I'm for making them a little more hardier, a Gozanti can go down in one round, last Epic game I got hammered by two A-wings with Cruise missiles 8 hits in total!
Possibly more crew slots and two Mods instead of one. Plus as has been said raise the gun range on Quads and Ions and even maybe a new cannon?
I often play Rebels and use the CR90, the primary is good and Turbos ok for other Epics but once those smaller ships are at range 3 then you only really have quads to deal damage.

EPIC IS AWESOME

I love Epic, and I love playing Huge ships.

But it does feel like they just get slaughtered by the smaller fighters.

Personally, I'd give Huge ships two actions each, per card. So they can really start to go to town with all that cool stuff they can do, jamming enemy ships, coordinating their own ships, passing out target locks, etc etc.

I'd also give all the Huge ships a boost in shield and hull. That something like the CR90 has only 8 shields is simply not enough. 15 at the very least, and even 20 would be reasonable.

Finally, I'd re-jig the big guns on most ships so that they have some variation of "if this attack hits, discard all damage dice and deal six damage to the defender". Getting hit by a capital ship turbolaser should be unlikely, but even a clip from one should be fatal to a snubfighter.

Having said that though, I think capital ships should also have smaller point-defence weapons like they do, so they can defend themselves from enemy fighters.

Energy is mostly fine, but adding one to each move would keep the flow strong while still requiring you to manage your supplies carefully.

EDIT: Also, I don't like the way that ships with a crippled fore-section just become massive battering rams. It feels a bit gimmicky, not very Star Wars, and pretty lame when you just mash your busted CR90 into the face of your opponents Raider and there's literally nothing they can do about it. If damage carried on from the crippled section into the functional section then this would be less of a problem. It might still happen, but it would give you more options to destroy the crippled ship and it would make ramming less attractive since you'd still take damage.

Oh, and I'm all for Star Destroyers in Epic, but only if they're big enough that I can fit the CR90 inside their docking bay...

Something like the Arquitens might be more reasonable, and possible a Brahatok or even a Nebulon B for Rebels...

6 hours ago, Chucknuckle said:

Personally, I'd give Huge ships two actions each, per card. So they can really start to go to town with all that cool stuff they can do, jamming enemy ships, coordinating their own ships, passing out target locks, etc etc.

I'd also give all the Huge ships a boost in shield and hull. That something like the CR90 has only 8 shields is simply not enough. 15 at the very least, and even 20 would be reasonable.

Finally, I'd re-jig the big guns on most ships so that they have some variation of "if this attack hits, discard all damage dice and deal six damage to the defender". Getting hit by a capital ship turbolaser should be unlikely, but even a clip from one should be fatal to a snubfighter.

+1 to all three suggestions. I might even do a step forward and do the opposite damage rules for primary weapons against huge ships: "deal one damage, then cancel all dice." You'd need ordnance to really cripple them.

4 hours ago, impspy said:

+1 to all three suggestions. I might even do a step forward and do the opposite damage rules for primary weapons against huge ships: "deal one damage, then cancel all dice." You'd need ordnance to really cripple them.

I did think about it, but ordnance in X Wing is pretty clumsily handled to start with, and those snubfighters are carrying some pretty darn big guns. I don't really have a problem with something like a B Wing or whatever stripping some shields from a huge ship, it just happens way too quickly because huge ships are energy starved, don't always have the option to reinforce, and have too few shields to begin with. Giving ships more actions would allow them to reinforce more often, more energy would make recovering shields more attractive, and having more shields to start with would straight up add more durability.

If ordnance all had some kind of "if this attack hits, cancel all dice and do XXX damage" then I'd look more closely at it since it would fit it's thematic role better. Torpedoes would be great in Epic if they only had two attack dice, but did a flat four damage if they hit, they'd be perfect for taking down capital ships, but as it stands torps and missiles are just another form of anti-fighter weaponry.

Honestly, I would eliminate capital ship ramming and give them more efficient attacks/actions instead.

On 5/10/2018 at 1:58 AM, Chucknuckle said:

...

Oh, and I'm all for Star Destroyers in Epic, but only if they're big enough that I can fit the CR90 inside their docking bay...

Something like the Arquitens might be more reasonable, and possible a Brahatok or even a Nebulon B for Rebels...

