54 minutes ago, gadwag said:

There were two z-95s at the top table of worlds - that ship has found its niche as a cheap gun.

The aggressor is more or less a TIE bomber with a turret instead of torps and bombs. Its issue is just that it costs too much (presumably because of barrage rockets)

Well, it costs too much and its action bar is nonsense for how it needs to be used. Its roll links only to an evade, but it can't put that to much use. Debris Gambit is a niche investment, and Juke is expensive for such a delicate and pricey fighter, and if you're evading with a ship like this then you're not attacking properly. It's a flawed design that's constrained further by not being allowed to outprice the TIE Bomber or swarm too heavily, so it doesn't see play.

Plus missiles are an awkward munition, but that topic has been talked to death.

That's why I figure FFG needs to tackle it sideways. It can't be properly solved with points. It needs either a base redesign, or a new configuration. Something along those lines...?

8 hours ago, gadwag said:

The aggressor is more or less a TIE bomber with a turret instead of torps and bombs. Its issue is just that it costs too much (presumably because of barrage rockets)

Yes. Barrage Rockets again prove to be one of the biggest mistakes FFG has made in 2e. Every ship with 2 missile slots is pretty much ruined because Barrage Rockets even exist. These should have been a dirt-cheap 3-dice bulleye arc weapon, so that there's a multi-charge and affordable alternative to Proton Rockets for a focus-based missile, but it doesn't replace the primary weapon.

Also, Veteran Turret Gunner. That card has also proven to be a problem. Between those two, TIE Aggressors can't really catch a break.

7 hours ago, Wazat said:

Well, it costs too much and its action bar is nonsense for how it needs to be used. Its roll links only to an evade, but it can't put that to much use. Debris Gambit is a niche investment, and Juke is expensive for such a delicate and pricey fighter, and if you're evading with a ship like this then you're not attacking properly. It's a flawed design that's constrained further by not being allowed to outprice the TIE Bomber or swarm too heavily, so it doesn't see play.

Plus missiles are an awkward munition, but that topic has been talked to death.

That's why I figure FFG needs to tackle it sideways. It can't be properly solved with points. It needs either a base redesign, or a new configuration. Something along those lines...?

I don't think they're too far off. Just a turret kinda turns an Aggressor into something kinda like a naked TIE/sf, and no-upgrades TIE/sf are pretty solid for what they are. Aggressor has potential to be a reasonable time-on-target filler ship. Linked Roll-Evade isn't the best possible linked action, but it can help keep the ship alive longer on those turns you'd want to roll anyhow.

I figure, if an Aggressor with a turret was 2 points cheaper (maybe even just 1 point), it's playable. But Barrage Rockets and VTG are probably holding it back.

Also, the physical ships aren't too common. That holds back experimentation.

Finally had the time to sit down and go through FO points. Aim is to make more pilots and Upgrades useable and a viable option in lists. Two small card errata to get them playable without warping the meta again.

With the /ba coming there can be much experimenting with new lists too.

With the /fo there's not really too much you can do on the low end as you are already getting too close to the/ln. Aim was +2pts for a named above the generic at the same Init (except Muse who gains a talent slot as well and TN who is sacrificial).

The Generic /SF's are a bit too effective in their mini-firespray configuration so a small 1pt increase combined with 2pts off the gunner gives them more incentive to play to the ships strengths. Backdraft was too high so no change closes his gap to the generics and QD is just rebalanced around the gunner change.

All /vn's not named Kylo goes down 3pts to encourage play. Recoil being the same as the FOTP is the correct option.

Upsilons get their nerf undone, except Tavson who is far and away the best, and is now costed as such. Dormitz gets a card adjustment so can drop back and Stridan and Cardinal come further down.

Hyperspace Tracking gets made Limited and come back to being useable as it only effects one Upsilon and turn 0-1 before becoming a blank card for the rest of the game. Small changes to other crew to encourage usage.

