I'd love to see a 2-missile-attack-per-turn "massed launch" option, but I agree that that then puts you in "look, twin harpoons!" territory.

Forcing you to fire at two separate targets stops it being "take eight damage and die" which wouldn't be healthy for the game, but then managing the need for target locks makes it really awkward, necessitating something like Targeting Synchroniser or Redline spending time setting up twin locks.

As far as I understand, the Punisher's key trait was the head-on attack run - whether with bombs or missiles - as opposed to the hit-and-run techniques now used by SLAM K-wings and gunboats.

I would probably go with something like this:

TIE/IT

Title. TIE Punisher Only.

You may equip an additional [system] upgrade.

When you reveal a green maneuver, you may execute a free Reinforce action.

You must place the Reinforce token with the fore side face-up.

Cost: ?

I would say 0 - a negative cost is possible, but that's a massive chunk of capability; even if it's just Collision Detector and a free Reinforce token for head-on attacks.

Whoever said, "and of course, Ruthlessness is never a good option for any Imp ship, unless the ship is durable and has multiple modified shots per turn" might be technically correct when placing it within a Punisher thread, but it makes me sad. No, it makes me downright angry. In typical Imperial Commander fashion, I can't help but think they should be immediately taken to the closest desolate planet and summarily shot.

1 hour ago, Magnus Grendel said:

I'd love to see a 2-missile-attack-per-turn "massed launch" option, but I agree that that then puts you in "look, twin harpoons!" territory.

Forcing you to fire at two separate targets stops it being "take eight damage and die" which wouldn't be healthy for the game, but then managing the need for target locks makes it really awkward, necessitating something like Targeting Synchroniser or Redline spending time setting up twin locks.

As far as I understand, the Punisher's key trait was the head-on attack run - whether with bombs or missiles - as opposed to the hit-and-run techniques now used by SLAM K-wings and gunboats.

I would probably go with something like this:

TIE/IT

Title. TIE Punisher Only.

You may equip an additional [system] upgrade.

When you reveal a green maneuver, you may execute a free Reinforce action.

You must place the Reinforce token with the fore side face-up.

Cost: ?

I would say 0 - a negative cost is possible, but that's a massive chunk of capability; even if it's just Collision Detector and a free Reinforce token for head-on attacks.

This would enhance the durability.

I better like the idea that you can have say two target locks on different targets and attack them both, if the targets are both in your arc, using the same secondary weapon.

And an title that grants EPT

4 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

Whoever said, "and of course, Ruthlessness is never a good option for any Imp ship, unless the ship is durable and has multiple modified shots per turn" might be technically correct when placing it within a Punisher thread, but it makes me sad. No, it makes me downright angry. In typical Imperial Commander fashion, I can't help but think they should be immediately taken to the closest desolate planet and summarily shot.

It is your right to do so!

Perhaps a new bomb type is needed.

Chaff. 1 point.

When you reveal a maneuver, you may discard this card. If you do, remove all red target locks from your ship and add an evade token.

Alternatively:

Scrambler buoy

two bomb icons, 3 points

when you reveal a maneuver, you can remove a red target lock from your ship and add an evade.

this takes two bomb slots, provides some durability, and is not discardable. Only a few ships can take it, namely the punisher.

1 hour ago, GeneralBergfrühling said:

This would enhance the durability.

I better like the idea that you can have say two target locks on different targets and attack them both, if the targets are both in your arc, using the same secondary weapon.

And an title that grants EPT

The 'lock two targets' is essentially weapons engineer, but it's going to interact weirdly with Redline's ability.

And the EPT isn't, in theory, needed. Miranda Doni, and Zeta Specialists, do perfectly well without them because their other upgrade bars cover it. It wouldn't be a bad idea but I wouldn't want two versions of the TIE/IT title, but nor would I want elite cutlass squadrons.

The problem is that the punisher's upgrade bar is actually second-rate; aside from the systems slot - all the other upgrade slots are actually just ammo magazines. Compare the K-wing (turret, crew) and scurrg (turret, crew or turret, systems, astromech).

31 minutes ago, Magnus Grendel said:

The 'lock two targets' is essentially weapons engineer, but it's going to interact weirdly with Redline's ability.

And the EPT isn't, in theory, needed. Miranda Doni, and Zeta Specialists, do perfectly well without them because their other upgrade bars cover it. It wouldn't be a bad idea but I wouldn't want two versions of the TIE/IT title, but nor would I want elite cutlass squadrons.

The problem is that the punisher's upgrade bar is actually second-rate; aside from the systems slot - all the other upgrade slots are actually just ammo magazines. Compare the K-wing (turret, crew) and scurrg (turret, crew or turret, systems, astromech).

Redline would have four target locks in total. Wow - those bags of target lock tokens would have a use, finally! I would LOVE this Redline. I hope its a she

EPT is especially needed for Saturation Salvo and Ruthlessness or Predator, if your name isn't Redline.

I fixed your idea to let them have two actions, so PTL isn't needed:

When you reveal a green maneuver, you may execute a free Reinforce action.

46 minutes ago, GeneralBergfrühling said:

Redline would have four target locks in total.

No, he won't. Because his ability 'limits' him to two target locks at once rather than simply saying 'one additional lock'.

In order to lock-and-fire at two separate targets, you'll need prerequisite tokens for both shots without messing this around.

