1 hour ago, skotothalamos said:

Pretty sure it’s A and there will be something in the rulebook that defines what a “bonus attack” is, and limits a ship to one bonus attack per turn to prevent triple-shot Bossk shenanigans.

Otherwise the words “as a bonus attack” on the card are a meaningless waste of space, and I feel like they are getting rid of those immediately.

As to whether it’s effective... maybe? QuickDraw tells me bonus shots are good, and if you can find a way to mod it (Predator, Force, the focus you didn’t spend on the first shot because you used the lock, etc) I think it’ll be just fine.

concur on the bonus attack likely being once per turn/once per phase.

we know saturation salvo spends missile charges, so maybe that works well with this? attack, spend a charge to salvo, spend a charge to bonus attack, spend another charge to salvo?

1 hour ago, skotothalamos said:

As to whether it’s effective... maybe? QuickDraw tells me bonus shots are good, and if you can find a way to mod it (Predator, Force, the focus you didn’t spend on the first shot because you used the lock, etc) I think it’ll be just fine. 

I think this is a major thing to remember. We know very very little about 2.0. We have had a few minor cards spoilt and people are trying to view things in a very 1.0 method. We are "used" to munitions hitting perfectly almost every time we fire them now because of token and passive mod stacking. In 2.0 this appears to have been toned down greatly, so even with just the force these could be very strong on a ship in a world where 2 dice attacks aren't "bad" again.

15 minutes ago, thelogicdump said:

I think this is a major thing to remember. We know very very little about 2.0. We have had a few minor cards spoilt and people are trying to view things in a very 1.0 method. We are "used" to munitions hitting perfectly almost every time we fire them now because of token and passive mod stacking. In 2.0 this appears to have been toned down greatly, so even with just the force these could be very strong on a ship in a world where 2 dice attacks aren't "bad" again.

That's the concern though, isn't it? 2 perfect 3 hit clusters doesn't cut the mustard in 1.0, where they can both be used on the same ship- Why would even less consistent missiles that force you to split fire be usable?

In comparison, 2.0 Protons are comparable to harpoons- Baked in EM possibly makes them better.

29 minutes ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

That's the concern though, isn't it? 2 perfect 3 hit clusters doesn't cut the mustard in 1.0, where they can both be used on the same ship- Why would even less consistent missiles that force you to split fire be usable? 

To use the same argument a perfect 2 dice attack from a tie fighter doesn't cut the mustard in 1.0. Why would it in V2? Basically because we don't know enough yet to understand stacking defence or offence etc. EG If you are up against 2 ships with reinforce and you roll damage and they blank out then even 1 damage is enough to get through. We just cannot write anything off yet about 2.0 with so little knowledge of anything.

31 minutes ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

In comparison, 2.0 Protons are comparable to harpoons- Baked in EM possibly makes them better. 

Maybe this is true? But maybe they are also 2-3 times as expensive because they are so good? Again without points costs everything is in a Schrödinger like situation. Both incredible and terrible at the same time. Until we know point costs and other upgrades we really cannot judge anything.

37 minutes ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

That's the concern though, isn't it? 2 perfect 3 hit clusters doesn't cut the mustard in 1.0, where they can both be used on the same ship- Why would even less consistent missiles that force you to split fire be usable?

In comparison, 2.0 Protons are comparable to harpoons- Baked in EM possibly makes them better.

IIRC cluster also doesn't spend the TL, so at least one of your shots will be modified. And on Vader, you could have TL and focus, so you could have a mod for each shot if you want. As for being forced to split fire; sure, it won't always be ideal, but maybe you have a ship at 1 hull (maybe 2 if it's low agility). You could kill the first one then get another shot on a different ship.

4 minutes ago, thelogicdump said:

To use the same argument a perfect 2 dice attack from a tie fighter doesn't cut the mustard in 1.0. Why would it in V2? Basically because we don't know enough yet to understand stacking defence or offence etc. EG If you are up against 2 ships with reinforce and you roll damage and they blank out then even 1 damage is enough to get through. We just cannot write anything off yet about 2.0 with so little knowledge of anything.

