So for me personally a very under appreciated EPT was Ruthlessness. Had to play smart with it but it was great when it worked to your advantage. The new 2.0 variant makes me cringe. So instead of just blasting a ship at range 1 of the hurt ship and potentially hitting your own. You now Must Damage one of your own ships at range 0-1 of the ship your shooting at. This changes a blank to a hit. On the surface I’m having a hard time justifying this choice of action. Much like I never understood self damaging QD in 1.0. To push through a last damage rather than waste another shot I suppose but still not an ideal setup. Anyone looked at this or thoughts on it?

It seems decent against low agi targets. It might also be cheaper in this iteration but otherwise yeah, seems pretty meh.

To me, it fits the idea that the Imperials are more interested in results, and don’t care if they endanger their own expendable assets to do so. “Expendable assets“? Well, they do throw masses of cheap fighters rather than fewer more survivable ones.

I think there is a good example of this in play near the end of Rebels . Thrawn wanted Hera shot down, but the Defender pilot ignored orders orders to break off, so Thrawn was ‘ruthless’ in ordering the Chimera’s guns to fire anyway. The Defender was grazed, but Hera rolled all evades and still survived.

1 hour ago, Ronu said:

On the surface I’m having a hard time justifying this choice of action. Much like I never understood self damaging QD in 1.0. To push through a last damage rather than waste another shot I suppose but still not an ideal setup. Anyone looked at this or thoughts on it?

It'll depend on the cost. But if you've got a supporting swarm of basic academy pilots, giving up a point of damage on one is ~ 8 points worth of damage. An extra hit on an ace could easily net you more value than that, and this is a valuable ability for imperials because the Interceptor, Striker, and Phantom are all unable to target lock by default. An upgrade letting you do something with blank die results is good. An upgrade letting you automatically flip one to a hit is even better.

As always, it could have potential utility in given circumstances… IF it hadn't to compete with other much better cards for the same upgrade slot.

Other than thematic mission play or a negative cost, it will be one of the least used upgrades.

1 hour ago, Jehan Menasis said:

As always, it could have potential utility in given circumstances… IF it hadn't to compete with other much better cards for the same upgrade slot.

Well, at the moment, at least, there aren't too many alternatives:

• Predator - good (an attack reroll is as near as darn-it a blank-to-hit if you've got a focus token) but bullseye-locked
• Crack Shot - good (a cancelled evade is as near as darn-it a blank-to-hit if you've got a focus token) but bullseye-locked
• Lone Wolf - good (an attack reroll is as near as darn-it a blank-to-hit if you've got a focus token) but prevents you flying in close proximity to allies
• Juke - eh. It's good for forcing an opponent to spend a focus token (or evade token) but unless you can pair with jam tokens, vader, hotshot gunner or similar target, it's not as good at directly increasing damage dealt
• Outmanoeuvre - good, if you can set up an out-of-arc shot. Assuming the target had focus, that's 5/8ths of an evade eliminated, and if they had evade as well it's even better.
• Trick Shot - good if you have an obstructed shot, but that's not ideal, and not that easy to set up.
• Saturation Salvo - ordnance only - and this eats charge like nobody's business, so pretty much locks you to ships with a white reload action like a punisher.

• Squad Leader - moves an action around the squad; not directly comparable
• Swarm Tactics - boosts initiative; not directly comparable
• Elusive - a defensive ability; not directly comparable
• Debris Gambit - a defensive ability; not directly comparable (and most imperial ships who'd want to evade already have a white evade action anyway - the TIE/x1 is the only obvious omission)

Ruthlessness' hurt an ally at range 1 of the target isn't too easy a condition to set up either, though, and that's in addition to causing the damage. On the other hand, an automatic any-result-to-hit is the most powerful modification going, and it's hopefully going to be cheap, as it's very comparable to fearlessness (need to place someone in range 1 to use it, causes any-result-to-hit, and results in return fire with +1 die - which is near enough an extra point of damage).

It might well be an alternative to Crack Shot that removes your reliance on bullseye arcs.

To Magnus' point, saying a 2.0 talent is bad by comparing it to a 1.0 EPT is a mistake, 1.0 EPTs were crazy strong for their points.

2.0 ruthlessness will be situational, but it also was in 1.0. If it's cheap it could find a spot in lists that have very low costs per hull point (e.g. generic TIEs or a decimator). Also dice mods will be much more precious in 2.0.

