I think there is actually a pretty simple solution to this problem:

Long Range Scanners: 0 pts

When taking the Lock action, your action cannot fail. During the endphase when tokens are removed, measure the distance to any objects you have locked. If the locked object is beyond range 3 discard your Lock token.

This simply reverses the way the Locks are acquired/failed, is completely worthless on higher initiative ships, and doesn't allow you to get double modded ordnance.

Thoughts?

Seems too annoying to track

Much rather just have it forbid lock spending

Then the fcs punisher will be pretty dang happyv

Quote

Seems too annoying to track

Much rather just have it forbid lock spending

Then the fcs punisher will be pretty dang happyv

If by "too annoying to track" you mean "remember a specific trigger and do/measure something when that trigger happens" then yes, it would be as annoying to track as other upgrade cards that tweak the rules to do something a little different or out of sequence. Is it annoying to track which ships have Advanced Sensors equipped? What about which ships are within range 1 of an astroid when it is blown up by a seismic charge?

I think it would actually speed up the game when it comes to the Lock action. Ships with this Long Range Scanners card equipped don't have to measure for Locks when they acquire them, just put down the token. Most of the time you will already know if the ship you locked is inside range 3 during the engagement phase when you declare them the target of your attack and have to measure range anyway. Unless someone has something like tractor beam that could potentially adjust their position during the engagement phase or end phase you can just remove the Lock tokens right away during the engagement phase if they didn't move into range 3. If you didn't attack your locked target that round, during the end phase you can measure for all your ships with the upgrade at the same time and remove the tokens for those that are now out of range.

It's annoying because you have to measure twice, which can slow down gameplay esp in scenarios where you take a lock and then the enemy faffs off out of range

Much more efficient to just disallow lock spending. Less text, less time wasted; far easier to remember

There'sa lot of ways to 'solve' the problem mechanically.

In regard to the question of whether it could be solved with point adjustment only, let me ask the jury: would you equip a 0-point proton torpedo on an I1 Y-wing? If you would, I submit that we have an answer

43 minutes ago, Babaganoosh said:

In regard to the question of whether it could be solved with point adjustment only, let me ask the jury: would you equip a 0-point proton torpedo on an I1 Y-wing? If you would, I submit that we have an answer

An upgrade that's 0 points and doesn't compete with anything on that slot will become auto-include. It seems to me that they want to move away from that in 2.0, so I doubt ordnance will go below 1 point, even on I1 generics.

You guys still aren’t putting forth an argument for why it would make sense to run a bunch of low ps with ordnance instead mid-high ps with ordnance or just cut ordnance altogether to maximize the number of ships in a squad or bring upgrades that will actually matter starting on the first engagement.

Especially now that all ordnance has Extra Munitions baked into it, having a ship die with 2 charge tokens on it because you can’t get a first-engagement target lock is a huge risk to take.

Was it my imagination or do I remember a podcast stating that many missiles could use focus instead of target locks while torpedoes needed target locks? Or did I just dream all of that?

On 5/16/2018 at 1:17 PM, Tvboy said:

Not everything can be fixed by changing points costs. If low init Pilots can’t acquire the TL they need on first engagement, then ordnance won’t be effective on low init Pilots. If they make the Pilots cheaper, that doesnt make ordnance any better. If they make ordnance cheaper, that will just make the higher init Pilots better that can actually use ordnance effectively.

But isn´ t the point that upgrades cost different amounts, depending on the quality of the pilots involved. Low iniative = cheaper, higher = more. I thought that was the point of the app....

5 hours ago, Tvboy said:

You guys still aren’t putting forth an argument for why it would make sense to run a bunch of low ps with ordnance instead mid-high ps with ordnance or just cut ordnance altogether to maximize the number of ships in a squad or bring upgrades that will actually matter starting on the first engagement.

Especially now that all ordnance has Extra Munitions baked into it, having a ship die with 2 charge tokens on it because you can’t get a first-engagement target lock is a huge risk to take.

If the opponent wants to focus fire on a munitions carrier worth 25-30% of your lost while the two 35+% aces take apart his list then that’s a fair trade, even if the bomber never got a shot off.

5 hours ago, dotswarlock said:

Was it my imagination or do I remember a podcast stating that many missiles could use focus instead of target locks while torpedoes needed target locks? Or did I just dream all of that?

In 1.0 most missiles either kept their TL or required focus instead. Torps always spent a TL. So maybe 2.0 tried to further develop that distinction. I’m just glad that torps don’t spend the TL anymore.