Hello, community! With another artwork piece revealing the Otana, if FFG rolled this ship out, what would it's stats be? What pilots would you want to see? Pilot abilities? Would it come with unique upgrade cards just for the Otana? What "fixes" would you hope it came with for other large ships? What would make this ship standout from among the other scum large-based ships? Would this be a candidate for scum's first 4 attack die ship? Let the discussing begin!

Ps, if this has already been speculated, copy down a link to the thread!

Azzameens, quite possibly dual Scum/Rebel pilots again, and hopefully with shinies to help the Falcon have a place on the tables again, given they're both YT-class vessels of limited agility.

Almost certainly not 4 attack; to be honest I'd hoped that was going to be the Scurrg, as a large-based 4-attack primary large-based Upsilon Shuttle equivalent. It would've given all three factions a 4-attack native vessel, and been an interesting (if less agile) alternative to the pre-existing IG-88 when it came to arc-based Scum sledgehammers.

They had different ideas, in the end, of course. I guess we'll have to wait and see on this one, too.

Stats should fall between the Outrider and Falcon. It'd probably have a PWT of 3 and gain a cannon slot with the Otana title (it did have a forward facing ion cannon and blaster in X-Wing Alliance)

I'd love to see Scum dials for the YT-1300 and 2400. Also, titles for the YT-1300 since the Azzameens own a couple of them along with the 2000.

But we need another Millenium Falcon expansion, this time in the special blue prequel colors along with pilot cards for EVERY PREVIOUS OWNER OF THE FALCON. Scum of course. With Scum Han, chewie and Lando. It's what we neeeeeeed, and it's canon! Film Cannon! And FFG gotta make the monies!

Mobile arc for the love of God

Way too many PWTs as is, and they're all either overcosted or just stupid

If they did it, should be mobile arc.

Better yet - all new models (not reprints of old) that would be PWT should use mobile arcs

Missed that boat with Hotr

Didn't even have to retrofit reb falcon. Resist yts are older and even more out of date and therefore mobile arc

The thing about mobile arcs is that they symbolize a freaking PILOT OPERATED turret! Not one with its own gunner! It ticks me off that everyone wants mobile arcs on things with devoted gunners. Why the heck should the direction the gunner points his gun take up an action for the pilot? And why would the gunner taking aim happen at the same reaction speed as the pilot? TBH, the gunner having to spend the pilots focus token is already pushing it, TL is understandable.

Better question would be "who gives a flying **** what a mobile arc supposedly represents?"

Gameplay >>>>>>> fluff

7 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

Better question would be "who gives a flying **** what a mobile arc supposedly represents?"

Gameplay >>>>>>> fluff

Not to me.

51 minutes ago, GLEXOR said:

The thing about mobile arcs is that they symbolize a freaking PILOT OPERATED turret! Not one with its own gunner! It ticks me off that everyone wants mobile arcs on things with devoted gunners. Why the heck should the direction the gunner points his gun take up an action for the pilot? And why would the gunner taking aim happen at the same reaction speed as the pilot? TBH, the gunner having to spend the pilots focus token is already pushing it, TL is understandable.

My thoughts on this are that all the YT mobile arcs should have an attached "feature" card that gives a free turret movement at some point outside the action step. Unfortunately the best opportunity to introduce feature cards has also been missed already The SF, ARC, Striker and U-wing "titles" should have been "features" (maybe the space tug array too)

5 hours ago, Kehl_Aecea said:

Stats should fall between the Outrider and Falcon. It'd probably have a PWT of 3 and gain a cannon slot with the Otana title (it did have a forward facing ion cannon and blaster in X-Wing Alliance)

I'd love to see Scum dials for the YT-1300 and 2400. Also, titles for the YT-1300 since the Azzameens own a couple of them along with the 2000.

YT-2000 with Ottana title should come with a double tap to allow the front arc ions and the turret to fire. Otherwise it is a less agile YT-1300, which sounds to me like a Decimator to me. You have a whole family of uniques as well, which would work great as scum and rebel pilots in all kind of YT freighters.

4 hours ago, GLEXOR said:

The thing about mobile arcs is that they symbolize a freaking PILOT OPERATED turret! Not one with its own gunner! It ticks me off that everyone wants mobile arcs on things with devoted gunners. Why the heck should the direction the gunner points his gun take up an action for the pilot? And why would the gunner taking aim happen at the same reaction speed as the pilot? TBH, the gunner having to spend the pilots focus token is already pushing it, TL is understandable.

