Question in the title. No click bait required.

I want to run the Caster, just seems so expensive atm.

42 minutes ago, Archangelspiv said:

Question in the title. No click bait required.

I want to run the Caster, just seems so expensive atm.

What with Ketsu’s ability and the Shadow Caster title, my gut says yes. A double tap that can easily get Tractor tokens out is big. I may be wrong, but it feels like a recipe for ick.

Probably not- the recent tractor change made the Lancer much less useful, and a gunner slot (or a config trading Crew for Gunner) might get it back on the table. Even just giving the generic a gunner and not the uniques might help.

If they put it on a Banshee title, so you couldn't use it with Shadow Caster, there would be no possibility of a problem with extra tractor tokens.

Maybe???

Against small bases the Tractor rules adjustment is moot yet against larger bases tractor has a dramatically reduced effect. I can see @SabineKey's concern, Ketsu pilot + Shadow Caster & Vet Tur Gunner = 3 tractor tokens (1 from the pilot ability at start of Engagement Phase, and up to 2 from the title) IF both attacks hit, but the first token (first 2 against large bases) no longer affects the ships that would require multiple tokens to move making getting the hits in a little harder (must be tractored to have the -1 green die applied). There may be some concern coming from swarm players since she could potentially tractor up to 3 ships (an increase of 1 additional ship, she currently can tractor up to 2 small bases during a single engagement phase) if she could equip VTG along side the Title. Still... 81 pts currently for just the hypothetical Ketsu with VTG and title. Ups to 84 with Fearless, though with Fearless 88-D, PerCo or Maul is a must take on Ketsu (87, 92 and 96 points respectively)… /shrug

3 hours ago, Matanui3 said:

If they put it on a Banshee title, so you couldn't use it with Shadow Caster, there would be no possibility of a problem with extra tractor tokens.

This is the only reasonable approach. Canonically, the shadow caster does not have a gunner slot - the turret is controlled via a linked system from the cockpit. This is a major plot point of the episode in Rebels where Ketsu is introduced, so FFG can't give the ship a gunner slot.

I would probably play Han Solo as a gunner instead of VTG, Shadowcaster has amazing blues.

Like the idea, would prefer it stuck to another title to avoid the fiasco. Nantex get enough hate as it is. Imagine how much the caster will get.

Although, I do think the ship chassis could use a little love somehow.

Idk, I'd probably be running Dengar on it honestly

I have to second the comments about the issue being the Shadow Caster title.

And what happens if you can then combo Asajj, 0-0-0, and BT-1 on the thing while still having access to all the other stress and tractor shenanigans with scum?

9 minutes ago, Frimmel said:

And what happens if you can then combo Asajj, 0-0-0, and BT-1 on the thing while still having access to all the other stress and tractor shenanigans with scum?

Having used Asajj with 0-0-0, adding BT-1 would be mean for little additional cost. Not overpowered, but definitely not fun as the crits rain in.

I can see why the developers chose to leave it off (both canonically and play-wise). I think adding a gunner would give the Lancer more variability (as seen by the varied responses above), and in no way make the ship overpowered. The ship has very little in the way of action economy, making it far less powerful than its 1e version. Adding a gunner would improve this ship more than it did for the Jumpmaster. I still haven't figure out how to make that one work...

1 hour ago, LagJanson said:

Having used Asajj with 0-0-0, adding BT-1 would be mean for little additional cost. Not overpowered, but definitely not fun as the crits rain in.

I guess you can kind of go there now.

YV-666 Light Freighter - •Latts Razzi - 66
•Latts Razzi - Martial Artist (59)
•0-0-0 (5)
•BT-1 (2)

Lancer-class Pursuit Craft - •Asajj Ventress - 82
•Asajj Ventress - Force of Her Own (74)
•Ketsu Onyo (5)
•Shadow Caster (3)

G-1A Starfighter - •4-LOM - 49
•4-LOM - Reprogrammed Protocol Droid (49)

Total: 197/200

View in the X-Wing Squad Builder

1 minute ago, Frimmel said:

I guess you can kind of go there now.

YV-666 Light Freighter - •Latts Razzi - 66
•Latts Razzi - Martial Artist (59)
•0-0-0 (5)
•BT-1 (2)

Lancer-class Pursuit Craft - •Asajj Ventress - 82
•Asajj Ventress - Force of Her Own (74)
•Ketsu Onyo (5)
•Shadow Caster (3)

G-1A Starfighter - •4-LOM - 49
•4-LOM - Reprogrammed Protocol Droid (49)

Total: 197/200

View in the X-Wing Squad Builder

Thanks. I hate it.

7 hours ago, dunhop said:

The ship has very little in the way of action economy, making it far less powerful than its 1e version.

Basically true of almost all large-based ships. Certainly at least as true as it is of small-based ships. Exceptional pilots like RAC, Lando, and Han in large ships are matched by small-based ships like Poe, Luke, Guri, Soontir, etc.

Honestly the large-based ships should be basically priced the same as small-based ships. The successful ones already are, by and large. Health and Agility make a much bigger difference than actual base size, which is marginally useful for blocking but just as easily blocked. Control-resistance and support abilities are really the only significant benefits inherent to most large ships. Otherwise you're just as well off with a B-Wing, U-Wing, etc. which have a little less health, but more agility and, crucially, a lower cost.