Comparing it to self damaging QD is a little different. The problem with that build was that QD ability is once per turn, so if you damaged yourself, then the other player just needed to take 2 more shields off and now QD is a one trick pony for 33+ points. Better to just let the opponent do the damage and hopefully trigger her ability more often (even if it means you don't get to choose when it triggers).

I could imagine ruthlessness being just dandy as a 0 cost

You pay in opprotunity (using your talent slot) and in taking guaranteed damage (after setting up relevant positioning) for a chance at pushing added damage through defenses

Imo, that'd easily justify a 0 cost upgrade.

1 hour ago, evcameron said:

To Magnus' point, saying a 2.0 talent is bad by comparing it to a 1.0 EPT is a mistake, 1.0 EPTs were crazy strong for their points.

2.0 ruthlessness will be situational, but it also was in 1.0. If it's cheap it could find a spot in lists that have very low costs per hull point (e.g. generic TIEs or a decimator). Also dice mods will be much more precious in 2.0.

Oh I am not saying it’s bad or worse than the similarly named 1.0 variant. I am saying that I am as a matter of course having a hard time digesting and justifying it’s use in 2.0 looking at how things are currently laid out.

The biggest thing is the restriction of Friendly ship not just another ship. That really gets me.

So on paper I don’t see it. In practice it could end up amazing.

2 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

Ruthlessness' hurt an ally at range 1 of the target isn't too easy a condition to set up either, though, and that's in addition to causing the damage. On the other hand, an automatic any-result-to-hit is the most powerful modification going, and it's hopefully going to be cheap, as it's very comparable to fearlessness (need to place someone in range 1 to use it, causes any-result-to-hit, and results in return fire with +1 die - which is near enough an extra point of damage).

Range 0-1 means you can use a blocker as both action denial and Ruthless dice mods so there's that

So, if you've gone to the effort of setting up the perfect shot by executing the block on your priority target, Ruthless makes for a nice "last resort" to keep the dice from betraying you

2 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

Ruthlessness' hurt an ally at range 1 of the target isn't too easy a condition to set up either, though, and that's in addition to causing the damage. On the other hand, an automatic any-result-to-hit is the most powerful modification going, and it's hopefully going to be cheap, as it's very comparable to fearlessness (need to place someone in range 1 to use it, causes any-result-to-hit, and results in return fire with +1 die - which is near enough an extra point of damage).

Magnus I have to disagree here on the comparison to Fearless. Fearless was designed with the Fang fighter in mind getting its ability at the same range as Fearless. Ruthless was never designed with a specific ship in mind and is a fundamental change that not only removed the auto damage but also makes the cost self deprecating to your squad.

I personally would have liked to see it be like so:

• Ruthless (Unique)

Choose a ship at range 0-1 of the attacked ship. Deal one damage to that ship and change one blank to a hit from your dice roll against the attacked ship.

The chosen ship may spend a green token to ignore this effect.

Now I can see this as an effective option. Either I strip tokens or deal damage to be effective. Else I just take it myself to ensure I get a dice result I want.

being unique prevents the Spamming that could happen like it was able to in 1.0 which albeit minor and rare was a thing.

What you’re all missing is that it is no longer mandatory. Having the option to deal another damage is enormous, even if it does cost some self-damage.

I’ve been playing with the ruthless Maarek list on FlyCasual (because I want to adjust my Reaper flying to 2.0) and it’s 100% better than I expected. Getting an extra damage against Luke or Wedge is amazing, and putting a damage card on a TIE or Reaper seems like a pretty affordable downside; TIEs pop in one shot anyway and the Reaper has enough hits to take it. The only one who doesn’t want the same is the x1 that can’t be damaged by it anyway.

Having that choice can be difficult but it’s very powerful and feels amazingly thematic.

I see it being pretty solid at around 1 point. Compare to Crackshot: similar result (one more damage), probabaly a bit easier to set up, and multiple uses—but you have to damage your buddies. Seems comparable.

Ruthlessness was one of my favourite talents. I would give kestal a twin laser turret and ruthlessness and snipe people.

In second edition, I may try a bunch of cheap ties with intimidation and something bigger with Ruthless. Just for fun.

The ability to inflict that one extra hit result to guarantee a crit goes through is not to be overlooked.

The question is, can Iden remove that damage? Sure it is only one point, but it could work.

Ruthlessness was one of my favourite talents. I would give kestal a twin laser turret and ruthlessness and snipe people.

In second edition, I may try a bunch of cheap ties with intimidation and something bigger with Ruthless. Just for fun.

