seriously, I loved this ability

why'd it have to go?

1 minute ago, ficklegreendice said:

seriously, I loved this ability

why'd it have to go?

Hopefully we'll get it again when they release the v2 Lancer officially... Dare to dream.

2 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

seriously, I loved this ability

why'd it have to go?

Go? It got spun into the Agile Gunner upgrade with a slight change and then barred from being carried on the chassis that originated it... 😠

11 minutes ago, Slugrage said:

Hopefully we'll get it again when they release the v2 Lancer officially... Dare to dream.

yes, lancer needs this upgrade badly. it wasnt OP in 2.0 but ffg still nerfed it.

is it just me or has FFG neglected the lancer in 2.0?

2 minutes ago, Da_Brown_Bomber said:

yes, lancer needs this upgrade badly. it wasnt OP in 2.0 but ffg still nerfed it.

is it just me or has FFG neglected the lancer in 2.0?

We're what, 4 months into 2.0? Lets be patient, still a shittonne of time to go.

10 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:

Go? It got spun into the Agile Gunner upgrade with a slight change and then barred from being carried on the chassis that originated it... 😠

With a firepower 2 turret that can only function with the title if the turret is in front arc? Still not going to help the lancer if the turret is in the right direction.

people flew ketsu in 1.0 effectively and she didn’t use her turret. As has been said the lancer needs some stressful way of doing more actions/getting tokens.

2 minutes ago, Da_Brown_Bomber said:

yes, lancer needs this upgrade badly. it wasnt OP in 2.0 but ffg still nerfed it.

is it just me or has FFG neglected the lancer in 2.0?

I'm with the crowd that's predicting a points drop for most large base ships on the first re-balancing. Look at Rey's Falcon... she's 80 points, and the generic Alliance YT-1300 is 78 points at Init 1 with no pilot ability. So I think the Resistance has been tweaked already for it, and that we'll hopefully see some drops for all the Alliance / Empire / Scum large bases, which would help the Lancer (and others) accordingly.

7 hours ago, Dengar5 said:

It is un-fixable. The 2-attack mobile arc, a single k-turn option, and no re-position make it un-competitive at almost any points costing. They killed it just like they killed the Jumpmaster. Expect a future scum ship that is very similar and will cost you $40-$50.

Given that this profile is better than the Moldy Crow HWK this is clearly untrue.

1 hour ago, thespaceinvader said:

Given that this profile is better than the Moldy Crow HWK this is clearly untrue.

The hwk does not use its turret for combat, it uses the turret to buff/debuff ships, you use the foward arc if at all possible.

heres the other problem, even if a ships whole dial was blue, a small base with average maneuverability is superior to a large base with the best maneuverability simply because of the base size. Also the lack of any reposition actions makes it even harder to dodge terrain or enemy ships attempting to get in range 1.

large bases are unwieldy simply because of their size, with the lancer odds are you will be blocked or land on terrain once, and that could make the whole ship crippled as you only have 2 shields.

I'd give it to the Tie SF treatment with a white linked rotate action if you do a 3 or faster maneuver.

8 minutes ago, viedit said:

I'd give it to the Tie SF treatment with a white linked rotate action if you do a 3 or faster maneuver.

That would be a nice option for a config for it.

2 hours ago, Hiemfire said:

That would be a nice option for a config for it.

i like it. so to actually do this FFG would create a 'fix' upgrade and release it in a future expansion? could be a new title/updated title or maybe print as a faction only upgrade meaning Scurrg bomber would have access to it as well?

16 minutes ago, Da_Brown_Bomber said:

i like it. so to actually do this FFG would create a 'fix' upgrade and release it in a future expansion? could be a new title/updated title or maybe print as a faction only upgrade meaning Scurrg bomber would have access to it as well?

What the **** is with people's hang up on making things titles? This is 2.0 now. Config > Errata > Title when it comes to not hard locking an ability fix to one build of ship. Titles are limited now and represent unique ships (I.E. Shadowcaster, Millennium Falcon, Moldy Crow and Havoc), as they should have only done in First Ed. And the Scurrg doesn't need a 'free' rotate action, it needs something to help it with bombing other than the bull current setup of hard locked Unique Pilot abilities. Scurrg = brawler if not Sol, Nym or Havoc, and a Lok with Havoc might as well dump the 3 points into FCS since the mileage it will get out of its ordinance is extremely limited unless you want to have it competing with a bare generic Lancer for price...

