that's just it. heavy weapon turret changes the required arc of the weapon. does that also mean it changes the type of attack, that it adds another type to the attack or neither?

turret attacks can generally be special attacks or primary attacks. special attacks can be turret, missile, torpedo or cannon attacks, but they are always from upgrade cards rather than ship cards. primary attacks are always from a ship card.

so we already have single attacks that fall into two or more different categories (a missile is as special attack, an ordnance attack and a missile attack. a primary turret is just that, a primary and a turret attack).

the question remains. is a heavy weapons turret missile attacks all of these categories: special, ordnance, missile, turret?

the arc requirement of missiles is changed. does that also change or add to the attack type?

2 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

In justice? You may be right.

But there's not actually anything in the rules to stop the process of an attack if there are no hits/crits, or likewise even no dice.

So basically you get the opponent into range and arc, declare him the defender and tell him to remove a green token? I had hoped that 2e would not have this kind of silliness.

5 minutes ago, Stoneface said:

So basically you get the opponent into range and arc, declare him the defender and tell him to remove a green token? I had hoped that 2e would not have this kind of silliness.

And locked. And yes, if you want to give up your attack to do it for some reason.

It's a really bad thing to do, because it costs a fortunate and does no damage.

58 minutes ago, Stoneface said:

So basically you get the opponent into range and arc, declare him the defender and tell him to remove a green token? I had hoped that 2e would not have this kind of silliness.

Here's the thing: an SF can just pack one of these Hotshot Gunners, and use their primary weapon. It works exactly like described above. Token gone.

In some ways, Cluster Missiles/Munitions Failsafe makes things harder, and accomplish less. You need a lock to use CM, and you can't sneak in a lucky hit against blank-out dice if you use MF. There's a bonus if you can tag a second ship, but otherwise? Primary might be better. But having 3-dice can matter. If you roll natural 3 hits (and probably often 2), you'd want to keep it and spend the charge from the missiles.

ya, remember it doesn't do any damage. you can use it and only trigger munitions failsafe when you roll badly, but it still means you have to run a tie sf with a missile, hotshot gunner and munitions failsafe. that's at the very minimum 46 points for an i2 pilot. it's going to be pretty useless. you'd need some ships with juke to really take advantage of it and you need the tie sf with missile/hotshot/failsafe to be firing before the other ships in your list.

omega squadron expert is i3 and costs 49 points with this loadout. it's still pretty ridiculous to invest in, since just attacking with your primary weapon will likely have the same effect, as in they will need to spend focus or calculate to avoid incoming damage a lot of the time anyways. you don't strictly need a lock though, if you're running another ship with targeting synchronizer (yes, i'm looking at you, midnight!).

i believe the best way to use it is probably with juke and fcs, so you could just do the first cluster missile attack and failsafe if you roll badly, still removing a focus or calculate token, then do the cluster missile bonus attack, maybe reroll with fcs and juke what ever evade result the defender rolls.

still comes out a bit too expensive to run four ships like this i'm afraid. maybe this is decent, though? i don't really think so, but i wouldn't be opposed to play versus it. it looks pretty terrible actually. well, at least i would laugh if someone brought this to the table. it's too much of an investment just to remove a token or two. it's better to just use juke on every ship in your list and have more ships.


special forces jukebox cheese (197)

Omega Squadron Expert — TIE/SF Fighter 36
Juke 5
Pattern Analyzer 5
Hotshot Gunner 7
Cluster Missiles 5
Fire-Control System 2
Munitions Failsafe 1
Ship Total: 61

“Backdraft” — TIE/SF Fighter 41
Juke 5
Pattern Analyzer 5
Cluster Missiles 5
Hotshot Gunner 7
Fire-Control System 2
Munitions Failsafe 1
Ship Total: 66

“Quickdraw” — TIE/SF Fighter 45
Juke 5
Pattern Analyzer 5
Cluster Missiles 5
Hotshot Gunner 7
Fire-Control System 2
Munitions Failsafe 1
Ship Total: 70

or


five times five points of juke (200)

Omega Squadron Expert — TIE/SF Fighter 36
Juke 5
Hotshot Gunner 7
Cluster Missiles 5
Fire-Control System 2
Munitions Failsafe 1
Ship Total: 56