Tie/fo

Null I0 - 31pts (+0)

Epsilon I1 - 26pts (+0)

Rivas I1 - 28pts (+0)

Zeta I2 - 27pts (+0)

Muse I2 - 30pts (-1)

TN-3465 I2 - 28pts (-1)

Omega I3 - 29pts (+0)

Longshot I3 - 31pts (-1)

Static I4 - 32pts (-2)

Scorch I4 - 34pts (+0)

Malarus I5 - 35pts (-4)

Midnight I6 - 39pts (-4)

Tie/sf

Zeta I2 - 33pts (+1)*

Omega I3 - 35pts (+1)*

Backdraft I4 - 39pts (+0)

Quickdraw I6 - 47pts (+2)*

Tie/vn

SJ Engineer I1 - 48pts (-3)

Avenger I3 - 54pts (-3)

FO Test Pilot I4 - 55pts (-3)

Recoil I4 - 55pts (-3)

Blackout I5 - 59pts (-3)

Kylo Ren I5 - 76pts (+0)

Upsilon

PO Thanisson I1 - 60pts (-2)

SKB Pilot I2 - 56pts (-2)

Lt. Dormitz I3 - 60pts (-10)**

Lt. Tavson I3 - 65pts (+1)

Major Stridan I4 - 61pts (-3)

Capt. Cardinal I4 - 61pts (-4)

Upgrades

Fanatical - 2pts (+0)

SF Gunner - 8pts (-2)

HST Data - 1pt (-9)***

BHC Codes - 1pt (+0)

Gen. Hux - 4pts (-2)

Capt. Phasma - 5pts (+0)

PO Thanisson - 2pts (-2)

Kylo Ren - 9pts (-2)

Snoke - 11pts (-2)

*See SF Gunner changes

**Changed to effect Sml & Med bases only

***Changed to Limited

I'm sure people will spot issues with this but that's the advantage of a forum and this is only my opinion. Flame away!

TIE Aggressor wants a Sensor slot. Possibly in exchange for the 2nd missile slot and a slight point decrease. Or keep Brockets and leave the price. For now.

Way back in 2.0, I flew Dash with Lone Wolf and PerCo alongside SuperNat ProTorp Luke. It was actually decent. Build wise, I felt like Outrider was too expensive for what it adds and Trick Shot made him way more obvious for marginal benefit.

Just never rotate, kite and focus for attack and defence, the LW reroll going where necessary. SuperTorp Luke was eminently capable of punishing anything that went for Dash and running from anything that didn't.

Dash's trajectory was hugely critical to success. Cornering him and closing his options was basically suicide.

Points nuke destroyed it, which was a shame, but understandable in other areas. I enjoyed it though and it seemed fairly wholesome. Even if some opponents clearly had 1.0 hangovers at the time.....

One point of interest. Today I noticed Wullffwarro, an infrequently-used b-tier pilot (at best) with a fun casual ability, is 1 point more expensive than Wedge, the Rebellion's most used pilot. Wullff gets -2 init, -1 agility, +2 hull, a wide arc, a red barrel roll, a less effective pilot ability, no config, a nerfed 2.0 reinforce, no native lock, etc, and a dial that lacks any flips. It gets worse when comparing generics to generics. Wullf and other 'tucks are an objectively worse option; I fly Wullff because I'm an unforgivable, filthy casual who loves his ability, and I use Wedge in the fleet as a crutch to balance out the deficiencies of Jan Ors and Wullffwarro.

I want to argue less that Wedge should go up -- he probably will but hopefully not by much -- but rather, that Wullffwarro should go down. Auzitucks are far too expensive for what they do, and their usage statistics show this.

IMO in the current meta, Wedge feels borderline necessary for the Rebellion to compete. That needs to be fixed holistically by fixing lots of rebel ship prices, not by nerfing Wedge and calling it a day. Otherwise Rebels have no answer to a lot of fleets out there, Han and Wedge being their only used I6s. I don't actually know how to do all this rebalancing without creating meta monsters -- maybe FFG is afraid of what happens when Auzitucks cross a certain cost threshold. But I love them and many other Rebel ships (z-95s, docked or undocked attack shuttles & sheathipedes, k-wings, ARCs, e-wings, hwks, etc), and would like to see them on the table. I really hope FFG does more than nerf the popular pilots; maybe Wedge needs to be almost left alone.