Maybe this is true? But maybe they are also 2-3 times as expensive because they are so good? Again without points costs everything is in a Schrödinger like situation. Both incredible and terrible at the same time. Until we know point costs and other upgrades we really cannot judge anything.

Ackshually.jpg

We know the point costs of a handful of upgrades. Protons cost 8, R2-D2 costs 10. Basically, Protons don't change as of the first draft of the app seen in the videos. (Due to the new 200 point scale)

I guess the inconsistency of offense on 2.0 clusters is potentially countered by 2.0's inconsistent defense across the board.

My main issue/concern of the viability of Clusters is mostly their inability to focus fire though- That alone I feel will regale them to uselessness. Look at Baze- Being forced to split fire is terrible. I feel as if they would likely have to be at Basically-Free levels of cost to compare.

3 minutes ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

My main issue/concern of the viability of Clusters is mostly their inability to focus fire though- That alone I feel will regale them to uselessness. Look at Baze- Being forced to split fire is terrible. I feel as if they would likely have to be at Basically-Free levels of cost to compare. 

Yes Baze feels bad in 1.0 no doubt. But that is largely because we have Gunner allowing for a double tap on the same target if required and because of token stacking it is primarily to punch through the tokens. EG Gunner against dual VCX's also feels super bad. However if gunner didn't exist then Baze would feel much better because it may be our only "double tap" option.

Because we have an existing reference it feels bad, but we know so little about 1.0 we cannot form that reference yet. I am not saying clusters are good, I am just saying they aren't worth writing off until we know final points.

And as for points in the video they have said the first thing they did was just go through and double all the points from V1.0 and then adjust from there. Obviously R2-D2 got an early bump but we still have no concept of final points.

Also, Cluster has 4 energy, so you get a lot of shots, and it's no worse than a normal 3 die attack. It basically lets you do your normal attack, but get a free second shot at another ship.

So much that we don't know about the rules and how things work, so many folk jumping to swivel eyed assumptions that this or that new card is broken or DOA.

We simply do not know the detail of v2, we don't know what a bonus attack is, how force works, what points costs things have. We don't know what other cards, and counter play options there are for the things that have been spoiled. The main thing that we haven't seen is the main new rules book.

Just chill out, enjoy the run in, devour the information, but don't Rek yourself over half baked knowledge

4 hours ago, VanderLegion said:

IIRC cluster also doesn't spend the TL, so at least one of your shots will be modified. And on Vader, you could have TL and focus, so you could have a mod for each shot if you want. As for being forced to split fire; sure, it won't always be ideal, but maybe you have a ship at 1 hull (maybe 2 if it's low agility). You could kill the first one then get another shot on a different ship.

I suspect this is the primary usage for it. Since the shots will be minimally modified, it seems more about splashing into low AGI support ships than TIE Fighter swarms.

it also may have a role as a utility upgrade the way snapshot is used on ezra to double stress a target, clusters might end up just being a means to apply debuffs across multiple targets.

1 hour ago, RynoZero said:

it also may have a role as a utility upgrade the way snapshot is used on ezra to double stress a target, clusters might end up just being a means to apply debuffs across multiple targets.

Assuming R3-A2 is a thing, which I'm not expecting.

My assumption on clusters - they will only be good against low agility targets (no complaints) or in very set squads (force users or Palpatine present to modify results.) - I am ok with being wrong on this, but that's my gut feeling.

With all the charges these munitions have, I'm worried we're going to hit a new age of alpha, initializing the PS race once more and supporting twice the alpha potential. I'm likely one of the few who preferred the gunfighter style of fighter-to-fighter combat the movies focus on rather than modern aviation-styled missile mayhem that later X-Wing sims introduced.

