I love the GUNBOAT as much as the next X-Wing fan. It's bringing cool new mechanics to the table, in a frame that doesn't immediately yell "OP!" when thinking of builds. It does, however, have some serious power creep going on.

A Scimitar Squadron TIE Bomber is 16 points, and 18 with the auto include Extra munitions. Given the low flexibility of the dial, it's hard to get off more than 2 sets of munitions before being killed. It has 6 hull behind AGi 2, which isn't actually that bad, but prone to crits.

A Nu Squadron GUNBOAT is 18 points, has 7 total hull behind 2 agility - putting it into Integrated Astromech T-70 durability range. It has the SLAM and Reload actions, 2 of the best in the game, with the ability to fire weaponry after slamming. It has a better dial, upgrade bar (sans bombs, which the Bomber sadly never uses), access to EPTs and more appropriately costed pilots.

If you wanted to field a squadron of 4 Imperial ships, the Gunboat is now a clear winner, even with ordnance lists. The generic bomber pilots have been totally outclassed (there's literally nothing they can do that a GUNBOAT can't do better, and at nearly the same price). The Reload and SLAM actins keep the Gunboat in the fight for far longer than the Bomber, and the increased durability, combined with ac-dodging capability means that they're going to last a long time in comparison.

It makes me sad that in order make new ships good (and not necessarily even great) FFG has to relegate older ships to the scrapheap.

It can be said that's the price to be paid for a long lived game. The new ships need to be different enough from previous releases to be both interesting and desirable. If the new ships didn't bring new weapons or mechanics to the game, who would buy them?

3 minutes ago, Stoneface said:

It can be said that's the price to be paid for a long lived game. The new ships need to be different enough from previous releases to be both interesting and desirable. If the new ships didn't bring new weapons or mechanics to the game, who would buy them?

The catch is, it relegates classic, loved, and well known ships to the trash. If this were a company that actually balanced its game, released new editions, released upgrade kits (real upgrade kits, new dials with new point costs, not mediocre patch fixes) then I'd agree, but they don't, so this is just pure powercreep from developers that don't know their job.

GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!! GUNBOAT!!

19 minutes ago, Astech said:

I love the GUNBOAT as much as the next X-Wing fan. It's bringing cool new mechanics to the table, in a frame that doesn't immediately yell "OP!" when thinking of builds. It does, however, have some serious power creep going on.

A Scimitar Squadron TIE Bomber is 16 points, and 18 with the auto include Extra munitions. Given the low flexibility of the dial, it's hard to get off more than 2 sets of munitions before being killed. It has 6 hull behind AGi 2, which isn't actually that bad, but prone to crits.

A Nu Squadron GUNBOAT is 18 points, has 7 total hull behind 2 agility - putting it into Integrated Astromech T-70 durability range. It has the SLAM and Reload actions, 2 of the best in the game, with the ability to fire weaponry after slamming. It has a better dial, upgrade bar (sans bombs, which the Bomber sadly never uses), access to EPTs and more appropriately costed pilots.

If you wanted to field a squadron of 4 Imperial ships, the Gunboat is now a clear winner, even with ordnance lists. The generic bomber pilots have been totally outclassed (there's literally nothing they can do that a GUNBOAT can't do better, and at nearly the same price). The Reload and SLAM actins keep the Gunboat in the fight for far longer than the Bomber, and the increased durability, combined with ac-dodging capability means that they're going to last a long time in comparison.

It makes me sad that in order make new ships good (and not necessarily even great) FFG has to relegate older ships to the scrapheap.

