3 minutes ago, ClassicalMoser said:2-dice, sure.
3-dice, 3 charges, sure.
3 dice, always on, I'm in the "never ever ever, please" camp. It's just difficult to balance that across the Y-Wing and the Ghost.
Since the Y-wing and the Ghost can't take the missile turret as they don't have a missile slot, that shouldn't be a problem. 3 dice, 3-4 charges, requires lock.
23 minutes ago, 5050Saint said:Since the Y-wing and the Ghost can't take the missile turret as they don't have a missile slot, that shouldn't be a problem. 3 dice, 3-4 charges, requires lock.
Yeah that I'd be totally fine with.
I'm not even opposed to a 3-dice turret with range-3 capability in theory, but it should either have a damage cap, a lock requirement, or something else that makes it just weaker than a Falcon's primary.
55 minutes ago, 5050Saint said:What do you think of a missile slot & turret slot upgrade that has is range 1-3? It would be unique to them and would be priced specifically for them.
Why not a 1-2 point turret upgrade that does what the /Sf's ship ability does?
4 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:Why not a 1-2 point turret upgrade that does what the /Sf's ship ability does?
Heavy missile turret? Interesting idea. Would it be Aggressor only?
Edited by 5050Saint7 minutes ago, 5050Saint said:Heavy missile turret? Interesting idea. Would it be Aggressor only?
Is there another ship that has both slots?
Edit: For clarity for those who don't understand the reference, the Tie/Sf changes the front arc requirement of equipped missile upgrades to turret arc. My suggestion would require both a missile upgrade and this hypothetical "heavy turret" be equipped to a ship for the turret upgrade to do anything.
Edited by HiemfireJust now, Hiemfire said:Is there another ship that has both slots?
No, but I wasn't certain that you were keeping to the missile + turret upgrade. This does allow you to fire whatever single missile slot missiles out of your turret arc, instead of just a generic turret missile. I like.
5 minutes ago, 5050Saint said:No, but I wasn't certain that you were keeping to the missile + turret upgrade. This does allow you to fire whatever single missile slot missiles out of your turret arc, instead of just a generic turret missile. I like.
They'd have to word it carefully to only work on single slot missiles, and probably remove the arc limitations that the /Sf ability has.
2 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:They'd have to word it carefully to only work on single slot missiles, and probably remove the arc limitations that the /Sf ability has.
Even if it did work on double-slot missiles, there are inherent costs there, plus charge limitations.
5x barrage could be an issue, especially with range denial, but, hmmm, would 5 points be too expensive? 13 for a 5-use 3-attack turret that denies range seems pretty good, but 9 for a concussion turret seems a lot less good. 7 for a homing turret is really interesting.
But ultimately the Seinar Specialist should be 25 and Dorsal should be 2. That mainly solves the Aggressor problem.
A bit crude as the X-wing card creator doesn't allow double slotted upgrades, and secondary upgrades require the attack info, but I like this.
6 hours ago, ClassicalMoser said:When you compare it to a TIE/fo or a Torrent, the TIE Aggressor is actually missing out on some critical things. It doesn't have any fancy turnaround maneuvers and it doesn't have blue turns or any tight turns.
Big turns certainly are well-suited to a turret ship, but I don't know if the aggressor really wants to be a turret ship as much as a cheap missile/spam platform. Drop Dorsal by a point and it looks a bit more appealing. Drop the Aggressor by a point and I think we'd start seeing them everywhere.
Ultimately it seems much more like a Scyk to me. Actually pretty decent naked just for its toughness, and if you make further investment worthwhile it could consider an upgrade or two.
Ion missiles should be three points. Dorsal turret should be two. Concussions should probably come down to 5. Homing should be 4.
I'm also personally of the totally-unsubstantiated opinion that cannons should be cheaper in general. Ion should be 4-5. Autoblaster was fine at 2. Tractor should be 1. Maybe keep them at their current prices for 2-primaries just to make the Scyk have a tougher choice but tbh I don't think it's strictly necessary since they bring so little to the table most of the time.
