2 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

So we're just completely sailing over how the context of the vast majority of 1.0 utterly invalidates the incredibly flawed assertion that gunner Luke is some kind of "training wheel". Competitive players have exploited the **** out of this horrible mechanic for literally years

AND doubling down on "it's so overcosted you won't want to take it! GREAT design!!!!"

Not doing much to defend the existence of this instance of bad design

Which is fair, because you have a better chance at avoiding gunner Luke attacks than making any sound argument in his favor

In 1e you didn't have the option of taking a double tap instead of your 360 turret for less than a third of the points, though.

Bistan >>>>>>> Luke, if you're a good enough pilot to get arc and focus without needing the rotate. Or just VTG, etc.

I'd accordingly prefer to have seen Bistan's mechanic ON Luke, or one of the other good gunners, but ignoring the trade-off at work here that didn't exist in 1e is just... well, ignorant.

And yes this is the 'priced into irrelevance' model, but... Luke crew is there. Raging against him isn't going to stop him being there.

So I'll take priced into irrelevance over the alternative.

Luke Gunner is there. He could be a crew card as well, though. That could allow for thematic lists without annoying people that hate that the gunner exists and to provide a Luke that isn't more than some ships to make building a thematic list easier.

2 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

So we're just completely sailing over how the context of the vast majority of 1.0 utterly invalidates the incredibly flawed assertion that gunner Luke is some kind of "training wheel". Competitive players have exploited the **** out of this horrible mechanic for literally years

AND doubling down on "it's so overcosted you won't want to take it! GREAT design!!!!"

Not doing much to defend the existence of this instance of bad design

Which is fair, because you have a better chance at avoiding gunner Luke attacks than making any sound argument in his favor

So let's get things straight:

Is it a bad design? - Yes, we agree on this. A card should never have to be risen to a cost where it is invaluable.

Is it broken? No, In my eyes its there to keep aces in check. I mean Like is soooo powerful agaist aces it's insane but agaist a tie swarm there are well better options. So in a sense think about 1.0 Autothrusters if you came across TLT its a life saver but if you come agaist the inquisitor it's usless, bow I'm not saying Luke will ever be usless but agaist some lists (which will become pretty meta based on the fact it can beat luke) it will be far from worth it's cost.

It comes to the Rock Paper Scissors, Luke beats aces but for example Swarms beat Luke, Bombs beat Swarms and Aces beats bombs.

But at the end of the day the game would be healthier if it wasn't there.

9 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

So we're just completely sailing over how the context of the vast majority of 1.0 utterly invalidates the incredibly flawed assertion that gunner Luke is some kind of "training wheel".

You‘ve been sailing over so much that I thought we might as well keep that altitude.

But if you would care to actually answer the questions:

1. do you or do you not agree that the cost for LukeGunner is mainly due to rotating his arc?

2. do you or do you not agree that maximal use of this ability and minimal use of this ability can be different numbers?

3. do you or do you not agree that in case of minimal use (= 0 times) due to always getting the target ship into arc without need for rotating by use of GunnerLuke, the points were wasted?

4 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

You‘ve been sailing over so much that I thought we might as well keep that altitude.

But if you would care to actually answer the questions:

I'll bite:

4 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

1. do you or do you not agree that the cost for LukeGunner is mainly due to rotating his arc?

The cost consists of two factors:
1) the force point

2) the option to rotate.

Thus, there's an inherent value beyond the rotation.

5 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

2. do you or do you not agree that maximal use of this ability and minimal use of this ability can be different numbers?

Sure - the force point.

5 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

3. do you or do you not agree that in case of minimal use (= 0 times) due to always getting the target ship into arc without need for rotating by use of GunnerLuke, the points were wasted?

I don't think so: the force point has value. It's worth at least 5 points in the new system, probably more than that. Free calculate, when many times on 3 dice you only need the 1 focus result anyway? It's valuable.

6 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

The cost consists of two factors:
1) the force point

 2) the option to rotate.