You count EM as auto include for the bomber but not OS-1 for the gunboat, despite talking about firing while it has weapons disabled? At least TRY to make fair comparisons if you’re going to accuse something of being power creep

The Gunboat won't replace the Bomber. They hold different roles. 4x Bomber lists have the advantage of being able to get off 4 missiles with modifiers per turn, for 2 successive turns. Now, honestly, that's often enough to splash out anything in the game (I've OTK'd enough durable ships with them to know). Gunboats can theoretically fire more ordnance, if they survive. They have more HP and agility to make that happen, but they also have to burn that action to reload after each shot, which means you have to invest in ASLAM for TL efficiency, and you're then missing out on the glory of LRS or Chips, both of which are major losses to an ordnance carrier that has SLAM. Where they'll shine with ordnance is in smart formation passes, swarming a single target until it's dead with one or two ships reloading while the other two are firing. That ability to disengage is something the Bombers do lack, but also something they regularly don't survive long enough to actually need.

If anything, the Gunboats most efficient builds are probably going to involve cannons. An efficient cannon platform is something the Imperials have been lacking. Sure, the Defender gave it a try with the /D title - and it is good - but when you're starting at 30 points for a PS1, it becomes quite niche. The space cow has a cannon slot, and is relatively cheap, but it's desperately slow and has the minor inconvenience of taking 3 rounds of a tournament to turn around. The Gunboat offers the Imperials a platform that both Rebels and Scum have had for a long time - a cheap cannon carrier. Now, it may make a splash as a flanker with a cannon (Karasabi is top billing for this), or it may not (and join the B-wing and Scyk in the "has potential" report card).

Either way, with ordnance or cannon, the Gunboat is more complimentary to the Bomber role, than a replacement. If anything, I'm looking forward to mixing in a single Gunboat with a Bomber squadron, and vice-versa.

Bombers have k-turns, for a start.

And a gunboat that's reloading isn't shooting ordinance for a round, while the bomber is potentially getting another shot off.

They're two points extra for one more hit point. Everything else either costs extra or has its own drawbacks.

Given bombers are mediocre to begin with, I think I prefer the balance be arranged this way.

2 minutes ago, Gadgetron said:

The catch is, it relegates classic, loved, and well known ships to the trash. If this were a company that actually balanced its game, released new editions, released upgrade kits (real upgrade kits, new dials with new point costs, not mediocre patch fixes) then I'd agree, but they don't, so this is just pure powercreep from developers that don't know their job.

I agree with your frustration but that's about it. They may release a 2.0 but I doubt it's going to happen while new movies are still being released. Without rebuilding the game from the ground up the best we can hope for is titles for some ships and maybe a points adjustment.

Unless you're a published game designer, saying they don't know their job, is just grousing. If you were an FFG insider, then you'd have some insight into the constraints they operate under.

24 minutes ago, Gadgetron said:

The catch is, it relegates classic, loved, and well known ships to the trash. If this were a company that actually balanced its game, released new editions, released upgrade kits (real upgrade kits, new dials with new point costs, not mediocre patch fixes) then I'd agree, but they don't, so this is just pure powercreep from developers that don't know their job.

9 minutes ago, Stoneface said:

I agree with your frustration but that's about it. They may release a 2.0 but I doubt it's going to happen while new movies are still being released. Without rebuilding the game from the ground up the best we can hope for is titles for some ships and maybe a points adjustment.

Unless you're a published game designer, saying they don't know their job, is just grousing. If you were an FFG insider, then you'd have some insight into the constraints they operate under.

Here's the secret. XWM 2.0 is here, they just didn't announce it. All the OT ships that everyone laments about are actually XWM 1.0. When they get an aces buff pack, they are brought up to 2.0.

Someday, they may release XWM 3.0, but they'll get to call it 2.0 like nothing ever happened before.

It isn't that it is better than a TIE Bomber which makes power creep. That is like saying Dorsal Turret is power creep because Blaster turret is so bad.

Man people really have no clue what "power creep" means

First of all, one more point of health is NOT worth 2 points even if you put more of it behind shields.