9 hours ago, viedit said:

I'd give it to the Tie SF treatment with a white linked rotate action if you do a 3 or faster maneuver.

Again turing the turret is not goint to help the lancer if it is firepower 2. Rotating the turret is only worth it if the turret was firepower 3, especially considering the title and Ketsu pilot want the turret in front arc.

Scum Han Solo with trick shot or Kavil in the Y-Wing are more reliable turret ships than the lancer and are probably 10 points or more cheaper when built.

The lancer needs some kind of offense buff, otherwise you might as well save 20+ points and use Kavil in the Y-Wing.

It would be nice if the lancer had some kind of reposition action as well(half the large bases have a reposition, the lancer seems like it would have more maneuverability than most ships its size)

On 12/30/2018 at 3:38 AM, thespaceinvader said:

Given that this profile is better than the Moldy Crow HWK this is clearly untrue.

The HWK does have a reposition, though. Not to mention being able to move the turret AND Focus.

5 hours ago, DakkaDakka12 said:

Again turing the turret is not goint to help the lancer if it is firepower 2. Rotating the turret is only worth it if the turret was firepower 3, especially considering the title and Ketsu pilot want the turret in front arc.

Scum Han Solo with trick shot or Kavil in the Y-Wing are more reliable turret ships than the lancer and are probably 10 points or more cheaper when built.

The lancer needs some kind of offense buff, otherwise you might as well save 20+ points and use Kavil in the Y-Wing.

It would be nice if the lancer had some kind of reposition action as well(half the large bases have a reposition, the lancer seems like it would have more maneuverability than most ships its size)

More than firepower, turrets in general suffer on action economy in 2.0. If you have to spend actions rotating, then you are losing on offensive mods. Asajj, arguably the best Lancer in 1.0 is suffering pretty badly so far in 2.0. Her ability is locked to the mobile arc. If she has to burn her action rotating arcs then she's not getting great mods on offense (or defensive if needed). A white linked rotate would give her additional economy to trigger her arc ability without costing her other mods.

22 minutes ago, viedit said:

More than firepower, turrets in general suffer on action economy in 2.0. If you have to spend actions rotating, then you are losing on offensive mods. Asajj, arguably the best Lancer in 1.0 is suffering pretty badly so far in 2.0. Her ability is locked to the mobile arc. If she has to burn her action rotating arcs then she's not getting great mods on offense (or defensive if needed). A white linked rotate would give her additional economy to trigger her arc ability without costing her other mods.

Honestly the Lancer in 2.0 is NOT a turret ship, as a large base it will almost always be your most expensive ship(at least(1/3rd of total points) if you make a 2 dice attack with 1/3rd of your points, you are gimping yourself.

For the lancer to become a turret ship again, they need to swap the firepower 3 front arc with the firepower 2 turret.

The lancer in 1.0 almost exclusively fired outside of its front arc.

Scum has 2 ships that have a turret but are often forced to fire out front arc one being the Lancer(title and highest initiative pilot) and the other the Jumpmaster(title and top pilot need front arc). I feel one of these 2 ships should focus more on the turret, and the other should have other options to make them worth a place in your list.

5 minutes ago, DakkaDakka12 said:

Honestly the Lancer in 2.0 is NOT a turret ship, as a large base it will almost always be your most expensive ship(at least(1/3rd of total points) if you make a 2 dice attack with 1/3rd of your points, you are gimping yourself.

For the lancer to become a turret ship again, they need to swap the firepower 3 front arc with the firepower 2 turret.

The lancer in 1.0 almost exclusively fir  ed outside of its front arc.

 

Scum has 2 ships that have  a turret but are often forced to fire out front arc one being the Lancer(title and highest initiative pilot) and the other the Jumpmaster(title and top pilot need front arc). I feel one of these 2 ships should focus more on the turret, and the other should have other options to make them worth a place in your list. 

I'm just saying her mobile arc is much like Palob's and is more for control than attacking.

Asajj is pretty jealous of the linked actions on the HWK-290...

Focus>>>Rotate Turret (red)

TL>>>Rotate Turret (red)

did FFG only want one ship per squad to have this versatility? The Moldy Crow title really only makes playing ONE HWK-290 in ur list worth it.

10 hours ago, DakkaDakka12 said:

Again turing the turret is not goint to help the lancer if it is firepower 2.

