21 minutes ago, Azrapse said:A beam attack as an action could be nuts. At least, shouldn't it say "You cannot attack again this round." at the end? Otherwise you are giving double taps to everyone, and Ruthlessness becomes autoinclude.
This modification would be crazy on low PS ship, able to land tractor and jam tokens on aces that have not had the chance to activate and get any tokens for defense...
At least: "you can't attack again this phase".
33 minutes ago, Azrapse said:A beam attack as an action could be nuts. At least, shouldn't it say "You cannot attack again this round." at the end?
Nah, because it's meant to work the way it worked in the games. Where you'd Jamming Beam or Tractor Beam your target and then rail them with your guns while still holding them with the beam.
Neither of the beams deal damage, so I don't really consider it a "double tap".
6 minutes ago, DarthEnderX said:Nah, because it's meant to work the way it worked in the games. Where you'd Jamming Beam or Tractor Beam your target and then rail them with your guns while still holding them with the beam.
Neither of the beams deal damage, so I don't really consider it a "double tap".
Don't let TIE/D defenders equip this mod or that's gonna hurt.
On 22/08/2017 at 0:38 AM, lntrn8 said:Wow ... They were VERY different ships....the Missile Boat had 1... ONE laser cannon which was the secondary weapon....its primary weapon were the concussion missiles, and a lot of them! Once the missiles ran out, the Missile Boat was not an effective striker at all.
i still would love to see the Missile Boat somewhere here, and not rolled into the Gunboat.
Just use a 3d printed Missile Boat miniature when equipping the OS-1 title. 
(I guess @Mel Miniatures' sells of Gunboats will be replaced by Missile Boats)
While I don't play Imperial I will most likely get one just because they are cool looking. 
1 hour ago, Azrapse said:A beam attack as an action could be nuts. At least, shouldn't it say "You cannot attack again this round." at the end? Otherwise you are giving double taps to everyone, and Ruthlessness becomes autoinclude.
This modification would be crazy on low PS ship, able to land tractor and jam tokens on aces that have not had the chance to activate and get any tokens for defense...
Because it's only fair to assign debuffs like crazy if you are scum? How is the shadowcaster better?
It should be easier to trigger ruthlessness twice in a round. There is a reason why you don't see ruthlessness everywhere, and that is because it is usually not worth it.
On 8/22/2017 at 4:43 AM, FTS Gecko said:It's not a big deal.
Getting the ship in the game is a big deal.
Seriously. Only here could people whine for YEARS about not having something and then whine that it's wrong when they get it.
If you're gonna act like a 3 year old, go play Chutes and Ladders.
Edited by Darth MeanieOn 8/21/2017 at 9:51 PM, lntrn8 said:I know ... Like the YT-1300, but it has a title card "Millennium Falcon". The YT-2400 has a title card "The Outrider", etc.. I was hoping for a title card or some reference referring to "Assault Gunboat"
I feel like you don't understand how names work...
Edited by PastrySandwichit's a possibility that the terms "gunboat", "assault gunboat", "missile boat", etc. were considered too generic to be registered with trademarks or that some other entity owns that title. It's not an unusual situation, especially as a Transformers fan where many that had simple names in the past now come out with the "Autobot" or "Decepticon" in front of the name in order to make it trademarkable, such as "Autobot Tracks" or "Autobot Gears"
X-Wing Minis game also has a tradition of marketing ship expansions by their specific class name, NOT their common nicknames. Most people couldn't tell you what a "Jumpmaster 5000" is, but they have heard of Punishing One; same with the YT-series ships and the other bounty hunter ships. This is a case where they are marketing it by its official name, not the nickname, which is consistent. throwing a fit over the fact they do not call it by its nickname is ridiculous.
11 hours ago, Azrapse said:The Gunboat could equip beam weapons. Any. You were only limited to the assortment of them offered to you for the mission. So to speak, there was the Beam weapon slot, and four ships in that game had it (GUN, T/A, T/D and MIS).
Really all the ships in TIE Fighter BUT the actual fighter had a space in the cockpit for beam weapon display (and the shield display too) but Bombers and Interceptors weren't given them in the official missions.
However i used to edit the FAQ out of that game and design missions that gave Bombers shields and beam weapons just so I could route the power to the engines and fly faster than A-wings and almost keep up with Defenders. I didn't need no stinking SLAM.
5 hours ago, cpdilloway said:it's a possibility that the terms "gunboat", "assault gunboat", "missile boat", etc. were considered too generic to be registered with trademarks or that some other entity owns that title. It's not an unusual situation, especially as a Transformers fan where many that had simple names in the past now come out with the "Autobot" or "Decepticon" in front of the name in order to make it trademarkable, such as "Autobot Tracks" or "Autobot Gears"
X-Wing Minis game also has a tradition of marketing ship expansions by their specific class name, NOT their common nicknames. Most people couldn't tell you what a "Jumpmaster 5000" is, but they have heard of Punishing One; same with the YT-series ships and the other bounty hunter ships. This is a case where they are marketing it by its official name, not the nickname, which is consistent. throwing a fit over the fact they do not call it by its nickname is ridiculous.
Interesting theory.
I have to agree that 'Assault Gunboat' is way too generic to slap a copyright onto. Loot at what has happened with the Space Marines and Imperial Guard, they're now Astra whatevers. You can't take a very generic name out of the public domain unless you were the one to put it into the public domain.
