14 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

Camp One: NO 360 degree turrets on any ship for any cost for any reason.

Camp Two: 360 degree turrets are OK as long as they are not too powerful and can be counter-played in some way.

11 minutes ago, __underscore__ said:

Emphasis mine.

And you are absolutely incorrect when Luke is involved.

Add Luke to your 2.0 turret and you get to chose what to shoot in a 360 degree arc regardless of previous mobile arc setting, regardless your ability ability to take an action or no, regardless the state of ship stress or blocking.

You sir need to think a bit more... and maybe have a spot of tea.

Or your simply trolling... then maybe a pint would better bring you into the fold.

5 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

It doesn't matter in my mind.

Fact: 360 turrets are 1.0 cancer.

Fact: (as we understand it) Luke creates a virtual 360 turret regardless of counter-play attempts.

Fact: Therefore Luke's cancer.

Opinion: It matters not if he's great or easy to kill, he breaks the rules.

Fact: He breaks one of FFG's stated design rules for 2.0.

Fact: If the above is true: Luke should be revised so he is not automatic.

fact: A single 60 point ship that can fire every turn is not cancer (pwt turret).

fact: A single 60 point ship that can fire every turn fully modded shots, dodge arcs, and mitigate damage is cancer.

Therefor, Luke is only cancer if you can get the other element of the combo.

There is no C3PO, R2-D2, evade got nerfed, Boost is red on the falcon (dial got nerfed, and the blues are pretty predictable), BR is red on yt2400. Predator is gone, ptl is gone, Rey and gunner (a lot less action free offensive mods).

As far I can see now: the falcon can:

a) Boost and Dodge (Stressed)

a.1) If Target still in arc get a single mod from luke force (3 dice 1 eye to hit => avg 2 hits)

a.2) Else, use luke to get an unmodded shot (3 dice => avg 1.5 hits)

b) Don´'t dodge and get a TL and then have luke for aditional mod (best offensive case) => 2.6 hits

c) Don't dodge, get TL and use luke to get an arc => 2.2 hits

d) Get an Evade token:

d.1) If Target still in arc get a single mod from luke force (3 dice 1 eye to hit => avg 2 hits)

d.2) Else, use luke to get an unmodded shot (3 dice => avg 1.5 hits)

Only in a.1), c) and d.1) is the free arc use of luke used, in the first it ends stressed and unmodded shot (a fair price avoidinng an arc on a high Ini Ship, In the second ypu get a good shot but are wide open to counter attacks. The third is usefull when facing lots of ships, but i don't see putting some damage even on a Tie with unmodded shots.

So far I feel that unless the falcon gets a point cost reduction, even with luke is offensive power is fairly low to justify a the point cost. So I don't belive Luke is OP at all

2 minutes ago, heychadwick said:

That's a bit black and white. No room for grey? Maybe he's a good option, but not the best option? Maybe Vet Gunner is good for someone who doesn't have a problem with getting a target in a mobile arc?

Also, maybe he's good to have for casual players who want fluff filled games? Maybe everything isn't geared towards being in the competitive game?

You could have still had luke all fluff filled and fun by moving his activation to end of combat, or before activation.

I just don't see a reason to have him designed the way he is that is all. I am all for random fun games but that does not justify a broken mechanic that could have easily been made not broken. In a none, competitive environment han is still moving his turret to react to almost everything (especially with a bid) but he is doing so with counterplay options. I do not see how Luke gunner is fun for the opponent in a casual fluff game.

1 minute ago, ficklegreendice said:

4.) The way Luke gunner is currently spoiled does not deserve to exist. It adds nothing good to the game and Luke could do literally anything else

That's just like your opinion, man.

I stick with it, having an easy entry ship is good design. Especially in a game where maneuvering is more important than everything else. Even better if it is an iconic character.

2 minutes ago, Icelom said:

1. he could be in camp one and just breaks the game if he is cheap enough

And then they can just change the cost on a rainy Wednesday afternoon and your problem is solved.

3 minutes ago, Icelom said:

2. I don't like the fact ffg designed a card like him, they have done so much that I agree with in 2.0 only to have luke gunner just ignore those changes/fixes.

This game has always had examples where basic rules were intentionally broken. Some were OP, some not. But all of them had fix cost. 2.0 has dynamic cost.

5 minutes ago, Icelom said:

3. 2.0 is like what 4-5 months out I really have nothing better to do than debate the merits of luke gunner and try to prove my point.

You have to try harder to conclusively prove your point

5 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

That's just like your opinion, man.

I stick with it, having an easy entry ship is good design.

indeed it is

but gunner luke is not an easy entry ship. It's a skill abyss that bypasses the fundamentals of the game

you want an easy entry ship? ****, you want an easy entry Luke?

man, isn't that convenient? He is both easier to play thanks to the action-independent nature of force AND he still obeys the core tenets of 2.0!

now if only he came in something players could easily access or something, like maybe the core set

7 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

And you are absolutely incorrect when Luke is involved.