Omega Squadron Ace — TIE/FO Fighter 31
Juke 5
Ship Total: 36

Omega Squadron Ace — TIE/FO Fighter 31
Juke 5
Ship Total: 36

Omega Squadron Ace — TIE/FO Fighter 31
Juke 5
Ship Total: 36

Omega Squadron Ace — TIE/FO Fighter 31
Juke 5
Ship Total: 36

15 minutes ago, meffo said:

ya, remember it doesn't do any damage. you can use it and only trigger munitions failsafe when you roll badly, but it still means you have to run a tie sf with a missile, hotshot gunner and munitions failsafe. that's at the very minimum 46 points for an i2 pilot. it's going to be pretty useless. you'd need some ships with juke to really take advantage of it and you need the tie sf with missile/hotshot/failsafe to be firing before the other ships in your list.

omega squadron expert is i3 and costs 49 points with this loadout. it's still pretty ridiculous to invest in, since just attacking with your primary weapon will likely have the same effect, as in they will need to spend focus or calculate to avoid incoming damage a lot of the time anyways. you don't strictly need a lock though, if you're running another ship with targeting synchronizer (yes, i'm looking at you, midnight!).

i believe the best way to use it is probably with juke and fcs, so you could just do the first cluster missile attack and failsafe if you roll badly, still removing a focus or calculate token, then do the cluster missile bonus attack, maybe reroll with fcs and juke what ever evade result the defender rolls.

still comes out a bit too expensive to run four ships like this i'm afraid. maybe this is decent, though? i don't really think so, but i wouldn't be opposed to play versus it. it looks pretty terrible actually. well, at least i would laugh if someone brought this to the table. it's too much of an investment just to remove a token or two. it's better to just use juke on every ship in your list and have more ships.


special forces jukebox cheese (197)

Omega Squadron Expert — TIE/SF Fighter 36
Juke 5
Pattern Analyzer 5
Hotshot Gunner 7
Cluster Missiles 5
Fire-Control System 2
Munitions Failsafe 1
Ship Total: 61

“Backdraft” — TIE/SF Fighter 41
Juke 5
Pattern Analyzer 5
Cluster Missiles 5
Hotshot Gunner 7
Fire-Control System 2
Munitions Failsafe 1
Ship Total: 66

“Quickdraw” — TIE/SF Fighter 45
Juke 5
Pattern Analyzer 5
Cluster Missiles 5
Hotshot Gunner 7
Fire-Control System 2
Munitions Failsafe 1
Ship Total: 70

or


five times five points of juke (200)

Omega Squadron Expert — TIE/SF Fighter 36
Juke 5
Hotshot Gunner 7
Cluster Missiles 5
Fire-Control System 2
Munitions Failsafe 1
Ship Total: 56

Omega Squadron Ace — TIE/FO Fighter 31
Juke 5
Ship Total: 36

Omega Squadron Ace — TIE/FO Fighter 31
Juke 5
Ship Total: 36

Omega Squadron Ace — TIE/FO Fighter 31
Juke 5
Ship Total: 36

Omega Squadron Ace — TIE/FO Fighter 31
Juke 5
Ship Total: 36

QD shouldn't have the combo.

QD having HSG alone probably renders the whole combo irrelevant. You pick a single target, HSG it, and unless it's got multiple focus or calculate, all the Jukes are now re-usable 1e crackshots.

A high init HSG followed up by a whole squad with Juke is pretty brutal as a list concept, but not easy to actually *design* because free evades are so uncommon, and only available en masse in a faction which has terrible access to high init cheap HSG.

I mean, Kestal plus 3 Phantoms could do it but you'd honestly be better off with just a fourth Phantom.

11 hours ago, meffo said:

...

the question remains. is a heavy weapons turret missile attacks all of these categories: special, ordnance, missile, turret?

the arc requirement of missiles is changed. does that also change or add to the attack type?

Consider this: What if there was a hypothetical missile that had a [turret arc] printed on the card? Instead of a [front arc]

That is essentially what we're looking at with this proposed combo.

13 hours ago, meffo said:

the question remains. is a heavy weapons turret missile attacks all of these categories: special, ordnance, missile, turret?

the arc requirement of missiles is changed. does that also change or add to the attack type?

I don't see a problem with this. Each one has to be viewed independently.

• If something isn't a primary weapon attack, then it's a special attack. It'll still be special.
• Ordnance denies range bonuses, if the icon is present. The Ordnance Icon is still there.
• Missile is kinda rarely referenced. OS-1, Captain Jonus, and Saturation Salvo are the only two I can think of. But it's still an attack coming from a missile upgrade, so it'd be a missile attack.
• Turret* is the arc type. This is the only thing which gets changed.