That being said, I can see arguments for both sides here.
The Imperials (and FFG) generally gave their fighters names based either on their function (Fighter, Bomber, Interceptor) or something mean sounding (Aggressor, Defender, Punisher). The Rebels tended to be the ones who named their craft after what it looked like. The official designations of TIE/ln and whatnot were usually left to the OCD folks at the Wook to fight over. Cygnus craft also tended to have Greek names associated with them (Lambda class). Therefore Alpha class Assault Gunboat is the logical name for a single ship.
But this is no longer a single ship. This is a highly modular ship that can take on multiple roles depending on what the mission calls for it. It is somewhat like the Black Hawk helicopter. One of the roles it can play is a dedicated gunship, but it can also be outfitted as a medical evacuation platform, command and control, and transport function.
In an effort to meld the old canon with the new, perhaps the Assault Gunboat was the variant in use on Imperial Star Destroyers and was 75% of what was fielded by the Empire (and by the looks of things it will be 75% of what players field on the table until the other cards are revealed. Therefore, in an effort to differentiate it from its other roles, the designation of Assault Gunboat was given to one, and the other two were known for whatever roles they received. But honestly, you can't name a fighter that can now fill so many shoes with a title that just covers one.
4 minutes ago, flyboymb said:I have to agree that 'Assault Gunboat' is way too generic to slap a copyright onto. Loot at what has happened with the Space Marines and Imperial Guard, they're now Astra whatevers. You can't take a very generic name out of the public domain unless you were the one to put it into the public domain.
I think that supports the legal theory. If it's so generic that they can't copyright it, then it gains unparalleled popularity (because Gunboat), they are powerless when trying to protect the name.
I just really can't buy into the whole 'somebody upstairs hates the Gunboat so they changed the name' theory. The release was given with a wink and a nudge to the forum and Reddit threads demanding it be brought to the game. You can't publicly link the 2 like that and not expect whatever hateful exec to not put 2 and 2 together and put some devs out on the street. Honestly, any exec that would normally veto such a thing but is so easily fooled is probably not worth having around because if he/she isn't looking over the details then they're likely to rubber stamp a card or ship that looks like a rocket 'back massager' and the company as a whole catches flak when it hits the market.
I mean in the end this is Disney at the very top. They don't have a great track record of finding inadvertently (or even blatantly) raunchy stuff in their products, but you'd think they'd have learned to really look for that kind of stuff by now and make sure their subsidiaries give the same amount of oversight on their products. The executive that raises a fuss about the Gunboat then allows the Gunboat to be released behind their back is likely going to be going on a 2 person fishing trip with the mouse out to the middle of the lake (every time I put my line in the water, I sang the Mickey Mouse Club song, and every time I sang the Mickey Mouse Club song I caught a fish).
5 hours ago, flyboymb said:I just really can't buy into the whole 'somebody upstairs hates the Gunboat so they changed the name' theory. The release was given with a wink and a nudge to the forum and Reddit threads demanding it be brought to the game. You can't publicly link the 2 like that and not expect whatever hateful exec to not put 2 and 2 together and put some devs out on the street. Honestly, any exec that would normally veto such a thing but is so easily fooled is probably not worth having around because if he/she isn't looking over the details then they're likely to rubber stamp a card or ship that looks like a rocket 'back massager' and the company as a whole catches flak when it hits the market.
I mean in the end this is Disney at the very top. They don't have a great track record of finding inadvertently (or even blatantly) raunchy stuff in their products, but you'd think they'd have learned to really look for that kind of stuff by now and make sure their subsidiaries give the same amount of oversight on their products. The executive that raises a fuss about the Gunboat then allows the Gunboat to be released behind their back is likely going to be going on a 2 person fishing trip with the mouse out to the middle of the lake (every time I put my line in the water, I sang the Mickey Mouse Club song, and every time I sang the Mickey Mouse Club song I caught a fish).
Logic like this is why I'm leaning into "They wanted a trademarkable name" 'legal reasons' camp. To date the only other 'generic' names have been Attack Shuttle (Released as part of the Ghost expansion, so maybe that was distinctive enough in itself), Protectorate Starfighter (I guess the combo of names is modestly distinctive) Agressor (Not sure about that one, but that was also pre-disney by a long shot so maybe it's OK?). I'm willing to bet 'assault gunboat' is a step too far for such a franchise.
19 hours ago, DarthEnderX said:This card still needs to exist more than ever now.
Ruel Text that refers to text which is (or was until now) pure fluff Will probably be very problematic when it comes to translations. So I guess we might not see something like this.
On 8/21/2017 at 9:41 PM, Sekac said:"Imperials will never have the 'Assault Gunboat.' Muahahahahahaha!" [Twirling mustache]
-FFG Devs
Accurate. I do not care though, A gunboat by any other name...
On 8/23/2017 at 6:47 AM, DarthEnderX said:This card still needs to exist more than ever now.
This is the tractor beam in the game... we have that. There is no reason for this card to exist.
1 hour ago, Jetfire said:This is the tractor beam in the game... we have that. There is no reason for this card to exist.
This card lets you equip a Tractor Beam or Jamming Beam on a ship without a Cannon slot, and lets you fire those Beams with an action instead of an attack.
