This is a little idea I cooked up with a buddy after we found that the scenario in the booklet that uses warheads (Strategic Salvo, pg. 21, Epic Battles ) to be a little bit unbalanced. We also thought it should be crazier and have more explosions.

I'm hoping this will make as much sense to you all as it does to me. Any feedback is appreciated.

HEAVY ORDNANCE
2 Players, Head-to-Head
Squad Limit: 500 squad points or 20 Threat

Scenario Setup:
Play Area: 6’x3’ Obstacles : Any 12 5 Red Warheads(P1) 5 Blue Warheads(P2)

Deployment Zones: P1: R2 of a long edge and outside of R3 of a short edge. P2 R2 of the opposite long edge and outside of R3 of a short edge. Same Deployment as “Cover the Evacuation” (pg. 19, Epic Battles )

Place Markers and Remotes: Players deploy as normal. Then, P1 places 3 warhead remotes along its edge of the play area, beyond R2 of another warhead remote. Then, P2 places 3 warhead remotes along its edge of the play area.

Scenario Rules:
Intercept Ordnance!: After a warhead is destroyed by an attack or flees, the opposing team scores 1[VICTORY POINT].
Escort the Warheads: While a warhead defends, if there is a friendly ship at range 0-1 of it’s [REMOTE TOKEN] and in its [Front 180 ARC], change all of its [FOCUS] results to [EVADE] results.
Warheads Away {System Phase}: Starting with the player who has the initiative, players alternate relocating their warheads forward using a [4 STRAIGHT], [3 BANK LEFT], or [3 BANK RIGHT] template (see page 11, Epic Battles).
Experimental Warheads {System Phase}: When activated, a warhead may choose to relocate using the [3 HARD LEFT] or [3 HARD RIGHT] template. If it does, it receives a [STRESS TOKEN].
Overwhelmed Gyro-stabilizers: A warhead with a [STRESS TOKEN] must relocate using a [4 STRAIGHT] template in the Systems Phase. When it does, remove its [STRESS TOKEN].
Controlled Detonation {End Phase}: Starting with the player who has the initiative, players alternate choosing to detonate a warhead that they control or pass. A warhead with a [STRESS TOKEN] may not be selected. When a warhead is chosen this way, it detonates according to the rules on its card and then is removed. After both players have passed, no more warheads may be detonated with “Controlled Detonation.”
High-Value Targets : When a warhead detonated with Controlled Detonation deals 3 or more damage to enemy ships, its controller scores 1[VICTORY POINT]. If it deals 5 or more damage to enemy ships, score 2[VICTORY POINTS] instead.

End of Game {End Phase} : If there are no warheads in play, the game ends.

Scoring:
Standard Scoring, plus 25 points (or 1 THREAT) per [VICTORY POINT] that player scored. In a tie, the team with the lowest total casualties wins.

Interesting. Have you tested the Original "Strategic Salvo"? Unfortunately I have not yet. But from reading it upon getting the pack, my gut feeling said it probably has the following problems (from memory!, commuting right now, and cannot look up the original):

-suicide run syndrome. Attacker can throw away everything care-free. Only in a draw attacker's losses are a negative factor. Onus on the defender, who has less armed units as well (see below).

-the warheads are extremely fast, and with 3 green on 4 hull more resilient than a TIE l/n, and even more resilient if an escorting attacker is near

-attacker has same point value for ships, and does not pay anything for the warheads, although:

-the warheads with a 50% chance have an "Advanced Deadman switch" exploding with huge force forward. And as fast as they are, the defender has no choice but to attack head-on on the small playing field in order to stop them in time, and gets them exploded right into the front of his/her ships. While the escorting attacker conviniently trailing behind is unaffected

What was your experience?

As for your alternative:

What is the objective (no targets, or are there targets as in the original)? If it is just escorting warheads over the field than it almost like passing engagement, but with "exploding shuttles"?

Is it not too easy if the players just can explode enemy warheads? Should they not slice into them first?

Your analysis of the "Strategic Salvo" mission is correct. The first three factors that you state make it trivial for the attacker to win. This was the inspiration for trying to design a "symmetrical" scenario. To be honest, all of the "asymmetrical" missions that I have tried (Atmospheric Entry pg. 16, Cover the Evacuation pg. 19, and Strategic Salvo) have seemed unbalanced.

Your fourth point is one that we also ran into, a possible solution for this would be to amend the "Escort the Warheads" rule to "While a warhead defends, if there is a friendly ship at range 0-1 of it’s [REMOTE TOKEN] and within its [Front 180 degree arc] , change all of its [FOCUS] results to [EVADE] results." This way, a player is forced to risk their own ships in order to defend their warheads.

The aim of "Heavy Ordnance" is to essentially bolt the warheads onto a Standard Game, rather than building a scenario in which victory revolves around ones use of the warheads. There should be some incentive to interact with the warheads, which was why I kept "Intercept Ordnance!" from the Strategic Salvo mission. However, I have noticed that the "Controlled Detonation" rule is currently poorly written and allows a player to score a point whenever they detonate their own warheads. I agree that it should be slightly harder to score points with your own warheads. As such, I have amended "Controlled Detonation" by removing the clause about scoring victory points and adding a new rule: "High-Value Targets: When a warhead detonated with Controlled Detonation deals 3 or more damage to enemy ships, its controller scores 1[VICTORY POINT]. If it deals 5 or more damage to enemy ships, score 2[VICTORY POINTS] instead." I chose the damage numbers without testing but the intention is to reward a direct hit on one ship with 1 point and catching multiple ships in the explosion with 2 points.

I will report back after testing the scenario.

Edited to add "that they control" to Controlled Detonation. I also realized that the 500pt scenarios in Epic Battles all have victory conditions other than time, turns, or concession. So I also added, " End of Game {End Phase}: If there are no warheads in play, the game ends." I suspect that there may be a way to exploit this victory condition, but both players having warheads should make it interesting to try to control the end of the game. I will report back with further testing.