25 minutes ago, That One Guy said:

I just realized Iden Versio can prevent all damage (non critical, that is), from one attack, not just one damage.

Yeah, she's amazing, and will get pricy really fast if she doesn't start that way.

17 minutes ago, Ronu said:

If Outmaneuver is still a thing and not too costly for a Defender it might be what gets stapled to her.

Pretty sure it still works exactly the same, I think the BoLS demo game had it on Wedge.

1 hour ago, Biophysical said:

*Just as a thought experiment. If you could take 4 Sabers with an EPT and Hull Upgrade, would that be enough?

I think that's probably a pretty good standard and would indicate a cost drop that would be the kind of difference I'd be looking for. By 1.0 standards, that would put a PS 4 at 19 points (assuming a "good" ETP is 3). That *might* be too optimistic.

51 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:

Low agi ships with the evade action suffer more. If you roll 3 evades on an Interceptor, you are golden. Sure, a 4th one might help, and you wasted an action, but how often do you think you will need to roll more than 3 evades? 

The falcon however will experience the "evade cap" far more often.

Every second time the falcon uses the evade action, it will be wasted (with the falcon re-roll)

The evade nerf sucks, but it's not green dice aces that suffer the most.

I wasn't just talking about the evade action nor was I just taking about aces but about the ship in general. I agree that the evade action is worse overall and that, in comparison, it really hurts one defense dice ships, that wasn't my point.

I understand your argument, but generally, high agility ships suffer more in a 2.0 environment, at least until we see the cost.

Ships like the Falcon or, for better comparison purposes, the B-wing aren't relying on their green dice or even tokens at all for defense. A ship like a B-wing is less likely to take proportional damage from an attack than an interceptor despite having fewer defense dice. I use proportional because obviously a B-wing is going to take more, but a single damage a interceptor takes is 1/3 of its health.

In a 3 attack dice situation (no tokens), a Bwing has less than 8% chance of losing 1/3 of it's health while an interceptor has only a 47% chance. With both attacker/defender having a focus token, a B-wing chance to lose 1/3 of its health increase to about 16% and an interceptor changes to about 46%.

We don't even really have to make a conjecture here since we can basically look at Wave 3 where the interceptors and B-wings were similarly costed and were both three attack dice ships with the central difference being that interceptors relied on three agility dice for defense. The action economy of that time was very similar to what we will see at the opening of 2.0 with the interceptor having access to more defensive action efficiency (token stacking) and a far better dial than the B-wing, whose advantage was efficiency in offense. The B-wing chassis was generally far superior (Soontir being the exception) and saw more competitive play at that time. It wasn't even really close. As I mentioned, there's a reason that interceptors were the first ship to see a fix (for all of them), and while B-wings followed shortly after, that was mostly for their ace pilots who were over-costed.

A ship like the B-wing pretty much goes unaffected in terms of defense in 2.0.

1 minute ago, AlexW said:

I think that's probably a pretty good standard and would indicate a cost drop that would be the kind of difference I'd be looking for. By 1.0 standards, that would put a PS 4 at 19 points (assuming a "good" ETP is 3). That *might* be too optimistic.

I wasn't just talking about the evade action nor was I just taking about aces but about the ship in general. I agree that the evade action is worse overall and that, in comparison, it really hurts one defense dice ships, that wasn't my point.

I understand your argument, but generally, high agility ships suffer more in a 2.0 environment, at least until we see the cost.

Ships like the Falcon or, for better comparison purposes, the B-wing aren't relying on their green dice or even tokens at all for defense. A ship like a B-wing is less likely to take proportional damage from an attack than an interceptor despite having fewer defense dice. I use proportional because obviously a B-wing is going to take more, but a single damage a interceptor takes is 1/3 of its health.

In a 3 attack dice situation (no tokens), a Bwing has less than 8% chance of losing 1/3 of it's health while an interceptor has only a 47% chance. With both attacker/defender having a focus token, a B-wing chance to lose 1/3 of its health increase to about 16% and an interceptor changes to about 46%.

We don't even really have to make a conjecture here since we can basically look at Wave 3 where the interceptors and B-wings were similarly costed and were both three attack dice ships with the central difference being that interceptors relied on three agility dice for defense. The action economy of that time was very similar to what we will see at the opening of 2.0 with the interceptor having access to more defensive action efficiency (token stacking) and a far better dial than the B-wing, whose advantage was efficiency in offense. The B-wing chassis was generally far superior (Soontir being the exception) and saw more competitive play at that time. It wasn't even really close. As I mentioned, there's a reason that interceptors were the first ship to see a fix (for all of them), and while B-wings followed shortly after, that was mostly for their ace pilots who were over-costed.