 Thus, there's an inherent value beyond the rotation.

Hence the ‚mainly‘. Eg Ezra saves 15pt and also has a force plus another effect. So if (force+Ezraeffect) = 15pt, then we know that the force is less than 15 and the smaller part of the cost of Luke.

6 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

Sure - the force point.

My mistake - I was purely talking frequency here. I.e., there is a theoretical difference between always using and never using it.

6 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

I don't think so

Compared to other options though. Eg just downgrading to Ezra means Luke wastes 15pt already.

1 minute ago, GreenDragoon said:

Hence the ‚mainly‘. Eg Ezra saves 15pt and also has a force plus anoter effect. So if (force+Ezraeffect) = 15pt, then we know that the force is less than 15 and the smaller part of the cost.

My mistake - I was purely talking frequency here. I.e., there is a theoretical difference between always using and never using it.

Compared to other options though. Eg just downgrading to Ezra means Luke wastes 15pt already.

Yep - Ezra is a mighty attractive gunner, especially if you need squad points or are confident you don't need the free turret pivot.

The real title of this should be Is Ezra Gunner really that good? ???

3 minutes ago, Dengars Toilet Paper said:

The real title of this should be Is Ezra Gunner really that good? ???

I mean... you're not wrong...

29 minutes ago, Dengars Toilet Paper said:

So let's get things straight:

Is it a bad design? - Yes, we agree on this. A card should never have to be risen to a cost where it is invaluable.

Is it broken? No, In my eyes its there to keep aces in check. I mean Like is soooo powerful agaist aces it's insane but agaist a tie swarm there are well better options. So in a sense think about 1.0 Autothrusters if you came across TLT its a life saver but if you come agaist the inquisitor it's usless, bow I'm not saying Luke will ever be usless but agaist some lists (which will become pretty meta based on the fact it can beat luke) it will be far from worth it's cost.

It comes to the Rock Paper Scissors, Luke beats aces but for example Swarms beat Luke, Bombs beat Swarms and Aces beats bombs.

But at the end of the day the game would be healthier if it wasn't there.

This is exactly what the designers should be avoiding. Autothrusters is a perfect example of a card that simply should not exist in 2nd Ed.

27 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

just downgrading to Ezra means Luke wastes 15pt already.

To elaborate:

If you never rotate then that statement is 100% objectively true. There‘s no possible discussion.

But: we can discuss how much worth it is to regain an otherwise missed shot?

Is it up to 14 points? If yes, then Han is almost better with Ezra for the force and a up to 15 point initiative bid. Almost because he has to spend his action on rotating the arc, and this only works with I6 pilots of course. It still serves to illustrate just how expensive it is.

Clearly some here value it higher and that is why they perceive GunnerLuke to be so good. That opinion is perfectly valid.

But it is not even debatable that a better player (one who never has to rotate) wastes point with taking LukeGunner instead of Ezra and something else.

1 minute ago, GreenDragoon said:

To elaborate:

If you never rotate then that statement is 100% objectively true. There‘s no possible discussion.

But: we can discuss how much worth it is to regain an otherwise missed shot?

Is it up to 14 points? If yes, then Han is almost better with Ezra for the force and a up to 15 point initiative bid. Almost because he has to spend his action on rotating the arc, and this only works with I6 pilots of course. It still serves to illustrate just how expensive it is.

Clearly some here value it higher and that is why they perceive GunnerLuke to be so good. That opinion is perfectly valid.

But it is not even debatable that a better player (one who never has to rotate) wastes point with taking LukeGunner instead of Ezra and something else.

Good players will need to rotate.

The idea that "good players" will never need to rotate is hilarious. It's rare, but good players occasionally play other good players, that understand where their arcs are, and that blocking said turret ship deprives them of the rotate action...

(I' know you didn't make that argument - just repeating)

1 minute ago, Tlfj200 said:

Good players will need to rotate.

The idea that "good players" will never need to rotate is hilarious. It's rare, but good players occasionally play other good players, that understand where their arcs are, and that blocking said turret ship deprives them of the rotate action...

