Are a bit underwhelming. Some niche roles on 2 dice ships, and of course Brockets.... but overall, uninspiring.

Agree/not agree?

What would you like to see happen in this slot?

Personally, bring back Cruise! A straight port from 1.0 may be too strong. Specifically, on the TIE/sf, (4 or 5 straight, poop a 5 die attack), and the Defender, (4k into focus, after grabbing a lock on the way in). Capping them at 4 dice might be reasonable, I would still snap them up. Perhaps 7 or 8 points?

Any love for non Brockets? Any other bright ideas?

I've had luck with Concussion Missiles on the TIE/SF generics, particularly with the ability to shoot them out of the rear arc. They give a decent amount of punch and the ability to flip damage cards is quite nice. Outside of 2 attack dice ships however, they're all too expensive for what they do, and the lack of a 4 dice missile makes the missile slot very underwhelming on anything that has 3 dice natively.

I would have completely changed how Missiles and Torpedoes work. But they didn't. So hey ho.

11 minutes ago, SOTL said:

I would    have compl  etely changed how Missiles and Torpedoes w  ork  . 

This.

Thematically, only missiles should be used for fighter combat. Torpedoes should be reserved for attacks on Capital ships, and only after their shields are down!

It's my big beef... the dying embers of 1.0 were ruined by the botched implementation of Bombs, Missiles & Torpedoes. It was excusable, though, because those mechanics had been laid down 5 years ago and designers knew the game much better now.

Roll on 2.0 and we get the exact same botched implementation of Bombs, Missiles & Torpedoes that was the albatross round the neck of 1.0. They'll sink 2.0 too eventually, it's just a matter of time.

3 hours ago, Cuz05 said:

Any love for non Brockets? Any other bright ideas?

Even on a 3-dice ship, homing missiles aren't a bad call.

A target locked (or focused) primary weapon shot at an agility 3 target at range 3 has about one chance in five of doing any damage.

Even if you consider homing missiles 'just' an automatic 1 damage, that's still nice - especially since if your opponent takes the hit, you keep the target lock for next turn.

3 hours ago, Cuz05 said:

Brockets

Can you give an exemple of this type of list please ? Thanks!

I think the solution to making missiles worth using isn't adding red dice, it's mitigating the Lock requirement. Acquiring Locks is too much of a hassle with the opportunity cost of taking the action and the range restriction/initiative system interaction in place in the game. Currently, it isn't worth doing unless there is a big payoff (i.e. a double-modded 4 dice attack). For lower-impact ordnance like Missiles, there needs to be a lower hurdle to using them. My preference would be something akin to 1.0 Deadeye - a cheap upgrade that allows you to treat Missile upgrades' " Attack (Lock) :" as " Attack (Focus): ". This would need to be paired with a revamp of the points for Missiles, but that was needed anyway. The idea here is to make Missiles the "easy to use" ordnance, not the high impact / high reliability ordnance. They have a decent number of charges and moderate power levels in terms of red dice and utility effects, so they would be worth running as a firepower improvement for 2 attack ships or on 3 attack ships looking for a specific utility (assuming they are priced well).

20 minutes ago, Transmogrifier said:

I think the solution to making missiles worth using isn't adding red dice, it's mitigating the Lock requirement. Acquiring Locks is too much of a hassle with the opportunity cost of taking the action and the range restriction/initiative system interaction in place in the game. Currently, it isn't worth doing unless there is a big payoff (i.e. a double-modded 4 dice attack). For lower-impact ordnance like Missiles, there needs to be a lower hurdle to using them. My preference would be something akin to 1.0 Deadeye - a cheap upgrade that allows you to treat Missile upgrades' " Attack (Lock) :" as " Attack (Focus): ". This would need to be paired with a revamp of the points for Missiles, but that was needed anyway. The idea here is to make Missiles the "easy to use" ordnance, not the high impact / high reliability ordnance. They have a decent number of charges and moderate power levels in terms of red dice and utility effects, so they would be worth running as a firepower improvement for 2 attack ships or on 3 attack ships looking for a specific utility (assuming they are priced well).

We have Instinctive Aim, so that design space is already "filled." I'd rather not take away a unique Force ability and allow normal pilots to get it (SNR should've been the only pre-move re-position imho).

Intinctive Aim is bad though and conceding that design space simply because a bad upgrade exists doesn't make much sense. Taking a single-moded ordnance shot makes sense for low Initiative pilots - they have to take the shots they can get and make up for the lower quality shots in volume of fire. It doesn't make sense for Force users to 1) sink points into Instinctive Aim instead of something better 2) take single-modded shots from an expensive platform that most likely is high Initiative and therefore able to acquire Locks.

