So.. I haven't seen any info about it, but I seem to recall it being said that with the new lock action we can lock onto friendlies and objects.

Has any info been posted about this?

I’m wondering if there will be a talent that lets you ignore objects if you lock them.

Just now, That Blasted Samophlange said:

So.. I haven't seen any info about it, but I seem to recall it being said that with the new lock action we can lock onto friendlies and objects.

Has any info been posted about this?

I’m wondering if there will be a talent that lets you ignore objects if you lock them.

I know you can lock objects, but no idea the functionality at this point.

Well, I think Seismic torpedo will require an attack from now on, against a locked object

Otherwise... no idea.

It would be nice if Echo could lock onto someone, to boost their initative enough, so they move after you. Like an Echo.

Probably future proofing, though I can see Seismic Torps needing locks on obstacles and certain abilities requiring locks on friendlies.

52 minutes ago, HolySorcerer said:

Hopefully it gets something. The loss of the 4th attack die combined with the loss of FCS is going to hurt its offense a lot compared to its 1.0 version.

46 minutes ago, HolySorcerer said:

Probably future proofing, though I can see Seismic Torps needing locks on obstacles and certain abilities requiring locks on friendlies.

Are you just repeating what I'm saying?

Seismic torps don’t need to be an attack. If they require a lock onto a rock (a rock lock) and to have the obstacle in arc and in range then that emulates the original card requiring an action. All the 2.0 card needs to say is:

’you may spend one charge to remove from play one obstacle with your target lock that is also in your firing arc and range 0-3. Each ship at range one of that obstacle suffers one damage.’

give it 2 charges for fun.

being able to lock objects and friendlies opens up huge opportunities for cinematic and campaign play. Being able to attack mines, satellites, cargo containers, etc opens the game into a huge design space.

I would like to see a Chaff/Jam action that defeats locks...

Can we lock onto 'locks? Or just Loks?

My Lok locked onto my opponent's 'lock to defend my LOC.

One outcome of the Target Lock -> Lock change I haven't really seen mentioned is it being a huge nail in the coffin for Wes (T65) to be translated into 2.0 as we know him. No elegant and concise wording seems to be available for the act of removing a lock related to the defender - unless de-lock becomes a keyword. If anything, he's only likely to return using Jam tokens, what is and is not as powerful of an effect as his current ability.

I'm not sure we will see seismic torpedoes any more. Considering how the seismic bombs work now, they have seemingly taken what the torpedoes did, and incidentally do what they do in the movies now.

@ryfterek not to be pedantic, but rather than de-lock, couldn't you just use a word that already exists - unlock? Apologies if english is not your native tongue.

2 hours ago, Hawkstrike said:

Can we lock onto 'locks? Or just Loks?

My Lok locked onto my opponent's 'lock to defend my LOC.

Uh, jammer tokens already do this

1 hour ago, ryfterek said:

One outcome of the Target Lock -> Lock change I haven't really seen mentioned is it being a huge nail in the coffin for Wes (T65) to be translated into 2.0 as we know him. No elegant and concise wording seems to be available for the act of removing a lock related to the defender - unless de-lock becomes a keyword. If anything, he's only likely to return using Jam tokens, what is and is not as powerful of an effect as his current ability.

It's as simple as "choose to remove one of the defending ship's target lock, focus, evade, or etc..." but either way it's looking at 2.0 with a 1.0 mindset in terms of evaluation. His ability probably doesn't need to be as good since a lot of things are toned down.

21 minutes ago, AlexW said:

It's as simple as "choose to remove one of the defending ship's target lock, focus, evade, or etc..." but either way it's looking at 2.0 with a 1.0 mindset in terms of evaluation. His ability probably doesn't need to be as good since a lot of things are toned down.

After attacking, during the (whatever phase), remove one of the Defender’s green or Lock tokens.

pretty simple. Pretty sure his ability will move to after the attack is resolved.

4 hours ago, That Blasted Samophlange said:

@ryfterek not to be pedantic, but rather than de-lock, couldn't you just use a word that already exists - unlock? Apologies if english is not your native tongue.

"Unlock" is by all means an option and a word I'm fully aware of, yet it sounds really odd to me in the context - "force the defender to unlock". What, their phone? ?

It is not, indeed, though.

3 hours ago, AlexW said:

It's as simple as "choose to remove one of the defending ship's target lock, focus, evade, or etc..." but either way it's looking at 2.0 with a 1.0 mindset in terms of evaluation. His ability probably doesn't need to be as good since a lot of things are toned down.