That is all.

3 hours ago, Wazat said:

One point of interest. Today I noticed Wullffwarro, an infrequently-used b-tier pilot (at best) with a fun casual ability, is 1 point more expensive than Wedge, the Rebellion's most used pilot. Wullff gets -2 init, -1 agility, +2 hull, a wide arc, a red barrel roll, a less effective pilot ability, no config, a nerfed 2.0 reinforce, no native lock, etc, and a dial that lacks any flips. It gets worse when comparing generics to generics. Wullf and other 'tucks are an objectively worse option; I fly Wullff because I'm an unforgivable, filthy casual who loves his ability, and I use Wedge in the fleet as a crutch to balance out the deficiencies of Jan Ors and Wullffwarro.

Some rebel ships are pretty cost effective. The Auzitucks are certainly not, but FFG is a bit afraid of reinforce after its terrible form in 1st ed. One of my kids has casual fun with Wulffwarro with Magva on board, and maybe Trick Shot (nice with his 180deg firing), which is throwing even mote points on a bad build ) but once damaged he hits like a truck.

On 11/21/2019 at 4:12 PM, theBitterFig said:

Yes. Barrage Rockets again prove to be one of the biggest mistakes FFG has made in 2e. Every ship with 2 missile slots is pretty much ruined because Barrage Rockets even exist. These should have been a dirt-cheap 3-dice bulleye arc weapon, so that there's a multi-charge and affordable alternative to Proton Rockets for a focus-based missile, but it doesn't replace the primary weapon.

So much this. That card is such a lazy and stupid design. It is the same problem as with 1st ed Veteran Instincts, if you for cheap can upgrade your Initiative (then PS) and nothing else is as valuable in the same slot (powercreep expertise was later an alternative, finally killing off all pilots without talent slot), of course it is stapled there. If you for cheap can get a third die (and look what a real damage (not e.g. ion) third die costs elsewhere!), and the slots are not occupied otherwise of course it is stapled there. But at the same time being so boring , just making it another 3die ship.

Unless this kind of cards is costed high, but then they instead disappear completely.

19 minutes ago, Managarmr said:

But at the same time being so boring , just making it another 3die ship.

• you must have the focus at the time you attack, which precludes spending it defensively against higher init attacks (bad for agi-reliant ships vs hull-reliant ships)
• the range pyramid is inverted - whereas 3-red ships are less effective at range 3 but jump to 4 red dice at range 1; barrage platforms trade best at range 3 and worst when targets make it into range 1
• barrage platforms are exceptionally vulnerable to blocks, and suffer double if forced to reposition, k-turn, or fly over obstacles
• access to double-mods is tied to bullseye arc, despite the inherent difficulty of landing bullseye without repositioning

There's always been this level of disdain towards Barrage carriers and it just escapes me.

With Barrage, the range control is twice as valuable. Setting good dials, and not needing to reposition/kturn, is twice as important. They're low-initiative generics that thrive when they get bullseye arcs on targets at range 2-3 without boosting or barrel rolling; who live or die by their approach towards obstacles and range control.

In my view, they're the very platonic ideal of a front-arc ship.

14 minutes ago, svelok said:

There's always been this level of disdain towards Barrage carriers and it just escapes me.

Early 2.0 Barrage Bomber burnout. The Jonus synergy the Barrage /sa's had access to raised allot of ire so the very vocal feeling is basically "keep it nuked from the game along with everything else that lets bombers be good".

4 hours ago, Managarmr said:

Some rebel ships are pretty cost effective. The Auzitucks are certainly not, but FFG is a bit afraid of reinforce after its terrible form in 1st ed. One of my kids has casual fun with Wulffwarro with Magva on board, and maybe Trick Shot (nice with his 180deg firing), which is throwing even mote points on a bad build ) but once damaged he hits like a truck.

Some rebel ships are indeed effective, but there are many others that see no play outside of low-casual (the other core factions suffer from this a lot too). And without Wedge to carry a lot of fleets, I don't think we'd see rebel much outside of bulk swarms. So here's hoping the faction is a bit more diverse in January.

