33 minutes ago, rogue_09 said:

Where you see "forced", most of us see "encouraged".

The nice thing is, nothing is requiring you to use dice results as only narrative guidance. You can always default to Advantages/Triumphs=Boosts/Upgrades and Threat/Despair=Setbacks/Upgrades without narrative fluff and call it a day.

I guess its you say tomato i say tomato thing, of course with English/American accents:P While the basic combat is okish and though the Starship combat is similar i have a certain dislike to talent trees which i feel generates cookie cutter characters and that pilots can easily be overwhelmed once you have more than one opponent as you cannot direct you basic action to encompass more than one. Also the set action alternatives for the pilot i find very basic and lacks the maneuvers i see in the SW dogfights. Barrel rolls, bootleg turns. Trying to outfox your enemies with skillful tactics and creativity. Hopefully my last two posts clarify me as a person that does want the system improved and shows i am not a hater.

Absolutely! It's been an interesting discussion to read. In the end, we have three very different and viable base systems for Star Wars that we can all use and borrow from as we see fit. With FFG, the d6 Holocron and my old Saga Edition books, I have decades worth of games I can create.

To speak to the lack of pilot actions, I think the intention is for the 'Gain the Advantage' action and 'Evasive Maneuvers'...maneuver... to cover the majority of what you're describing. It just needs some descriptive fluff. When my pilot player says he's performing Evasive Maneuvers, I ask him *how* he's evasively maneuvering. That could very well be a barrel roll or bootleg turn.

does not lack those things. Those are all a part of evasive manuevers, gain the advantage. And the Koigan turn in the Hotshot tree etc. The difference is this system does not have 500 different manuevers. it has a couple basic concepts and the manuevers are handled by the narrative. You basically perform a mechanic and describe it how you like. IE I do a gain the advantage. Then describe it as a high yoyo.

2 hours ago, splad said:

Quite honestly it's more passion than venom. i would like to see the problems addressed and fixed so i can use it. I Still buy the FFG line not for mechanics but because they have great source material and i like their different approach in certain aspects to the Star Wars Galaxy. I am not the only one who see the problem and a discussion has ensued and some rule issues i have seen in new light and work arounds that will shave allot of aggravation and time off using this system to emulate Star Wars as i see it.

Source material for what exactly? Nearly everything has better sources in WEG material, a few things got upgraded to new canon and prequel additions, but in essence those sourcebooks are completely centered around mechanics. Stats for X, Y and Z-Wing here, new weapons there, pistol duels, spending advantages in nebulas, asteroid fields, larger spacebattles, urban battlefields, close quarter battles, trenches, whatever. The mechanics of the system are a central part in everything within the system, extending even into the narrative or so simple things like buying a house. There are literally rules for that, with mechanical boni, tables and all. And it is in each source book the same. New species, new specs, new gear, a few new mechanics specific to the topic at hand, and basically less informations on the fluff than a wookieepedia entry would deliver. Lastly some encounters with fitting description how to handle such situations mechanically.

Are the mechanics perfect? Not even close, but if you keep buying those books, you are buying mostly just into the mechanical aspects of the system. FFG does nearly never release original content in their RPG books, they merely give stats.

20 minutes ago, SEApocalypse said:

Source material for what exactly? Nearly everything has better sources in WEG material, a few things got upgraded to new canon and prequel additions, but in essence those sourcebooks are completely centered around mechanics. Stats for X, Y and Z-Wing here, new weapons there, pistol duels, spending advantages in nebulas, asteroid fields, larger spacebattles, urban battlefields, close quarter battles, trenches, whatever. The mechanics of the system are a central part in everything within the system, extending even into the narrative or so simple things like buying a house. There are literally rules for that, with mechanical boni, tables and all. And it is in each source book the same. New species, new specs, new gear, a few new mechanics specific to the topic at hand, and basically less informations on the fluff than a wookieepedia entry would deliver. Lastly some encounters with fitting description how to handle such situations mechanically.

Are the mechanics perfect? Not even close, but if you keep buying those books, you are buying mostly just into the mechanical aspects of the system. FFG does nearly never release original content in their RPG books, they merely give stats.