Well, in the 2.0 world that would probably be more along "remove one of the defender's green tokens or a corresponding lock token", or how @GrimmyV put it above. But then again, first part is somehow covered now with Jam effect. And so my bet is that, if anything, Wes may end up just jamming the defender. What could not interfere with locks though.

Thing is, with blue TL being removed from the mechanics of the game, I am not sure how should the lock be referred to in a nice way that would not drive the RAW maniacs crazy with theories of now being able to remove that sweet "lock no. 6" token from a playmat four tables away.

I wouldn't say that evaluation of whether or not TL stripping is going to be strong in 2.0 environment is far fetched, based on available spoilers. Locking is still a thing for ordnance. ATC on TIEad. Krennic. We know already that locks will be important in various scenarios - so a pilot being able to get rid of them is up for discussion.

But overall boys, yes, you're mostly right. I might want to stop analysing X-wing spoilers while hangover.

Wes is not in the game, we know all X-wing pilots.

1 hour ago, eMeM said:

Wes is not in the game, we know all X-wing pilots.

Even the ones in the conversion kit?

1 hour ago, eMeM said:

Wes is not in the game, we know all X-wing pilots.

Has the core set been spoiled?

45 minutes ago, That Blasted Samophlange said:

Even the ones in the conversion kit?

They will be identical to those in the blisters.

29 minutes ago, skotothalamos said:

Has the core set been spoiled?

Not entirely, but there are 13 pilots in the core set, just like in the first two, and by analogy we can expect 4 X-wing pilots (2 named, 2 generics) and 9 TIE pilots (3 named, 3x2 generics). We know Luke and Porkins are in the core set.

3 hours ago, eMeM said:

They will be identical to those in the blisters.

This isn't necessarily true. The conversion kits will have all of those, sure, but I don't think anyone's said that that's ALL the X-Wing pilots they will have. If anything, the opposite: it's been stated that the kits will include the new pilots from the blisters on top of the existing pilots from 1.0.

13 minutes ago, fhdz said:

This isn't necessarily true. The conversion kits will have all of those, sure, but I don't think anyone's said that that's ALL the X-Wing pilots they will have. If anything, the opposite: it's been stated that the kits will include the new pilots from the blisters on top of the existing pilots from 1.0.

I'm pretty sure it's not true. That'd mean new players would have to buy conversion kits.

Not all pilots will make it to 2.0. There is only 84 pilot cards for 37 dials in the rebel conversion kit, it is not that many, don't expect more than blisters for wave 1 and 2 uniques plus 0-2 generics per ship for future waves.

On 5/12/2018 at 4:39 AM, Commander Kaine said:

Are you just repeating what I'm saying?

Is the loss of the 4th die on the Tie Phantom confirmed?

1 hour ago, Goseki1 said:

Is the loss of the 4th die on the Tie Phantom confirmed?

Yup. You can see whispers attack dice through another base's hole on the spread.

16 hours ago, eMeM said:

They will be identical to those in the blisters.

I think you got that the other way around. FFG said the blister packs for wave 1 would only have content included in the conversion kit. They didn’t technically say that the only conversion kit pilots could be found in a blister.

No idea if they will be or if the conversion box gets more pilots. I hope they do because of the number of T65s most people are porting over, but who knows?

Maybe we will learn more on Friday during the unboxing.

1 hour ago, ScummyRebel said:

I think you got that the other way around. FFG said the blister packs for wave 1 would only have content included in the conversion kit. They didn’t technically say that the only conversion kit pilots could be found in a blister.

No idea if they will be or if the conversion box gets more pilots. I hope they do because of the number of T65s most people are porting over, but who knows?

Maybe we will learn more on Friday during the unboxing.

I assure you you will not find any more pilots in the conversion kits. Think about what that would mean for new players, count the number of pilot cards and dials, with just 8 cards for the wave 1 ships the lineup is spread very thin.

If FFG cared about you collection of X-wings they would give you more than two dials in the conversion kit.

On 5/12/2018 at 6:59 AM, Hawkstrike said:

Can we lock onto 'locks? Or just Loks?

My Lok locked onto my opponent's 'lock to defend my LOC.

Yo dawg, I heard you liked target locks, so I put the target lock action on your Lok so your Lok can lock while you fly.