8 hours ago, Hiemfire said:

I'm scratching my head over why so many have an issue with a 2 die primary having access to being able to roll 3 die regular in range 2-3. WTH?

I don't mind this at all, if it's appropriately costed. But a weapon which for a B-wing, T-70 and Firespray is just "marksmanship in the cannon rather than talent slot" (2 points, give or take) whilst for a gunboat or scyk is a permenant extra attack dice - remember cannons lost their range 3 bonus but now gain range 1 bonus - (hard to price but spec forces gunner is 10, TIE/ln to equivalent TIE interceptor and Scyk to equivalent Khiraxz are 11), meaning unless you have a varying cost it's difficult to price fairly.

18 hours ago, Hiemfire said:

I'm scratching my head over why so many have an issue with a 2 die primary having access to being able to roll 3 die regular in range 2-3. WTH?

It's not necessarily whether or not they have access to it, but that is some of it. To the extend that I don't want Scyks and Gunboats to have regular 3-red attacks, it's that I want them to feel different from other 3-red ships. Kinds of ships should matter more than just a difference of paint job. It was good of FFG to have Special Forces Gunner really turn the TIE/SF into two ships in one (2-red missile ship, 3-red medium fighter)

//

The bigger issue is whether it can be balanced against the weapon being utterly useless on a B-Wing.

A 3-dice 2-3 cannon on a B-Wing is paying only for the Crit effect. Worth maybe 4 points, at max.

But a 3-dice primary on a Scyk? Yeah. That'll require a big step up. 3-dice Scyk with normal 3-dice (not just Ion Cannon with a kinda 3) probably needs to cost like 36 points. Given that Scyks need a price cut anyhow, this cannon probably needs to cost 8-10 points. Special Forces Gunner costs 10 points, so a 10 point Mangler Cannon, even if Range 2-3, seems like a good starting place. Factoring in the baseline crit conversion, it might need to be more like 12 points.

And then there's IG-88 B, who has a back-up/make-up shot. Right now, I think it's kind of balanced that they can only give not-normal damage make-up attacks. Aggressors probably need pricing like a 2-red ship, not like a B-Wing or Upsilon Shuttle. T-70s likewise need pricing for cannons similar to Scyk, rather than similar to B-Wings.

Is it possible to have a variable pricing? Yes. Is it a good idea? I tend to think it isn't. Variable pricing adds complication. Right now, there are very few variable pricing, and they're very direct. Base Size, or Agility. Could Cannons be the same way, since clearly a Shield Upgrade adds more to a 3-green ship than to a 0-green ship? Maybe. But what about Missiles and Torpedoes? I just think it'd add a lot more hassle than the benefit it gains.

//

In some ways, many Cannons shouldn't even exist as secondary weapons, not like Torpedoes or Turrets. Tractor and Jamming Beams work by replacing all your normal damage with a kind of token. So why does that have to be a full secondary weapon? FFG could have invented a new phrasing, that basically allows your primary attacks to have an alternate damage type. It also means that balance issues become a lot smaller with the differences of a Cannon on 2 or 3 dice ships. Ion doesn't give you a 3-dice attack, it causes your hits/crits to deal ion tokens instead. Likewise Tractor or such. Heavy Laser Cannon gives +1 red die against bullseye ships at Range 2-3, not a different Bullseye attack. In such a world, a Mangler Cannon would essentially be Marksmanship, but I don't mind that. 1e Linked Battery was 1e Predator, basically.

This would make Cannons a lot weaker on Scyks and Gunboats, but it also allows them to become a lot cheaper. It'd be a different design philosophy.

There could be other drawbacks to this... I'm kind of headache-y and it isn't fully thought through. There'd need to be something about how using a cannon means it's no longer a primary attack, technically. Bah.

//

Another issue: 3-dice lock-based Missiles should almost surely be cheaper. Concussion at 6 points is really high. At 4 points, that serves the role of getting a lot of these 2-red ships "kinda" up to 3 dice, but with a lot more limitations than a cannon. Cannons need extra consideration because they're unlimited and unrestricted. Particularly unrestricted. Advanced Targeting Computer is basically Manger Cannon, but the x1 sucks, because of the restriction and the price.

//

19 hours ago, PaulRuddSays said:

What about range 2-3, 3 attack 3: if this attack hits, cancel all dice and deal one critical damage?

Oh, I almost included exactly that text in my post, but I wound up cutting it...

Maybe.

I think it'd need testing, at something like 6-7 points. More expensive than Ion Cannon, since if folks learn it's good, they might learn that Ion Cannon is not bad. And it'd still really suck on a B-Wing, so again my original thought: maybe just stick to damage-substitution cannons.

3 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

But a 3-dice primary on a Scyk? Yeah. That'll require a big step up. 3-dice Scyk with normal 3-dice (not just Ion Cannon with a kinda 3) probably needs to cost like 36 points. Given that Scyks need a price cut anyhow, this cannon probably needs to cost 8-10 points. Special Forces Gunner costs 10 points, so a 10 point Mangler Cannon, even if Range 2-3, seems like a good starting place. Factoring in the baseline crit conversion, it might need to be more like 12 points.

A Scyk equipped with one coming out to 1-2 pts more than a TIE Striker or Interceptor is the ballpark I see this falling into, but an additional charge over that for the reduced area Marksmanship equivalent of the bullseye portion of the ability is a bit much to me.