What can be done with the Jumpmaster 5000 to make it a usable ship? Check out the my take on fixing the JM5K here on the newest edition of the Confession of a Midwest Scrub!

Disagree with the fixes. I love the new dial and it gives the ship a unique playstyle. All it needs is firepower. A real 3-front and a white rotate action fix the ship for good.

With its asymmetrical dial favouring port-side turns, JM5K was, in fact, a predecessor to a somehow forgotten Rebel craft, used during Galactic Civil War.

~David Attenborough

make the turret rotate a white action for one.

I've posted on this before, but my preferred fix is to make the chassis 2-dot limited (i.e. no more than 2 Jumpmasters in any list) and then tank the prices.

Failing that, just make the Scout unique. ANd tank the prices.

I really, really don't want to see a precedent set of publishing fix cards for existing ships. That was probably the worst part of 1e for an awful lot of people.

Add a crew slot. The title still takes away 1 so you are left with one. Dental with perceptive copilot or maul is really happy.

Or or if you are flying a bump master, 2 crew gives you a lot of support and jank options

25 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

I really, really don't want to see a precedent set of publishing fix cards for existing ships. That was probably the worst part of 1e for an awful lot of people.

Somewhat agree. My proposal: Errata the title to give it a 3-front a-la Moldy Crow, and maybe add a white rotate.

Boom! You have what amounts to an almost-limited ship that now works quite well for a variety of tasks but can't be spammed effectively.

But please, please don't change the dial; it's the coolest and most thematic thing about the ship and makes it a joy to fly. For those of us who have no memory of the absurd garbage that was the 1.0 dial (why give a large ship a better TIE Defender dial?!) the Jump's dial is really not bad and can be very powerful if played well. With a front arc it can keep the mobile one out the left side and have good coverage options and stay un-stressed unless it's turning around (like all normal ships have to).

27 minutes ago, Sir13scott said:

Add a crew slot. The title still takes away 1 so you are left with one. Dental with perceptive copilot or maul is really happy.

Or or if you are flying a bump master, 2 crew gives you a lot of support and jank options

Dental Copilot sounds like a great upgrade for a grizzled bounty hunter!

But in all honesty I've thought a second crew slot could be a very reasonable suggestion as well.

When I click the link to your blog, pops ups come up that don't let me navigate away from them and I have to close the window. I have no idea if you're aware of it or if it's just my phone but I wanted to warn you and anybody else that clicks on it.

Give it a slot for Passive Sensors...? Maybe a gunner, or even an additional crew (to skirt P1 taking one away)? Talent for the generic?

That's about all I got that doesn't require new game design and then somehow putting it in people's hands. Configs are cool but not coming any time soon.

As a big fan of FE JumpMaster, I like these ideas.

I added these configurations as mod for Fly Casual: https://imgur.com/a/s7MjdPH

(This update will be released in the end of this week)

2 minutes ago, Sandrem said:

As a big fan of FE JumpMaster, I like these ideas.

I added these configurations as mod for Fly Casual: https://imgur.com/a/s7MjdPH

(This update will be released in the end of this week)

Crazy fast work, man! So excited for the update!

1 hour ago, thespaceinvader said:

I've posted on this before, but my preferred fix is to make the chassis 2-dot limited (i.e. no more than 2 Jumpmasters in any list) and then tank the prices.

Failing that, just make the Scout unique. ANd tank the prices.

I really, really don't want to see a precedent set of publishing fix cards for existing ships. That was probably the worst part of 1e for an awful lot of people.

I like the idea of 2 dot limited. Mostly for generic defenders. I prefer fix cards to errata-ing cards with a dot.

1 hour ago, Sir13scott said:

Add a crew slot. The title still takes away 1 so you are left with one. Dental with perceptive copilot or maul is really happy.

Or or if you are flying a bump master, 2 crew gives you a lot of support and jank options

This is an option, but might create a monster. Still an option to consider.

5 minutes ago, DXCrazytrain said:

When I click the link to your blog, pops ups come up that don't let me navigate away from them and I have to close the window. I have no idea if you're aware of it or if it's just my phone but I wanted to warn you and anybody else that clicks on it.

Anyone else? I'd check your browser or just your device in general if no one else notes the problem. Wordpress shouldn't be popping anything up.

54 minutes ago, 5050Saint said:

I like the idea of 2 dot limited. Mostly for generic defenders. I prefer fix cards to errata-ing cards with a dot.

Unless there's a force-multiplier like Howlrunner or Juke involved, or a thematic reason to have fewer (perhaps that's the case for the TIE/D?), I don't understand why limiting a chassis in this way would be helpful balance-wise? If it's one point too expensive you can sub in a 3rd ship of a very similar power level. If that isn't strong enough then decreasing the chassis by one point wouldn't be too good.

I think there's a place for new cards and for errata; errata for things that don't work as intended, new cards to add a different way of using something that exists (titles, mods, etc.). I'm very much in favor of a config or two for the B-Wing. The P1 title needs an errata but I could also see a config for the JM5K being a good thing if it added an interesting mechanic that involves decision making.

