it but it really seems like full arc full range turrets are about as broken as the original decloak mechanic must have been.
That allowed a player to basically see the entire table after movements to almost guarantee either an arc dodge or a clear shot.
Turrets with no restrictions do kinda the same thing by just letting a player focus on target priority, action combos, and not flying off the map or right into someones arc.
To a new player its immediatly obvious how overpowered that is on a falcon, decimator, dash, or jump master.
Im not complaining about playing against it because it cant be beaten or anything like that. I have won a small handful of games against 3 dice or more PWTs as people call em.
Im more focusing on the idea that their current implementation in game doesnt really seem to make it a better game.
Edited by Boom Owl
22 minutes ago, kris40k said:Over the years, the community learned how to kick the elephants *** after it got nerfed a bit. PWTs aren't the best game mechanic, but its not ruining the game.
There are worse things in X-Wing: TMG than them right now.
Whats worse than full range full arc turrets?
Jumpmasters? Not sure those would be a problem at all without an auto aim turret. Sure the arc synergy matters but if they screw up im still taking a shot. In fact im pretty sure they would just be firesprays that can barrel roll and hard turn without a backward arc.
Edited by Boom Owl
9 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:Whats worse than full range full arc turrets?
That depends on whom you ask. A variety of answers might include...
I'm sure I missed a few. The sky is falling in a variety of directions (some of them opposite to each other), depending on whom you ask.
Edited by haslo2 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:Whats worse than full range full arc turrets?
Personally, I would say Jumpmasters, and not because they have a PWT, but because of the complete package that results in an unbalanced ship (dial, stats, available upgrades, etc.). They are primarily a problem when in-arc anyways, like with the old U-Boats build, old Dengar/Manaroo, Dengar/Tel, Rauboats, which all try to fight in-arc with torpedoes or Dengar's ability.
Fat Han isn't tearing up the boards anymore; he's retired these days. Dash does well, but he doesn't fall into the fullrange in common used builds; he has a hole. If you see RAC anymore, its because Kylo Ren is on board, not because of the "scary" PWT. People hate K-Wings because of them dropping bombs on your head or Miranda hitting you with a 5 die homing missile (in-arc), not because of the 2 die PWT which plinks off Autothrusters without even trying.
It's just not that much of an issue anymore, these days.
1 minute ago, Boom Owl said:Ok got it.
So the answer to why its not a huge problem is that I basically should not fly any of the cool little ships that dont have autothrusters.
Heh.
If that is what you took away from this thread, then that's what you do.
Or head to Reddit, r/xwingtmg, look up Paragoombaslayer (just look for posts downvoted into the negatives) and you two can commiserate about how horrible PWTs are.
Or, learn to fight them like everyone else has.
I recommend the last one. Cheers.
4 minutes ago, kris40k said:Heh.
If that is what you took away from this thread, then that's what you do.
Or head to Reddit, r/xwingtmg, look up Paragoombaslayer (just look for posts downvoted into the negatives) and you two can commiserate about how horrible PWTs are.
Or, learn to fight them like everyone else has.
I recommend the last one. Cheers.
Apologize if i got snarky.
Definitely taking the last one as the main approach! Your ultimately right about this.
But still holding out hope that FFG does more than just autothrusters to scale back PWTs.
Edited by Boom OwlX-wing 2nd edition:
This would all come out in a conversion box that would be all cards and cardboard. 1st edition expansion packs would be discontinued and 2nd edition expansion packs would be rolled out for each ship. If you already have a huge fleet you could just buy the conversion box. If you are new to the game you could start buying the 2nd edition ex packs.
I know its not going to happen... but a man can dream
Oh look, someone waay smarter than me is already working on it
34 minutes ago, KommanderKeldoth said:X-wing 2nd edition:
- When defending, if you are out of the attacker's firing arc, roll one additional defense die (like being at range 3)
- Secondary weapons do not ignore range bonuses
- Engine upgrade is small ship only
- Critical hits require 2 evade results to cancel (a single evade result downgrades it to a regular hit. This would help to keep 2 dice attacks relevant and it would make green dice fortressing harder). Cards that convert hits to critical hits would be rare/expensive/hard to use.
- 200 point standard format with doubled costs (i.e. allow for more granularity in costing upgrades)
- Re-jigger costs, pilot abilities and upgrade cards
This would all come out in a conversion box that would be all cards and cardboard. 1st edition expansion packs would be discontinued and 2nd edition expansion packs would be rolled out for each ship. If you already have a huge fleet you could just buy the conversion box. If you are new to the game you could start buying the 2nd edition ex packs.