I am talking sourcebooks like this! Which explore new content like the Temple on Lothal.

The temple of lothal is not new content, but just taken straight out of Star Wars: Rebels season 1.
Most "new" content of Nexus of Power is taken straight out of Dave Filoni and Pablo Hidalgo's Feather. Just with new stats and mechanics.
And if it was not from TCW or Rebels than it was most likely something popular in legends. ;-)

3 hours ago, splad said:

While the basic combat is okish and though the Starship combat is similar i have a certain dislike to talent trees which i feel generates cookie cutter characters and that pilots can easily be overwhelmed once you have more than one opponent as you cannot direct you basic action to encompass more than one. Also the set action alternatives for the pilot i find very basic and lacks the maneuvers i see in the SW dogfights. Barrel rolls, bootleg turns. Trying to outfox your enemies with skillful tactics and creativity. Hopefully my last two posts clarify me as a person that does want the system improved and shows i am not a hater.

Aileron rolls, etc > Evasive Maneuvers or spending one advantage on Elusive.
Barrel rolls > taking Evasive Maneuvers twice or spending two advantages on Tuck and Roll.
Bootleg turns > Koiogran Turn maneuver, literally.
Outsmarting > Spend a Triumph on Where'd They Go?

The solution to getting overwhelmed by larger amounts of opponents? Gain the Advantage. Position yourself somewhere in relation to the fire arcs of your enemies which does not allow them to fire. For example is staying on the six of a flight group of enemy fighters a safe bet to not get shot by them. It forces them to take the Gain the Advantage action instead. The ability to spend triumphs to gain GtA extra targets in some environments comes especially handy in larger spacebattles to gain more control over the battle, but options like to remove targets temporary from battle or provoke collisions, hide in the clouds of a nebula or outmaneuver targets based on triumphs spend or become much harder to hit, etc … it is all there and gives pilots the much needed control. A lot of fancy maneuvers are just in the narrative dice. That is the core concept of the system, instead of telling the GM what you try to do and then roll some dice to see if you succeed, you roll some dice and tell the GM based on that what you are doing.

I wholeheartedly can recommend the suggestions in the "DOGFIGHT TERRAIN" chapter of Stay on Target, p.77, together with Stellar Terrain in AoR-CRB p. 251, Table 7-6 and 7-7.

1 hour ago, SEApocalypse said:

Gain the Advantage. Position yourself somewhere in relation to the fire arcs of your enemies which does not allow them to fire. For example is staying on the six of a flight group of enemy fighters a safe bet to not get shot by them. It forces them to take the Gain the Advantage action instead.

I don't think GtA will prevent them from firing at you, you just have the capacity to ignore evasive maneuvers and choose wich arc you shoot, but this last part is useless against TIEs. Even if you GtA, that will not prevent them to fire at you... GtA unfortunatly won't make you harder to hit :-/

1 hour ago, SEApocalypse said:

The temple of lothal is not new content, but just taken straight out of Star Wars: Rebels season 1.
Most "new" content of Nexus of Power is taken straight out of Dave Filoni and Pablo Hidalgo's Feather. Just with new stats and mechanics.
And if it was not from TCW or Rebels than it was most likely something popular in legends. ;-)

It is new content in print which is what i'm getting at and explored by FFG. Let's not debate semantics when it's obviously never hit the shelves anywhere else.

11 minutes ago, Rosco74 said:

I don't think GtA will prevent them from firing at you, you just have the capacity to ignore evasive maneuvers and choose wich arc you shoot, but this last part is useless against TIEs. Even if you GtA, that will not prevent them to fire at you... GtA unfortunatly won't make you harder to hit :-/

Quote

#2: Which firing arc is allowed to shoot at a ship is entirely handled narratively, and thus is up to the GM based on where the ships have ended up relative to each other. In the case of Gain the Advantage, the ship with Advantage is keeping itself in a favorable position relative to the targeted ship, so in this case it is likely that the targeted ship would be limited to just the weapons in the firing arc the ship with Advantage is staying in. Though the GM is always the final arbiter of this based on the specifics of the story.