2 minutes ago, Transmogrifier said:

Intinctive Aim is bad though and conceding that design space simply because a bad upgrade exists doesn't make much sense. Taking a single-moded ordnance shot makes sense for low Initiative pilots - they have to take the shots they can get and make up for the lower quality shots in volume of fire. It doesn't make sense for Force users to 1) sink points into Instinctive Aim instead of something better 2) take single-modded shots from an expensive platform that most likely is high Initiative and therefore able to acquire Locks.

Have you actually tried it? A v1 or Aethersprite pilot with Homing Missiles and Instinctive Aim takes a focus (because they fly at I3 and are unable to get a lock), and is pointed at your Fenn/Teroch/Soontir/Vader/Lulo. Do you take the hit, or four dice with a focus?

Now the platform itself might be slightly overpriced, but if Lulo and Talissan's pricing is any indication, FFG now knows how to balance a 2 red, 4 HP Interceptor correctly, and Rebel A-Wings, v1s and Aethersprite should be competitive soon enough. Of those, the mid initiative force user might well get a lot out of Instinctive Aim.

3 hours ago, SOTL said:

Roll on 2.0 and we get the exact same botched implementation of Bombs, Missiles & Torpedoes that was the albatross round the neck of 1.0. They'll sink 2.0 too eventually, it's just a matter of time.

Well, it can all be fixed with better ordnance. A new type of missile or torp could implement a better plan for those components of the game. I would still advocate for a 180-degree arc of fire.

The bummer is that now that Proton Torpedoes is a used title, the better torpedo will have a a dumb non-SW name.

I liked the idea of Chips from 1.0--a mod that made the ship better at using said weapon. The problem was the number of fully moded dice being thrown: 5 is/was out of hand.

12 minutes ago, Okapi said:

Have you actually tried it? A v1 or Aethersprite pilot with Homing Missiles and Instinctive Aim takes a focus (because they fly at I3 and are unable to get a lock), and is pointed at your Fenn/Teroch/Soontir/Vader/Lulo. Do you take the hit, or four dice with a focus?

The TIE/v1 especially, since it has a lovely green dial and focus linked off its boost and barrel roll. It keeps them cheap but able to threaten someone at range 3 (something a 2-dice primary ship can never really do otherwise).

Also note that Instinctive Aim is one of two upgrades we already have to make using ordnance easier - the other is the Targeting Synchroniser, which works very nicely on First Order and Resistance ships (I've seen quite a few squads where TIE/sf supported by a targeting synchroniser use missiles to gain a 3rd attack die instead of the more expensive Special Forces Gunner)

1 hour ago, Magnus Grendel said:

Even on a 3-dice ship, homing missiles aren't a bad call.

A target locked (or focused) primary weapon shot at an agility 3 target at range 3 has about one chance in five of doing any damage.

Even if you consider homing missiles 'just' an automatic 1 damage, that's still nice - especially since if your opponent takes the hit, you keep the target lock for next turn.

Getting the lock safely is the big challenge with them especially with lower init ships.

1 hour ago, Scumm Bar Chef said:

Can you give an exemple of this type of list please ? Thanks!

Aka Barrage Rockets. Commonly associated with numbers of TIE Bombers alongside a Lambda, or a TIE Punisher or 2 with a certain TIE Phantom pilot.

Or if you're feeling fruity, a TIE Aggressor.

1 hour ago, Okapi said:

Have you actually tried it? A v1 or Aethersprite pilot with Homing Missiles and Instinctive Aim takes a focus (because they fly at I3 and are unable to get a lock), and is pointed at your Fenn/Teroch/Soontir/Vader/Lulo. Do you take the hit, or four dice with a focus?

Now the platform itself might be slightly overpriced, but if Lulo and Talissan's pricing is any indication, FFG now knows how to balance a 2 red, 4 HP Interceptor correctly, and Rebel A-Wings, v1s and Aethersprite should be competitive soon enough. Of those, the mid initiative force user might well get a lot out of Instinctive Aim.

@Rytackle came up with a great point that one should not compare point values between similar ships. FFG may adjust points to balance the faction.

A-wings may be cheaper for Resitance than Rebels in the long run due to there being no cheaper filler ship available. I'm not saying Rebel A's won't go down, but I don't think they will drop like a hammer. Maybe Jake goes from 40 down to 38 because, aside from the rear arc, I truly believe his ability is a lot better than the Tallie is.

Rebel A-Wings won't go down. It's about faction identity and which ship FFG want to see on the table most often to create that identity.

2 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

Even on a 3-dice ship, homing missiles aren't a bad call.

A target locked (or focused) primary weapon shot at an agility 3 target at range 3 has about one chance in five of doing any damage.

Even if you consider homing missiles 'just' an automatic 1 damage, that's still nice - especially since if your opponent takes the hit, you keep the target lock for next turn.

1-in-5? More like 60% . The average damage is 0.946. That's with the extra range die. You do get to keep the TL though so its probably worth it.