Wullffwarro is indeed fantastic in casual play. My favorite list ( Wullffwarro War Crimes ) is based around taking his attack dice to a silly maximum. I played it again today at a small casual charity tournament and had a great time! I've considered using Magva, but Saw is just too good a crew for him to pass up.

7 hours ago, Hiemfire said:

Early 2.0 Barrage Bomber burnout. The Jonus synergy the Barrage /sa's had access to raised allot of ire so the very vocal feeling is basically "keep it nuked from the game along with everything else that lets bombers be good".

Quite the contrary in my case. Everyone should know I’m as far from the “nerf it because I dislike it” camp as I can get. I only dislike Barrage because it doesn’t play to the TIE/sa’s strengths. The platform has a linked lock and a bomb-based ship ability. It should be dropping bombs and shooting lock-based missiles.

Unfortunately, neither of those are viable, even on the TIE/sa. And Concussion and Cluster missiles are supposed to be among the most commonly used, whereas we’ve never yet seen reference to barrage rockets from a TIE/sa.

Personally, I don’t really think barrage needs a nerf. I think its cost would be sufficiently prohibitive if other good missiles existed. And they do, they’re just not good yet (at all). Their prices should run around 2-5, not 4-6.

If you could get concussion missiles and proton bombs for a similar price as barrage, it would be much more of a choice. As-is, barrage is always the better choice (and isn’t that good or versatile, just has a crazy good synergy with Jonus).

The TIE bomber and TIE interceptor are my two favorite chassis in the game. I own 6 of each and love flying them. I just want them to be good, and thematic, and interesting.

3 hours ago, Wazat said:

Wullffwarro is indeed fantastic in casual play.

I love stacking him out with Juke and PerCop, flying him next to a Saw with Jyn.

4-5 dice in 180 with double mods and defensive negation, AND an evade if you shoot first.

I'm gonna be happy when we have some new points to play with. New ships. More I3 I4?

We definitely need more reasons to play I3 I4.

5 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

I'm gonna be happy when we have some new points to play with. New ships. More I3 I4?

We definitely need more reasons to play I3 I4.

Organize a local event, set the initiative limit to 4, or use some other house rule to mix things up. I'm playing in an event next sunday where the lists were randomized using YASB, and then you're allowed to remove one upgrade, and add stuff with the leftover points, nothing in my list is over i3.

3 hours ago, ClassicalMoser said:

Quite the contrary in my case. Everyone should know I’m as far from the “nerf it because I dislike it” camp as I can get. I only dislike Barrage because it doesn’t play to the TIE/sa’s strengths. The platform has a linked lock and a bomb-based ship ability. It should be dropping bombs and shooting lock-based missiles.

this! it's exactly what i feel about bombers!

some days ago for this reason i tried on fly casual this squad:

5× scimitar bombers with cluster missiles and proximity mines (40 points each)

i suggest you to give it a try in a calual game. it's very fun

having barrage on board very means you will quite never use barrel in lock and nimble bomber ability, things that you probably pay in points, so...

this is probably why bombers fell overcosted.

they need a well designed/costed lock based missile or device that make you forget about barrage

14 minutes ago, Manolox said:

they need a well designed/costed lock based missile or device that make you forget about barrage

Let's hope mag-pulse warheads, ion bombs and cluster mines help fill that niche when they release in february.

PS: I have a feeling tragedy simulator with ion bombs is going to be REALLY trolly. 😁

If they make a new missile that means you can stop stapling Brockets, and then you staple 'New Missile' to them, the dynamic doesn't really change.

The issue is obviously gaining a lock at low In. Passive Sensors hasn't really seemed to open that door fully. If it it did, would the results be welcome?

Hello wall of optimally locking Bombers, what joys we have returned to.... There needs to be nuance in the game and there is only so far certain archetypes can take that without being detrimental.

I think missiles are in a decent place. I think Bombers aren't in a bad place. Perhaps the squad blend and flight pattern just needs a bit more work to be reasonable and worth using.

I know people think all the squad building challenges and flight plans are solved and good things are good and bad things are bad. But I opt out of that belief. Sometimes things are just harder to get going.