We could get it to fit inside the docking area of the Star Destroyer. Looking from the top, the CR-90 will disappear.

Not that I think your demands are unreasonable (glances at Armada ISD docking bay ) but I am sure that something can be worked out.

Aaaand we've gone from reasonable change suggestions to 6ft model suggestions. Fan ******* tastic.

The ramming/run over of small ships is more or less needed, because otherwise it would be far to easy to just block any Huge ship.

Bigger maneuver selection. Slightly different profile for different ships.

Add 0-move.

1.0 Huge ships are totally chanceless against cruise missiles and harpoon missiles.

If you want to keep the theme of Huge being vulnerable to small wasp stinging, the Huge still need a lot more shields and hull. I mean, for 35 points you get a slow, weaponless C-roc with 10hull, 4shields (=14). For the same points you get an rather agile VCX has a 4dice primary, 10hull, 6 shields (=16).

4 hours ago, Managarmr said:

The ramming/run over of small ships is more or less needed, because otherwise it would be far to easy to just block any Huge ship.

Bigger maneuver selection. Slightly different profile for different ships.

Add 0-move.

1.0 Huge ships are totally chanceless against cruise missiles and harpoon missiles.

If you want to keep the theme of Huge being vulnerable to small wasp stinging, the Huge still need a lot more shields and hull. I mean, for 35 points you get a slow, weaponless C-roc with 10hull, 4shields (=14). For the same points you get an rather agile VCX has a 4dice primary, 10hull, 6 shields (=16).

Yeah, something like the Ghost should never have more hitpoints than a CR90. It's a **** capital ship!

Big ships have the recover action that costs energy to get shields back and that's fine. What would also be nice is a team or cargo that lets you move shield tokens from an untouched section to another section that has taken hits for little to no cost. This would help with action economy and energy efficiency.

Adaptive Shielding, Cargo ??* points

At the start of the combat phase, you may (discard this card to)* remove any number of shield tokens from one of your sections to recover that many shields on another section up to that section's shield value.

*cost would probably depend on if this is one time use or ongoing, or as we are seeing with 2.0 stuff, a limited number of charges.

Just consolidating our ideas so far and how many people have voted for/suggested said ideas...

• More Hull/Shields - 13
• More Actions/More actions Per Turn - 10
• Greater Attack Damage/Range - 10
• Better/More Energy efficiency - 7
• More Maneuver Options - 6
• Separate Weapon to hit from damage dealt - 4
• Make Available in Standard Play - 3
• Reduced damage taken from Small Ships - 3
• Keep Ramming the same - 3
• More Crew/Team/Mod Slots - 3
• Changes to Ramming - Small ships not destroyed - 3
• Better/Different Regen - 3
• Campaign/Objective Missions - 3
• Reduced Regen - 3
• More Epic Ships - 1
• Some Large Bases able to equip Epic Hardpoint weapons - 1
• Carrying/Repairing Small fighters - 1
• Ships Divided into 2-3 sections instead of 1-2 - 1

Updated 5/25/18

As much as I love Epic, I'm fairly confident that Epic 2.0 is gonna have to be a community-led pile of house rules.


Here's why I don't think we'll see Epic officially supported in 2.0 (at least for a very long time):

It has been nearly three years since Scum & Villainy debuted, and they still do not have a second Epic ship. Yet, we're about to see the creation of two additional factions (First Order and Resistance), neither of which have any Epic ships to convert over... nor do there appear to be any good candidates in the films for anything beyond a barely Epic-scaled First Order 'drop ship' or a shieldless weaponless boring Resistance 'escape shuttle,' as everything else canonically appearing is far too large, well beyond the specs of a Raider.

And we just saw Epic get a rules update where they require each side to have an Epic ship now, which I think is a great rule. So they'll either have to abolish that brand new requirement in 2.0, or somehow churn out two new Epic ships at a time when their means of production are likely already buckling under the 2.0 conversion and Legion's monthly-ish release schedule. Armada, one of the top five selling Miniature Games lines, hasn't had any news about an upcoming product for over a year now, so the hope that FFG will find time to work into the design and production schedule some new Epic ships seems terribly unlikely.