(I' know you didn't make that argument - just repeating)

I agree. But going by one of your recent vassal episodes with Dash - how often did he rotate? I think once or twice, right?

So Ezra is 14pt (my 15 were wrong!), c3po is allegedly 12pt according to a reddit post.

Is a force token, two calculate tokens, and the option for ezra‘s gunner effect and c3po‘s defense better or worse than rotating twice per game?

It won’t be 0 rotations for the vast majority of players and games. But we can use such comparisons to see figure out the value of the effect.

19 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

Is it up to 14 points? If yes, then Han is almost better with Ezra for the force and a up to 15 point initiative bid. Almost because he has to spend his action on rotating the arc, and this only works with I6 pilots of course. It still serves to illustrate just how expensive it is.

@GreenDragoon, you and @Tlfj200 are way too smart for me to insert any nonsense in this discussion; I'm learning though; but I'm thinking this would be a great name for a band, just sayin'

...now where's my tea?

4 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

I agree. But going by one of your recent vassal episodes with Dash - how often did he rotate? I think once or twice, right?

So Ezra is 14pt (my 15 were wrong!), c3po is allegedly 12pt according to a reddit post.

Is a force token, two calculate tokens, and the option for ezra‘s gunner effect and c3po‘s defense better or worse than rotating twice per game?

It won’t be 0 rotations for the vast majority of players and games. But we can use such comparisons to see figure out the value of the effect.

I mean, I'm agreeing that at 30, I doubt I'd take it.

I was just noting that the free rotate is valuable, but I'm not sure it's '30 points - whatever we find 1 force point to be' valuable.

Just now, Tlfj200 said:

I mean, I'm agreeing that at 30, I doubt I'd take it.

I was just noting that the free rotate is valuable, but I'm not sure it's '30 points - whatever we find 1 force point to be' valuable.

That much was the entire point of my ridiculously simplified questions.

As soon as someone agrees that never using the rotate wastes somewhere between 16-25 points then we can put a more precise price on the free rotate over the course of a game.

And as soon as someone agrees that the frequency of the rotate is dependent on player skill (or rather skill of both players and their used ships/builds) then we can also say that the wasted points are dependent on player skills.

And that lets us conclude that the better the player the less valuable the card.

Also: My question is whether Luke will be figured out and whether there is a clear yes/no answer regarding his usefulness in competitive play, or whether he will end up as an actual option.

For example, I‘m still confirmed that a 39/40pt Quickdraw can use AdvOptics or Sensor Cluster. One provides constant worth, and one gives rare but crucial value. That is an interesting choice!

Similarly, will Luke be a nobrainer (either use him always or never), or will he end up as one option out of several? And how much is that dependent on player skill? Only one of these three outcomes is bad for the game, and so far it looks like the least likely to me.

The issue with pricing Luke-G is he is extraordinarily match-up dependent. On Han against a pack of B-wings, Luke provides a force token and that's about it. On Leebo against Soontir, 30 points is probably a bargain.

1 minute ago, gamblertuba said:

The issue with pricing Luke-G is he is extraordinarily match-up dependent. On Han against a pack of B-wings, Luke provides a force token and that's about it. On Leebo against Soontir, 30 points is probably a bargain.

I mean, that's the interesting part, isn;t it? If the upgrade is dead weight for 'x%' of the meta, then it's a calculated decision to take it.

But that's based on cost - if luke gunner was like, 10 points, it'd be good all the time.

41 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

I mean, that's the interesting part, isn;t it? If the upgrade is dead weight for 'x%' of the meta, then it's a calculated decision to take it.

But that's based on cost - if luke gunner was like, 10 points, it'd be good all the time.

OK, I'll bite...

