2 hours ago, Rakaydos said:

excuse me... tournment rules are live. Biggs got unbanned from protecting epic ships.

Yes Biggs is good to affect huge ships. But there is a wording issue in the tokens section of huge ship rules that could be argued disallow esege from assisting. I hope they fix it to match the email that is floating around. But the new tourney regs don't do that.

On 1/16/2018 at 8:55 PM, DarthGrixis said:

With a friend we like playing epic at home and we come with a couple of homebrew house rules to have more building options for epic ships:

I would like to know your thoughts and please try to be constructive:

1. Team slot can be use for Team or non-unique crew upgrade card

2. All hardpoint weapons require 1 energy to fire (instead of 2 energy)

We always find ourselfs trying to use iconic heros and villains, but it seems that weapons engineer is a must on the Raider, Han+Weapons engineer also very strong on CR-90. These idea lets us use crew cards like weapons engineer, shield techn and repair droids using the Team slots (we never fully use them anyway) and let the crew slots free to use Tarkin, Vader, Ozzel, etc...

number 2 is to make sure you don´ t run out of energy so easily, so we can still use other upgrade cards that requires energy, like gunnery team. I still think that huge ships could still run out of energy if not use properly, so energy management will remain a very important thing to pilot them.

I have a lot of other terrible ideas, for example revise the Huge only crew cards, like Admiral Ozzel, Grand Moff Tarkin and General Dodonna, these are high military commanders, perhaps with them leading the huge ship the Pilot skill could receive a boost? (acting like a veterans instincts for huge ships) after all I would guess Tarkin is a better ship commander than a Weapons Engineer.

Okay well here is my take.

1. Well it makes somewhat sense as a team would take up more room than a single passenger. Back when the CR-90 first came out you had 3 different teams but the Tantive IV title gave your ship a 4th team slot that at the time could not be used until the Gozanti came out. However, that is where X-wing comes in with the abstraction over simulation again. Right now you have three upgrades representing a passenger that can't exactly sit on the lap of an X-wing pilot. You have the basic <crew> which is pretty much a single seat as it often refers to unique individuals that are for the most part by themselves. Then you have the <team> which is a group of individuals trained for a specific task that will require them to work together. Last is the double crew <crew><crew> upgrades which represents either a large individual or an important individual with accompanying retinue, or a group of large individuals? The big question is which is larger, the team or the double crew? But again that goes to tell you that a ship with 2 crew slots is representing more than just 2 additional seats in the cockpit.
2. Well you do have hardpoint weapons that require only 1 energy. Quad Laser Turrets only require you to spend one energy. You can carry two so you can spend a 2nd energy in case the first shot misses. Not to mention the Gozanti's turret hardpoint dual laser turret only uses 1 energy. It is mostly the hardpoints that go up to range 4 & 5 that requires 2 energy to fire.

As for house rules the best one I can think of (especially if using ordnance tubes) is allowing more than 1 blue target lock token on your ship. The target lock action still only gives 1 red and 1 blue (unless you have a weapons engineer) and you still cant have more than one red target lock token on the same ship. OR at the very least allow 1 blue target lock token for each section (weapons engineer can up it to two if you put a weapons engineer on each section you can have 4 different ships locked).

double post bug (new forum updates and they still got em)

I'd be nice to have some sort of guideline to work out collisions when two huge ships overlap and the overlapping ship was attempting to execute a Bank maneuver. Unlike smaller ships, you can't "slide back" along the path of the maneuver template (since banking is like a teleport from A to B for huge ships), and also unlike small ships the exact placement of a huge ship can be the difference between crushing a 50pt ship or not.

On 1/18/2018 at 7:47 AM, Vineheart01 said:

Engine Booster is a 1fwd in the manner of usual epic ship movements. Its not using the 1fwd template and hopping it like other ships when they boost.

That would be one HECK of a speed buff if it hopped a 1fwd.

And if they somehow royally effed up the ruling on that and they do actually hop a 1fwd template....wtf ffg....

I call it the "Holdo Maneuver"...

Ok, so a few things that I would like addressed in a epic tournament FAQ or rule update:

- Harpoons against huge ships. We applied RAW and extrapolated from the assault missile (from huge ship rules), but a small paragraph on it might be good.

