13 hours ago, LTuser said:

One thing i'd like to see, is for homing missiles, THEM Getting an attack in a FOLLOWING round, if they missed their initial attack.. SHOWCASE their homing ability!

It's a possibility for a future 'advanced homing missiles' but I'm not sure how you'd do it.

The game's default mechanic to 'remind' you of stuff next turn is a flipped charge, but obviously you're using the charges for the missiles' ammo count.

I guess you could use a condition token, or a 'smart missile salvo' remote?

13 hours ago, PhantomFO said:

To my mind, missiles should be more accurate than Torpedoes, but won't hit as hard.

Well, that's basically the idea behind homing missiles, isn't it? It only really does 1 damage, unless you get cocky, think you can dodge it entirely, and screw up.

Whether it's fairly costed for its effectiveness is a different question, but "reliably accurate shot at range 3 that only does 1 damage" is pretty much exactly homing missiles' thing.

22 hours ago, heychadwick said:

Yes, it would be nice to have some that did more, but it would also probably break the game.

That sentence has been proven consistently wrong throughout the history of gaming.

9 hours ago, Marinealver said:

You and everyone else. We all have these wacky weapon effect that's not worth the cost in points as terrible choices for the missile slot that often the best one is to chose none.

I see Missiles primarily for 2 Attack die ships. Either that or for something special, like Ion Missiles.

7 hours ago, NakedDex said:

The majority of missiles are overpriced for both what they do and what is likely to take them. Most ships taking a missile are a primary Attack 2, so they're taking a missile for some flex in damage two or three times per game.

Cluster Missiles have 4 charges.

Barrage have 5, but not for all.

1 hour ago, Jehan Menasis said:

That sentence has been proven consistently wrong throughout the history of gaming.

I think you mean proven right. The history of this game is way too many over powered upgrades that broke the game. That's why they made 2nd Ed.

On 6/30/2019 at 2:24 PM, svelok said:

I'd be satisfied if most of the current missiles were just 1-2 points cheaper.

Agreed, Homing Missiles at 3 points was great, a nice little filler missile for Scykes, Z's etc.

21 hours ago, hargleblarg said:

Missile slots are everywhere, so realistically, no missile should ever come close to the power level of proton torpedos. What I would like to see is more focus missiles. My ideal missile would probably look something like this:

Attack:Focus. 2 dice. Range 2-3. 3 charges.

If this attack hits, cancel all dice results, then the defender suffers 2 damage.

Gives 2 dice ships like Z-95s and A-Wings a missile that would be simultaneously worth using but not overwhelming when spammed.

In the game of X-wing Vs. TIE fighter, you had the option of taking heavy rockets to kill larger ships. I had an idea similar to this.

Requires 2 missile slots

Attack: Lock

2 dice

Range: 2-3

1 charge

If this attack hits, cancel all dice results. The defender suffers 5 damage.

On 6/30/2019 at 5:22 AM, Nyxen said:

Honestly, I want cruise missiles back, maybe not exactly the same, but the thematic feel of dive bombing with a 5 straight into missile launch was great.

Make them medium and large base only to prevent Afterburners abuse on Round 1, and standard maneuvers only as adding a speed bonus on a turnaround maneuver doesn't make sense.

On 6/30/2019 at 8:47 AM, theBitterFig said:

That said, I'd like some sort of cheaper version of a Proton Rockets with fewer dice but more charges. 3 points, 3 dice, 3 charges, range 1-3 bullseye, no text other than "Attack: Focus."  Is that too strong for the desired cheapness? I'd rather lower the power (range 1-2, 2 charges) than increase the cost. That'd be a really great upgrade for a lot of the cheap missile ships like A-Wings, as a tool to give then a little more punch, but it's not automatic, like Barrage Rockets (I may be in the minority, but I really hate Barrage Rockets...).

I like it. It feels rather Barrage Rocket-ey, and you could put 7 Torrents in a list with those at 3 points, which sounds scary, but no more than 7 Vultures with ESC.

22 hours ago, hargleblarg said:

Attack:Focus. 2 dice. Range 2-3. 3 charges.

If this attack hits, cancel all dice results, then the defender suffers 2 damage.

No, thank you. That is basically 2 auto damage on 1 or 0 defense die ships. That is a single arc TLT right there. Toss it in a fire.