Second, the bomber and titleless boat do exactly the same thing. Reload is actually NOT that good as it devours your action economy and attack, making the already slow and demanding ordnance gimmick even more slow and demanding. You need two points to make it worth anything which makes the boat even less efficient

Third, SLAM by itself also isn't great as it disables your weapon. again you need to spend points to make it worth much. But barrel roll? That's a **** fine self sufficient action

Fourth, the bomber does things the boat can't. Effective five ship list? Yeah, unguided and left some scimitars. Carry crew? Yep. Carry bombs? Yep (and deathfire even makes em worth taking). Kturn? Yep!

The bomber just gets a bad rep because it isn't seen very much competitively. The boat? Well, it ain't even out yet. We have no actual idea if it'll be viable at all. The only thing we can speculate is that 3 rhos will probably out perform 3 gammas and a thing, because 3 rhos have similar damage outputs but never ever have to fall back onto their *** primary unless they're in range 1

But it is something people have been waiting for a long time, and for me it is a very interesting, new and unique ship

37 minutes ago, Gadgetron said:

The catch is, it relegates classic, loved, and well known ships to the trash. If this were a company that actually balanced its game, released new editions, released upgrade kits (real upgrade kits, new dials with new point costs, not mediocre patch fixes) then I'd agree, but they don't, so this is just pure powercreep from developers that don't know their job.

Oh, please. If the game required that we buy entirely new dials/cardboard/etc. every update, we'd just be complaining about that instead. Sure, there's stuff the developers could improve on, but saying they don't know their job just because they decided to try to make changes with minimal cost impact to players is grossly unfair.

28 minutes ago, Reiver said:

Bombers have k-turns, for a start.

And a gunboat that's reloading isn't shooting ordinance for a round, while the bomber is potentially getting another shot off.

They're two points extra for one more hit point. Everything else either costs extra or has its own drawbacks.

Given bombers are mediocre to begin with, I think I prefer the balance be arranged this way.

If it's using the ordnance title, it can shoot the round it reloads, provided it has a target lock from a previous round.

I just don't see it.

The lack of a K-Turn or equivalent. The higher points cost. The more limited upgrade bar (that takes points to expand).

This isn't like a B-Wing kinda power-creeping the X-Wing in the role of baseline 3-red-dice jouster. The gunboat is a radically different ship on the table.

22 minutes ago, VanderLegion said:

You count EM as auto include for the bomber but not OS-1 for the gunboat, despite talking about firing while it has weapons disabled? At least TRY to make fair comparisons if you’re going to accuse something of being power creep

OS-1 isn't an auto-include. ****, you could use the Assault Configuration on a torpboat with a Flechette cannon for when it's slamming. The point is that even without titles, the Assault gunboat is the better ordinance carrier. It has more health, more munitions, a better dial and easier EPT access.

17 minutes ago, NakedDex said:

The Gunboat won't replace the Bomber. They hold different roles. 4x Bomber lists have the advantage of being able to get off 4 missiles with modifiers per turn, for 2 successive turns. Now, honestly, that's often enough to splash out anything in the game (I've OTK'd enough durable ships with them to know). Gunboats can theoretically fire more ordnance, if they survive. They have more HP and agility to make that happen, but they also have to burn that action to reload after each shot, which means you have to invest in ASLAM for TL efficiency, and you're then missing out on the glory of LRS or Chips, both of which are major losses to an ordnance carrier that has SLAM. Where they'll shine with ordnance is in smart formation passes, swarming a single target until it's dead with one or two ships reloading while the other two are firing. That ability to disengage is something the Bombers do lack, but also something they regularly don't survive long enough to actually need.

As can 4 Nu Squadron Pilots with Harpoon Missiles and Plasma missiles, and they have 1 more hull to avoid being PS killed. Then, the GUNBOATS can reload and keep doing so for as long as the game goes on. If case you hadn't seen how reload works - you can reload any number of weapons for a single action so only 1 in 3 turns needs to be spent reloading for a gunboat with 2 equipped missiles.

After all, if you let a generic Bomber get off more than 2 ordinance sots you're not flying right.