Any less defensive power though, and you are better off taking the modded shot. 2 single modded shots do more damage (on average) than 1 double modded + 1 auto damage.

Too condition IMO for a 3die. Great on 2die high-PS (or target sync'd) though.

6 hours ago, DexterOnone said:

This.

Thematically, only missiles should be used for fighter combat. Torpedoes should be reserved for attacks on Capital ships, and only after their shields are down!

In the EU, torpedoes were used quite a bit against fighters, and allowed some versatility between missiles (exclusively small craft) and heavier ordnance (rockets and bombs, used only against capital ships).

Even in the PC games, I remember I'd usually equip torpedoes if I wasn't sure what threats I'd face or if I knew threats would be at both ends of the spectrum. The Advanced version could chase down just about anything but A-Wings.

44 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

In the EU, torpedoes were used quite a bit against fighters, and allowed some versatility between missiles (exclusively small craft) and heavier ordnance (rockets and bombs, used only against capital ships).

Even in the PC games, I remember I'd usually equip torpedoes if I wasn't sure what threats I'd face or if I knew threats would be at both ends of the spectrum. The Advanced version could chase down just about anything but A-Wings.

The EU had all kinds of goofy stuff. In the films, it's usually guns for fighter-to-fighter combat, and torps for static targets.

If I had my way, concussion missiles would be the equivalent of proton torpedoes, (just swap the upgrade icon and title text) and torps would be affected by target size. Like 4 dice attack, +1 attack against large base ships, -1 attack against small base ships.

1 minute ago, Koing907 said:

The EU had all kinds of goofy stuff. In the films, it's usually guns for fighter-to-fighter combat, and torps for static targets.

If I had my way, concussion missiles would be the equivalent of proton torpedoes, (just swap the upgrade icon and title text) and torps would be affected by target size. Like 4 dice attack, +1 attack against large base ships, -1 attack against small base ships.

If we're going strictly by the films, should anti-fighter missiles even be a thing in the Galactic Civil War era?

The main problem I see with your idea of linking torpedoes and target size is that, because hit and damage are linked, a small ship that blanks on defense will still take less damage than a large ship that blanks, which is the opposite of what we'd expect. Maybe throw the changes onto defense dice, instead? That is, small ships roll one extra green die, allowing them to evade more often, but still take full damage if it hits.

1 hour ago, prauxim said:

1-in-5? More like 60% . The average damage is 0.946. That's with the extra range die.

That calculation is worked assuming the target has only unmodified green dice, which whilst not impossible is also far from garuanteed. Try it with a focus token (which is what my back of a scrap of paper guess was based on, although I admit I didn't say that) and it drops pretty dramatically.

As it happens, it's not quite as bad as 1 in 5 - but you're still looking at about a 1 in 4 chance of hitting without the missiles.

http://xwing.gateofstorms.net/2/multi/?d=hAAAAAAAAAAA&a1=MwAAAAAAAAAA

9 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

That calculation is worked assuming the target has only unmodified green dice, which whilst not impossible is also far from garuanteed. Try it with a focus token (which is what my back of a scrap of paper guess was based on, although I admit I didn't say that) and it drops pretty dramatically.

As it happens, it's not quite as bad as 1 in 5 - but you're still looking at about a 1 in 4 chance of hitting without the missiles.

http://xwing.gateofstorms.net/2/multi/?d=hAAAAAAAAAAA&a1=MwAAAAAAAAAA

If they are focused they should not take the auto-damage, the average damage of 4-die single mod against 3-die focus is only 1.2 and attacker almost certainly has to spend the TL to achieve that.

4 hours ago, Wiredin said:

@Rytackle came up with a great point that one should not compare point values between similar ships. FFG may adjust points to balance the faction.

A-wings may be cheaper for Resitance than Rebels in the long run due to there being no cheaper filler ship available. I'm not saying Rebel A's won't go down, but I don't think they will drop like a hammer. Maybe Jake goes from 40 down to 38 because, aside from the rear arc, I truly believe his ability is a lot better than the Tallie is.

Could be, but that's just a guess, and in my opinion almost a little worrying if it were true. Having one ship do something another can't, sure, but deliberately designing bad ships to maintain faction identity in a game where you typically only field 3-5 of them would just be a waste of resources and shelf space.

Besides, I don't think the facts support that assumption. Very rarely have the most iconic ships been the most powerful ones. For the longest time the X-Wing was so bad the game might as well have changed its name to K-Wing, or Jumpmaster. Thus far no balancing attempt held some obscure ship (let alone a popular and well known one like the A-Wing) back to make room for X-Wings and TIE Fighters.

3 hours ago, prauxim said:

If they are focused they should not take the auto-damage, the average damage of 3-die single mod against 3-die focus is only 1.2 and attacker almost certainly has to spend the TL to achieve that.

Homing Missiles is a 4-die attack