Well, it's not Superior EPT by any means but could be good for some pilots, issue here is that ordinance is disposable. So for Scum I could maybe put it for Quinn Jast, being able to reload and Kimogila also being obviously good option. Other than that, can't think of anything else at the moment for Scum.

Of course it is suitable for Gunboat too. But it's not so crazy thing, it is made against Rebel meta, or so I understand it.

Also Harpoon Missiles is something to keep eye on too! Not sure if it works, but might, or with Assault Missiles. Because if you could do two extra damage against everything at range 1, it would be very powerful!

11 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

So what about TIE/D then? Does "after attacking" effects only trigger once as well??

No.

TIE/D IS an after attacking effect.

42 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

They are two attacks.

They just have one 'declare target' step and one 'after attacking' step.

So, Cluster Missiles is 2 attacks. . .

13 minutes ago, WAC47 said:

No. There are two different types of “attacks.” The first is a full attack sequence, where you have the opportunity to declare target. Those attacks fully resolve before moving through the chart again. Then there are attacks that must be performed against the same target. They resolve twice before resolving the “attack” sequence.

Go read the timing chart it explains it better than I just did.

and TIE/D generates 2 attacks, but according to the timing chart they are not the same thing.

Without prior knowledge and/or the availability of the timing chart, there is no way to understand that "perform this attack twice" is not they same as performing another attack.

That is not good wording, because in plain English, they are both 2 attacks. TLT and CM need some sort of keyword to make their attack mechanic obviously different to novices. Something like "perform this attack as 2 linked attacks." "Linked" becomes a keyword that you are not done with the attack until both sets of dice are rolled.

I never said it was good rules design

17 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

So, Cluster Missiles is 2 attacks. . .

and TIE/D generates 2 attacks, but according to the timing chart they are not the same thing.

Without prior knowledge and/or the availability of the timing chart, there is no way to understand that "perform this attack twice" is not they same as performing another attack.

That is not good wording, because in plain English, they are both 2 attacks. TLT and CM need some sort of keyword to make their attack mechanic obviously different to novices. Something like "perform this attack as 2 linked attacks." "Linked" becomes a keyword that you are not done with the attack until both sets of dice are rolled.

I never said it was good wording.

I said that's how it works.

You know how it works now, so can you stop arguing about it?

This is already the case, btw. 'Perform this attack twice' means 'do dice bits twice but the declare target and after attack bits only once'. 'After attacking, make another attack' e.g. Gunner, TIE/D, IGGy B, Double Edge, Baze Malbus etc, means 'go right through from Declare Target again'. The fact that they're similar doesn't mean they're not clearly distinct.

You have to read the rules to know it. But you have to read the rules to know e.g. that you can't TLT two different targets with the same TLT.

It's almost like you have to read the rules to know how to play the game.

2 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

It's almost like you have to Be a Rules Lawyer to know how to play the game.

19 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

It's almost like you have to read the rules to know how to play the game.

Which rules? The rules on the card? The rules in the core book? The FAQ??

In a game with rules on components of the game, the rules on those components should be explicit enough to play the game without mistakes.

Having to look up keywords like Jam, Reinforce, Focus, Evade, etc. is learning the game. Having to follow a flow chart and consult multiple documents for minutia is not ideal at best, and very confusing at worst.

There are still people who are not playing Minefield Mapper by RAW.

20 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

Which rules? The rules on the card? The rules in the core book? The FAQ??

In a game with rules on components of the game, the rules on those components should be explicit enough to play the game without mistakes.

Having to look up keywords like Jam, Reinforce, Focus, Evade, etc. is learning the game. Having to follow a flow chart and consult multiple documents for minutia is not ideal at best, and very confusing at worst.

There are still people who are not playing Minefield Mapper by RAW.

Do you think this ever came up, like at the Battle of Hoth?

AT-AT Pilot: Alright! I just made a couple attacks, now I'll shift my target and begin overcharging my cannons!

Rebel Trooper: You can't do that! You have to pick one or the other after your attack; not both!

AT-AT Pilot: What? I made two attacks, so I should be able to react twice!

Rebel Trooper: No way! You attacked twice, but it only counts as one attack!

AT-AT Copilot: I'd just like to weigh in that we've always fought battles as if it's two attacks, and no one's complained before.

Rebel Artillery Gunner: Well what cannon do you have equipped? Some of them are worded a little differently.

AT-AT Pilot: MS-1 Heavy Blaster Cannon.

Rebel Trooper: Oh, come on! They errata'd that thing ages ago!

(Everyone gets out their most-recent-printings of the Galactic Conventional Rules of Warfare and starts thumbing through them.)

3 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

Which rules? The rules on the card? The rules in the core book? The FAQ??

In a game with rules on components of the game, the rules on those components should be explicit enough to play the game without mistakes.

Having to look up keywords like Jam, Reinforce, Focus, Evade, etc. is learning the game. Having to follow a flow chart and consult multiple documents for minutia is not ideal at best, and very confusing at worst.

There are still people who are not playing Minefield Mapper by RAW.

All of the above.

They're all the rules.

(I concur, by the way, but this is a 5+-year-old game which is not written well from a technical perspective and has had a major revision since its last formal rulebook publication (and for some reason doesn't have a live rulebook online), so an FAQ is inevitable. There are three things to look at - the cards, the FAQ, and the rulebook. It's not hard.)

(Minefield mapper needs FAQing, just as an aside, I desperately hope we'll get an update next week after G4H drops.)

The fact that it could be done better, doesn't mean it's rocket surgery. There are three things you have to read.

