SF Gunner:

While you perform a primary (front arc) attack and your (mobile arc) is in your (front arc), you may roll 1 additional attack die.
After you perform a primary (front arc) attack, and your (mobile arc) is in your (back arc), you may perform a bonus primary (mobile arc) attack.

SF Ability:

You can [rotate your arc] indicator only to your [front and rear arc]. You must treat (front arc) [sth] of your (missile) upgrades as (arc indicator).

So roughly, you can only shoot front and back, and you can fire secondary weapons from your mobile arc.

This does not look great. We can see they only get 2 green dice, and probably 2 red dice too, given the Gunner ability.

They get linked white actions, but don't pay attention to that, it is a lie.

What the ship can do, effectively, is to choose between shooting 3 dice in the front, or 2 two dice attacks from the rear. So basically the same as before.

Only, this time it costs a slot, a ship ability, and an action.

The only benefit the SF gets is the ability to shoot missiles from the rear.

The gunner slot won't be used, because the extra dice of the ship is still only given by the gunner. So, basically, this slot is useless for anything else.

The double tap won't work with the missile, despite it being the ship ability, since the SF gunner only applies to primary attacks. And you won't use any other gunners.

You get 4 linked white actions, but not really. Rotating the arc doesn't really get you a benefit... It alleviates your drawback (2 dice attack)

I really don't see a point in this ship, unless the dial got a significant upgrade... like TIE interceptor levels of dial quality.

I feel like everything the ship can do that makes it special, is more of a drawback than a benefit. Turret? Yeah, but your primary is worthless without. I don't get what's the point of making a Gunner slot either, especially if you create a card that adds the BASE STATS of the ship. You are never going to use anything else.

The SF ability wasn't GREAT in first edition. It was finicky to pull off, and the benefits weren't that great. with the loss of the easy mods (good thing) the SF sees a decreased efficiency from the start, but now you can actually ruin your (mediocre) double tap by just making the wrong decision. Also, now you can't fire backwards at all, only if you have the arc indicator in the rear.

And finally....

From all the ships, the SF needed LWF the MOST. The ship needs 3 agility.

I am extremely dissatisfied with this ship. Beyond words. Everything I expected from 2.0 to do with this ship, they did the opposite. Instead of a more interesting and fun ship, (or at least, the same level as before) we got something that is solely defined by limitations. This special forces ships excels at exactly nothing.

Understand that I'm not talking about power... I just don't see a reason to fly a ship with a bad dial (at this point, I don't dare to dream), with a difficult and finicky special ability that deals fairly average damage, and requires an action. It doesn't even have a gunner slot, because it trades it for the same ability it had in 1.0, but worse.

But at least it got a (nerfed) evade... Yay?

The ship only needed LWF because the power level of other ships was SO high. It’s going to be just as good as it is in 1.0, only now you’ll have to work for it.

Next.

Too much 1st Ed in a second Ed topic

Butt missiles seem fun

Though I will agree it seems unnecessarily finnicky, I guess it's thematic to have to actually point the gunner

Otherwise, until slots and dial and point costs are known, further analysis is pointless

LITERALLY

12 minutes ago, nikk whyte said:

The ship only needed LWF because the power level of other ships was SO high. It’s going to be just as good as it is in 1.0, only now you’ll have to work for it.

Next.

You base this analysis on what exactly?

I don't think we can be sure the SF gunner slot is locked into the SF gunner until we know the points cost of both, as well as the abilities of any other first order gunners. Some of them might get the same treatment Rebel gunners got, and do the same thing the generic does, only better for more points. And without the SF gunner, the ship will be a good bit cheaper than it's Resistance counterpart, so it might find a home there (though I wouldn't count on it). As for the dial and statline... It's a First Order X-wing with a gimick. While I could see playing with the dial a little since other comparable ships like the Advanced and both X-wings got mild buffs, FFG doesn't want it to be a super ace. That's what the silencer is for, after all.