27 minutes ago, Reiver said:

Bombers have k-turns, for a start.

And a gunboat that's reloading isn't shooting ordinance for a round, while the bomber is potentially getting another shot off.

They're two points extra for one more hit point. Everything else either costs extra or has its own drawbacks.

The red K-Turn is not really a match for the double-turn SLAM. For one, you get stressed. And considering you won't get an action the 2-die attack is going to be largely worthless.

That turn can be spent running away to set up for the next attack run - how often have you had 3 successive ordinance opportunities with the same ship?

That is an extra hitpoint, 2 amazing actions and a better dial, plus the ability to access cheap and amazing titles.

25 minutes ago, Stoneface said:

Unless you're a published game designer, saying they don't know their job, is just grousing. If you were an FFG insider, then you'd have some insight into the constraints they operate under.

A bad game is a bad game. However, X-Wing is a good game, and many people seem to think that there can't be anything wrong with good games. The fact is that X-wing has had problems since day one (Biggs) and it's been exacerbated over time. I, as a competitive, experience player can safely ay the developers have slipped. Far more experienced players than me have said the same thing. My local community agrees, and the forums are divided. It's clear there are issues.

17 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

It isn't that it is better than a TIE Bomber which makes power creep. That is like saying Dorsal Turret is power creep because Blaster turret is so bad.

It's also better than the Punisher, if that helps? Not to mention trumping Y-wings, B-wings, Kihraxz, X-wings, etc as ordinance carriers, jousters and arc-dodgers.

14 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

First of all, one more point of health is NOT worth 2 points even if you put more of it behind shields.

Second, the bomber and titleless boat do exactly the same thing. Reload is actually NOT that good as it devours your action economy and attack. You need two points to make it worth anything which makes the boat even less efficient

Third, SLAM by itself also isn't great as it disables your weapon. again you need to spend points to make it worth much. But barrel roll? That's a **** fine self sufficient action

Fourth, the bomber does things the boat can't. Effective five ship list? Yeah, unguided and left some scimitars. Carry crew? Yep. Carry bombs? Yep (and deathfire even makes em worth taking). Kturn? Yep!

Again, 2 points gives you a shield, and shields instead of hull (which is a good trade here). Plus both an action bar and maneuver dial upgrade.

Reload is fantastic. Consider a Nu Squadron pilot with 2 Harpoon missiles and guidance chips with the OS-1 title. It can get a TL, on a ship, then continuously SLAM to keep it in ARC, all the while maintaining 4 die, modified attacks with the reload action. It's vastly superior to Extra munitions for getting 3+ shots off in a game.

SLAM is fantastic for preserving MoV in a competitive environment. It remains to be seen how awesome the GUNBOAT will be when it starts firing prockets/harpoons after slamming.

The Bomber can carry crew, which is its strongest point. Even then, Sabine's TIE does that better, as does a Lambda. As for 5-ship lists, the Striker has that territory firmly in its grasp, and the Kihraxz is not far behind. Deathfire is cool, but b the time you're done loading him up effectively he's 2/3 of a Nym, so why not go the extra mile?

Nu Squadron Pilot (18)
Flechette Torpedoes (2)
Long-Range Scanners (0)

Scimitar Squadron Pilot (16)
Unguided Rockets (2)
Lightweight Frame (2)

Alpha Squadron Pilot (18)
Autothrusters (2)

Imperial Trainee (17)
Lightweight Frame (2)
Adaptive Ailerons (0)

Omicron Group Pilot (21)

Total: 100

View in Yet Another Squad Builder

Different strokes for different folks

29 minutes ago, Astech said:

...

It's also better than the Punisher, if that helps? Not to mention trumping Y-wings, B-wings, Kihraxz, X-wings, etc as ordinance carriers, jousters and arc-dodgers.

...