If the crew system was more robust (different subsets of cards like gunners, co-pilots, techs, ect.), then what you are saying makes more sense. But the way crew cards work in game is more streamlined, making it easier to put together and play, but less accurate. A crew like Sabine isn't giving her own actions because she's spending her time working on bombs, Dengar is providing better targeting, and C-3PO is...shouting "look out!" at opportune moments, or something.

Also, if we were to give crew more agency, we change how attacks work. During a space battle in Rebels, you usually have someone manning the forward guns, one in the turret, and one firing out the back with the Phantom's guns. If we where to directly translate that to the game, that means the Ghost should be capable of three shots a turn. It gets close to that with the Phantom title, but not all the way. And that's just one ship. The Falcon should be getting three shots a turn (missile slot and two turrets), the YT-24 should be getting two, the HWK should be getting two, and so on. For game balance, this isn't how FFG did attacking.

Now we come to mobile arcs. In ANH, when Han and Luke are shooting at the TIEs with the quads, there are several instances where a TIE would blow past them, and they'd have to adjust their field of fire (or arc) to keep after that target. The only part that doesn't make sense in the context of fluff is the pilot taking the action to turn it for a gunner, like you said. But, with a lot of actions already being attributed to the pilot, it kind of makes sense to keep with the framework of the game. Plus, this can be aliviated by the idea of upgrades like Gyroscopic Targeting. Ways to move an arc for a different price. If more mobile arc ships were to be released, we could see pilot abilities that deal with the classic "take X action and rotate arc for free", crew cards like turret gunner who allow for free adjustment during activation, or a new mod like Gyroscopic Targeting.

28 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

If the crew system was more robust (different subsets of cards like gunners, co-pilots, techs, ect.), then what you are saying makes more sense. But the way crew cards work in game is more streamlined, making it easier to put together and play, but less accurate. A crew like Sabine isn't giving her own actions because she's spending her time working on bombs, Dengar is providing better targeting, and C-3PO is...shouting "look out!" at opportune moments, or something.

Also, if we were to give crew more agency, we change how attacks work. During a space battle in Rebels, you usually have someone manning the forward guns, one in the turret, and one firing out the back with the Phantom's guns. If we where to directly translate that to the game, that means the Ghost should be capable of three shots a turn. It gets close to that with the Phantom title, but not all the way. And that's just one ship. The Falcon should be getting three shots a turn (missile slot and two turrets), the YT-24 should be getting two, the HWK should be getting two, and so on. For game balance, this isn't how FFG did attacking.

Now we come to mobile arcs. In ANH, when Han and Luke are shooting at the TIEs with the quads, there are several instances where a TIE would blow past them, and they'd have to adjust their field of fire (or arc) to keep after that target. The only part that doesn't make sense in the context of fluff is the pilot taking the action to turn it for a gunner, like you said. But, with a lot of actions already being attituded to the pilot, it kind of makes sense to keep with the framework of the game. Plus, this can be aliviated by the idea of upgrades like Gyroscopic Targeting. Ways to move an arc for a different price. If more mobile arc ships were to be released, we could see pilot abilities that deal with the classic "take X action and rotate arc for free", crew cards like turret gunner who allow for free adjustment during activation, or a new mod like Gyroscopic Targeting.

A free mod would work. You may perform a free rotate arc action at the pilot skill equal to the squad point cost of one of your single crew slot crew cards plus one, or After you perform a different action. Also you can equip another different mod. So long as the shadow caster can't take it. This would reward taking Luke Skywalker or Gunner. Errata Luke and gunner to be mobile arc only, but you don't have to miss, and the first attack can't be from the mobile arc.

This is the basic idea, it needs to be reworded into X-Wingese.

Fixed forward arc, but cannon and turret slots. Maybe a system slot.

As they say, ships with gunners shouldn't have to change their firing arc as an pilot action.
Gameplay is above Fluff, BUT the game aims at a level of simulationism that keeps it true to its lore.

It isn't to hard to make gameplay be closer to fluff while keeping turrets balanced. (It's an entirely diferent question if we are able to make this change at this point of the game lifecycle)
For example: many have said that in real life (and simulators) turrets are very hard to aim with unless either your own ship is flying straight towards the target (the target is in arc), or the target is flying straight towards you (you are in the defender's firing arc).
At any other angles, your shots are perpendicular to the target's trajectory and the difficulty to lead the target right increases by a lot.

So they could come with a rule that affects turret attacks to represent this.

When attacking out of arc, if you aren't in the defender's frontal firing arc:

• The defender rolls 1 extra defense die.
• The defender may add one evade result to his roll.
• The defender doubles the amount of defense dice rolled.
• The defender rolls as many extra defense die as the speed of the last maneuver they performed this round, to a maximum of 3.
• The attacker cannot modify his attack dice.
• The attacker rolls 1 fewer attack die.
• The defender may cancel 1 of the attacker's attack dice.