Have you played with/against the new Lambda shuttle? A 2-dice extra arc is useful, and more meaningful than it might appear at first.

The issue with the 2-dice mobile arc on the Lancer is that it has to give up it's one and only one action to rotate that arc. If there were a way to get even red rotate actions, Lancer mobile arc gets a lot nicer.

3 hours ago, Da_Brown_Bomber said:

The Moldy Crow title really only makes playing ONE HWK-290 in ur list worth it.

I don't know that I agree with this. I kinda think that if the Moldy Crow was banned, most HWK pilots would still be worth their points, because their abilities are good. Like, I can totally see Palob still being a good ship without the title, but there's no reason to not run it, since those 12 points are far and above the most important 12 points in the list.

1 hour ago, theBitterFig said:

I don't know that I agree with this. I kinda think that if the Moldy Crow was banned, most HWK pilots would still be worth their points, because their abilities are good. Like, I can totally see Palob still being a good ship without the title, but there's no reason to not run it, since those 12 points are far and above the most important 12 points in the list.

38pt Palob with no 3 dice fwd attack and no extra focus tokens other than what he steals probably wouldnt make the cut imo. Torki Mux at 36pts with no title?... no thanx. Both these pilots would really miss the 3 dice attack from front. im not convinced either would see much (if any) play without MC.

if both could take the title and be combined in the same list? 50pts for Palob and 48pts for Torkil? now these would be virtually a must play for scum

if the title wasnt essential to the HWK-290 wouldnt u see ppl using it wout the title and using that 12pts elsewhere?

2 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

Have you played with/against the new Lambda shuttle? A 2-dice extra arc is useful, and more meaningful than it might appear at first.

The issue with the 2-dice mobile arc on the Lancer is that it has to give up it's one and only one action to rotate that arc. If there were a way to get even red rotate actions, Lancer mobile arc gets a lot nicer.

I don't know that I agree with this. I kinda think that if the Moldy Crow was banned, most HWK pilots would still be worth their points, because their abilities are good. Like, I can totally see Palob still being a good ship without the title, but there's no reason to not run it, since those 12 points are far and above the most important 12 points in the list.

Comparing the Lancer to the Lambda is not fair as attacking with a Lambda is an extra, Lambda is a support ship, but the Lancer is a combat ship and it’s much more expensive.

Atm other options are more efficient than the Lancer.

If you want the Lancer to become a turret ship the turret needs to be firepower 3 to compete with other ships. If the Lancer is becoming a debuff/tractor beam ship, it needs to become very cheap, and maybe gain an extra crew.

If it stays a combat ship, firepower 3 turret, and a gunner slot or a mod that works like agile gunner.

Either way support or combat, it needs a way to stress for advantage to make use of it’s currently uselessly amazing dial.

On 12/29/2018 at 6:44 PM, theBitterFig said:

"Adaptive Gyroscopes : In the end phase, you may perform    a Red R  otate Acti  o  n.  "

This would be better in the system phase, to avoid issues with advance information... whether from the perspective of revealing your intentions or intended as misinformation

10 hours ago, Da_Brown_Bomber said:

38pt Palob with no 3 dice fwd attack and no extra focus tokens other than what he steals probably wouldnt make the cut imo. Torki Mux at 36pts with no title?... no thanx. Both these pilots would really miss the 3 dice attack from front. im not convinced either would see much (if any) play without MC.

if both could take the title and be combined in the same list? 50pts for Palob and 48pts for Torkil? now these would be virtually a must play for scum

if the title wasnt essential to the HWK-290 wouldnt u see ppl using it wout the title and using that 12pts elsewhere?

I'd argue that they don't miss the 3 die front arc, they miss *the font arc. It would be almost as good at 2 dice - because the really big thing most of the unique HWKs (and all the good ones) share is abilities contingent on their arcs. And indeed, I'd probably pick a cheaper 2 die version over the more expensive 3 die version, because I tend to get more shots with the turret anyway.

57 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

I'd argue that they don't miss the 3 die front arc, they miss *the font arc. It would be almost as good at 2 dice - because the really big thing most of the unique HWKs (and all the good ones) share is abilities contingent on their arcs. And indeed, I'd probably pick a cheaper 2 die version over the more expensive 3 die version, because I tend to get more shots with the turret anyway.

Ok, so how much is reasonable for a non-limited 2 dice front arc.

If it was 4-6 points I think it would be a better choice on Torkil and Dace.