The ability to inflict that one extra hit result to guarantee a crit goes through is not to be overlooked.

The question is, can Iden remove that damage? Sure it is only one point, but it could work.

1 hour ago, That Blasted Samophlange said:

Ruthlessness was one of my favourite talents. I would give kestal a twin laser turret and ruthlessness and snipe people.

In second edition, I may try a bunch of cheap ties with intimidation and something bigger with Ruthless. Just for fun.

The ability to inflict that one extra hit result to guarantee a crit goes through is not to be overlooked.

The question is, can Iden remove that damage? Sure it is only one point, but it could work.

It’s not an attack so I would suspect it cannot.

1 hour ago, That Blasted Samophlange said:

The question is, can Iden remove that damage? Sure it is only one point, but it could work.

Even if she could, why would you? Surely you wouldn't opt to use the ability if it would finish off one of your precious fighters? Surely you'd rather use her ability to negate a truly awful attack?

11 hours ago, Ravenhull said:

To me, it fits the idea that the Imperials are more interested in results, and don’t care if they endanger their own expendable assets to do so. “Expendable assets“? Well, they do throw masses of cheap fighters rather than fewer more survivable ones.

I think there is a good example of this in play near the end of Rebels . Thrawn wanted Hera shot down, but the Defender pilot ignored orders orders to break off, so Thrawn was ‘ruthless’ in ordering the Chimera’s guns to fire anyway. The Defender was grazed, but Hera rolled all evades and still survived.

Now the question becomes... Can we field cheaper fighters than anyone else?

TIEs cost the same as Z-s, and Ruthelessness would work better with them.

AFAIK we cannot field +1 interceptor when compared to the Fang, or +1 Aggressor when compared to the Y-Wing.

So, in a word, we cannot field more ships than rebels or scum. That's a blatant lie people say on these forums.

Ruthless would be better if it wasn't Imperial. You could pair it up with Deadmans Switch and the like, put it on Kath Scarlet and have her blast her own suicide Binayre's as well as hitting the target for +1 dice and an extra reroll. Rebels could at least repair the damage with their Astromechs.

The only combo I can think with Imperials is putting it on a Decimator that's carrying Sloan and using it to force nasty stress spikes on people. Assuming they want to take your bait and hit that 1hp TIE Fighter, and if they don't? Oh well it's still alive and around.

Besides, it's not like you weren't going to take her is it? They could cost that card at 30pts and it'd still be worth taking with a Shuttle or Reaper.

39 minutes ago, ClassicalMoser said:

Even if she could, why would you? Surely you wouldn't opt to use the ability if it would finish off one of your precious fighters? Surely you'd rather use her ability to negate a truly awful attack?

Because you may be down to one enemy ship with low hull, and 10 minutes left in a match and you want to snake in another damage?

It is nowhere near optimal, but, but, it could well.. save your butt.

Ruthless is really more of a scum ability. (stab your buddy for bonuses)

Fearless is more of a First order ability (dangerous positioning for bonuses)

Empire should have had Endless, working like Escalation in reverse, and Resistance gets something like "Peerless" to represent their theme of "Our temwork makes ME awesome," to contrast with Rebels's Selfless "We're all in this together."

54 minutes ago, Rakaydos said:

Ruthless is really more of a scum ability. (stab your buddy for bonuses)

Fearless is more of a First order ability (dangerous positioning for bonuses)

Empire should have had Endless, working like Escalation in reverse, and Resistance gets something like "Peerless" to represent their theme of "Our temwork makes ME awesome," to contrast with Rebels's Selfless "We're all in this together."

Ruthless as an idea is not bad.

Ruthless as a card is not great.

Flavorwise, the old card work much better. "We are shooting at that point, and ANYTHING near that point will get damaged. Because we want to shoot there. "

Now it's like: "We gonna shoot our own ship, because it is more accurate that way"

Commander Kaine, 2018, colorized

The way I'd explain the new mechanic is: Imperial commanders know that their targets will use whatever cover is available during evasive maneuvers. If the defender can spoil a shot by passing behind another Imperial ship, it only makes sense to do so. But if you're willing to fire while your own ship is in the way, you can catch the defender at a moment when they thought they were safe and more reliably land a shot.

It's a stretch, but it's plausible enough (to me) that I won't be bothered by the mechanic not making sense.

5 hours ago, ClassicalMoser said:

Even if she could, why would you? Surely you wouldn't opt to use the ability if it would finish off one of your precious fighters? Surely you'd rather use her ability to negate a truly awful attack?