Punisher? The only thing that punishes is the person who puts them in their list. Y-wings can take TLT so they can do something XG-1 can't. B-wings and X-wings aren't exactly controlling the meta unless it is Biggs and gunboat has none of those. We are waiting on the Klingon fix. So again your argument seems to be lacking.

2 hours ago, Astech said:

OS-1 isn't an auto-include. ****, you could use the Assault Configuration on a torpboat with a Flechette cannon for when it's slamming. The point is that even without titles, the Assault gunboat is the better ordinance carrier. It has more health, more munitions, a better dial and easier EPT access.

As can 4 Nu Squadron Pilots with Harpoon Missiles and Plasma missiles, and they have 1 more hull to avoid being PS killed. Then, the GUNBOATS can reload and keep doing so for as long as the game goes on. If case you hadn't seen how reload works - you can reload any number of weapons for a single action so only 1 in 3 turns needs to be spent reloading for a gunboat with 2 equipped missiles.

After all, if you let a generic Bomber get off more than 2 ordinance sots you're not flying right.

The red K-Turn is not really a match for the double-turn SLAM. For one, you get stressed. And considering you won't get an action the 2-die attack is going to be largely worthless.

That turn can be spent running away to set up for the next attack run - how often have you had 3 successive ordinance opportunities with the same ship?

That is an extra hitpoint, 2 amazing actions and a better dial, plus the ability to access cheap and amazing titles.

A bad game is a bad game. However, X-Wing is a good game, and many people seem to think that there can't be anything wrong with good games. The fact is that X-wing has had problems since day one (Biggs) and it's been exacerbated over time. I, as a competitive, experience player can safely ay the developers have slipped. Far more experienced players than me have said the same thing. My local community agrees, and the forums are divided. It's clear there are issues.

It's also better than the Punisher, if that helps? Not to mention trumping Y-wings, B-wings, Kihraxz, X-wings, etc as ordinance carriers, jousters and arc-dodgers.

Again, 2 points gives you a shield, and shields instead of hull (which is a good trade here). Plus both an action bar and maneuver dial upgrade.

Reload is fantastic. Consider a Nu Squadron pilot with 2 Harpoon missiles and guidance chips with the OS-1 title. It can get a TL, on a ship, then continuously SLAM to keep it in ARC, all the while maintaining 4 die, modified attacks with the reload action. It's vastly superior to Extra munitions for getting 3+ shots off in a game.

SLAM is fantastic for preserving MoV in a competitive environment. It remains to be seen how awesome the GUNBOAT will be when it starts firing prockets/harpoons after slamming.

The Bomber can carry crew, which is its strongest point. Even then, Sabine's TIE does that better, as does a Lambda. As for 5-ship lists, the Striker has that territory firmly in its grasp, and the Kihraxz is not far behind. Deathfire is cool, but b the time you're done loading him up effectively he's 2/3 of a Nym, so why not go the extra mile?

I agree the game has problems but Biggs isn't one of them. Whatever metric the Designers used from the start was off. They admitted as much in the interview. It didn't matter so much early on except for the Phantom which turned out to be just bat crap crazy OP. IMO where their model really broke down was the Jumpmaster release. Some of the blame rests with the playtesters. Some of these OP combos should have been caught in play testing. Then again, we don't know how much time was allotted for this portion of the development cycle. One of the things we do know is the Devs were under a lot of pressure to push things out the door. That's evident by the number of releases per year and the number of complaints from players that things were coming out too fast. I believe they said they were working two Waves out from what's been released. Look at the stuff that's not considered a wave like Aces pack, Veteran's pack and Epics and you begin to see that there's not a lot of time to debug a release. Another thing to consider is scheduling production time for the models and printing. That "window" is probably reserved either before or shortly after design begins on a wave. There's more things to consider but I'll stop here.

Is there problems with the game? Yes, it's very evident. Are the designers incompetent? I doubt it. If they were X-wing wouldn't be as good as it is. I worked in engineering for a long time and we had a saying that is relevant to this situation. "It's difficult to make a chicken sandwich when all they give you is chicken s**t".

