So at my store someone made some new cardboard bases with the bullseye firing arc on them for a couple of ships, which were not the Kimogila. Yes this is the same guy who has a metal map, with magnet bases, and tokens for the entire game.

Any way the template moves and can move a bit which means the Bullseye arc can either just barely hit or just barely miss.

To fix this; The guy at my store 3d printed a little plastic device which slide into the number of any base, then he it forces the bullseye arc to be perfectly straight. Why did FFG not do something like this, It would be easy to include and would force correct placement of the template. Plus eventually any ship could have them, just sell the little plastic device separately.

I was wondering if anyone else has had any chance to test this, (Not using vassal, because if forces correct placement everytime.)

Thanks,

Isn't the bullseye arc the same width as the front guides? Just place a template in there to measure.

23 minutes ago, HolySorcerer said:

Isn't the bullseye arc the same width as the front guides? Just place a template in there to measure.

This. This is exactly how I plan to use the bullseye firing arc.

I think the OP is saying that the problem is templates always have a bit of "wiggle." Depends who is holding the template when you measure.

It’s not the template, it’s the nubs. I think the rules insert card will say nubs.

4 minutes ago, gamblertuba said:

I think the OP is saying that the problem is templates always have a bit of "wiggle." Depends who is holding the template when you measure.

There is a little play in there. Sometimes that play is the difference between hitting an asteroid or not.

Is the bull's-eye arc the width of a maneuver template or the width of a range ruler...

Just now, JediRush24 said:

Is the bull's-eye arc the width of a maneuver template or the width of a range ruler...

Maneuver template.

1 minute ago, Pooleman said:

Maneuver template.

I'm not so sure about that:

Looks closer to range ruler size. Maybe even between the two. But it's not movement template size. It's closer in than that.

****.. that's a big (expletive deleted) arc .. is it too much?

If it is more narrow than the nuns then I’m sure some people will be making cheap templates that fit snugly into the nub guides but them come in to represent the width of the bullseye arc.

Why do you all want to use a template or range ruler between the nubs?!

There are ships in the way, and most likely in a distance that does not perfectly fit a template or range ruler inbetween...

Lasers are the way to go.

And alternativel align a range ruler on the outside of the printed arc

I rarely have a problem with loose ship tokens on small bases - if anything, they're usually too snug.

(large are a different matter)

Perhaps the custom-made proxies were slightly under-sized...?

I have never had a cardboard base be too small for the plastic. As far as measuring inaccuracies go, it's just a part of tabletop war gaming. Sometimes you accidentally nudge a ship or measure a hair's breadth too far outside or inside the firing arc. It's human error and it tends to benefit both you and your opponent throughout the game. You should always try to minimize it but it will never be perfect in face to face non-vassal games.

Just use a laser as if you were going to use firing arcs.

IMHO the movement selection is not suitable for a bulls-eye firing arc. Some sort of oblique movement to move between 1 and 45 degrees. Maybe in the start of the planning phase so it isn't as a hidden maneuver but more of a part of the planning phase. But maybe later after other factions beside scum gets special rules, like after the Imperials get their bulls-eye firing arc next maybe?

I'm sensing big issues ahead from this one, it seems unnecessarily fickle. The space to align the measuring ruler has even less than the normal arc

I generally use a laser most of the time anyway so I'll be fine

Well, how do people deal with shots that may or may not be in their regular forward, 180° or rear arcs?

The same common sense, courtesy and fair play should apply here as well; It's not as dire as one might think.

3 hours ago, Force Majeure said:

Well, how do people deal with shots that may or may not be in their regular forward, 180° or rear arcs?

The same common sense, courtesy and fair play should apply here as well; It's not as dire as one might think.

Exactly! It is a line in a firing arc like any other. Saying otherwise seems unneccesary?

Indeed, Bullseye is a lot easier to line up perpendicular, because you CAN put something perpendicular to the base to pine up with, whereas for the corner lines you can't. I'm surprised noone's made a tool for that yet though.

LAZORS

1 hour ago, RufusDaMan said:

LAZORS

What are you calling me?!?

You be LAZOR yourself!

( )

I have always found using templates to be more accurate than using laser pointers

It's the range ruler for measuring the arc, It has some play for sure. My buddy 3d printed a plastic insert which slides into your base and forces the template to be placed correctly. I just wish FFG did something like this.

On 11/30/2017 at 7:25 AM, Hooba Jooba said:

I have always found using templates to be more accurate than using laser pointers

When aligning the laser, a tiny movement can make a huge difference. I use a laser when there's lots of ships in the way, but I prefer to use a template edge.