I don't really see a reason that 2 or 3 non Brocket Bombers can get some work done for a list. Perhaps they are still a little overcosted compared to other platforms but there is nothing wrong with them mechanically.

But upgrade stapled spam lists do belong in the cold.

I'm kind of hoping they'll add the sensor slot to the Aggressor. That would differentiate it further from the Bomber, and let it get locks (or keep them, if you spring for an FCS) a little more easily. Probably wouldn't be enough to make it competitive, but it would be a step in the right direction.

A Veteran Ordnance Gunner would also be an interesting option. The number of ships with missile/torpedo and gunner slot is relatively low, and they're nearly all fairly unpopular in the meta. Maybe try a trigger similar to the Turret Gunner. "After you perform a primary attack, you may acquire a lock on the defender." Thematically it's similar to the way coaxial machine guns were used with main guns on tanks, and it's weak/slow enough to be priced relatively low.

46 minutes ago, Okapi said:

A Veteran Ordnance Gunner would also be an interesting option. The number of ships with missile/torpedo and gunner slot is relatively low, and they're nearly all fairly unpopular in the meta. Maybe try a trigger similar to the Turret Gunner. "After you perform a primary attack, you may acquire a lock on the defender." Thematically it's similar to the way coaxial machine guns were used with main guns on tanks, and it's weak/slow enough to be priced relatively low.

I don't think that'd be all that useful for ordnance boats, it's just too slow. If the requirement is both missile and torpedo slot then the ships that can use it is slim indeed(3 ships), if it's one of missile/torp it opens up a lot more ships. If it requires ordnance equiped then it loses some value, but may still be worth it, if it's priced aggressively enough.

As a scum player: Marauder titled firesprays, Falcon, Jm5K, Y-wing, YV-666. Definitely a good pick for firespray... maybe for Latts Razzi in YV-666.

Let's see, empire: Aggressor, Punisher, Bomber, Decimator. No super synergies, good for turret aggressors, maybe?

Rebels: ARC-170, Y-wing, K-wing, Falcon, VCX, YT-2400. Nice for Shara Bey, good for any other ARC-170, and the large ships.

Resistance: Falcon. Nice for it.

FO: TIE/SF. Decent choice for it.

Republic: ARC-170, Y-wing. Nice for ARC-170 again.

CIS: N/A

In short: seems to me like it'll be most useful to double-mod turreted or multi-arc ships, it's just too slow for ordnance.

16 hours ago, svelok said:

• you must have the focus at the time you attack, which precludes spending it defensively against higher init attacks (bad for agi-reliant ships vs hull-reliant ships)
• the range pyramid is inverted - whereas 3-red ships are less effective at range 3 but jump to 4 red dice at range 1; barrage platforms trade best at range 3 and worst when targets make it into range 1
• barrage platforms are exceptionally vulnerable to blocks, and suffer double if forced to reposition, k-turn, or fly over obstacles
• access to double-mods is tied to bullseye arc, despite the inherent difficulty of landing bullseye without repositioning

There's always been this level of disdain towards Barrage carriers and it just escapes me.

With Barrage, the range control is twice as valuable. Setting good dials, and not needing to reposition/kturn, is twice as important. They're low-initiative generics that thrive when they get bullseye arcs on targets at range 2-3 without boosting or barrel rolling; who live or die by their approach towards obstacles and range control.

In my view, they're the very platonic ideal of a front-arc ship.

For me, it's what the Barrage Rockets do to the overall design space. Pretty much every ship which could equip Barrage Rockets is overpriced. Even if there's more nuance to 3-red-dice ships with Barrage, when compared to printed 3-dice primary attacks, there's still so many 3-dice primary ships. Meanwhile, the cost is that double-missile slots are kind of unplayable. I don't think the overall impact on the game is worth it.

//

This does give me an idea, however. Not a real-game-suggestion, but a thought-experiment. What if a lot of ships lost their 3rd red die, but gained "While attacking, if you are calculating or focused, roll 1 additional attack die."