I do hope they SHARPLY reduce the cost of IPMs and ion Torps

Great as ion can be, Ordnance with tl restrictions are do stringently limited that they oughta be cheap

I actually really like the way the devs have rolled out missiles in 2nd edition. They're finicky things to get off, but nice for extra punch or situational control effects. Like cannons, they should all cost about half of what they do now because they're never worth it on 3-primaries and too hard to set up/expensive on most disposable 2-primary platforms.

Ion missiles - 2pts

Cluster missiles - 3 pts

Homing missiles - 3 pts

Concussion missiles - 4 pts

Prockets and Barrage stay where they are (powerful but expensive). But these prices would make them actually a worthwhile consideration on TIE aggressors, bombers, punishers, A-Wings, Torrents, and even the Scyk. The main cost is in setting them up (giving up your defensive mods and positioning correctly) so paying the extra cost on top of that is never worth it, especially on disposable filler/blocker ships like the Z-95 or Torrent. Synchronized Console, targeting synchronizer, etc. make them easier to set up, but again, it's more investment in a usually-disposable piece.

Would these prices make them OP on any currently existing platform? I don't think so. An extra attack die for a 2-primary, within a very limited range, after getting a target lock, probably as the only modification, just seems balanced to me at 2-4 points. They definitely shouldn't be less but they really won't see use at more. Incidentally, these are the exact costs that my statistical model gave so there's some objective basis for these anyway. They're not taken much, and when they are they consistently underperform for their cost. Any missile-dependent lists are throwing good points after bad, investing too much in something that's too hard to set up and gives too little return when you can.

So my response is really: No, we don't need more powerful missiles (though I wouldn't mind more options). We really just need the existing options to be very affordable and they would be quite good.

On a related note, I think the devs consider too much the cost/use ratio of an upgrade and don't factor in opportunity costs enough. For example, Ion Cannon at 5 points would maybe be a good thing, except the only platforms that can use it don't have 5 points to spare for it or else really don't need it due to their existing 3-primary (making 5 points a waste). 3 points would make it a great control option on B-Wings, Aggressors, or Scyks, but at 5 it's just a little too much to plan on giving up attacks over, especially when multiplied across more than one ship.

Cannons:

Jamming Beam - 0

Tractor Beam - 2

Autoblasters - 2

Ion Cannon - 3

Heavy Laser Cannon - 3

1 hour ago, ficklegreendice said:

I do hope they SHARPLY reduce the cost of IPMs and ion Torps

Great as ion can be, Ordnance with tl restrictions are do stringently limited that they oughta be cheap

Honestly I was thinking Ion torpedoes should be 4 points, but then I started thinking about it.

Even if it can only do 1 damage, it's two 4-dice attacks that deny range bonus. It gives an excellent chance of ionizing a small-base ship, and even a very decent likelihood of ionizing a YT1300 in a single shot (4 hits one evade or 3 hits zero evade - tell me the odds?). Once you take them on more than one it only gets better.

Maybe 6 is too much, but I see them as potentially much more useful and flexible on ships without reload than APTs are. I'm not sure.

16 minutes ago, ClassicalMoser said:

It gives an excellent chance of ionizing a small-base ship, and even a very decent likelihood of ionizing a YT1300 in a single shot (4 hits one evade or 3 hits zero evade - tell me the odds?).

To get the required 3 tokens on a YT-1300 all 4 of the torps dice would have to be hit or crit and the YT-1300 would have to not have gotten a single evade. Unlike 1.0 (where you'd get a hit and and Ion on a hit result), first 1 result is spent for the hit Ion weapons apply, then the rest are converted to Ion tokens. Large bases take 3 tokens to Ionize.

4 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:

To get the required 3 tokens on a YT-1300 all 4 of the torps dice would have to be hit or crit and the YT-1300 would have to not have gotten a single evade. Unlike 1.0 (where you'd get a hit and and Ion on a hit result), first 1 result is spent for the hit Ion weapons apply, then the rest are converted to Ion tokens. Large bases take 3 tokens to Ionize.

Right, forgot that. Yeah... 4 is probably closer to right. 1 more than homing Missiles.

7 hours ago, 5050Saint said:

I like it. It feels rather Barrage Rocket-ey, and you could put 7 Torrents in a list with those at 3 points, which sounds scary, but no more than 7 Vultures with ESC.

In my mind, it's Barrage Rockets done right.

Personally, I feel like Ordnance attacks should be hard. Most stuff requires a lock. Proton Rockets require only a focus, but a narrow bullseye. So they've already established two kinds of difficulty: [1] harder actions, but easy firing arcs [2] easy actions, but harder firing arcs. But Proton Rockets are a powerful, expensive weapon. Having a weaker, cheap weapon seems like something also worth having.