I know its not going to happen... but a man can dream
These are some of the most reasonable changes I've seen suggested. Bravo. Though for Engine Upgrade, I'd rather change the large-base Boost rules like the Barrel Roll rules: set the template outside the opposite nub instead of between them, creating a much smaller turn (almost a pivot, really), likewise use the template sideways for a straight Boost.
2 minutes ago, ObiWonka said:These are some of the most reasonable changes I've seen suggested. Bravo. Though for Engine Upgrade, I'd rather change the large-base Boost rules like the Barrel Roll rules: set the template outside the opposite nub instead of between them, creating a much smaller turn (almost a pivot, really), likewise use the template sideways for a straight Boost.
Thank you, sir! I actually can't really claim credit for most of them. It's more of a 'best hits' of things I have seen on the forums.
I am against large based ships having boost if only because it makes them absurdly fast due to how their bases work. Even with your suggestion you could have a shuttle outpacing an A-wing. The falcon deserves to have access to boost ('the fastest hunk of junk in the galaxy!') and the IG-2000 (because it has a slow dial). As it stands now engine upgrade is practically stapled to most large based ships due to how good it is for them.
Just now, KommanderKeldoth said:Thank you, sir! I actually can't really claim credit for most of them. It's more of a 'best hits' of things I have seen on the forums.
I am against large based ships having boost if only because it makes them absurdly fast due to how their bases work. Even with your suggestion you could have a shuttle outpacing an A-wing. The falcon deserves to have access to boost ('the fastest hunk of junk in the galaxy!') and the IG-2000 (because it has a slow dial). As it stands now engine upgrade is practically stapled to most large based ships due to how good it is for them.
Do hate engine, but mostly because it's so good on some ships that's aunto-include and costs a whooping 4 points!!! Always have a hard time fitting it into small ships lists due to the cost. From the screenshot of MajorJuggler's 2.0, engine upgrade is both cheaper and small ship only, so rejoice <3!
17 hours ago, HammerGibbens said:It's a design flaw and they recognise it as such. They're trying to correct it by making turrets and pilots that reward having your target in your arc (synced, Rey) or coming up with new mechanics entirely (mobile arc).
and
also the falcon had 2 turrets so unless you want to be managing 2 mobile firing arcs that was just better.
However if you want to complain about something complain how the boost and barrel roll combo (and pre-nerf decloaking) took all the guess work out of X-wing. Planning phase didn't mean much now that you can simply move out of arc after you reveal your dial when all the other dials were revealed.
But in short for the OP well if you don't want 1-3 range then you just got to get rid of primary weapons all together. The idea is that primary weapons provide range bonus at range 1 and 3.
3 hours ago, Boom Owl said:Whats worse than full range full arc turrets?
Turrets are not firing arcs.
2 hours ago, KommanderKeldoth said:X-wing 2nd edition:
- When defending, if you are out of the attacker's firing arc, roll one additional defense die (like being at range 3)
- Secondary weapons do not ignore range bonuses
- Engine upgrade is small ship only
- Critical hits require 2 evade results to cancel (a single evade result downgrades it to a regular hit. This would help to keep 2 dice attacks relevant and it would make green dice fortressing harder). Cards that convert hits to critical hits would be rare/expensive/hard to use.
- 200 point standard format with doubled costs (i.e. allow for more granularity in costing upgrades)
- Re-jigger costs, pilot abilities and upgrade cards
This would all come out in a conversion box that would be all cards and cardboard. 1st edition expansion packs would be discontinued and 2nd edition expansion packs would be rolled out for each ship. If you already have a huge fleet you could just buy the conversion box. If you are new to the game you could start buying the 2nd edition ex packs.
I know its not going to happen... but a man can dream
"When defending, if you are out of the attacker's firing arc, roll one additional defense die (like being at range 3)"
Actually, I would prefer "out of Arc" attack dice with different odds
"Secondary weapons do not ignore range bonuses"
I totally disagree with you here. I play a casual games where bonuses still apply to secondary weapons, and unfortunately it throws off the balance. Plus it gives secondaries a different feel.
"Engine upgrade is small ship only"
Again, disagree. However, I think large base ships should have their own maneuver templates.
"Critical hits require 2 evade results to cancel (a single evade result downgrades it to a regular hit."
I could agree with this if criticals were just one spot on the attack dice.
"200 point standard format with doubled costs"
"Re-jigger costs, pilot abilities and upgrade cards"
I am in complete agreement here. The entire point system needs an overhaul, some things are more valuable than were originally intended, and some things are way overpriced.