"Oops your dial is better now" isn't as interesting to me as:

Actuated Structural Bracing

"Before you execute a maneuver or perform a red action, you may spend a charge to decrease its difficulty. After you fully execute a red maneuver, recover 1 charge."

2 charges, non-recurring. 5 points.

Or something along those lines. Its desire to turn left is the most unique thing about the ship. Please lets not kill its only identity just to make it easier on ourselves; it can be made into something far more engaging with a little thought.

The reason to do it is so you can tank the price without making it spammable, basically.

If you made the Jump as it stands cheap enough to not be downright awful it would probably be costed to fit 5 or even 6 to a list.

But you definitely, DEFINITELY shouldn't be able to DO that, so...

I'd be happy if the ship gained a Gunner slot instead of a second crew member. Dengar would benefit greatly from access to gunners like Greedo, Hotshot Gunner or Agile Gunner.

Also: add some astromechs that can only be used by Medium or Large ships. That would not only help the Punishing One, but also the Havoc, Kimogila and ARC.

7 minutes ago, ClassicalMoser said:

Unless there's a force-multiplier like Howlrunner or Juke involved, or a thematic reason to have fewer (perhaps that's the case for the TIE/D?), I don't understand why limiting a chassis in this way would be helpful balance-wise? If it's one point too expensive you can sub in a 3rd ship of a very similar power level. If that isn't strong enough then decreasing the chassis by one point wouldn't be too good.

I think there's a place for new cards and for errata; errata for things that don't work as intended, new cards to add a different way of using something that exists (titles, mods, etc.). I'm very much in favor of a config or two for the B-Wing. The P1 title needs an errata but I could also see a config for the JM5K being a good thing if it added an interesting mechanic that involves decision making.

"Oops your dial is better now" isn't as interesting to me as:

"Before you execute a maneuver or perform an action, you may spend a charge to decrease its difficulty. After you fully execute a red maneuver, recover 1 charge."

2 charges, non-recurring. 5 points.

Or something along those lines. Its desire to turn left is the most unique thing about the ship. Please lets not kill its only identity just to make it easier on ourselves; it can be made into something far more engaging with a little thought.

Limited for generic Defenders is so you can't run triple defenders, but be able to decrease the price to less than 67.

I'm for flippable B-wing and a StarViper configs for opened and closed wings like the X and U-wings.

I like the charge based reduction config you have there.

3 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

But you definitely, DEFINITELY shouldn't be able to DO that, so...

Forgive my naïveté but why not? If it’s really THAT bad I don’t see it steamrolling any more than 5 cartel marauders (at least they have a 3-primary and can turn around).

If they’re that good they should cost more.

Ultimately, either they’re worth 40 points or they’re not.

My vote goes to a slight price reduction and adding a crew or gunner slot. Seems an easy fix and gives them new life - I have already seen Dengar used pretty well and getting like an almost free Hotshot Gunner or whatever would be pretty sweet.

3 minutes ago, PhantomFO said:

Also: add some astromechs that can only be used by Medium or Large ships. That would not only help the Punishing One, but also the Havoc, Kimogila and ARC.

Completely agree. The small base restriction on the R4 astromech is odd as it doesn't make any of those ships oppressively good. The ARCs and Kimos they'd be nice on, and only one Scurrg and JM5K can take an astromech which they are decent on as well.

11 minutes ago, ClassicalMoser said:

Forgive my naïveté but why not? If it’s really THAT bad I don’t see it steamrolling any more than 5 cartel marauders (at least they have a 3-primary and can turn around).

If they’re that good they should cost more.

Ultimately, either they’re worth 40 points or they’re not.

Because 6 large bases is just an absolute nightmare to actually play against. The entire game would just devolve into endless bump chains forever. Four is about the limit that should be on any one side in a 3'x3' table.

It's not that it would necessarily be OP, it's that it would be bloody MISERABLE.

4 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

It's not that it would necessarily be OP, it's that it would be bloody MISERABLE.

Completely fair and makes sense now, haha.

The combat config isn't bad -- though erasing the dial asymmetry completely is probably not a great idea, given it's meant to be a defining feature.

The second one, though, is just an excuse for 1st Edition degenerates to play Bumpmasters again, and you can **** RIGHT OFF with that nonsense.

24 minutes ago, DR4CO said:

The second one, though, is just an excuse for 1st Edition degenerates to play Bumpmasters again, and you can **** RIGHT OFF with that nonsense.

The Bumpmasters without the 360 turret but only a 2 die single arc is nothing to worry about. If Bumpmasters would be a thing, we would have already seen with 4 Scum Falcons.

2 minutes ago, 5050Saint said:

The Bumpmasters without the 360 turret but only a 2 die single arc is nothing to worry about. If Bumpmasters would be a thing, we would have already seen with 4 Scum Falcons.

The scum Falcon doesn't have barrel rolls or 1 hards. It certainly doesn't have white sloops.

The Jumpmaster is in the same position like Armor Lock from Halo Reach. It had an affect on the meta to the point that people just don't want to see it again or else they start suffering mental flashback breakdowns.