4 hours ago, Astech said:

OS-1 isn't an auto-include. ****, you could use the Assault Configuration on a torpboat with a Flechette cannon for when it's slamming. The point is that even without titles, the Assault gunboat is the better ordinance carrier. It has more health, more munitions, a better dial and easier EPT access.

Just pointing out that if you're going to count the ability to fire while it has a weapons disabled token in it's favor, you also have to count the points to be able to do so.

4 hours ago, Astech said:

As can 4 Nu Squadron Pilots with Harpoon Missiles and Plasma missiles, and they have 1 more hull to avoid being PS killed. Then, the GUNBOATS can reload and keep doing so for as long as the game goes on. If case you hadn't seen how reload works - you can reload any number of weapons for a single action so only 1 in 3 turns needs to be spent reloading for a gunboat with 2 equipped missiles.

Sure, you can reload and keep going for as long as the game goes on. On the other hand, how often does a ship get off multiple ordnance shots and still be around long enough to need more?

4 hours ago, Astech said:

After all, if you let a generic Bomber get off more than 2 ordinance sots you're not flying right.

Same is probably true for the gunboat. 1 extra health doesn't go THAT far.

4 hours ago, Astech said:

The red K-Turn is not really a match for the double-turn SLAM. For one, you get stressed. And considering you won't get an action the 2-die attack is going to be largely worthless.

The kturn can also easily take you out of range 3 a lot of the time, meaning the next round you can move back in, clear the stress and line up the ordnance shot.

4 hours ago, Astech said:

That turn can be spent running away to set up for the next attack run - how often have you had 3 successive ordinance opportunities with the same ship?

That is an extra hitpoint, 2 amazing actions and a better dial, plus the ability to access cheap and amazing titles.

A bad game is a bad game. However, X-Wing is a good game, and many people seem to think that there can't be anything wrong with good games. The fact is that X-wing has had problems since day one (Biggs) and it's been exacerbated over time. I, as a competitive, experience player can safely ay the developers have slipped. Far more experienced players than me have said the same thing. My local community agrees, and the forums are divided. It's clear there are issues.

It's also better than the Punisher, if that helps? Not to mention trumping Y-wings, B-wings, Kihraxz, X-wings, etc as ordinance carriers, jousters and arc-dodgers.

Being better than the punisher is just as meaningless. The punisher is also a terrible ship, and again, it's not power creep to have an actual good ship just because it's better than an old bad ship. The X-wing and kihraxz aren't actually meant to be ordnance carriers (though the kihraxz actually makes a pretty good one post-G4H, and I'd probably take my scum quad harpoon list over 4 ps2 gunboats). B-wing has never been any good as an ordnacne carrier (though the ship itself has been decent at times in the past), the y-wing is a good ship, but also has never been a good ordnance carrier.

4 hours ago, Astech said:

Again, 2 points gives you a shield, and shields instead of hull (which is a good trade here). Plus both an action bar and maneuver dial upgrade.

Reload is fantastic. Consider a Nu Squadron pilot with 2 Harpoon missiles and guidance chips with the OS-1 title. It can get a TL, on a ship, then continuously SLAM to keep it in ARC, all the while maintaining 4 die, modified attacks with the reload action. It's vastly superior to Extra munitions for getting 3+ shots off in a game.

If you have guidance chips, you don't have advanced slam, so you can't reload after slamming to keep firing. And if you're keeping your TL to be able to keep firing, you don't have any modifiers since you can't spend the TL. If you have chips instead of Adv Slam, you have the single die modifier, but that's it. And how often are you going to get off more than 3 shots in a game anyway?

Bomber REALLY need some help. like REALLY.

And punishers need even more help.

Imo though, the gunboat and the bomber will play a little differently. But generally the bomber could use more efficiency. Problems are not the build options, its that the ship generally isn't useful to use.

