48 minutes ago, namdoolb said:

Silly question, but what's stopping the use of a variable points cost for cannons?

Ion cannons: substantial upgrade on a 2 atk ship, barely an upgrade at all on 3 dice... (same story to a certain extent with all cannons) so what's stopping us from having a variable cost based on primary atk value?

Say a 2 atk ship pays the standard 5 points, a 3 atk ship might get the upgrade for 3 points, and a 4 atk ship would only pay 1 point for the upgrade.

(Points values used above are only for illustrative purposes) 

Honestly though, I don't mind the flat cost, but I think the flat cost should be based on a 3-primary. Missiles and Torps have a flat cost, and they aren't somehow more abusive on a 2-primary than a 3-primary, though they tend to be relied on more there. After all, the only ships with a 2-primary and cannons are the Scyk, the Star-Wing, and the Transport. For the first two, cannons are directly competing with Torps (which have a lot more firepower and control for the points) and for the transport it's kinda supposed to be its main weapon anyway. I think they should look at it like the turret slot; it's okay for it to be a decent weapon in its own right, and the 2-primary is just a placeholder in case you're really strapped for points or decide to go the ordnance route and don't buy it.

But straight-up compare Ion Cannon Turret to Ion Cannon. One of them doesn't work at range 3, but it gives you a whole extra arc of coverage, that moves! . That's not an even tradeoff in the least, yet they're priced the same. If it's okay for the turret slot itself to be "worth points" and get cheap weapons, why can't cannons be the same way? You're not getting extra coverage, and only IG-88B can double-tap with it (and it's strictly the worst kind of double-tap).

After all, why would Ion cannons at 3 points on Scyks or Transports be a problem? It's true that 6 ion cannons is a lot, but it's currently legal on the TIE Aggressor, and that arc can shoot sideways or backwards (and has one more health behind it). I want to say an arc-locked ion attack on the Scyk isn't that abusive, is it? They've been flown for a while and have had pretty negligible performance in OP events. Maybe if one was Serissu it would make them decent but still not OP?

Variable cost

Just say that cannons ignore the range 3 defensive die bonus. They will see play then. Simple and Effective.

Remember changes have to be made by tweaks, nothing large, This is a tweak they could make and Cannon's get much better, without any cards or updates needed.

11 hours ago, eagletsi111 said:

Just say that cannons ignore the range 3 defensive die bonus. They will see play then. Simple and Effective.

Remember changes have to be made by tweaks, nothing large, This is a tweak they could make and Cannon's get much better, without any cards or updates needed.

The range 3 ones might.

New linked battery modification:

After you declare a target, you may choose to make both a primary weapon attack and cannon weapon attack against that target. You may choose the order of attacks, but the dice cannot be modified.

I played a scenario with more than 200 pts and almost all Generics. My opponent took 4 HLC Scyks. They actually were pretty effective. The more ships you have on the table, the greater the chance of using them. I think part of the problem with Cannons is that most lists only have 3 ships and they are some high Init Ace. Maybe Epic Battles will change things.

HLC are gonna be buff in Epic assuming it works broadly the same as in 1e, as are Jamming Beams.

1 hour ago, thespaceinvader said:

HLC are gonna be buff in Epic assuming it works broadly the same as in 1e, as are Jamming Beams.

Seriously. Bullseye is going to be trivial against Huge ships, and that's going to be a lot of hurt really cheap.

Heck, I could even see folks putting HLC on Upsilon Shuttles in Epic.

20 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

Seriously. Bullseye is going to be trivial against Huge ships, and that's going to be a lot of hurt really cheap.

Heck, I could even see folks putting HLC on Upsilon Shuttles in Epic.

Agreed. Honestly I think this could make pricing really tricky. Cheap HLC is kind of a necessity in 200 pt play, but could really be abused in epic. And that's not to mention the insanities of Tarkin, Leia, Jerjerrod, etc. Put Tarkin and Jerry on a Raider and you get huge amounts of locking and boosting power every other turn . Leia on a CR90? Dials basically don't have any red anymore, and at just 6 points! Jendon will also be utterly fantastic, and Bodhi Rook would be godlike.

I'm almost afraid they'll have to have alternative epic costs for some cards. I don't like that idea because I really want epic to be easy to get into for my friends and it would be one more turnoff...

Eh, Epic is not going to be balanced for competitive play, unless I very much miss my guess.

And yeah, HLCs will be strong, but they will also be on ships that Epics can target from r5, and murder before they engage.

39 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

Eh, Epic is not going to be balanced for competitive play, unless I very much miss my guess.

And yeah, HLCs will be strong, but they will also be on ships that Epics can target from r5, and murder before they engage.

You underestimate my FOURTEEN CARTEL SPACERS AND SERISSU!

Would probably murder a huge ship on turn 3 or so.

You need to have cannons use more than that bullseye arc.

make a universal rule letting you fire cannons in addition to primary attacks. Price appropriately if needed for cards like heavy cannons.

3 hours ago, Marinealver said:

You need to have cannons use more than that bullseye arc.

Not necessary (see: crack shot).

All that is needed is accurate pricing. HLC for 2 and Ion for 3 would be great and would be played all the time . Tractor for 1 would never not be taken. Autoblasters are an incredible value even on a B-Wing and show the devs are open to considering this.