As for Lightweight Frame... The SF doesn't NEED it. It certainly appreciated a defense buff. But it's a jouster. It lives and dies by efficiency, so its effectiveness will come down to how its priced.

8 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

Too much 1st Ed in a second Ed topic

Butt missiles seem fun

Though I will agree it seems unnecessarily finnicky, I guess it's thematic to have to actually point the gunner

Otherwise, until slots and dial and point costs are known, further analysis is pointless

LITERALLY

It would be also thematic to have 3 green dice. (WHOAH THIS THING REALLY MOVES)

But it still makes no sense to have a gunner slot be occupied by the same upgrade all the time.... 2.0 was supposed to be against that sort of thing.

Compare it with the T70. The ability of the t70 (config) rewards good play by doing something you couldn't do before, and it was a similarly priced craft, with similar performance.

The SF rewards good play with nothing new, and it takes a slot for the ship special ability (The t70 doesn't)

Of course, we don't know the price of the ships, and it is likely that the SF gets a cheaper price. I don't care about that... that's a bad trade deal. I don't want more, but worse fighters.

2 minutes ago, Squark said:

I don't think we can be sure the SF gunner slot is locked into the SF gunner until we know the points cost of both, as well as the abilities of any other first order gunners. Some of them might get the same treatment Rebel gunners got, and do the same thing the generic does, only better for more points. And without the SF gunner, the ship will be a good bit cheaper than it's Resistance counterpart, so it might find a home there (though I wouldn't count on it). As for the dial and statline... It's a First Order X-wing with a gimick. While I could see playing with the dial a little since other comparable ships like the Advanced and both X-wings got mild buffs, FFG doesn't want it to be a super ace. That's what the silencer is for, after all.

As for Lightweight Frame... The SF doesn't NEED it. It certainly appreciated a defense buff. But it's a jouster. It lives and dies by efficiency, so its effectiveness will come down to how its priced.

The ship ability makes no sense with the SF gunner, and the SF gunner makes no sense without the ship. I think it is highly unlikely we get any other configuration for this.

33 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:

[doom and gloom ranting]

But at least it got a (nerfed) evade... Yay?

Didn't you learn your lesson from having to eat your words when X-Wings were priced to prevent 5-per-list?

A (2+1)/2/3/3 is basically the same statline as an X-Wing. Both have Focus/TL/Barrel Roll. An hit point moved to a shield and an evade action is OK, and the rear-arc tricks add some flexibility and arc coverage which a basic X-Wing lacks. If the TIE/sf with a Special Forces Gunner is priced close enough to an X-Wing, it'll all be fine.

2 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

Didn't you learn your lesson from having to eat your words when X-Wings were priced to prevent 5-per-list?

A (2+1)/2/3/3 is basically the same statline as an X-Wing. Both have Focus/TL/Barrel Roll. An extra shield and an evade action is OK, and the rear-arc tricks add some flexibility and arc coverage which a basic X-Wing lacks. If the TIE/sf with a Special Forces Gunner is priced close enough to an X-Wing, it'll all be fine.

Ehm...

An action dependent 2+1 is hardly the same as 3 dice native. I think I've said more than enough about this for the Advanced, which is only saved by an Initative 6 force user with 3 force poins, and most people agree that the Advanced generic is overpriced. Like I said it would be. And it was designed around to not give additional synergy for Vader. Like FFG said they wouldn't do.

So yeah, I was wrong about the X-wings, but right about other stuff.

Compare it to the X-wing, and let's assume they cost the same (with SF gunner included). That still doesn't look flattering for the SF. If something is more difficult to fly (like the SF), it should have greater rewards. There is literally nothing about this ship that justifies the added difficulty of making the Front arc shot work.

My assumption is that the dial is going to stay the same (like most newer dials).

We will see. But whatever happens, the ship will not be what I want it to be. Nothing about this ship looks "fun". I don't care about the price.

36 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:

You base this analysis on what exactly?

Playing the game.

Where is the SF spoilers?

Yeah, the SF looks clunky and boring. Why they decided to require a special gunner rather than just baking that into the base ship ability we will never know. Based on what we know so far I am expecting a nerf to the dial and a points increase, because nothing else they've done makes sense.