Add Luke to your 2.0 turret and you get to chose what to shoot in a 360 degree arc regardless of previous mobile arc setting, regardless your ability ability to take an action or no, regardless the state of ship stress or blocking.

You sir need to think a bit more... and maybe have a spot of tea.

Or your simply trolling... then maybe a pint would better bring you into the fold.

No, my correction of your post is accurate. Luke is unique so there can only be a single 360 turret in your squad.

I'm in the not thrilled about Luke Gunner for 2.0. It is clearly as spoiled/translated a 360 PWT. I thought removing those was the point of 2.0.

I don't have all the information yet but this card certainly smells like a bad decision unless the idea was Luke and Han in the Falcon being the meta. I have to think the most valuable opportunity in the game is the chance to attack and Luke will almost always give you the opportunity to attack. Mods are life but there are no mods without attacking.

2 minutes ago, __underscore__ said:

No, my correction of your post is accurate. Luke is unique so there can only be a single 360 turret in your squad.

I see your point, but allowing one turd in the brownie mix makes the whole pan bad.

2 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

indeed it is

but gunner luke is not an easy entry ship. It's a skill abyss that bypasses the fundamentals of the game

you want an easy entry ship? ****, you want an easy entry Luke?

man, isn't that convenient? He is both easier to play thanks to the action-independent nature of force AND he still obeys the core tenets of 2.0!

now if only he came in something players could easily access or something, like maybe the core set

You think that tone is helpful?

Easy entry ship as in "360deg", because that's inherently easier than any arced ship. Of course you know that.

And mobile arcs are still part of the game, so are large bases. Which means Han with GunnerLuke still teaches plenty to a new player. Which you, of course, also know.

3 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

I see your point, but allowing one turd in the brownie mix makes the whole pan bad.

Don't worry it's ok because you are not allowed to put 2 turds in the brownie mix. That makes the first turd ok.

And if you just spent a couple years removing all the turds, the next thought better not be "This turd's not too bad by itself." And if it is, don't expect to be selling me a bunch of those brownies.

Selling me on 2e involves convincing me that the designers have learned to tell the difference between a brownie bite and a dog turd. This one card is enough to make me doubt that ability.

1 minute ago, GreenDragoon said:

You think that tone is helpful?

Easy entry ship as in "360deg", because that's inherently easier than any arced ship. Of course you know that.

And mobile arcs are still part of the game, so are large bases. Which means Han with GunnerLuke still teaches plenty to a new player. Which you, of course, also know.

I do apologize for the tone

it's just really tiring having to repeatedly demonstrate just how entirely without merit the 1.0 turret mechanic is from literally every angle

which is appropriate, given the 1.0 turret mechanic

The free engagement-phase mobile arc rotations will continue until morale improves!

10 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

I see your point, but allowing one turd in the brownie mix makes the whole pan bad.

Nah, it's alright.

14 minutes ago, __underscore__ said:

No, my correction of your post is accurate. Luke is unique so there can only be a single 360 turret in your squad.

not to bring up godwin's law but

• Ghost fenn has only a single 360 turret in the squad
• 100pt miranda has only a single 360 turret in the squad
• Dash Poe/Corran has only a single 360 turret in the squad
• RAC + Ace has only a single 360 turret in the squad
• Fat Han has only a single 360 turret in the squad

The potential to build a powerhouse list is not set by the number of 360 turrets you can put in it.

Throwing in my thoughts here. I don't thing gunner Luke is all that bad and won't be an all powerful meta warping card.

I do think that it's not the best decision to include such a mechanic in a new edition that had the intent of removing bad mechanics.

there is absolutely no reason to be this upset by it at this point. We don't know the cost and we have not seen what else is coming. the assumption, based on what we know, is that it can't be countered. For all we know, there will be a dark side force power that either shuts down force abilities or allows you to move the arcs on enemy ships so they miss you. who knows, the possibilities are endless right now. I get where FGD is coming from. the concern is justified, the amount of sky is falling rants really isn't. Until we can see the whole picture at least.

thing is, if we get specific counter-mechanics (for ANY mechanic, be it turrets or force) they'll only exacerbate the problem

remember, maneuvering > list building in 2.0

what are specific counter-upgrades? list building, list match-up; not actual flying

if gunner Luke's any good, we could well just go down the same toilet bowl spiral 1.0 went through. Best case scenario, as has already been brought up, is the app nukes into uselessness, making it a complete waste of design space and of an iconic character.

there is no "right answer" for the problem (currently spoiled) gunner Luke presents, only the hope that it's so overpriced that it'll never see play. frankly, that's not the kind of design I want to see for any game let alone X-wing 2.0

I view Luke as Gunner in the same context as Proton Bombs in 1.0.