- Asteroid placement: the "at" and "within" can be confusing for new epic players. Having a full example a bit like the autothrusters would cut down on a lot of explaining.

- Boba Fett: if a face up card was dealt to the fore section, can Boba get rid of a card on the aft section?

- A few other things that slip my mind at this moment.

On 2/14/2018 at 9:23 AM, dotswarlock said:

Ok, so a few things that I would like addressed in a epic tournament FAQ or rule update:

- Harpoons against huge ships. We applied RAW and extrapolated from the assault missile (from huge ship rules), but a small paragraph on it might be good.

- Asteroid placement: the "at" and "within" can be confusing for new epic players. Having a full example a bit like the autothrusters would cut down on a lot of explaining.

- Boba Fett: if a face up card was dealt to the fore section, can Boba get rid of a card on the aft section?

- A few other things that slip my mind at this moment.

Well, Harpoons no longer "splash" damage from huge ships, since Huge Ships are now prevented from being assigned Condition Cards (Harpooned is a condition).

AT/WITHIN is explained in detail in the general rules, I assume that'll have to be good enough, since the Epic documents don't typically retread information, but rather supplement the standard rules documents with Epic-Specific information.

I would say that Boba can discard an upgrade card from either section, since for all other purposes a dual-card huge ship is treated as a single ship, with the only exception being how attackers target it and deal damage during attack.

On 2/14/2018 at 6:23 AM, dotswarlock said:

Ok, so a few things that I would like addressed in a epic tournament FAQ or rule update:

- Harpoons against huge ships. We applied RAW and extrapolated from the assault missile (from huge ship rules), but a small paragraph on it might be good.

- Asteroid placement: the "at" and "within" can be confusing for new epic players. Having a full example a bit like the autothrusters would cut down on a lot of explaining.

- Boba Fett: if a face up card was dealt to the fore section, can Boba get rid of a card on the aft section?

- A few other things that slip my mind at this moment.

1. Yup, harpoon cannot penetrate the thick plate armor of capital ships.
2. at and within applies the same meaning in standard so I don't think it is going to be much confusion there. New players are usually going to play a game of standard X-wing first.
3. Good question. I am going to go with yes but a TO may rule otherwise.

21 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

1. Yup, harpoon cannot penetrate the thick plate armor of capital ships.
2. at and within applies the same meaning in standard so I don't think it is going to be much confusion there. New players are usually going to play a game of standard X-wing first.
3. Good question. I am going to go with yes but a TO may rule otherwise.

"AT: a ship is at a specified range if the closest point of its base falls inside that range."

"WITHIN: a ship is within a specified range if the entirety of its base falls inside that range."

Quoted from the standard rules reference.

They are not the same meaning which is why they have separate definitions, but you're right that people should be familiar with standard before epic.

2 minutes ago, Dabirdisdaword said:

"AT: a ship is at a specified range if the closest point of its base falls inside that range."

"WITHIN: a ship is within a specified range if the entirety of its base falls inside that range."

Quoted from the standard rules reference.

They are not the same meaning which is why they have separate definitions, but you're right that people should be familiar with standard before epic.

You misread, they are the same in both epic and standard as the meaning of "within" doesn't change between the two formats, not that it is the same as "at".

1 minute ago, Marinealver said:

You misread, they are the same in both epic and standard as the meaning of "within" doesn't change between the two formats, not that it is the same as "at".

Fair enough, but your writing sure doesn't read that way.

As below

On 17/01/2018 at 4:55 AM, DarthGrixis said:

All hardpoint weapons require 1 energy to fire (instead of 2 energy)

Are you assigning energy to your huge ship before starting play as per tournament rule (“Players assign Energy tokens to each of their Huge ships and their equipped secondary weapons up to their respective energy limits.”)? This might help you instead of needing a house rule.

To me part of the fun is energy management! When huge ships get slowly battered and ground down I love it. They would last a very long time (too long?) with more energy available as you can perform more recover actions (and with Shield Technician spend only what you need).