This isn't like the TIE Advanced, where it takes non-trivial effort to get the third attack die. Simply leaving the arc front is going to be exactly the same as a 3-dice primary. If you want rear-shots, linked white rotate actions means all you have to do is not-bump, and think ahead a little. That's more than fair; I'd even call that a positive design change, fitting for a post-360 arc X-Wing.

Doubling 1e costs, presuming the same dial, if this with gunner wound up being 46 points for an Init 2 generic, or 50 for an Init 3 with a Talent slot... hrm a hair more than I think would be right. Cheapest ARC is 50 points, and I think one of these is a little worse. So if they were 44/48 for generics, I'd call that good. FCS and Homing Missile would be solid for 50 points on an Init 2. To that end, 44 points is the same cost as a Grey Squadron Bomber with Dorsal Turret and Veteran Turret Gunner, which is also a 2-dice double-tapper.

Personally, I loved the 1e TIE/sf. I had a lot of fun flying generics with Accuracy Corrector and LWF. Probably not as good as the Delta Defender for same 28 points, but what generic really was, and these SFs were interesting heavy fighters. This, so far, feels about the same.

I wish it could take Veteran Turret Gunner. Double shot forward attack would be neat at Range 1.

2 agility is fine in this game. I've been playing around with and have played against 2.0 Strikers and Phantoms, and you know what? They don't need LWF or ACD at the current power level. In my 2.0 practice games they all live just as long, if not longer, than they did in 1.0 thanks to the power level drop. 2 agility SFs will be absolutely fine. In fact I'm excited for them.

1 hour ago, Commander Kaine said:

Ehm...

An action dependent 2+1 is hardly the same as 3 dice native. I think I've said more than enough about this for the Advanced, which is only saved by an Initative 6 force user with 3 force poins, and most people agree that the Advanced generic is overpriced. Like I said it would be. And it was designed around to not give additional synergy for Vader. Like FFG said they wouldn't do.

So yeah, I was wrong about the X-wings, but right about other stuff.

Compare it to the X-wing, and let's assume they cost the same (with SF gunner included). That still doesn't look flattering for the SF. If something is more difficult to fly (like the SF), it should have greater rewards. There is literally nothing about this ship that justifies the added difficulty of making the Front arc shot work.

My assumption is that the dial is going to stay the same (like most newer dials).

We will see. But whatever happens, the ship will not be what I want it to be. Nothing about this ship looks "fun". I don't care about the price.

It's not an action dependant 2+1 dice. You can leave it pointed forward and always have 3 dice. Then if you have someone behind you instead, you're free to rotate to also shoot behind you.

49 minutes ago, kraedin said:

I wish it could take Veteran Turret Gunner. Double shot forward attack would be neat at Range 1.

It can take veteran turret gunner, but it will trade its 3 dice attack for it.

1 hour ago, HolySorcerer said:

Yeah, the SF looks clunky and boring. Why they decided to require a special gunner rather than just baking that into the base ship ability we will never know. Based on what we know so far I am expecting a nerf to the dial and a points increase, because nothing else they've done makes sense.

well the text on the gunner is more than a little wordy, so...

honestly, vet turret gunner seems a fine parallel to SF gunner (Depending on the cost of the SF gunner) provided you can get mods on both attacks

7 minutes ago, VanderLegion said:

It's not an action dependant 2+1 dice. You can leave it pointed forward and always have 3 dice. Then if you have someone behind you instead, you're free to rotate to also shoot behind you.

Except when you are stressed or used Adv. Sensors.... coincidentally, two of the most interesting states of the SF. The dial is riddled with red moves (and it is likely to stay the same) which now shut down its ability, and Adv. sensors makes impossible to use the rotate arc all together.

Sure, it is not as bad as the Advanced Lock requirement, but it is a massive nerf to an already medicore ability.

The SF was Great in 1.0 because:

Expertise

FCS

LWF

6 hull/shields

Adv. Optics.