So I actually think we'll see no official support for Epic in 2.0, which is tragic. That said, I fully trust the community will be able to come up with some 2.0 house-rules converting the existing huge ships into the new format, and let's face it, Epic has never been an officially supported format so it probably doesn't really matter if FFG ever made official conversions (besides, that stuff doesn't seem to be in the conversion kits.... so would they expect us to rebuy 2.0 models to convert our existing Epic ships? or would there be an EPIC Conversion kit released later? Either seem unlikely, in my opinion).


I know I've already started thinking a bit about how a 2.0 conversion of the current Epic Ships and Epic Rules might look. But I see a lot of suggestions in this thread I fundamentally disagree with, so of course like any Community Project, it'll be contentious as will not get the full support of the community as everyone thinks their own very limited experiences of a format should be the arbiters of design and balance.

Um... it is hard to make suggestions based on so many unknown variables. From what I have seen so far of 2.0, here are the precepts that 2.0 seem to be keeping in mind:

- 2 dice attack ships must remain relevant.

- Token stacking for defense is no longer possible (or not as easy)

- Few ships can combine barrel roll and boost

- Fully modded attacks are harder to do (target lock and focus)

With that in mind, here is how I would "start" to modify the epic play in 2.0:

- Remove recover and reinforce actions. Instead, replace it with "angle shields" and "Reinforce shields"

- "Angle shields" grants a reinforce token that reduces damage by 2 to a minimum of 0 on the chosen section, but only works at range 3 and beyond. Fighters that move in range 0-2 slips "under" the shield and can attack the hull directly. This action is designed for the initial long range engagement and give the capital ship a chance against alpha strike, but can be foiled by a clever player. It would also give transports a chance to actually survive a long range engagement against a corvette or Raider.

- Reinforce shields: reduce damage by 1 to a minimum of 1 damage (so 2 dice ships are still relevant, same as the reinforce in version 2.0). However, after reinforcing a section, you may transfer from 0 to 3 shields to said section from energy reserves or from another section. So it is a combined classic reinforce and recover.

- Increase shield value to take the above requirement into consideration (would have to playtest it to find out by how much).

Maybe with this setup, we encourage clever deployment, flanking and targeting priority instead of just going for the brute force straight confrontation.

9 hours ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

As much as I love Epic, I'm fairly confident that Epic 2.0 is gonna have to be a community-led pile of house rules.


Here's why I don't think we'll see Epic officially supported in 2.0 (at least for a very long time)

Here is what FFG are saying about epic

Quote

What about Epic Mode?

Epic will continue to be a supported X-Wing format in future releases! Stay tuned to future X-Wing Second Edition announcements for more information.

That pretty much says it’s coming, but they have to get standard up to speed first. So I’m expecting epic to be dealt with around 2.0 wave 4 or 5.

Hi there forum friends! I haven't dropped in on the Epic forum more than once or twice since it showed up, but I thought I'd come look for exactly this topic!

I really want Epic ships to get a redesign in 2.0, to be as fun as all the other new 2.0 stuff! So I thought I'd share some of my ideas.

First, I agree with the original post that the smashing rules aren't cool. Like, game balance wise I sort of get it and I also understand that a small ship would get damaged by a huge ship hitting it at full speed, but smooshing them completely, even if they're canonically almost as big as a Gozanti (like the Ghost and Falcon)? Nah. Of course this would be coupled with a modification that lets huge ships bump littler ships and do damage to those ships equal to the delta in hull size or something like that. So like 3 damage to small ships, 2 to medium, and 1 to large. And then the huge ship would have to roll dice to damage itself.

Next, I really think regen needs to be toned down a bit. It's too swingy and can be annoying. I'd rather huge ships could just regen like one or two damage per turn. Maybe this would also mean reworking the energy mechanics.

I also would like the huge ships, to compensate for the decrease in regen, to have way more hull. Like almost twice as much. Hitpoint creep has struck this game, and this has been incorporated into 2.0, with X-Wings now having 4 hull (just as an example), so I think the huge ships should also feel significantly beefier than a Ghost.

I also think they should have more weapons. Many things in 2.0 will be attacking multiple times per round, like ships with Veteran Turret Gunner, the Han Solo gunner, etc, so I think the huge ships should also get a few more hardpoints. Just a few, but make it more accurate with the models (so like 8 guns for the CR-90 for example).

Finally, I think the movement should be redesigned. Some huge ships are actually pretty maneuverable, and I think they should have better options. I also think that the movement should be redesigned to allow for bumping smaller ships without destroying them.