For a "barrage" of unguided rockets, requiring bullseye doesn't seem too strange, but it's "easy" in terms of requirements to the ship. You just have to be in the right spot.

1 hour ago, theBitterFig said:

In my mind, it's Barrage Rockets done right.

Personally, I feel like Ordnance attacks should be hard. Most stuff requires a lock. Proton Rockets require only a focus, but a narrow bullseye. So they've already established two kinds of difficulty: [1] harder actions, but easy firing arcs [2] easy actions, but harder firing arcs. But Proton Rockets are a powerful, expensive weapon. Having a weaker, cheap weapon seems like something also worth having.

For a "barrage" of unguided rockets, requiring bullseye doesn't seem too strange, but it's "easy" in terms of requirements to the ship. You just have to be in the right spot.

Agreed. And I also hate barrage rockets. Sad thing is the TIE bomber wants to lock but the lock-based missiles stink.

I’d hate to see the most iconic missiles left out in the cold. Maybe once they put out a missile like this they’ll come to their senses and dunk the prices of the lock missiles.

I'm actually still a little surprised the Bombers didn't get a target lock ability akin to the E-wings. Their primary role is ordnance delivery, you'd think they'd have the ability to lock out further to set up the runs.

6 minutes ago, NakedDex said:

I'm actually still a little surprised the Bombers didn't get a target lock ability akin to the E-wings. Their primary role is ordnance delivery, you'd think they'd have the ability to lock out further to set up the runs.

They got a linked roll-lock. And a red reload. And a better dial.

But their principal advantage is that they’re dirt cheap, which E-Wings are anything but. At least imps have Jendon.

I mean, roll-lock is kinda whatever. Red reload is ok (still waiting on a mod that makes it white), and their dial remains pretty mediocre if we're being honest. There's nothing wrong with the frame, but for something that lives and dies based on its ordnance, I thought there would be better emphasis on that style. Yes, the frame is cheap, but when you actually stick some ordnance on the dedicated ordnance carrier, you end up with something comparably priced to the E-wing. A Gamma Ace with Protons and Barrage plus Trick shot is in the same price range as a Rogue Squadron E-wing with Advanced Protons, but the E-wing still has a better stat line, dial, and initiative.

It's an apples to oranges comparison anyway. I'm just saying I'm surprised the Bomber's native ability was so lacklustre when the better ordnance ability is on a non-ordnance based ship. I'd sack the Nimble Bomber ability in a heartbeat for that E-wing target lock.

1 hour ago, NakedDex said:

I mean, roll-lock is kinda whatever. Red reload is ok (still waiting on a mod that makes it white), and their dial remains pretty mediocre if we're being honest. There's nothing wrong with the frame, but for something that lives and dies based on its ordnance, I thought there would be better emphasis on that style. Yes, the frame is cheap, but when you actually stick some ordnance on the dedicated ordnance carrier, you end up with something comparably priced to the E-wing. A Gamma Ace with Protons and Barrage plus Trick shot is in the same price range as a Rogue Squadron E-wing with Advanced Protons, but the E-wing still has a better stat line, dial, and initiative.

It's an apples to oranges comparison anyway. I'm just saying I'm surprised the Bomber's native ability was so lacklustre when the better ordnance ability is on a non-ordnance based ship. I'd sack the Nimble Bomber ability in a heartbeat for that E-wing target lock.

Soo... don't fill all the slots. The reason the Barrage bomber is effective is because it is cheap.

Oh I'm not suggesting you trick it out for the sake of it, I'm just saying if it had the E-wing lock ability, or something in that long range style, that it would have been a nice thematic nod, as well as making all those other missile options a bit more tempting.

I run Bombers a lot, and have done for a long time. I miss Long Range Scanners for the Scimitars. Maybe I'm just pining for that, but that little upgrade made the world of difference on their efficiency, and allowed for flexibility in what they carried, instead of just nailing Barrage Rockets to the frame and calling it a day.

5 hours ago, NakedDex said:

Red   reload is ok (still waiting on a mod that makes it white), 

I was just thinking about this. Make a Gunner that adds a white reload with a requirement that you have a red reload action already. Call it munitions specialist.