One of the points in the new Epic FAQ that would need clarification is this (see part in bold):

"Target Lock Tokens
A ship that acquires a target lock on a huge ship must acquire that lock on a single section of the huge ship. The closest point of the chosen section must be within range. The red target lock token is placed next to the chosen section of the huge ship and its effect only applies to that section ."

What is the impact of that rule when pilot abilities or upgrade cards affect "the defender"? For example:

- Spend target lock for missiles and torpedoes, that one seems pretty easy

- Omega Leader's ability: that one is harder to rule.

2 hours ago, dotswarlock said:

One of the points in the new Epic FAQ that would need clarification is this (see part in bold):

"Target Lock Tokens
A ship that acquires a target lock on a huge ship must acquire that lock on a single section of the huge ship. The closest point of the chosen section must be within range. The red target lock token is placed next to the chosen section of the huge ship and its effect only applies to that section ."

What is the impact of that rule when pilot abilities or upgrade cards affect "the defender"? For example:

- Spend target lock for missiles and torpedoes, that one seems pretty easy

- Omega Leader's ability: that one is harder to rule.

When a ship is attacking a Huge ship, in essence it treats the Huge ship as two separate ships, the fore and the aft. So if you have the front locked and want to use your proton torpedo, but you are at range 1 of the fore and range 2 of the aft, you cannot spend the lock you have on the fore to fire that torpedo at the aft. You would have to find a different mode of attacking. So yeah, its pretty clear.

Where it gets fuzzy is when the Huge ship shoots back. It places its blue lock on any part of itself and it can use that lock when attacking with a weapon that is has equipped to either its fore or its aft.

That makes the case of Omega Leader a good question. Most effects that affect a "ship" affect the entirety of a huge ship often with either the attacker or defender deciding which section takes the effect. Since Omega Leader says, "Enemy ships you have locked..." I would think that meant anything the "ship" throws at him whether its attacking from the fore or aft.

I may be wrong, but that seems to follow based on other rules.

IMHO there are two kinds of interactions between huge and small/large-based ships, which should be looked at or at least are up for a debate.

These quite distinct interactions, even if they are legal on paper are banned in my playgroup, simply because they cause a very one-dimensional way of how certain huge ships are played. Additionally these interactions neither seem thematic or "logical" but rather ... weird (probably not even intended by FFG?). I mean how is the "leadership", "aura" or whatever of Howlrunner supposed to increase the accuracy of a Raider's cannon-fire? Seems odd.

Interactions are:

1. Small- and large-based ships cannot alter the pilot value of huge ships. That is the abilities of Roark Garnet (Rebel HWK), Torkhil Mux (Scum HWK) or the EPTs Swarm Tactics and Decoy become invalid.
2. Small- and large-based ships should not be able to grant or force re-rolls to a huge ship, grant additional dice or even reduce dice rolled directly. This applies for offence and defense likewise, e. g. Captain Jonus, Howlrunner, Jan-Ors (Rebel HWK), M9-G8 (Astromech),
3. Condition cards do not apply to huge ships --> already ruled by FFG in the latest FAQ (or can you image that a Raider is really impressed or distracted by the "suppressive fire" of a single tie fighter?)
4. Ships like Captain Kagi or Omega Leader should maybe get the Biggs Darklighter treatment as their abilities can be ignored by huge ships. Same could aplly for the EPT "Draw their fire"

These are very specific interactions (especially the 1.-3.), which at least for us are contrary to the larger scale and spirit of epic, where swarms supported by capital ships clash not huge ships, each with two "support" ships.

"Ok"-ish interactions on the other hand are granting target locks to huge ships, that is e. g. Systems Officer, Colonel Jendon, Dutch Vander, Shara Bey, Bodhi Rook (U Wing) seem reasonable (good coordination, communication of target coordinates, "laser" target marking... get your imagination going...).

And some cards need the Agent Kallus treatment and should not affect huge ships , e. g. A Score To Settle.

20 hours ago, chapterII said:

IMHO there are two kinds of interactions between huge and small/large-based ships, which should be looked at or at least are up for a debate.

These quite distinct interactions, even if they are legal on paper are banned in my playgroup, simply because they cause a very one-dimensional way of how certain huge ships are played. Additionally these interactions neither seem thematic or "logical" but rather ... weird (probably not even intended by FFG?). I mean how is the "leadership", "aura" or whatever of Howlrunner supposed to increase the accuracy of a Raider's cannon-fire? Seems odd.