On 5/12/2018 at 6:54 AM, Dabirdisdaword said:

Aaaand we've gone from reasonable change suggestions to 6ft model suggestions. Fan ******* tastic.

I can still dream, and the Star Destroyer Model doesn't need to be 6' long (25" would do).

Keep in mind X-wing is a table top abstraction of Star Wars space dog fights. Having the Star Destroyer model completely eclipse the CR-90 when over it instead of fitting it inside the hanger bay should work just as well for table top gameplay purposes. FFG did that for Armada and if they can't get the CR-90 in the hanger bay of an ISD in Armada then why should we have to put the same unreasonable standards on X-wing?

I think I would feel disappointed with an ISD for Epic. It would never be big and imposing enough. The closest I've seen is when the ISD becomes the table:

Yeah I've mentioned in other threads that SD mats are super neat and wish ffg would do an official one. But a model would be underwhelming or unplayably cumbersome.

On 5/20/2018 at 9:18 PM, Kieransi said:

Hi there forum friends! I haven't dropped in on the Epic forum more than once or twice since it showed up, but I thought I'd come look for exactly this topic!

I really want Epic ships to get a redesign in 2.0, to be as fun as all the other new 2.0 stuff! So I thought I'd share some of my ideas.

First, I agree with the original post that the smashing rules aren't cool. Like, game balance wise I sort of get it and I also understand that a small ship would get damaged by a huge ship hitting it at full speed, but smooshing them completely, even if they're canonically almost as big as a Gozanti (like the Ghost and Falcon)? Nah. Of course this would be coupled with a modification that lets huge ships bump littler ships and do damage to those ships equal to the delta in hull size or something like that. So like 3 damage to small ships, 2 to medium, and 1 to large. And then the huge ship would have to roll dice to damage itself.

Next, I really think regen needs to be toned down a bit. It's too swingy and can be annoying. I'd rather huge ships could just regen like one or two damage per turn. Maybe this would also mean reworking the energy mechanics.

I also would like the huge ships, to compensate for the decrease in regen, to have way more hull. Like almost twice as much. Hitpoint creep has struck this game, and this has been incorporated into 2.0, with X-Wings now having 4 hull (just as an example), so I think the huge ships should also feel significantly beefier than a Ghost.

I also think they should have more weapons. Many things in 2.0 will be attacking multiple times per round, like ships with Veteran Turret Gunner, the Han Solo gunner, etc, so I think the huge ships should also get a few more hardpoints. Just a few, but make it more accurate with the models (so like 8 guns for the CR-90 for example).

Finally, I think the movement should be redesigned. Some huge ships are actually pretty maneuverable, and I think they should have better options. I also think that the movement should be redesigned to allow for bumping smaller ships without destroying them.

8 seems off. The fore mounted twin barreled turrets are it's primary. But upping it to 4 hardpoints to match the 4 on the model would be nice

3 hours ago, Dabirdisdaword said:

8 seems off. The fore mounted twin barreled turrets are it's primary. But upping it to 4 hardpoints to match the 4 on the model would be nice

That's what I meant, I just didn't word good.

The primary, which has top and bottom so it would be one of those mobile arcs like the Falcon has, and then the four hardpoints, to cover all 8 guns on there.

considering the amount of Epic my group of players seems to be playing at the moment, I'm pretty sure we will be coming up with some way of getting huge ships on a 2.0 table well ahead of FFG's release schedule...but I digress - oh and wall of text warning...

I'm glad someone pointed out the VCX-100 shaped elephant in the room (and to a lesser extent the deci), the TOTAL health of a cr-90 is only 18 hull and 8 shields and costs 90pts, the raider has 18 hull and 10 shields and costs 100. A lothal rebel has 10 hull and 6 shield for 35pts - that's more than ANY of the single-card epics have, at essentially the same cost. So I definitely agree that epic need to be tougher.

as for firepower, let's take an example from the game of epic I played on Sunday. A CR-90 and a Raider in point blank range and broadside to each other, forget has 3x quad guns, the raider 2x quads and an Ion battery. The CR-90 fires first thanks to Roark Garnet on a support ship and has access to focus thanks to Esege in a K-wing, unloads everything into one section of the Raider (fore) and manages to strip all its shields - this seems reasonable, and was pretty cool on the table. The problem is, the turn before the CR-90 had unleashed that same broadside into a range 2 TIE defender, and stripped 2 of its three shields.