5 hours ago, NakedDex said:

I run Bombers a lot, and have done for a long time. I miss Long Range Scanners for the Scimitars. Maybe I'm just pining for that, but that little upgrade made the world of difference on their efficiency, and allowed for flexibility in what they carried, instead of just nailing Barrage Rockets to the frame and calling it a day.

As noted, you can get it via having Jendon as a command ship - he pairs extremely well with either TIE/sa or TIE/x1.

I wouldn't expect to see Long Range Scanners simply because (1) they gave E-wings what's basically that ability and they seem to be down on duplicating stuff and (2) more importantly the 'heavy ordnance' carrier, the TIE/ca, has a systems slot which delivers this ability - you don't want to have the punisher and bomber too close in function.

The TIE bomber can do well with lock missiles, but the trick is looking at cluster missiles - especially with jonus in tow they're one of the few platforms which can make effective use of the bonus attack.

12 hours ago, NakedDex said:

I'm actually still a little surprised the Bombers didn't get a target lock ability akin to the E-wings. Their primary role is ordnance delivery, you'd think they'd have the ability to lock out further to set up the runs.

They're also cheap and expendible like a proper TIE

Not exactly shelling out for state of the art sensors when they won't even buy em shields! Which is why they use barrage rockets, don't need no fancy sensors if you have enough explosions!

You're thinking of the Punisher

5 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

The TIE bomber can do well with lock missiles, but the trick is looking at cluster missiles - especially with jonus in tow they're one of the few platforms which can make effective use of the bonus attack.

At 3 points I'd use them. At 5 it's a total waste. ALL lock-based missiles should be 2 pts less expensive. I know I sound like a broken record, but I'm not the only one who thinks this and maybe the devs will notice.

1 hour ago, ficklegreendice said:

Which is why they use barrage rockets, don't need no fancy sensors if you have enough explosions!

I really don't like barrage rockets on the bomber though. They feel much more thematic to me on the Punisher or gunboat, something more expensive or specialized that can just pour out a maelstrom of explosives in your face. IMO, the bomber is more of a simple, cheap missile-launch platform, and that's why they gave it the linked lock. I just want the classic Concussion/Cluster/Homing missiles to actually be useful. Think of this: At 3 points for cluster, a Scimitar Squadron Bomber with Proton Bombs and Cluster Missiles would clock in at 37 points; that would make an excellent little filler ship! Of course, the Gamma ace is curiously overpriced (why did they increase the difference between the generics? I thought it would decrease ), but the bomber as a cheap little thing could be great. Cheap enough missiles might also make an appealing addition to a Rhymer build so he has something to do during those turns when he can't reload his APTs.

Never going to see low I targetlocks without a way to mitigate that central issue, sadly

Apart from passives, all we got are barrage/ESC and support options

Which is why I'm fiending to finally get a game in with the ****** CiS. Got sensors, probes, AND 32-c to work through!

6 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

Never going to see low I targetlocks without a way to mitigate that central issue, sadly

There's Jendon, and I'd be quite surprised if we didn't get Imperial Probe Droids in the future. The TIE Bomber also has bombs, so if they close the gap for your munitions, you get to dump on them the next turn, and all for cheap (and it's not like that 3 points would be a major loss even if you never use it – it's making your opponent plan around it). Not to mention if your 37-pt TIE bomber is getting shot at, your 103 pt Supernatural Vader isn't, so that just helps him out.

So I feel like what I was actually getting at with that original Bomber post is getting a smidgen muddled in how in saying it. I'm not suggesting Bombers should get LRS (though I would not say no...), and nor am I saying they should be stocked full of every **** munitions available. What I'm trying to say is that I wish their native ability was a boost to locking rather than dropping a bomb slightly to the left occasionally. Something like a long range lock with restrictions like front arc only. It was more a lament against Nimble Bomber being decidedly underwhelming on what is still one of my favourite frames to play.

I've got arguably more table time with Bombers than any sane man should have, and I agree with the majority of what you're all saying. I've always kept them cheap, kept them numerous, and been ready for them to pop against aces, but I've also done pretty darn well with them over the years.

The Jendon trick is one I've had on the menu for a long time but have yet to try because... well because the cost of it means you're sort of restricted to missiles for at least half the list, and that brings us back to missiles being underwhelming in many cases. I've had a build in the books for a while now of a pair with Protons and a pair with Concussions alongside Jendon, but I see so many high initiative, super fast, super evasive, multi repositioning aces around here that I'm honestly just thinking 4x Scimitars with Homing and Jendon with Vader.

Maybe I'll give that a go this week.