4 minutes ago, LagJanson said:

Assuming R3-A2 is a thing, which I'm not expecting.

My assumption on clusters - they will only be good against low agility targets (no complaints) or in very set squads (force users or Palpatine present to modify results.) - I am ok with being wrong on this, but that's my gut feeling.

With all the charges these munitions have, I'm worried we're going to hit a new age of alpha, initializing the PS race once more and supporting twice the alpha potential. I'm likely one of the few who preferred the gunfighter style of fighter-to-fighter combat the movies focus on rather than modern aviation-styled missile mayhem that later X-Wing sims introduced.

Remember, it also appears we're entering an era where more ships can boost, and less ships can multi-action.

So, while the threat of an alpha exists, the argument that you have to "let them" might be even more true, for many squads and ships.

Just now, Tlfj200 said:

Remember, it also appears we're entering an era where more ships can boost, and less ships can multi-action.

So, while the threat of an alpha exists, the argument that you have to "let them" might be even more true, for many squads and ships.

Yep. Plus, there is much we don't know still, so any analysis at this point is based on incomplete data. Call it a concern, at best, based on past experiences.

1 minute ago, LagJanson said:

Yep. Plus, there is much we don't know still, so any analysis at this point is based on incomplete data. Call it a concern, at best, based on past experiences.

I mean, that's fair - we all remember the world of heavy alpha being the dominant strategy. I just have hope that this Brave New World™ will have useful ordinance without leading to overpowered alpha broadly.

2 hours ago, Biophysical said:

I suspect this is the primary usage for it. Since the shots will be minimally modified, it seems more about splashing into low AGI support ships than TIE Fighter swarms.

This.

Putting 1.0 out of my mind and just attempting a macro look at game mechanics, I believe secondary weapon’s —by definition— should be quite good against large targets, but in contrast practically worthless against space superiority fighters; least that’s the way I see it working best.

11 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

I believe secondary weapon’s —by definition— should be quite good against large targets

I wonder if Secondary Weapons could have a "different" type of target lock that is easier to obtain on big base ships than small base fighters.

Just now, Boom Owl said:

I wonder if Secondary Weapons could have a "different" type of target lock that is easier to obtain on big base ships than small base fighters.

Unlikely, but possible. I can hear the cries "Token Creep!" now...

10 minutes ago, LagJanson said:

Unlikely, but possible. I can hear the cries "Token Creep!" now...

My favorite recent quote: "2.0 looks boring, its just arcs and X-Wings vs Tie Fighters"

7 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

My favorite recent quote: "2.0 looks boring, its just arcs and X-Wings vs Tie Fighters"

Where the heck? Who the.... Maybe a knowledgeable Fenn/Lothal player who can explain to us all the many nuances of the list?

12 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

My favorite recent quote: "2.0 looks boring, its just arcs and X-Wings vs Tie Fighters"

31 minutes ago, LagJanson said:

Where the heck? Who the.... Maybe a knowledgeable Fenn/Lothal player who can explain to us all the many nuances of the list?

Im 99% sure they were just trolling me.

43 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

My favorite recent quote: "2.0 looks boring, its just arcs and X-Wings vs Tie Fighters"

To be fair, if the game was literally just arcs and X-Wings vs. TIE Fighters, it would be kind of boring.

4 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

Im 99% sure they were just trolling me.

Oh, ok. That's fine then. Phew!

1 hour ago, LagJanson said:

Unlikely, but possible. I can hear the cries "Token Creep!" now...

To anyone who had local sloppy (or straight up cheating) players with extra munitions and shields, adding extra token types like force and charge is a scary prospect.

We ran our worst offender out after he was caught cheating on stream at Canadian Nat (going 6-0 in swiss), but I doubt there's a lack of other players like him. The fact that he was generally unpleasant on top of it was just a very bad cherry on that sundae. My solution was always to beat him quickly and be done with him for the day. Thankfully, my son never had to play him...