in the same game a pair of concussion missile shots from a Kimogila nearly annihilated a gozanti from full health.

my last corvette build was about 120pts, and was pretty brutal for an epic ship. But for the same points I could get Fat Han and Finn-Rey and have basically the same hit points on the table, more more likely to survive AND do damage.

i suppose what I'm trying to get to is this, the Huge ships seem relatively balanced within themselves at the moment, but they just aren't as points-effective as normal ships.

please don't take this as me hating epic, its still my preferred format for X-wing (i have 2 GR-75, 2x C-ROC, a Gozanti, and CR-90), and has given me more awesome moments of play than any of my 100/6 games - but the Huge ships definitely need some love in 2.0.

2 hours ago, Surak said:

considering the amount of Epic my group of players seems to be playing at the moment, I'm pretty sure we will be coming up with some way of getting huge ships on a 2.0 table well ahead of FFG's release schedule...but I digress - oh and wall of text warning...

I'm glad someone pointed out the VCX-100 shaped elephant in the room (and to a lesser extent the deci), the TOTAL health of a cr-90 is only 18 hull and 8 shields and costs 90pts, the raider has 18 hull and 10 shields and costs 100. A lothal rebel has 10 hull and 6 shield for 35pts - that's more than ANY of the single-card epics have, at essentially the same cost. So I definitely agree that epic need to be tougher.

as for firepower, let's take an example from the game of epic I played on Sunday. A CR-90 and a Raider in point blank range and broadside to each other, forget has 3x quad guns, the raider 2x quads and an Ion battery. The CR-90 fires first thanks to Roark Garnet on a support ship and has access to focus thanks to Esege in a K-wing, unloads everything into one section of the Raider (fore) and manages to strip all its shields - this seems reasonable, and was pretty cool on the table. The problem is, the turn before the CR-90 had unleashed that same broadside into a range 2 TIE defender, and stripped 2 of its three shields.

in the same game a pair of concussion missile shots from a Kimogila nearly annihilated a gozanti from full health.

my last corvette build was about 120pts, and was pretty brutal for an epic ship. But for the same points I could get Fat Han and Finn-Rey and have basically the same hit points on the table, more more likely to survive AND do damage.

i suppose what I'm trying to get to is this, the Huge ships seem relatively balanced within themselves at the moment, but they just aren't as points-effective as normal ships.

please don't take this as me hating epic, its still my preferred format for X-wing (i have 2 GR-75, 2x C-ROC, a Gozanti, and CR-90), and has given me more awesome moments of play than any of my 100/6 games - but the Huge ships definitely need some love in 2.0.

I hope they make epic a lot more like HotAC without necessarily the AI component but more of a progressive system incorporating quick play cards.

i want an epic asteroid base model like HotAC. Even if it’s just a card.

i want an epic 4x6 double sided mat (ISD on one side)

i want the epic movement template to be more fluid and move like the armada template.

I want a single epic conversion box for all factions with several faction specific cards and a large 20+ campaign mission book. Making it more of a campaign/narrative boxset as well as epic conversion. I don’t expect the campaign to center on epic ships or require them in every mission but each epic ship should have at least 1 mission include it. They can even remake the 3x transport mission with card transport epic ships.

The point is by making a well made progressive campaign like HotAC that includes the new epic 2.0 rules ffg will encourage people to buy and play epic in the campaign as well. Making epic less of an after thought.

5 hours ago, Gungo said:

Making epic less of an after thought.

This is 100% my qualifier for bothering to move forward with this game.

I am tired of feeling like the neglected second cousin in XWM. This conversion, while pretty dang cool in terms of rethinking the game from the ground up, is nevertheless obviously focused on easy adjustments to the meta and balance for Sport-Wing.

We don't even have any idea when Epic 2.0 might happen. Sadly, I suspect 1-2 years.

I own the entire game in spades; I really don't need to buy anything to enjoy X-Wing 1.0 for years to come. OTOH, I would like to see my options grow. But, I really need to know that FFG gives a **** about other styles of play before committing to rebuying a game I already own.

Otherwise, I can spend my time figuring out how to get purrgil into the game.

1 hour ago, Darth Meanie said:

The Ghost is being attacked by Vorlons!