* There's two potential sources of things which could be called turret attacks. One are turret arc attacks, the other are turret upgrade attacks (which are all** also turret arc attacks). Of course, it's only awkward in words, but would be perfectly clear on cards. One would use the "arc indicator symbol" and the other would use the "turret upgrade symbol."

** It's entirely possible (although incredibly unlikely) for a future turret upgrade to use a firing arc other than a turret firing arc... I could imagine "Front-Locked Blaster Turret" or such which would be a front arc or bullseye arc weapon. Almost surely never going to happen, but still.

ok, agreed, silly combo works 100%. thank you all. 🙂

On 2/18/2019 at 1:37 PM, Maui. said:

Hotshot Gunner doesn't say "while you perform a turret special weapon attack," it says "while you perform a [turret arc icon] attack."

i didnt say that. not sure what you are trying to say..

On 2/18/2019 at 2:16 PM, Txousman said:

The Last part of Heavy Weapon turret forces you (MUST) to treat the front arc requirement in the missile card as turret. This means that for this ship, missiles attacks are turret attacks

it changes the requirement (from front attack arc to turret attack arc), yes. it doesnt change the weapon into a <turret icon> weapon. i tried to clarify this with the cpt. jonus example.

On 2/18/2019 at 2:16 PM, Txousman said:

.. front arc skill wont trigger

correct. but jonus would still trigger (because it is still a <turret icon> weapon)

On 2/18/2019 at 2:25 PM, thespaceinvader said:

This is a [missile upgrade] using a [turret symbol] to attack, from. 

yes. thats my point.

5 minutes ago, Cassan said:

i didnt say that. not sure what you are trying to say..

it changes the requirement (from front attack arc to turret attack arc), yes. it doesnt change the weapon into a <turret icon> weapon. i tried to clarify this with the cpt. jonus example.

correct. but jonus would still trigger (because it is still a <turret icon> weapon)

yes. thats my point.

So... what were you trying to say? Because it sounds like you are saying you agree that HSG works with a missile on a /SF, so I'm not sure what input you were actually trying to have on the discussion?

1 minute ago, thespaceinvader said:

what were you trying to say?

1 minute ago, thespaceinvader said:

it changes the requi  rement (from front attack arc to turret attack arc), yes. it doesnt change the weapon into a <turret icon> w  eapon   .   i tried to clarify this with the cpt. jonus example.

E: Retracted.

On 2/18/2019 at 10:02 PM, theBitterFig said:

* There's two potential sources of things which could be called turret attacks. One are turret arc attacks, the other are turret upgrade attacks (which are all** also turret arc attacks). Of course, it's only awkward in words, but would be perfectly clear on cards. One would use the "arc indicator symbol" and the other would use the "turret upgrade symbol."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it officially "Mobile Arc"? I think a lot of the confusion comes from people casually calling it a Turret Arc, which sounds a lot like Turret upgrades.

no, its actually called "turret arc" in the rrg. but i agree - the whole "arc"-wording is quite confusing.

44 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it officially "Mobile Arc"? I think a lot of the confusion comes from people casually calling it a Turret Arc, which sounds a lot like Turret upgrades.

Take a look at the rules reference document, the symbol is referred to as a turret arc on page 4 and page 19 and multiple other places. Mobile arc is from first edition.

42 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it officially "Mobile Arc"? I think a lot of the confusion comes from people casually calling it a Turret Arc, which sounds a lot like Turret upgrades.

there is no such thing as a mobile arc in x-wing 2.0. it's called a turret arc. it was inspired by the mobile arc from the lancer class pursuit craft in first edition. normally, the word turret is not used in the rules, it's instead represented by

1 minute ago, Tvboy said:

Take a look at the rules reference document, the symbol is referred to as a turret arc on page 4 and page 19 and multiple other places. Mobile arc is from first edition.

Huh. That just sounds needlessly confusing.

Just now, JJ48 said:

Huh. That just sounds needlessly confusing.

What is confusing about it?

5 minutes ago, Tvboy said:

What is confusing about it?

<Looks up at lengthy discussion resulting from confusion over similarity of unrelated terms.>

20 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

<Looks up at lengthy discussion resulting from confusion over similarity of unrelated terms.>

ya. it's been stated in this forum before, the can be a bit confusing, since it can refer to a kind of arc as well as a kind of attack. the turret upgrade card symbol is not really used ever. i guess that's because there are so many primary attacks that use turret arcs as well.

it's important to distinguish arcs from attacks of course, as they are different things. with that said, it's pretty good that symbols like this exist and has become an integral part of the language in the game, especially since the language is already confusing or conflicting sometimes.