A ship like the B-wing pretty much goes unaffected in terms of defense in 2.0.

But pure jousting value is less accurate predictor of power that. Before because everyone can be dodged, and hypermobility is limited to fewer ships

Makes me wonder if it will be worth it to cancel hits in an attack if there are uncancelled grits. You could waste the ability on a ship that will be crippled anyway...

Staple: Lambda-shuttle. I may even have to buy/make an Escort Shuttle model for it, now that it has a rear arc! (Though, probably without the hideous paint-job it had in the games.)

Not Sure: TIE Defender. My favorite part of flying them in 1.0 was the TIE/D title. Without that, I'm not convinced they'll be as much fun to fly.

Wild Card: TIE Punisher. Not sure what my builds for them will look like yet, but I tried hard to get them to work in 1.0, and I'm pretty sure I will make them work in 2.0.

Ahhh, escort shuttles: The TIE Fighter's natural enemy.

19 minutes ago, AlexW said:

I think that's probably a pretty good standard and would indicate a cost drop that would be the kind of difference I'd be looking for. By 1.0 standards, that would put a PS 4 at 19 points (assuming a "good" ETP is 3). That *might* be too optimistic.

Would you consider 2.0 Predator good enough? I wonder if we can expect a drop in relative point cost, or it will stay the same with the extra restriction. Remember, points costs for upgrades are supposed to change based on the platform. I bet there will be a lot of list building focused on leveraging the best platform that a good upgrade costs a reasonable price on. It's just a crap shoot right now, though.

Regardless, if 4 + EPT + Hull Upgrade is not practical, what about 3 + low PS blocker? Still enough?

18 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:

But pure jousting value is less accurate predictor of power that. Before because everyone can be dodged, and hypermobility is limited to fewer ships

Sure, but that's my original point back on p.4, that the interceptor is going to be much more reliant on arc-dodging (because it has nothing else really) which in turn means they are going to have very swingy match-ups and ships that can take Luke Gunner will probably really give them a tough time.

1 minute ago, AlexW said:

Sure, but that's my original point back on p.4, that the interceptor is going to be much more reliant on arc-dodging (because it has nothing else really) which in turn means they are going to have very swingy match-ups and ships that can take Luke Gunner will probably really give them a tough time.

Honestly, this is why I'm so interested in the generic interceptors. If they're cheap enough, they can overcome Gunner Luke with raw firepower where Ace Interceptors may not have the endurance. It's also why I'm so interested in that hull upgrade. 4 HP means you in all likelihood takes two attacks to kill it with horrible defensive dice.

3 minutes ago, Biophysical said:

Would you consider 2.0 Predator good enough? I wonder if we can expect a drop in relative point cost, or it will stay the same with the extra restriction. Remember, points costs for upgrades are supposed to change based on the platform. I bet there will be a lot of list building focused on leveraging the best platform that a good upgrade costs a reasonable price on. It's just a crap shoot right now, though.

Regardless, if 4 + EPT + Hull Upgrade is not practical, what about 3 + low PS blocker? Still enough?

That's a fair point and could provide more elements of balance. I'm just looking at how fragile the ship is and am nervous about that and can't imagine the design headache in 2.0 to make them balanced overall.

I think that if you can fit in 3 "good" Sabers and a decent 4th ship that might be workable.

9 minutes ago, That One Guy said:

Ahhh, escort shuttles: The TIE Fighter's natural enemy.

Though I guess the rear turret needs a bit more power to really be an Escort Shuttle.

JV-7

Title

When an attack from your rear arc hits, cancel all die results and do 5 damage to the target.

2 minutes ago, Biophysical said:

Honestly, this is why I'm so interested in the generic interceptors. If they're cheap enough, they can overcome Gunner Luke with raw firepower where Ace Interceptors may not have the endurance. It's also why I'm so interested in that hull upgrade. 4 HP means you in all likelihood takes two attacks to kill it with horrible defensive dice.

Agreed, options for defensive upgrades are going to be important. Have we seen a hull upgrade yet? I know I heard somewhere that stealth is pretty much unchanged.

1 minute ago, JJ48 said:

Though I guess the rear turret needs a bit more power to really be an Escort Shuttle.

JV-7

Title

When an attack from your rear arc hits, cancel all die results and do 5 damage to the target.