Three. Two, if you only count things that won't actually be physically present on the table in most games.

33 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

Three. Two, if you only count things that won't actually be physically present on the table in most games.

The real kicker is that those 2 sources take precedence over the one that is always physically present. *sigh*

And, since they pretty clearly stated in the last interview that all they have time for is new ships, in seems unlikely any of these nuances will be ironed out any time soon.

I mean, no, the rulebook doesn't take precedence over what's on the table. That's how the rules work.

The rules provide the framework, the cards provide exceptions. The FAQ then takes precedence over what's on the table, but really not that often in practice.

There are literally 8 things which have actually been errated, and only about 4 of those have any meaningful gameplay changes.

The timing chart is a big thing, sure, and can take a little effort to internalise, but it really should have been in the rules all along (certainly, as soon as the 'after Defending' trigger came out a year and a half ago with Dengar and Valen Rudor), and as and when they revise the core rulebook, I'm sure it will be. Though as you note, I doubt that's happening in the foreseeable future.

It really seems like you're going out of your way to look for problems.

2 hours ago, thespaceinvader said:

I mean, no, the rulebook doesn't take precedence over what's on the table. That's how the rules work.

The rules provide the framework, the cards provide exceptions. The FAQ then takes precedence over what's on the table, but really not that often in practice.

There are literally 8 things which have actually been errated, and only about 4 of those have any meaningful gameplay changes.

The timing chart is a big thing, sure, and can take a little effort to internalise, but it really should have been in the rules all along (certainly, as soon as the 'after Defending' trigger came out a year and a half ago with Dengar and Valen Rudor), and as and when they revise the core rulebook, I'm sure it will be. Though as you note, I doubt that's happening in the foreseeable future.

It really seems like you're going out of your way to look for problems.

I wish it was a big thing. As in, a poster for my game room.

And no, not really. Your the only person who will talk to me today, thespaceinvader.

Is there a print shop somewhere nearby? It's not exactly hard to make posters

If swarms or voltron formations come into play I can see assault missiles working. Either every ship at range 1 takes a damage while the target ship takes more, or every ship at range 1 rolls for damage.

I think it has potential on unguided rockets since there are a ton of 1 agility ships out there. But I doubt I will fly it much

Nera Dantels with Saturation Salvo, Munitions Failsafe and Flechette Torpedoes would be fun. She's a stress turret that also does splash damage.

Flavor with FCS for action efficiency or Accruacy Corrector to make sure you keep missing (or to help her primary hit on bad dice rolls)

Would it see play at top tables? ABOSOULTELY NOT. Would it be fun to mess around with casually? YESSS

I think for the next FAQ the munition failsafe will be discarded if the attacker deal at least on damage with SS.

13 minutes ago, player2422845 said:

I think for the next FAQ the munition failsafe will be discarded if the attacker deal at least on damage with SS.

lol no it won't.

10 minutes ago, player2422845 said:

I think for the next FAQ the munition failsafe will be discarded if the attacker deal at least on damage with SS.

Why? We've just had a stretch where rebel jank and fsr variants taught us single point damage spread around several ships in a list isn't going to get far

Darth Vader, TIE/x1, Sat Salvo, Acc Corrector, Munitions Failsafe, Concussion Missiles Harpoon Missiles- 35pts.

You can choose whatever EPT carrying pilot you want if you want to shave points off but the actions and PS are good for getting locks, or upgrade the missiles to Homing if you are worried about 4 Agility defenders, otherwise Concussion Harpoon will work against 3 Agility and below. You can cancel dice with the AC and not add the hits so you always miss and keep the missile (failsafe) for when you want to trigger the salvo effect.

I have no idea if this will actually be worth it on the table.

10 minutes ago, kris40k said:

Darth Vader, TIE/x1, Sat Salvo, Acc Corrector, Munitions Failsafe, Concussion Missiles - 35pts.

You can choose whatever EPT carrying pilot you want if you want to shave points off but the actions and PS are good for getting locks, or upgrade the missiles to Homing if you are worried about 4 Agility defenders, otherwise Concussion will work against 3 Agility and below. You can cancel dice with the AC and not add the hits so you always miss and keep the missile (failsafe) for when you want to trigger the salvo effect.

I have no idea if this will actually be worth it on the table.

No, it won't.

Paying 5 points to get a 1-die sort-of-autoblaster and NOT getting ATC or Engine is a terrible, terrible idea.

2 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

No, it won't.

Paying 5 points to get a 1-die sort-of-autoblaster and NOT getting ATC or Engine is a terrible, terrible idea.

Losing EU does suck. Still have BR, but no boost on Vader is meh. Having both really makes him shine, but I think something that is built for salvo really needs to be flown with a different mindset than normal Vader.

You lose ATC but get AC, so your pinging away for 2 auto hits with the main guns instead of roll 2 + 1 auto crit. /shrug.

I don't think its good, but I'd put in on the table to mess around with.

On ‎21‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 0:54 PM, thespaceinvader said:

Yes. It does.

Do what the cards say. The Vaksai card syas the equipped upgrqdes reduce their cost by one, so a Vaksai cruise Missile costs 2, and SS works on AGI 1 or lower in this context.

thanks! I think I like Saturation salvo in Vaskai only with homing missiles or harpoon

Double Edge-TLT-Unguided Rockets-Saturation Salvo: 28 points

Cheaper then most aces, fires with Rockets, if he misses, he could still do one damage and then another two.

Great against the current meta of Nym, Dengar, and Biggs, no one has three agility (except me who still flies Defenders, Interceptors, and Advanced in the same list).