• X-Wings: they're now 2-dice primary ships, but the "open S-Foils" side has the text, and the "closed S-Foils" side no longer reduces attack dice.
  • So I figure folks never fly Luke again without Torpedoes. His big strength is that he can use the Force and never have to focus: he can just Lock and Roll and K-Turn freely. But nerfs to the force aren't bad.
• B-Wings, U-Wings, Kihraxzes, Belbullabs: they just get the text as a ship ability. Not sure on Starvipers.
  • B-Wings have a handy linked action, but are limited to a really narrow set of moves. That's kind of neat.
  • U-Wings drop a bit in durability, which would strike me as fair.
  • Kihraxz remains the boring basic jouster.
  • Belbullab with their linked actions are really tempting, too. Easy for them to keep their 3-dice, but that dial is awkward when perma-stressed.
  • If Starvipers were to get this change, they'd still have their incredible mobility, but they'd be incredibly punished on the durability scale... hrm... harder to justify giving it to them.
• Delta 7B configuration: no longer grants an attack die, but has this text.
  • 7B Jedi can't double-reposition or lock as easily now. Yay for Jedi nerf.
• Special Forces Gunner: you'd have to be focused and double-front for the 3rd die.
  • That does interesting stuff with Quickdraw. Fanatical/FCS becomes a bad upgrade combination (I kind of think it might not be right anyhow). Defending might mean spending a focus to keep shields, or losing more shields to perform a 3-dice revenge shot.

I also figure: most basic jousters like X-Wings which lost their automatic 3rd die could also stand to lose a few points. Having to be focused to have 3 red dice really justifies allowing the X-Wing to slip below the 41 point barrier.

Some ships should keep a printed 3rd die.

• TIE Interceptors should keep it, but probably not Strikers. That really gives a reason for generic squints to exist.
• TIE Silencers would be an interesting keep. I'd be nervous about Kylo, but it'd be a nice perk for everyone else, and kind of a reason to fly Silencers. Just hike Kylo's price some, maybe.
• I'd let a lot of the rarely-used heavy fighters keep it. Stuff like Auzitucks, G1-A, Scurrg, Kimogila (maybe 2 dice, but gain a 3rd when focusing or the defender is in Bullseye). They've mostly already got limitations from weak dials and awkward medium bases.
  • Not sure on ARCs. 104th are incredibly cost effective already. Awkward to fly, but still.
• Likewise, E-Wings would probably get to keep 3 dice. Or at least can be either focused or locked to get their 3rd die. They become a lot more tempting compared to X or B, if they get more action flexibility.
• Probably keeping the normal 3-dice on the TIE Defender. I probably have a better opinion of them than most folks, but letting them keep a 3rd die, plus the free evade, plus the white K-Turn, that kind of justifies a high cost as an "easy mode" ship. I feel like lowering the price on them to the point they're competitive at large events would make them unbearable at smaller kit tourneys and the FLGS, so I like the high cost.

9 hours ago, Cuz05 said:

If they make a new missile that means you can stop stapling Brockets, and then you staple 'New Missile' to them, the dynamic doesn't really change.

The issue is obviously gaining a lock at low In. Passive Sensors hasn't really seemed to open that door fully. If it it did, would the results be welcome?

Hello wall of optimally locking Bombers, what joys we have returned to.... There needs to be nuance in the game and there is only so far certain archetypes can take that without being detrimental.

I think missiles are in a decent place. I think Bombers aren't in a bad place. Perhaps the squad blend and flight pattern just needs a bit more work to be reasonable and worth using.

I know people think all the squad building challenges and flight plans are solved and good things are good and bad things are bad. But I opt out of that belief. Sometimes things are just harder to get going.

I don't really see a reason that 2 or 3 non Brocket Bombers can get some work done for a list. Perhaps they are still a little overcosted compared to other platforms but there is nothing wrong with them mechanically.

But upgrade stapled spam lists do belong in the cold.

I don’t think we need a new missile at all (least of all Mag-Pulse, another poor design. We just need the existing lock-based missiles to be affordable.

Low-I isn’t that big a problem for the TIE/sa; they can tank a hit or two just fine and use the missiles after the first pass. Plus they have the numbers to survive most jousts quite intact: Still worth 4 points or so for concussion missiles, even without the silliness of Jendon or Passive Sensors.