Proton Bombs were stupidly powerful in 1.0. They were the first mechanic that could push damage under shields, and faceup damage at that. There were pilots who could drop them at PS10 with nearly perfect knowledge.

They were also stupidly expensive, and the chassis that could carry them at PS10 were also stupidly expensive for that ability. So the card rarely saw play.

So yeah, Luke can be both potent, and also very expensive. As a gunner, he's not going to help much against things like the Firespray or YV-666 that can Reinforce against his attack. If a stacked Falcon comes in at 120-130 points, you're still looking at the equivelent to a 60-65 point ship that only gets one attack per round. That's manageable.

40 minutes ago, Kdubb said:

Can we talk about this more please?

How do things like this happen? ?

I especially love how they deliberately changed the original art away from the Falcon, which we know is a ship with a red Boost maneuver, to the Vaksai, which we know does not.

2 minutes ago, PhantomFO said:

I view Luke as Gunner in the same context as Proton Bombs in 1.0.

Proton Bombs were stupidly powerful in 1.0. They were the first mechanic that could push damage under shields, and faceup damage at that. There were pilots who could drop them at PS10 with nearly perfect knowledge.

They were also stupidly expensive, and the chassis that could carry them at PS10 were also stupidly expensive for that ability. So the card rarely saw play.

So yeah, Luke can be both potent, and also very expensive. As a gunner, he's not going to help much against things like the Firespray or YV-666 that can Reinforce against his attack. If a stacked Falcon comes in at 120-130 points, you're still looking at the equivelent to a 60-65 point ship that only gets one attack per round. That's manageable.

I especially love how they deliberately changed the original art away from the Falcon, which we know is a ship with a red Boost maneuver, to the Vaksai, which we know does not.

Until a single future upgrade hit that caused widespread panic, knee-jerk reaction bans from TO's and an eventual FAQ nerf.

Luke is just like that, he may not be OP out the gate but he leaves open the option because he breaks a core component of the game. The designers stated they wanted 2.0 to be as robust and future-proof as possible... but do they?

43 minutes ago, heychadwick said:

I'll dispute this. It wasnt really 360 turrets by themselves that were cancer. It was 360 turrets that could:

1) Arc Dodge

2) Fire really powerful offensive attacks

3) Avoid heavy damage

It was this combo that really made them cancer. That isn't there with Luke gunner. To not see the entire picture is to not see the full problem...and why Luke Gunner isn't such a big deal.

The problem is THIS thinking right here. Probably why FFG doesnt think its a problem either. Same way they didnt think PS11 coordinate or infinite bombs was a problem in 1E.

Most people are looking at Luke Gunner in a single ship mentality. Combine a YT with Luke along with a ship like Shara Bey or Dutch to share locks, or Esege or Two Tubes or Garven to pass focus tokens, or a ship like Fenn to coordinate at I6, and now Luke starts becoming a huge problem when that single reroll from Han, becomes a focus + reroll on your 3 hull interceptor without autothrusters EVERY ROUND. EVERY ROUND. Han can bump ALL he wants when Luke turns his turret and Adv Sensors Two Tubes tosses him a focus.

Luke Gunner has broken mechanics designed in it. That is the problem. There is no stopping it, no counterplay. You can get a broken ship that is initiative 9 or 9,000 and a can boost 5 times in a row and barrel 10 times in a row and Luke gunner just points his arc at after it stops wobbling around and fires.

Things without limits, without counterplay become broke. Zuckess crew, bomblets, attanni, Manaroo's ability, Palpatine, etc.

It just boils down to, is Luke Gunner broken? Yet to be determined

Is it bad game design? Yes

Am I worried? No. I think FFG will price it out of play if it becomes a problem, but the point is it shouldnt be in the game in the first place.

22 minutes ago, jagsba said:

not to bring up godwin's law but

• Ghost fenn has only a single 360 turret in the squad
• 100pt miranda has only a single 360 turret in the squad
• Dash Poe/Corran has only a single 360 turret in the squad
• RAC + Ace has only a single 360 turret in the squad
• Fat Han has only a single 360 turret in the squad

The potential to build a powerhouse list is not set by the number of 360 turrets you can put in it.

If you think I'm saying that it won't be good you're mistaken. It's obviously going to be a powerhouse list, but Fat Han was always going to be. The ship, the character and even the archetype are too popular not to feature in the game somewhere.

It's a pity they made it a 360 turret, I have to say, but considering I'm used to flying against them all the sodding time these days it's still a marked improvement on 1st Edition. Plus the more I see being revealed the more tools I see to fly against it, which it why my anger levels over Luke are descending.