One of those should be enough to represent the added difficulty. Turrets would still have an advantage since they can fire at their pursuers with ease (like in real life), but their damage output should be a bit reduced (or as much as we want it to be, be deciding on what punishing effect it applies), and so, those playing turrets would need to care about maneuvering because they will always want to have their targets in arc, or stay in arc of their targets to fire with full power.

20 hours ago, ficklegreendice said:

Mobile arc for the love of God

Way too many PWTs as is, and they're all either overcosted or just stupid

Yeah, and what happens when a ship has a mobile fire arc we have seen with the Lancer. An undercostet ship that has nearly the exact same advantages as a PWT but kills Autothrusters too.

Just don´t make so much 3 or 4 Dice PWT! Propblem solved. Or make them pay for it. Not just with points... with bad dials too (like the exact opposite of Dengar).

Either give it a mobile arc or give it the usual "I have a turret but i would MUCH rather have front arc" mentality. We dont need another blind-fly PWT that literally just has to not slam into things to be a great ship. Too easy to fly those, so they either do nothing due to the price or are all over the place due to the price.

Since the Otana had ion cannons, rather than give it a cannon due the Lancer-thing where it applies the effect of the cannon/turret w/o actually having one.
Title: YT-2000 Armaments -> 1pt -> When attacking with a primary weapon in your firing arc, roll 1 extra die. If this attack hits and the defender is in your firing arc it receives 1 ion token
Give it a PWT2 with that title. In arc its just as deadly as anything else (plus ion effects), but out of arc its just "well, i can still shoot i guess"

1 hour ago, xstormtrooperx said:

Yeah, and what happens when a ship has a mobile fire arc we have seen with the Lancer. An undercostet ship that has nearly the exact same advantages as a PWT but kills Autothrusters too.

Just don´t make so much 3 or 4 Dice PWT! Propblem solved. Or make them pay for it. Not just with points... with bad dials too (like the exact opposite of Dengar).

We haven't seen diddly of asajj since the Manny need, just heavily limited play until dengartel came to the for and now at wave 11 we don't see her at all

The caster is basically a not crap firespray. Calling it undercosted, especially when the jm5k exists, is just silly

Not to mention that the mobile arc is wildly different from a pwt in that it can be dodged at all. It makes the ship predictable and difficult to use boost while still getting mods. It actually forces the pilot to choose between advantages

22 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

We haven't seen diddly of asajj since the Manny need, just heavily limited play until dengartel came to the for and now at wave 11 we don't see her at all

The caster is basically a not crap firespray. Calling it undercosted, especially when the jm5k exists, is just silly

Not to mention that the mobile arc is wildly different from a pwt in that it can be dodged at all. It makes the ship predictable and difficult to use boost while still getting mods. It actually forces the pilot to choose between advantages

Parattani is still a thing. Nym is beatable. A lot of players jumped on the Nym-Bandwagon. But is it really better than Parattanni? I think it will show when the hype about him is gone.

Crap firespray. LoL the only firespray that is crap is the imperial one.

About Ventress: Undercosted in a way that it is not priced like a PWT. But it works nearly like one. I still stand to my statement. How often has Ventress to change her arc.

She comes with really strong board control, can nearly always attack with 2 Arcs, doesnt care about AT (besides range 3) and comes in for lame 40 points (Attanni version) or 42 (PTL version). Oh and she really is a tank that is hard to bring down with Latts and her own stress ability (beware god if the enemy plays PTL himself).

Perhaps an 'Hired for the Empire' box can come out with a firespray only mod like the Manuevering Fins on the YV, except in reverse to help put Imp Fett. And also come with Imp versions of all the bounty hunter ships. And a new FAQing Slave One title. And illicits for the Empire. Maybe it can be packed with a recolor Firespray (Kath Scarlet colors) or that Mining Guild TIE and ... something else.

It would have a white T-roll be 20 points undercosted, needs 3 different nerfs and will still be the salt of the x-wing forums, reddit, and podcasts. enjoy.

The big thing that annoys me about the game is that customised freighters are manoeuvrable than purpose built fighters, with high PS pilots like Han that is sorta understandable, but ships like the Lancer etc seem to have better dials than ships like the Interceptor. My one hope for the game is that FFG update early wave dials to bring into play talon rolls and S Loops for them. Easy to do, 0 point modification, you may equip another modification, add the Talon Roll and or S Loop to your dial.

I would like to see all Star Wars ships in the game at same point, even Slave II, as ugly as that ship is. As a Fett fan boy, the disappointment from going from Slave I to Slave II.... we there is no words...