5 hours ago, JJ48 said:

If it's using the ordnance title, it can shoot the round it reloads, provided it has a target lock from a previous round.

If it's using the ordnance title, it's also costing 20pts minimum.

On ordinance, that is a far cry from the Bomber's 16.

Scimitar/UGR/LWF x5

Can't do that with the Gunboat.

Nor bombs, for that matter, not that there are any good bombing Bombers except Deathfire.

1 hour ago, VanderLegion said:

Just pointing out that if you're going to count the ability to fire while it has a weapons disabled token in it's favor, you also have to count the points to be able to do so.

Sure, you can reload and keep going for as long as the game goes on. On the other hand, how often does a ship get off multiple ordnance shots and still be around long enough to need more?

Same is probably true for the gunboat. 1 extra health doesn't go THAT far.

The kturn can also easily take you out of range 3 a lot of the time, meaning the next round you can move back in, clear the stress and line up the ordnance shot.

If you have guidance chips, you don't have advanced slam, so you can't reload after slamming to keep firing. And if you're keeping your TL to be able to keep firing, you don't have any modifiers since you can't spend the TL. If you have chips instead of Adv Slam, you have the single die modifier, but that's it. And how often are you going to get off more than 3 shots in a game anyway?

The point is that even without titles the GUNBOAT fills the bomber's role even better than the bomber. For the gunboat, it's impossible to kill with only 3 TLT shots, so against Miranda/Nym you are far more durable.

As for the K-turn, a 3-bank into a 3-turn is just as good, if not better, and doesn't leave you stressed next turn.

Major Vinder in particular is going to last far longer than any bomber, and could really leverage the extra firepower provided by the reload action.

47 minutes ago, Reiver said:

If it's using the ordnance title, it's also costing 20pts minimum.

On ordinance, that is a far cry from the Bomber's 16.

Without the title it's a better ordnance carrier than the Bomber, as Extra munitions often takes that spot. Again, it's got a better dial, health, action bar and EPT access.

45 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

Scimitar/UGR/LWF x5

Can't do that with the Gunboat.

Nor bombs, for that matter, not that there are any good bombing Bombers except Deathfire.

And yet, Strikers fulfil the 5, 3 dice swarm far better than either ever will. With the gunboat, you could do 5 flechette cannons, which could be amazing, if only the stress stacked.

Again, there are so many better bombers (Miranda and Nym, pretty much) that as soon as you put bombs on something else you might as well change to one f them.

The Bomber used to have 2 remaining niches: a very cheap crew carrier, and a 4 ship ordnance build or two. Now all it has going for it is cheap crew, which is kind of garbage for Imperials.

Except you can't do 5 Flechette cannons because a Flechette Nu costs 21.

1) The TIE bomber has been medicore-to-bad for the history of X-Wing, so targeting the Assault Gunboat to that power level would just add another pointless ship to the Imperial arsenal.

2) The TIE bomber is a far better bomber than the Gunboat, in that it is possible for it to drop bombs. This is the only role TIE bombers actually fulfil on-screen, so this isn't a theme problem.

22 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

Except you can't do 5 Flechette cannons because a Flechette Nu costs 21.

Fair point, I guess the next best thing is 5 with Tractor beams, but it does seem 4 is the magic number.

4 minutes ago, kraedin said:

1) The TIE bomber has been medicore-to-bad for the history of X-Wing, so targeting the Assault Gunboat to that power level would just add another pointless ship to the Imperial arsenal.

2) The TIE bomber is a far better bomber than the Gunboat, in that it is possible for it to drop bombs. This is the only role TIE bombers actually fulfil on-screen, so this isn't a theme problem.

My point is that it's sad that a new ship removes a much-loved old one's role by accident just to keep up with the game's power creep.

The TIE bomber may be the worst bomber in the game. At least the Punisher can equip bomblets and Adv.Sensors. If you're going to bomb in a tournament, it's Miranda, Nym or Nothing(tm).