Have we seen anything that indicates that TIE Strikers will be able to get a third agility in 2.0, a la Lightweight Frame in 1.0? I feel like their 1.0 point cost was designed with Lightweight Frame in mind.
The reason I ask is, I want to run some 2.0 proxy games with a friend but I'm not sure how to spec out my Strikers points/upgrade-wise.
Signs point to no as far as I know, but at the same time 2 evade dice aren't as irrelevant as they are in 1.0
3 hours ago, a4rino said:Have we seen anything that indicates that TIE Strikers will be able to get a third agility in 2.0, a la Lightweight Frame in 1.0? I feel like their 1.0 point cost was designed with Lightweight Frame in mind.
The reason I ask is, I want to run some 2.0 proxy games with a friend but I'm not sure how to spec out my Strikers points/upgrade-wise.
My guess is no,
The card itself was a fix card for certain tie ships and really messed up all design of future tie ships with less then 3 agility. (i never took any tie with a native 1-2 agility without it after its release)
If it does make it i bet it will be in name alone and have a completely different function.
Hopefully it is not in 2.0 in its current format, because it is one of these annoying autoinclude cards.
Also supposedly less height in damage spikes in 2.0, thus no need for it.
If it does exist in 2.0, it almost definitely will not have that ability. I don't know what it would have but not that.
i suspect the name to still exist or atleast get reused but wouldnt mean the same thing.
As in, price reduction but all damage is face up or something normally bad like that.
Its not really needed in 2.0, getting high dice attacks arent as easy and full modifications arent as easy to get either. 1.0 really fell to stupid high HP for the cost or 3agi ships that could even attempt to survive, thats why it existed.
Not like it helped THAT much anyway since it also negated most obstructed/R3 shots benefits.
Thanks everyone for helping me out, it looks like I'll be rolling two green dice for my proxy 2.0 game.
6 hours ago, Nyxen said:Signs point to no as far as I know, but at the same time 2 evade dice aren't as irrelevant as they are in 1.0
2 hours ago, Vineheart01 said:i suspect the name to still exist or atleast get reused but wouldnt mean the same thing.
As in, price reduction but all damage is face up or something normally bad like that.Its not really needed in 2.0, getting high dice attacks arent as easy and full modifications arent as easy to get either. 1.0 really fell to stupid high HP for the cost or 3agi ships that could even attempt to survive, thats why it existed.
Not like it helped THAT much anyway since it also negated most obstructed/R3 shots benefits.
But these ships should have that 3 agility natively... The aggressor, the striker... These are agile ships. That's why imps get less shields.
I really hope there is the LF in 2.0
25 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:But these ships should have that 3 agility natively... The aggressor, the striker... These are agile ships. That's why imps get less shields.
If TIE strikers had 3 agility and 4 hull, it would severely step on the toes of TIE interceptors. I like the differentiation. Maybe we'll start putting Hull Upgrades on TIE strikers? Who knows!
I reckon if Lightweight Frame is re-introduced, it will go the same way as the Light Syck upgrade and all damage cards will be dealt face-up (exposed) as a consequence for taking what is essentially an auto-include card on many ships, assuming it does the same thing.
It could just be what decreases the difficulty of normal bank moves for all TIE class models.
24 minutes ago, Viktus106 said:I reckon if Lightweight Frame is re-introduced, it will go the same way as the Light Syck upgrade and all damage cards will be dealt face-up (exposed) as a consequence for taking what is essentially an auto-include card on many ships, assuming it does the same thing.
It could just be what decreases the difficulty of normal bank moves for all TIE class models.
I'd like that. It should be a free card in that case
10 hours ago, Parakitor said:If TIE strikers had 3 agility and 4 hull, it would severely step on the toes of TIE interceptors. I like the differentiation. Maybe we'll start putting Hull Upgrades on TIE strikers? Who knows!
This. Hull Upgrade Imperial Trainees are 20 point ships, and I don't see any reason to assume that won't be a nice, simple option for a squad element.
The TIE Interceptor and TIE striker have already got moved a touch closer with generic interceptors getting Autothrusters - which is essentially "every action you have is linked with red boost/barrel roll" meaning they both get free extra movement.
The striker is the more fragile of the two at 4 hull, agility 2 - it's essentially a Z-95 with move manoeuvrability and more guns - but it does apparently get a bomb slot - sorry, device slot - as well because of that cross-sections book.
We don't know how much bombs will cost, but being able to pack bombs into a striker swarm could be fun, especially now seismic charges are born again mean:
Dense obstacle fields have always been an issue for the high-minimum speed striker, and the natural lurking place for Dash-Never-To-Be-Sufficiently-Accursed-Rendar. Add in the new obstacle-hugging version of Han, and trying to peel rebel scum out of dense asteroid and debris belts is likely to be a standard problem in 2.0. Fortunately, we now have a very efficient tool to deal with this issue.
The first rule of Jungle Warfare: Eliminate The Jungle .
1 hour ago, Magnus Grendel said:This. Hull Upgrade Imperial Trainees are 20 point ships, and I don't see any reason to assume that won't be a nice, simple option for a squad element.
The TIE Interceptor and TIE striker have already got moved a touch closer with generic interceptors getting Autothrusters - which is essentially "every action you have is linked with red boost/barrel roll" meaning they both get free extra movement.