I'd totally use Iden if ruthlessness was going to strip the last HP from one of my TIEs. I'd prefer to use her to bounce a torpedo shot, but hey if it lets me push a crit through with ruthless Maarek then sure I'll spend a charge.

4 hours ago, Mward1984 said:

Ruthless would be better if it wasn't Imperial.

Yeah, I hear you - ruthless would combo really well with Kath, Saw pilot and dead man's switch. It fits scum flavour-wise too (not rebels so much). However, it does combo excellently with the new deathfire, who attacks and drops a bomb when he explodes.

9 hours ago, ficklegreendice said:

I could imagine ruthlessness being just dandy as a 0 cost

There's no way this will be zero cost. Even in 1.0, Vader (who traded 2 hits for a crit, albeit with less setup) was 3 points. Changing any die to a hit is big in 2.0. Ruthless won't be crazy expensive, but it's certainly more than 0 points. I can't wait to fly it on Maarek with a miniswarm of TIE bumper cars.

The big thing for me is that 1.0 Ruthlessness let your enemy decide how it triggered. If they spread out and flew close to your ships, it was not going to trigger in your favour. In 2.0, you control the action.

16 hours ago, Sparklelord said:

Range 0-1 means you can use a blocker as both action denial and Ruthless dice mods so there's that

So, if you've gone to the effort of setting up the perfect shot by executing the block on your priority target, Ruthless makes for a nice "last resort" to keep the dice from betraying you

Stack with the blocker having intimidation for extra synergy, if you like (hopefully that's got a bit cheaper, too, as it's pretty overpriced in 1.0)

16 hours ago, Ronu said:

Magnus I have to disagree here on the comparison to Fearless. Fearless was designed with the Fang fighter in mind getting its ability at the same range as Fearless. Ruthless was never designed with a specific ship in mind and is a fundamental change that not only removed the auto damage but also makes the cost self deprecating to your squad.

Agreed. Ruthlessness is no longer anything like 1.0 Ruthlessness at all. That was a cheap 'splash damage' effect. This now allows you to kill your original target even more dead at the cost of some collateral damage to your squad. Which, to me, suits the title of the talent better.

15 hours ago, ClassicalMoser said:

What you’re all missing is that it is no longer mandatory. Having the option to deal another damage is enormous, even if it does cost some self-damage

This. It's like using self-damaging to use supernatural reflexes to boost; you're not going to do it very often but it can be scary as heck when you do.

Note also that it's not primary weapon only, so you're not just trading 1-for-1 on damage, but can also use it to push through weapons with an if-you-hit effect (especially important for ion weapons which need multiple uncancelled hits to ionize larger targets), or with an advanced to push

14 hours ago, That Blasted Samophlange said:

The question is, can Iden remove that damage? Sure it is only one point, but it could work.

Iden Versio's ability is "Before a friendly TIE/In fighter at range 0-1 would suffer one or more damage, you may spend 1 [ charge] . If you do, prevent that damage. " - it's not restricted to 'when defending', so can be used against any source of damage.

Using it on a single point of non-critical damage is probably a waste unless it's going to kill the TIE fighter in question, though, in which case I have to question your choice to use Ruthlessness....

11 hours ago, Mward1984 said:

Besides, it's not like you weren't going to take her is it? They could cost that card at 30pts and it'd still be worth taking with a Shuttle or Reaper.

Provided you've got a swarm of cheap TIE fighters, she's great value for money. However, if she's handing out rerolls like candy, you probably don't need Ruthlessness so much, because the rerolls let you cope with blank attack dice without shooting down your own dudes.

Quote

Ruthless is really more of a scum ability. (stab your buddy for bonuses) 

Quote

Flavorwise, the old card work much better. "We are shooting at that point, and ANYTHING near that point will get damaged. Because we want to shoot there. " 

Now it's like: "We gonna shoot our own ship, because it is more accurate that way"  

Personally, I prefer the new one for flavour (and that's as an Imperial swarm player), because it does fit ruthlessness. It's not magically giving your guns splash damage against other enemies, so much as the quote from the decimator's mission, Interdiction:

Why aren't our batteries firing?"

"Our fighters are engaging the enemy, Commander. We have no clear shot."

"I have heard you praise the accuracy of your gunnery teams on numerous occasions. I hope it was more than idle boasting. Commence firing !"

It's more effective fire because you accept collateral damage to friendly grunts (something the Empire has never been too bothered about when it matters; such as Tarkin shooting out Scarif Base).