Interactions are:

1. Small- and large-based ships cannot alter the pilot value of huge ships. That is the abilities of Roark Garnet (Rebel HWK), Torkhil Mux (Scum HWK) or the EPTs Swarm Tactics and Decoy become invalid.
2. Small- and large-based ships should not be able to grant or force re-rolls to a huge ship, grant additional dice or even reduce dice rolled directly. This applies for offence and defense likewise, e. g. Captain Jonus, Howlrunner, Jan-Ors (Rebel HWK), M9-G8 (Astromech),
3. Condition cards do not apply to huge ships --> already ruled by FFG in the latest FAQ (or can you image that a Raider is really impressed or distracted by the "suppressive fire" of a single tie fighter?)
4. Ships like Captain Kagi or Omega Leader should maybe get the Biggs Darklighter treatment as their abilities can be ignored by huge ships. Same could aplly for the EPT "Draw their fire"

These are very specific interactions (especially the 1.-3.), which at least for us are contrary to the larger scale and spirit of epic, where swarms supported by capital ships clash not huge ships, each with two "support" ships.

"Ok"-ish interactions on the other hand are granting target locks to huge ships, that is e. g. Systems Officer, Colonel Jendon, Dutch Vander, Shara Bey, Bodhi Rook (U Wing) seem reasonable (good coordination, communication of target coordinates, "laser" target marking... get your imagination going...).

And some cards need the Agent Kallus treatment and should not affect huge ships , e. g. A Score To Settle.

A score to settle can't affect huge ships because huge ships don't get conditions

Thx for this catch, that one slipped me.

Anything to add in terms of the other more important, potentially controversial issues I brought up for discussion regarding the interaction of small/large with huge ships?

I mean... it's pretty clear that in their most recent faqs and regs for epic that they encourage having smalls and large affect huges.

The Feb faq clearly specifies that esege can assist in dice modification for epics.This is likely because point for point the epics just aren't as efficient as smalls and larges. So the support buffs help bring them in line. You may find it thematically odd, but if they didn't work that way the viability of huge ships drops through the floor.

So no nothing to add beyond what ffg added, which is smalls can buff huges.

This thread is a bit outdated in that the faq we were expecting and discussing has dropped about a month after the thread started so the questions here have largely been answered.

On 4/2/2018 at 12:58 PM, Dabirdisdaword said:

A score to settle can't affect huge ships because huge ships don't get conditions

I wish they wrote this rule differently, and said "huge ships cannot receive conditions which are not huge ship only" instead of "cannot receive conditions [at all]." There aren't any Huge Ship Only conditions, and likely won't be any time soon, since there doesn't appear to be a new Epic ship in the pipeline, but now if there is such an Epic ship eventually, and there is an Epic-oriented upgrade which applies a condition, they'll need to rewrite the rules, rather than having pre-written the exception now.

What's going to happen to Epic when Saw releases? It sounds kind of broken on an epic ship with four attacks and Recovery.

56 minutes ago, D00kies said:

What's going to happen to Epic when Saw releases? It sounds kind of broken on an epic ship with four attacks and Recovery.

Perhaps, but thematically I would love to see the huge ships stomp on fighters so Im ok with it. The first few waves of epic have generally left huge ships lacking. Later stuff has brought them up a bit to where they can be worth their points.

I almost wish all huge weapons were one more red die than they are. And I wish Ion batteries did two damage instead of a crit.

Update the Gozanti's list of what it can carrier. (Strikers!!!)

Get rid of the "Huge ship only" restriction on Raymus Antilles. (A guy can dream!)

On 4/23/2018 at 11:55 AM, D00kies said:

What's going to happen to Epic when Saw releases? It sounds kind of broken on an epic ship with four attacks and Recovery.

I mean, Saw is kinda Vader? Vader does two-self-damage, and inflicts an automatic crit regardless of dice. Saw does one damage, and has a super-crit-focus, which can still be evaded by dice and effects. Vader Raider is kinda a thing, right? But I don't think it's so much of a thing that it rules Epic.