It had fairly difficult to pull off double tap, mostly for flavor.

It lost all of those, except the hull/shield ratio, and the double tap became even worse.

I don't see what would make this ship great. At all.

It's not great anymore because it lost the no consequences passive mods and an agility? You're comparing it way too hard to 1.0 standards. In 2.0 the ship you just described would be straight busted.

Also bump and stress should be a very real concern not just for this ship but for any. No free butt shots with mods even after bumping, you have to be able to fly well.

better dial, great pilot abilities, appropriate point costs, new tech upgrades...

too much unknown about the SF, other than (as defkhan said) stuff like Expertise/FCS/LWF/Optics were all necessary in the broken gamestate of 1st ed and are absolutely not necessary here

The new SF stuff is finnicky, but at least it is consistent with allowing counter-play by providing actual consequences for not facing your turret properly

and without knowing...just about literally everything else? it's difficult to make any sort of value judgement with a straight face

Also... Is there any argument against this:

3/2

2

3

3

Focus

Lock

Evade

Broll

Ship ability: may fire <missile> weapons out of rear arc.

SF gunner: You may roll 1 fewer dice on your primary attack from (frontarc), if you do so, you may perform a bonus primary attack from (reararc)

5 minutes ago, defkhan1 said:

It's not great anymore because it lost the no consequences passive mods and an agility? You're comparing it way too hard to 1.0 standards. In 2.0 the ship you just described would be straight busted.

Also bump and stress should be a very real concern not just for this ship but for any. No free butt shots with mods even after bumping, you have to be able to fly well.

No. It's not great, because it lost all those things, and didn't get anything else. Compare it with the T70, a very similar ship in performance and cost (same era too, so they pair of naturally well). It got more stuff.

3 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

better dial, great pilot abilities, appropriate point costs, new tech upgrades...

too much unknown about the SF, other than (as defkhan said) stuff like Expertise/FCS/LWF/Optics were all necessary in the broken gamestate of 1st ed and are absolutely not necessary here

The new SF stuff is finnicky, but at least it is consistent with allowing counter-play by providing actual consequences for not facing your turret properly

and without knowing...just about literally everything else? it's difficult to make any sort of value judgement with a straight face

Well... BD got worse. and no news on QD. It could be, but I'm not optimistic.

8 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:

No. It's not great, because it lost all those things, and didn't get anything else. Compare it with the T70, a very similar ship in performance and cost (same era too, so they pair of naturally well). It got more stuff.

Which is fine because it puts them on even footing. SFs, especially QD, were highly competitive in 1.0, whereas T-70s not named Poe or Jess were pretty bad. Poe was only good because of unlimited regen, Poe's ability, and Autothrusters. ALL of which are gone. So yes the SF lost a ton, but so did Poe. Everything got knocked down in power.

I for one am super excited for the SF in 2.0. If Quickdraw's ability remains the same, he's going to be amazing. If the thing still has a system slot, then Fanatical + FCS is going to be my goto build (which mimics 1.0 Expertise + FCS). Significantly nerfed compared to 1.0, but incredibly strong on a 2.0 playing field.

7 minutes ago, defkhan1 said:

Which is fine because it puts them on even footing. SFs, especially QD, were highly competitive in 1.0, whereas T-70s not named Poe or Jess were pretty bad. Poe was only good because of unlimited regen, Poe's ability, and Autothrusters. ALL of which are gone. So yes the SF lost a ton, but so did Poe. Everything got knocked down in power.

I for one am super excited for the SF in 2.0. If Quickdraw's ability remains the same, he's going to be amazing. If the thing still has a system slot, then Fanatical + FCS is going to be my goto build (which mimics 1.0 Expertise + FCS). Significantly nerfed compared to 1.0, but incredibly strong on a 2.0 playing field.

Poe lost unlimited regen, his ability and AT

but gained free PTL, 1 per game SLAM without WD and a Configuration card (which is really good)

I'm not hating on Poe, but you can't seriously say they got the same treatment.