If you have the ability to take a turret, and you are guaranteed that you can keep the arc, and no one else can, you take him. Beginners will like the constancy against mates who can guess you and out-fly you and expert pilot will want him to insure that the great fliers cannot choose what you think they will as bate. In poker it's like having a pair of ladies, every hand, guaranteed. Why wouldn't you. Do we think 2.0 will be won by dice or by taking the odds? Over a long tourney, do you want the high=risk, high-reward? Or easy fly consistency?

Remember, in the end, the house always wins.

55 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

OK, I'll bite...

If you have the ability to take a turret, and you are guaranteed that you can keep the arc, and no one else can, you take him. Beginners will like the constancy against mates who can guess you and out-fly you and expert pilot will want him to insure that the great fliers cannot choose what you think they will as bate. In poker it's like having a pair of ladies, every hand, guaranteed. Why wouldn't you. Do we think 2.0 will be won by dice or by taking the odds? Over a long tourney, do you want the high=risk, high-reward? Or easy fly consistency?

Remember, in the end, the house always wins.

Because you can get a Phoenix squadron blocker instead for the same points.

I've heard that the Devs priced Luke gunner the same as "an inexpensive ship." The lowest we got is a TIE fighter at 24 points in 2nd eddition (12 points in first). If they price turret ships high in general, and give a huge price premium for higher initiative ships with a turret, then the money just isn't there for an upgrade like this.

Slap it in a low initiative generic turret ship and it will probably be ok. Otherwise, there's better stuff to get out there for what you are paying.

I think that all of these upgrades are horribly overpriced for what they do.

Costs have doubled from 1.0 and were then apparently doubled again for some reason. Seems they felt all upgrades were underpriced in 1.0

Ezra 14 points? C3PO 12?

If Luke is costed at 30 or near that, they might not even put him in the game either. Sorry but this debate has become moot. He is not to be seen on competitive tables at that cost. No Way. Which is sad, luckily his ship card seems fine at least. There is just maybe one scenario where i could see him played, and that’s if we come back to a total arc-dodging meta. To be honest it’s very hard to dodge the falcons double turret all the time like this already, and the Falcon seems to have pretty hard counters in swarms and the like (as always).

But anyway, that’s not what i see happening. Super Ace meta where you can’t stack tokens anymore all day long? I kinda don’t buy it.

Because if all the upgrade prices will be like that (very overpriced compared to 1.0 that is, and i have seen a few spoiled prices that i pretty much find very high already), i think i see where this is going. It’s going to be a wave 1-3 meta like in 1.0, where everybody just minmaxes stats. So we will see 7-8 Tie Swarms or 4B or 4X lists and the like again. The base ship prices seem very low compared to the upgrades. That’s why i doubt that a lot of upgrades will be very competitive. So just buy HP and raw dice rolls instead!

It does make some sense actually. In 1.0, we barely saw any generics in the end. So maybe FFG thought: Back to the roots.

Personally i like the Aces and all their fancy bells and whistles, but hey, if we have to play a few waves of good ole joust the swarm again, why not.

1 hour ago, Rakaydos said:

Because you can get a Phoenix squadron blocker instead for the same points.

Maaaaaybe. I mean yes you obviously can but would you. Maybe. Maybe all the other changes can bring the game back to a place where stuff dies and super defensive point tanks aren't winning every game at time. But maybe not.

2 hours ago, clanofwolves said:

OK, I'll bite...

If you have the ability to take a turret, and you are guaranteed that you can keep the arc, and no one else can, you take him. Beginners will like the constancy against mates who can guess you and out-fly you and expert pilot will want him to insure that the great fliers cannot choose what you think they will as bate. In poker it's like having a pair of ladies, every hand, guaranteed. Why wouldn't you. Do we think 2.0 will be won by dice or by taking the odds? Over a long tourney, do you want the high=risk, high-reward? Or easy fly consistency?

Remember, in the end, the house always wins.

There's always a cost.

If Dash + Luke Gunner costs 130 points... that's not a lot left over for the 'friend.'

The less ships you have on the board, the easier it is for me to find Dash.

And if it proves too good? UP UP UP. There is literally a point it's not worth taking.