I would release it by wave. Core Set 2nd edition cards and cardboard. Then Wave 1 Second Edition cards and cardboard. Etc.. Etc..
Because they cost a lot. It works pretty well.
9 minutes ago, Jadotch said:
"Secondary weapons do not ignore range bonuses"
I totally disagree with you here. I play a casual games where bonuses still apply to secondary weapons, and unfortunately it throws off the balance. Plus it gives secondaries a different feel.
Yeah, I was imagining this change in conjunction with a re-working of ordnance in general to make missiles and torpedoes not require guidance chips to be good. As far as cannons and turrets go, I feel like that in the beginning they were primarily 'condition' dealers (ion cannon/turret) and so the range rule made sense. As the game went on you had stuff like mangler cannon and TLT added that just represent different kinds of blaster weapons. My logic is why shouldn't those blasters follow the same rules as the ship's primary blasters?
As rules and cards currently stand I can see why its too late to make that change.
Well, basically, way I see it - people sometimes forget as a Secondary Weapon turrets have been in the game since Wave 1. If you are 100% against the ability to fire out of arc period, X-Wing has never been the game for you. Most people aren't though, because secondary weapons have a couple of things (no range bonus, usually range limits, etc).
However, the turret secondary weapon basically set the standard for performing 360 attacks. You make an attack, even if it's outside your firing arc. Once you have this simple mechanic, it's probably hard to go back and make it more complex especially when you're adding just one ship with the PWT function. So the Falcon has the Primary Weapon Turret mechanic which is just making attacks out of arc. It's simple and does what you want, and doesn't get into the logistical pitfalls which happens if you think too hard about the Falcon's turrets (Like it has two, one ventral, one dorsal. Why can't it fire in multiple directions at once?). This then stuck as the standard for PWT and it pretty strongly fits the feel of the original films (thus, "fat turrets" are a strong strategy in the RPG too - Fire Arc: All is great). Later things complicated the issue which originally formed the classic "ship triangle" of Turrets, Jousters and Arc Dodgers to make them more prominent, but even now (and then) I'd argue mostly it's misuse of the PWT mechanic by ships which is the real pain. The underlying ability isn't "wrong" per say though. I mean, what else would you do, especially after writing ICT?
Also, Shadowcaster isn't actually an example of "how a PWT should be" because it's not actually a Primary Weapon Turret . It's a Fixed forward primary weapon and also has some primary weapons on a turret the pilot also controls, hence it's relatively unique mechanic.
19 hours ago, Boom Owl said:Why are full 360 range 1-3 turrets part of gameplay?
Because FFG collects and bottles the tears of nerd rage that exist for this very reason?
It's also a good excuse for those who can't adapt to turrets.
RoV
1 hour ago, Marinealver said:However if you want to complain about something complain how the boost and barrel roll combo (and pre-nerf decloaking) took all the guess work out of X-wing.
Agreed, I don't like reactive repositioning either. Change it in the same update that changes how PWTs work.
5 hours ago, Boom Owl said:trivialize significant portions of an otherwise interesting game.
Odd. That's exactly how I feel about 100/6 deathmatch XWM.
5 hours ago, KommanderKeldoth said:X-wing 2nd edition:
- When defending, if you are out of the attacker's firing arc, roll one additional defense die (like being at range 3)
-> Yes.
- Secondary weapons do not ignore range bonuses
-> maybe.... my 2 cents is a target lock removes range 3 bonus on any attack. After all, computer is helping you???
- Engine upgrade is small ship only
- >Agreed except the Falcon. "Fastest hunk of junk..." should mean something. Maybe a free barrel roll or boost on a title card
- Critical hits require 2 evade results to cancel (a single evade result downgrades it to a regular hit. This would help to keep 2 dice attacks relevant and it would make green dice fortressing harder). Cards that convert hits to critical hits would be rare/expensive/hard to use.
-> I like this!
- 200 point standard format with doubled costs (i.e. allow for more granularity in costing upgrades)
-> this should already be done. Just host a tournament with different requirements. Keep it fun. I am entering one in a few weeks that is a draft format. Really excited.
- Re-jigger costs, pilot abilities and upgrade cards
-> oh so agree! But a very slippery slope very slippery
10 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:Welcome to the boards, and have a cocktail...
9/10 for the analogy...
... you could have gotten 10 with:
10 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:I'll have mine shaken, not stunned .
7 hours ago, KommanderKeldoth said:
- Engine upgrade is small ship only
Or, alternatively:
"This upgrade costs 2 (3? 4?) additional squad points if equipped on a Large ship."