• Assume your 'linked launchers' title/upgrade/whatever lets you shoot twice.
• That would be a title, because you wouldn't want it to be a system (lose fire control system) or modification (lose long range scanners/guidance chips) because losing those upgrades seriously impacts the value of ordnance.
• You would want to mandate that it be a different target because double-tapping someone with harpoon missiles is potentially game-breaking. Fortunately, missiles are already arc-locked and range-locked, so a 'free second shot' isn't too flexible.
• Rules line 1 is "Once per round, after you perform an attack with a [torpedo] or [missile] secondary weapon, you may perform another attack with a [torpedo] or [missile] secondary weapon against a different ship. You cannot attack again this round."
• That already allows you to play John Woo gunslinger with unguided rockets, provided you don't spend a focus token on your first shot. At 2 points, that's pretty good value for money and doesn't need additional help.
• Double-tapping XX-23 S-Thread Tracers is pointless, and firing tracers followed by non-tracer missiles is a problem that provides its own solution.
• If you want to use proton rockets in an agility 1 TIE/IT, you need your head examining for reasons unconnected to any 'fix' titles.
• Target Lock missiles need a new lock for the second shot - yes, you could functionally restrict it to missiles which don't need to spend the lock, but (a) that's arbitrarilty limiting your choice of weapon and besides, the assumption that you'll spend the lock to reroll attack dice is included in the expected 'punch' of the missile relative to those who say "spend your lock to perform this attack".
• I would suggest that after you perform an attack, you are allowed to "acquire a target lock on another enemy ship within (range 1? range 1-2?) of the defender and then perform another...".
• That way it leaves you with options - fire two missiles at close opponents, or fire a missile and relock with fire control, or (in the case of redline) do both!

in that scenario, could just fire the unguided first. Both missiles/torps trigger the title and the title doesnt specify what kind of missile/torp needs to be fired first.
That way you have no issue of burning the focus before the unguided goes off.

29 minutes ago, Magnus Grendel said:

No, he won't. Because his ability 'limits' him to two target locks at once rather than simply saying 'one additional lock'.

In order to lock-and-fire at two separate targets, you'll need prerequisite tokens for both shots without messing this around.

• Assume your 'linked launchers' title/upgrade/whatever lets you shoot twice.
• That would be a title, because you wouldn't want it to be a system (lose fire control system) or modification (lose long range scanners/guidance chips) because losing those upgrades seriously impacts the value of ordnance.
• You would want to mandate that it be a different target because double-tapping someone with harpoon missiles is potentially game-breaking. Fortunately, missiles are already arc-locked and range-locked, so a 'free second shot' isn't too flexible.
• Rules line 1 is "Once per round, after you perform an attack with a [torpedo] or [missile] secondary weapon, you may perform another attack with a [torpedo] or [missile] secondary weapon against a different ship. You cannot attack again this round."
• That already allows you to play John Woo gunslinger with unguided rockets, provided you don't spend a focus token on your first shot. At 2 points, that's pretty good value for money and doesn't need additional help.
• Double-tapping XX-23 S-Thread Tracers is pointless, and firing tracers followed by non-tracer missiles is a problem that provides its own solution.
• If you want to use proton rockets in an agility 1 TIE/IT, you need your head examining for reasons unconnected to any 'fix' titles.
• Target Lock missiles need a new lock for the second shot - yes, you could functionally restrict it to missiles which don't need to spend the lock, but (a) that's arbitrarilty limiting your choice of weapon and besides, the assumption that you'll spend the lock to reroll attack dice is included in the expected 'punch' of the missile relative to those who say "spend your lock to perform this attack".
• I would suggest that after you perform an attack, you are allowed to "acquire a target lock on another enemy ship within (range 1? range 1-2?) of the defender and then perform another...".
• That way it leaves you with options - fire two missiles at close opponents, or fire a missile and relock with fire control, or (in the case of redline) do both!

As a Game Designer, you can fix things the way you want to let them work. Just errata a bit here and there - and Redline could have 2x2 TL. No problem.

The idea is to use the SAME secondary weap for the 2 attacks - and then discard it. Unless there will be Ordnance Tubes as well. This means not necessarily that all types of ammunition would make sense with this mechanic. so you could use Unguided rockets - but you can't spend the focus in your first attack, unless you want to sacrifice your second attack, because there is no more focus, which is required to fire. I hope you get the idea.

My proposal is any of the following (I'd like to see at least 4/6)

TIE/IT
Tie Punisher Only. Title.

• You may equip any number of "TIE only" modifications.
• When defending, you may cancel any [hit] result by discarding one equipped [bomb], [missile], or [torpedo] upgrades.
• When attacking with a secondary weapon that instructs you to "discard this card to perform this attack," you may also perform that attack at an additional legal target.
• You can gain and maintain an additional target lock on a different ship.
• You may drop an additional bomb using the "3" template. If you place two bombs this turn, skip your attack action during the Combat phase.
  

1. The first clause allows use of both Lightweight frame and Twin Ion Engine Mk 2. The original idea in my head was limiting these bonus modifications to just "TIE only" but seeing as there are presently only 2 such modifications for 3 total squad points, I don't see the need to specify you cannot take an additional modification. Perhaps it would be ruled differently, but I would like feedback on this idea.
2. The second clause makes the ship far more survivable, as some have already pitched. I don't take credit for this idea.
3. The third clause makes Punishers, well, punishing.
4. The fourth clause permits the third one to fire at multiple targets. The third clause mostly needs this.
5. The fifth clause is something that perhaps should be a TIE Bomber and Punisher only item, so perhaps it should be saved for elsewhere. It also gives them more versatility in bombs than most, and permits the use of a dropped and launched bomb in the same turn, or the ability to drop 2 bombs.