Let's hope for that. The firespray has like 3 titles

For the Intercepter concerns, think about this you were able to get 5 in a list using the Alphas. If the post between 30-33 points each your getting 5 or 6 ships. That many 3 dice attacks and chew through ships often before enough can be destroyed to stop the damage from being to severe. Occasionally your dice will fail but that’s true of any ship really. High risk high reward advanced TIE Fighters is what the Intercepters are.

7 minutes ago, AlexW said:

Agreed, options for defensive upgrades are going to be important. Have we seen a hull upgrade yet? I know I heard somewhere that stealth is pretty much unchanged.

I don't think so, but I'm pretty sure there's a shield upgrade, which would be fine if the points fit.

1 minute ago, Ronu said:

For the Intercepter concerns, think about this you were able to get 5 in a list using the Alphas. If the post between 30-33 points each your getting 5 or 6 ships. That many 3 dice attacks and chew through ships often before enough can be destroyed to stop the damage from being to severe. Occasionally your dice will fail but that’s true of any ship really. High risk high reward advanced TIE Fighters is what the Intercepters are.

So Interceptors are just upgraded Fighters? Can't we come up with some way to differentiate them more? Like maybe give them shields? And an ion cannon? And a third wing strut? And flip the panels out? And call it a TIE Defender?

3 minutes ago, Ronu said:

For the Intercepter concerns, think about this you were able to get 5 in a list using the Alphas. If the post between 30-33 points each your getting 5 or 6 ships. That many 3 dice attacks and chew through ships often before enough can be destroyed to stop the damage from being to severe. Occasionally your dice will fail but that’s true of any ship really. High risk high reward advanced TIE Fighters is what the Intercepters are.

But interceptors were overpriced.

1 minute ago, Commander Kaine said:

But interceptors were overpriced.

Alphas are definitely better now, with the ability to link into a maneuver action.

6 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:

But interceptors were overpriced.

Matter of opinion there.... Though even if they were pricing them to be 30-32 is about on par for the upgrade to the Fighter, at the same initiative level. Also the idea of blending them in with basic Ties and other Variants needs consideration. They are going to be awesome flanking diversions as they always were.

14 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

Though I guess the rear turret needs a bit more power to really be an Escort Shuttle.

JV-7

Title

When an attack from your rear arc hits, cancel all die results and do 5 damage to the target.

Have you ever watched Battle Bunny's TIE Fighter Let's Play? He hhhhhates escort shuttles.

Just now, That One Guy said:

Have you ever watched Battle Bunny's TIE Fighter Let's Play? He hhhhhates escort shuttles.

Doesn't everyone? Play the very first mission on Hard. Complete the Primary objectives and feel like a big-shot. Then three Escort Shuttles pop in and remind you that you're still flying an easy-to-hit, delicate, unshielded craft.

14 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

Doesn't everyone? Play the very first mission on Hard. Complete the Primary objectives and feel like a big-shot. Then three Escort Shuttles pop in and remind you that you're still flying an easy-to-hit, delicate, unshielded craft.

Actually I got pretty good at killing them. You just have to stay at about .8-1k

1 hour ago, Biophysical said:

Alphas are definitely better now, with the ability to link into a maneuver action.

This is not to be underestimated. Action-independent modifiers are much more scarce in 2.0, and being able to boost or barrel roll (or even both!) means the Alphas will be supreme blockers. If you can fit 4 Alphas with decent support, they'll be good.

• Coordinate won't work because they'll be stressed. If that weren't the case, Ciena Ree would be FANTASTIC here! I suppose they don't always have to utilize their Autothrusters...could be interesting.
• The new version of Intelligence Agent could work, but you only get to abuse one ship, so it's a bit more limited (and fair) than 1.0.
• Handing out focus tokens seems like a good bet, so maybe Vizier in a Reaper...except his PS is too high, so he won't have focus tokens to hand out yet. Will we get a Fleet Officer type card?
• Will there be mechanics to relieve stress, like Captain Yorr? With him around, you could definitely put Ciena Ree to good use.[EDIT: If he takes the stress, he can't coordinate them. Silly me] But really any stress mitigation would help.
• Speaking of stress, disrupting the enemy may be just as helpful in supporting the Alphas. Admiral Sloane might okay here - at some time during the game you will lose a ship before it gets to shoot, so boosting the attacks of the remaining ships will be clutch. Similarly, just jamming an enemy will make the Alphas more survivable (on average).

This list just highlighted for me how much we don't know yet about 2.0. Man, now I'm getting all excited about TIE interceptors. "Strikers, Interceptors, you two need to play nicely and take turns. I love you both, but there's one of me and two of you."

Be nice if strikers, interceptors, and bombers all started out at a reasonable 32 points (so sake as 1.0 scimitar)