You also seem to forget that the bomber doesn’t have a sensor slot, so PS doesn’t even work. But ion Missiles for 2 points would be just fine (I’ll take it back if you can name one chassis that would be busted on). Cluster missiles for two or three likewise (situational double-tap is as dubiously useful as the occasional extra die at range two only).

Homing for 3 and Concussion for 4 would also be far, far from OP (except on PS platforms, but that’s only because PS itself should be 4-5). Seismic bombs were fine at 2 and Protons at 4. Without trajsim they’re really not that scary. Conner nets at 4 instead of 6 would help as well.

I’m not arguing for some alternative default bomber build. I’m arguing, as I ALWAYS do, for diversity.

There should never be a go-to build.

Also, you’re just plain wrong that Missiles are in a decent place. They’re never, ever used except with either Jendon or Passive Sensors. The occasional Grand Inquisitor or Torrent will attempt them, but those lists don’t do as well anyway, and another 2 points of bid wouldn’t push them into OP territory.

Ion and Clusters are all but trash. Homing is very situational. Concussion is good but way too expensive for how hard it is to pull off. Fix those and the bomber (and aggressor and Z-95 and Scyk and Punisher and named torrents and kimogila and RZ-1) is in a good place again.

Just dropped in to say TIE Bombers are definitely NOT overcosted, they're one of the most efficiently statted/costed ships in the game at 29pts with a great dial. The only thing wrong with them is that people *think* they need Barrage Rockets when they really don't.

My next blog will cover this efficiency in a bit more detail, but as an example of what they can do I was only one game away from booking my ticket to Worlds by playing 2x Scimitar Bombers with Proxy Mines. Even when lifted up to 35pts the base Bomber chassis is so efficient it can carry the load and come out not far behind an Academy Pilot for defensive efficiency.

I don't think I am wrong that missiles are in a decent place but I accept it's a minority view. Dropping 1pt off them here and there doesn't do a lot, a good player is looking to leverage more value from a squad than that. Unless it's spam.... It will make people look at them more seriously and perhaps add a few percent elsewhere in a list as a result. The point drop would then appear to have been the answer.

PS on Bombers, I know they don't have the slot, I simply mean that it hasn't massively caught on as a missile enabler in general, so the mechanic itself possibly wouldn't add much to the Bomber either.

My point is probably that I think they are fine, diversity is there, if people step out of the safe zone. Those point reductions you suggest seem fair in places, although strong on some currently undercosted platforms.... I just feel like they don't actually enable much in the way of new lists with new strengths. Empire have a great number of options at those marginal prices already.

Perhaps robot crit rockets are giving anything with points equipped, no shields and little defence, issues in the meta atm.

And trip aces are obviously difficult. And very common.

Answers may be elsewhere.

Another missile related thing: I find it interesting that only around half of Vulture squads are equipping Energy Shell Charges, and about a quarter of squads are equipping Discord Missiles. Some of that is that Vultures potentially squishy, and mostly need critical mass of numbers, and critical mass means more Calculate tokens means more Networked Calculations which reduces the squishiness.

But overall, I think it's a good thing that missiles aren't stapled to them. There are only two which anyone ever really reaches for, but still.

5 hours ago, Cuz05 said:

PS on Bombers, I know they don't have the slot, I simply mean that it hasn't massively caught on as a missile enabler in general, so the mechanic itself possibly wouldn't add much to the Bomber either.

.

.

.

Answers may be elsewhere.

If something like Tracers ever gets a 2.0 release I think we'll see low I bombers and missile/torp carriers back in full swing. Until then I fully agree with this.

3 hours ago, Test Pilot said:

If something like Tracers ever gets a 2.0 release I think we'll see low I bombers and missile/torp carriers back in full swing. Until then I fully agree with this.

Jendon

On 12/1/2019 at 1:33 PM, ClassicalMoser said:

It should be dropping bombs and shooting lock-based missiles.

Unfortunately, neither of those are viable, even on the TIE/sa.

Bombers with proximity mines are pretty good. Maybe not S-tier but definitely viable