(Presuming there's no Gunner for Dash, that is)

1 minute ago, wurms said:

The problem is THIS thinking right here. Probably why FFG doesnt think its a problem either. Same way they didnt think PS11 coordinate or infinite bombs was a problem in 1E.

Most people are looking at Luke Gunner in a single ship mentality. Combine a YT with Luke along with a ship like Shara Bey or Dutch to share locks, or Esege or Two Tubes or Garven to pass focus tokens, or a ship like Fenn to coordinate at I6, and now Luke starts becoming a huge problem when that single reroll from Han, becomes a focus + reroll on your 3 hull interceptor without autothrusters EVERY ROUND. EVERY ROUND. Han can bump ALL he wants when Luke turns his turret and Adv Sensors Two Tubes tosses him a focus.

Luke Gunner has broken mechanics designed in it. That is the problem. There is no stopping it, no counterplay. You can get a broken ship that is initiative 9 or 9,000 and a can boost 5 times in a row and barrel 10 times in a row and Luke gunner just points his arc at after it stops wobbling around and fires.

Things without limits, without counterplay become broke. Zuckess crew, bomblets, attanni, Manaroo's ability, Palpatine, etc.

It just boils down to, is Luke Gunner broken? Yet to be determined

Is it bad game design? Yes

Am I worried? No. I think FFG will price it out of play if it becomes a problem, but the point is it shouldnt be in the game in the first place.

You're never going to have a situation where every ship is equally strong against all other ships. That part is impossible, and you should just quit now if that's what you want out of 2.0.

Where 2.0 is getting back to basics is a return to the concept of "pillars."

Jousters are stronger against turrets through cost efficiency, especially since turrets can't arc-dodge as well in 2.0.

Turrets are stronger against arc-dodgers, since they can afford easier coverage.

Arc-dodgers are stronger against jousters thanks to more repositioning options.

It seems silly to worry that Luke is what breaks the game for arc dodgers, since we still have ships in the game with full 180-degree firing arcs.

1 hour ago, Kdubb said:

Can we talk about this more please?

How do things like this happen? ?

There's still the possibility of a Vaksai configuration for the Kihraxz that adds a red boost?

Other than that, I got nothin'.

Han can already do this to every ship that isn’t PS9, lol. This is some ridiculous nitpicking.

My reaction is kind of eh. I know how awful the turrets were in 1.0 and for that reason I was really disappointed at first sight. But I've been thinking about it a lot since then.

One thing to remember is that the developers really thought about what each upgrade slot/type meant as far as fluff goes. Gunners are clearly adding offensive potential via mods, extra attacks, etc. and I'm sure they will be quite expensive in general (even in 1st edition they ran 4-7ish, and they were weaker then in general). I doubt offensive OR defensive mods will be very easily available via crew since that doesn't seem to fit their new role: looking at the crew we've seen so far, they seem more focused on coordination between ships or interaction outside of ships. I may be wrong; it's early to rush to judgement on any of these things.

Here's a thought though: Let's pretend Luke doesn't exist. At this point, it seems EXTREMELY rare (Norra Wexley is the only example I know of) for a ship to mitigate more damage than its base agility per attack. Even with perfect mods and infinite rerolls, the Falcon will hurt against more than one 3-5 die attack. Even 2 hits is GUARANTEED to deal damage (a change I am extremely happy about). But this definitely means that the Falcon, making up a huge part of the list, is going to need to be able to deal plenty of damage in order to earn its keep. When focused down by all ships, even if it turtles with evade or tries to scoot away with boost, it will easily go down in 4 turns or less.

Getting off 4 3-die attacks without much modification really isn't a good investment of squad points. This is where the gunners come in. I assume that gunners will be the most offense-boosting upgrades in the entire game. And I expect them to be quite powerful. Turreted ships would have to be either quite cheap or else much tankier than they seem to be without them. What gunners do we know of so far? Not many. But the ones we do know of are extremely powerful. An extra attack per round doubles your damage output. We know that such gunners exist, and I'm sure that there will be more that do similar things.

Now if we just math this, which is better for an experienced player? Guaranteeing one attack, or getting the option of a double-tap? If you're flying well, you shouldn't need to rotate your turret at all, and you can use boost to double arc and double-tap, or else use another powerful as-yet-unrevealed gunner for another, similarly powerful effect. But what if you're still learning to fly? Spending 60 points to get an unmodified, 3-dice attack for 4 turns or less only guarantees that you won't be curb stomped by a better player. It doesn't mean you'll beat a better player.

I guess I'm just not that scared of him. I don't necessarily agree with the design decision, but the skill ceiling is also about as low as the skill floor. There's not much you can do with him. It's nice for starting players to learn how to control range, choose actions, avoid obstacles, etc. without having a terribly punishing I-never-even-got-to-shoot experience. But its still burning down every single time.

I kinda like the fluff: Luke gets you into the franchise, but you stay for the more developed characters.