Andrew Fischer
RPG Producer
Fantasy Flight Games

Ok it's nowhere is the rules, none of the 3 corebooks, it is his own interpretation. If we have to dig in the forum about Devs explanation on every single rule and how they interpret them we are far from done. When they will publish a Faq then yes it will be official rules

49 minutes ago, SEApocalypse said:

Just such bad parenting rules. Needs a significant upgrade in layout so you can see options of rules as you progress through the phases in combat. And to hunt down rules like this to make sense of this is insane. I would applaud an online print of updated concise rules from ffg

3 hours ago, splad said:

Just such bad parenting rules. Needs a significant upgrade in layout so you can see options of rules as you progress through the phases in combat. And to hunt down rules like this to make sense of this is insane. I would applaud an online print of updated concise rules from ffg

Absolutely.

Unfortunately FFGs licence is based very old contracts and is limited by the exclusive electron arts license for digital games, which is the sole reason for the lack of a PDF version of the books as well. Editing was never a strength of FFG either and the rules for FFGSWRPG are especially scattered. The rules for how armor works was under revision for quite some time for example with conflicting developer options on them, the revised rules themselves are currently to be found in a Genesys rules guidlines set from this years gencon. Talk about obscure, but even rules and mechanics within the regular publications are … well scattered through the three Star Wars RPG lines and dozen of sourcebooks. Does not help either that the Online FAQ does not get updated and that most of the interesting FAQ entries would be from the forum sticky anyway.

Speaking of conflicting developer opinions, in one of the order 66 podcasts iirc Sam, says something different about GtA. So here is up to the GM to choose which interpretation he follows as well, imho allowing to stick to an fire arc and position of an opposing ship makes a lot of sense, and that I am aware of to cases of developer supporting this idea and just one case when they decided that this would not work.
On top does Andrew Fischer's interpretation of GtA solve party the lethality of space combat in one-seater fighters and makes the pilot skill extremely important in dogfights. So it just feels right and simulates the same thing I would do in space combat sims myself - stick to the six of my target or evade weapon fire by going out of my way of enemy fire by sticking to a side outside of their turrets arc, etc … the system can simulate this if you use GtA as central piece of the dog fight positioning.

I thought about it, and it seems to be a good option in the first place. If you chose the rear of this TIE for your incoming shots after succeeded at GtA against him, then you are just behind and he can't shoot back..

With a new rule, a new problem unfortunatly. If you prevent someone from shooting back as soon as his ennemy succeed at GtA in a dogfight, the first round and initiative will be even more important and maybe critical. Even the best pilot across the galaxy won't change the odds as the piloting skill is irrelevant of the difficulty when someone try to GtA against you. An average difficulty for same speed, against a minion TIE or against Vador himself it is the same difficulty.

I think every little house rule like this one might have lots of consequences that doesn't appear immediatly, and it can reveal flaws and unbalances. For exemple you may think that changing the GtA check for an opposed check is more effective, I tried that and the consequences where you roll against lots of red dice and the despair started to appear on every single GtA check... this took hours to explain and resolve those. So finally I ended up just using the Adversary talent for GtA check against Npc. In the previous case Vador with 3 Adversary would boost the difficulty from 2 sad purples.

But yes a triumph might do that, position yourself on the six of that ennemy, I like a lot and will try

The problem with the interpretation that GtA limits return fire (aside from nothing in the actual book backing it up) is that a turn covers a fair amount of time and lots of maneuvers. At Close GtA might be able to keep you out of arcs, but it makes far less sense beyond that.

Consider an X-wing at Long range closing nose to nose with two ISDs that are within Short range of each other. GtA would somehow enable the X-wing to slip in behind one ISD but not the other ISD while still maintaining the range. This is beyond stupid as the X-wing simply can't pick up that much speed in an "orbital pass" around the massive vessel at Long range, and why are the ISDs now facing the same way but they have the fighter in a nonsense zone that is Long range from the Fore of one and the Aft of the other while both ISDs are still within Short of one another.

I strongly suggest only allowing GTA against opponents within Close range. That fix prevents the stupidity I described above.