The striker is the more fragile of the two at 4 hull, agility 2 - it's essentially a Z-95 with move manoeuvrability and more guns - but it does apparently get a bomb slot - sorry, device slot - as well because of that cross-sections book.
We don't know how much bombs will cost, but being able to pack bombs into a striker swarm could be fun, especially now seismic charges are born again mean:
Dense obstacle fields have always been an issue for the high-minimum speed striker, and the natural lurking place for Dash-Never-To-Be-Sufficiently-Accursed-Rendar. Add in the new obstacle-hugging version of Han, and trying to peel rebel scum out of dense asteroid and debris belts is likely to be a standard problem in 2.0. Fortunately, we now have a very efficient tool to deal with this issue.
The first rule of Jungle Warfare: Eliminate The Jungle .
-...The Millennium Falcon has entered an asteroid field, and we cannot risk...
- Asteroids do not concern me Admiral, deploy the strikers . I want that ship, and not excuses!
To be fair, TIE bombers with Nimble Bomber are just as (if not more) capable of doing the job. But a Striker is actually capable of dogfighting effectively with people in the nice clear patch of space afterwards.
It's potentially going to be murderous for other light swarms, though. Assuming obstacle deployment rules don't change, rocks are "more than range 1 apart", which in practice means about range one-and-a-bit unless you're deliberately trying to squash them together.
That means that there's a pretty decent chance of hitting two rocks with a charge if you fly between them, and a non-trivial chance of hitting three, which could create a 'bug splat' capable of covering a sixth of the board with a single charge.
1 minute ago, Magnus Grendel said:To be fair, TIE bombers with Nimble Bomber are just as (if not more) capable of doing the job. But a Striker is actually capable of dogfighting effectively with people in the nice clear patch of space afterwards.
It's potentially going to be murderous for other light swarms, though. Assuming obstacle deployment rules don't change, rocks are "more than range 1 apart", which in practice means about range one-and-a-bit unless you're deliberately trying to squash them together.
That means that there's a pretty decent chance of hitting two rocks with a charge if you fly between them, and a non-trivial chance of hitting three, which could create a 'bug splat' capable of covering a sixth of the board with a single charge.
Yeah, but the tactic gets less effective as the game moves on. It's instantly balanced
Just now, Commander Kaine said:Yeah, but the tactic gets less effective as the game moves on. It's instantly balanced
Oh, agreed. It's not worth packing more than a couple of seismics in a squad, tops, just like seismic torpedoes, because there's only so much aggressive landscape gardening a battlefield can need. But it will be worth it the first (and probably only) time a swarm player parks a TIE fighter swarm in a cluster of debris to find a gently beeping ovoid waiting for them.
I believe the technical term is " B W A A A A AH HH M M M M M ".
I need my lightweight frames for my Tie Aggressors .
Otherwise they go too fast down... and I am unhappy
1 hour ago, Magnus Grendel said:To be fair, TIE bombers with Nimble Bomber are just as (if not more) capable of doing the job. But a Striker is actually capable of dogfighting effectively with people in the nice clear patch of space afterwards.
It's potentially going to be murderous for other light swarms, though. Assuming obstacle deployment rules don't change, rocks are "more than range 1 apart", which in practice means about range one-and-a-bit unless you're deliberately trying to squash them together.
That means that there's a pretty decent chance of hitting two rocks with a charge if you fly between them, and a non-trivial chance of hitting three, which could create a 'bug splat' capable of covering a sixth of the board with a single charge.
To clarify, any individual seismic only blows up 1 asteroid, not all within range, so a single charge cannot set off a chain reaction of multiple explosions.
On topic: I'd guess that point costs have been adjusted with not having lightweight frame in mind. Can't wait to get these strikers on the table now that they are ALWAYS fast with the new adaptive ailerons. I doubt they have been put in the range of take six... but 5 is probably still likely, maybe with a couple points of upgrades.
Off topic: I will never not have this queued up when playing seismics now!
When we see LWF in 2.0 it will be the same game effect but it will have a different name and be the baked in ability of the TIE SF.
Speaking of the SF, it really should have a 3/3/3/3 statline and attack with the same dice back and forth (it's literally the same gun swiveling)
3 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:To be fair, TIE bombers with Nimble Bomber are just as (if not more) capable of doing the job. But a Striker is actually capable of dogfighting effectively with people in the nice clear patch of space afterwards.
It's potentially going to be murderous for other light swarms, though. Assuming obstacle deployment rules don't change, rocks are "more than range 1 apart", which in practice means about range one-and-a-bit unless you're deliberately trying to squash them together.
That means that there's a pretty decent chance of hitting two rocks with a charge if you fly between them, and a non-trivial chance of hitting three, which could create a 'bug splat' capable of covering a sixth of the board with a single charge.
I think you only pick one rock within range 1.
50 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:Speaking of the SF, it really should have a 3/3/3/3 statline and attack with the same dice back and forth (it's literally the same gun swiveling)
It's got the turret and the forward-mounted guns. So the turret is the 2 attack part, and the forward-mounted guns add another 1 attack for forward facing attacks.
5 minutes ago, Ixidor said:It's got the turret and the forward-mounted guns. So the turret is the 2 attack part, and the forward-mounted guns add another 1 attack for forward facing attacks.
yup. Definitely not the same gun swiveling back and forth.