Title.

Probably because they didn’t want to deal with multiple arc indicators.

No.

I think that would have been much better. There's no actual reason that 2 turrets should face away from one another

1.0 Shadowcaster has taught us that a movable 180° arc is almost impossible to dodge. So no.

15 minutes ago, Ravenhull said:

Probably because they didn’t want to deal with multiple arc indicators.

That, and also because it would increase the power a bit. Setting up approaches from two different angles is doable, but setting up approaches from three or more angles is much less so. You may as well just go back to 1.0 turrets at that point.

12 minutes ago, Greebwahn said:

I think that would have been much better. There's no actual reason that 2 turrets should face away from one another

360 coverage or back to back shooting/covering is actually a common tactic in our recent wars, whether helicopter door guns, WW2 Dorsal guns or the team that any armoured vehicle and their crew make up to cover each other's backs. Can't see it being a stretch that two gunners would face opposite ways to cover each other. Also the main reason is simpler arc gameplay and interactions.

I guess the problem is that keeping a mobile arc in front then another on either side allows you to cover a continuous 180 degree arc, which is incredibly large and hard to dodge, as the shadowcaster has shown us. With the added flexibility of placing that large arc anywhere, especially on a large base ship, makes it kinda pointless to have decreased arcs at all.

I agree that the bowtie thing feels stupid, but gameplay > logic

7 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:

I agree that the bowtie thing feels stupid, but gameplay > logic

Eh, there's a little logic to it. Where's Luke?? Right behind Han, down the tube, facing the other way:

But more importantly, could you all start playing the game for just a little while before you try to fix it?

I would have liked to see a bit of variety in the arcs, for example, they should have given the Deci a mobile 180 arc to make up for how lumbering it is.

6 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

Eh, there's a little logic to it. Where's Luke?? Right behind Han, down the tube, facing the other way:

But more importantly, could you all start playing the game for just a little while before you try to fix it?

Technically, he is below him (or above).

I also always assumed that they look "outwards" (so down or up) rather than forward or backwards.

Also, I didn't try to fix the game right now, I was arguing for the current method. So... Could you quote someone relevant instead?

also 2 mobile arcs would cause confusion with some of the gunner abilities that let you shoot out of an arc you haven't shot already. Like could you point them both out the back and then shoot the same ship again if you miss the first shot.

Yes exactly! That would make sense!

Sure, having 2 mobile arcs would be harder to dodge, but would make a lot more sense thematically

Gameplay >>>> fluff, always and forever

People have already gone over the reasons, and FFG seems to be operating under that logic because they nerfed the caster mobile arc to a 2-die

This is so you get something for avoiding its primary arc, giving you SOME kind of incentive to do something other than just rolling more dice at the thing

Now, if anything, the yts could have just ONE mobile arc like the JM5k for the sake of ease. Be thankful that having two gives you more tactical flexibility

It is a game, with spaceship, with solar panels, flown by wizards... It is all about abstraction. If I would talk about logic consistency I would question TLJ rather than the miniature game

16 hours ago, Duskwalker said:

1.0 Shadowcaster has taught us that a movable 180° arc is almost impossible to dodge. So no.

Admiral Chiraneu sais Hello and oh now with reinforce, ability works on defence, and only 88pt.

I like your concept, but agree with the implementation of opposed arcs. Arc-dodging is still relevant, where it can be much more difficult against 180-degree coverage.

2 hours ago, RedHotDice said:

Admiral Chiraneu sais Hello and oh now with reinforce, ability works on defence, and only 88pt.

Last time I checked, Chiraneu had a bow-tie, just like everybody else. So what are you even talking about?

Arc dodging the shadow caster while keeping a shot is already a pain in the behind and only really viable for a handfull of ships. Your proposed suggestion would if anything make things worse because you could move one arc to the back. The bow tie is a nice compromise between preventing 180 angled arcs and only giving the mutli-turret ships a single arc. Plus, all of the bowtie ships can equip one type of ordnance or another, so you can even get 270-degree coverage if you target lock.

If this was a thing, every Falcon would be built with Cluster Missiles in the front arc, and would point one arc out the right and one out the rear. Start at the left side of the board and just fly clockwise around the edge of the board. You'd be back to making it impossible to flank or arc dodge.

The bowtie means that at the very, very least the Falcon (or similar) will always have a vulnerable arc at the sides or rear.

It's best for gameplay, as everyone else has said.