Actually, a TIE/fo is just a bad Scyk.
4 hours ago, 5050Saint said:A bit crude as the X-wing card creator doesn't allow double slotted upgrades, and secondary upgrades require the attack info, but I like this.
Drop the missile slot, it already requires an equipped missile upgrade for it to do anything, add "single" behind the missile icon in the ability text, that'll work to keep Diamond Boron and Barrage Rockets from being used as turret arc weapons, and I like it.
Edited by Hiemfire51 minutes ago, Stay OT Leader said:Actually, a TIE/fo is just a bad Scyk.
SOTL, alright, are you just being mischievous? I mean.... COME ON MAN there's 3 turns... and those groovy aggro sloops, and all those pretty blues on the dial... at same 25 point cost.
Convince me, cause I think you're pretty spot on at least 89.41% of the time. But now I'm getting worried about your analytical well being. 🙏
I miss x-wing trollies
1 hour ago, Stay OT Leader said:Actually, a TIE/fo is just a bad Scyk.
Maybe true because poor firepower and 1 less hull BUT it depends what you need. It’s hard to make a case that the Scyk is a better blocker, or that it has more time-on-target.
Critically, the Scyk can take a hardpoint, but at that point the Scyk is more expensive so it should be better...
3 hours ago, Stay OT Leader said:Actually, a TIE/fo is just a bad Scyk.
Depends on the pilot, IMHO.
Firstly, the cannon slot trumps anything the FO has.
Secondly, the Scyk dial is better than the FO dial in practice. The FO dial looks better at first glance but I've played a bunch of both ships since December and whenever I'm in the FO it feels like a pretty vanilla dial while the Scyk's 5K and 1-banks are hit all the time when you play. The Scyk is much much better at controlling range and avoiding being bumped.
In terms of pilot abilities the FO has the edge in Rivas and TN, but most of the time I'm just using the base generics anyway.
5 hours ago, Stay OT Leader said:the cannon slot trumps anything the FO has.
Indeed, but it also makes the Syck cost 3-6 more points. If it wasn't better for 6 more points, I'd be disappointed.
5 hours ago, Stay OT Leader said:the Scyk dial is better than the FO dial in practice. The FO dial looks better at first glance but I've played a bunch of both ships since December and whenever I'm in the FO it feels like a pretty vanilla dial while the Scyk's 5K and 1-banks are hit all the time when you play. The Scyk is much much better at controlling range and avoiding being bumped.
I won't disagree with you here, but I also won't agree. Both are good for different reasons: Scyks are better at being slow, doing range control, and the 5k is good, and FO's are better at being fast, turning, and clearing stress.
The TIE Aggressor is... disappointing. Looks pretty cool but that's all really. Its turret slot is unique for the Empire, but with only two turret options, pretty worthless IMO. If an ionization platform is desired, i'm inclined to load a TIE Bomber or Assault Gunboat with Ion Torpedoes (or perhaps Ion Cannons for the latter) rather than try to use the Ion Cannon Turret. And basing a build around the Dorsal Turret seems dubious. I do like having an ability cover my flank or rear but only if i have spare points for that, and without the turret, the TIE Aggressor doesn't really have any primary task other Empire ships can't do as well or better. Veteran Turret Gunner-based double-shot TIE Aggressor is just too expensive to be worth it.
At only one point less than the TIE Bomber (at lowest initiative), which offers overall more durability and identical dial (except for K-turns), it isn't really compelling difference. Comparing the generic talented pilots does make the TIE Aggressor look a bit better (2 points less), but i almost never use anything but named or lowest initiative TIE Bombers so at least for me that is utterly irrelevant.
I suppose the linked action isn't too bad, especially if combined with Debris Gambit but that results in somewhat expensive ship rapidly for what it does, and it does make utilizing ordnance difficult unless you got another source for Locks and Focus. And let's not forget the TIE Bomber is far more flexible otherwise, with options for torpedoes or bombs as well.
To make the TIE Aggressor better, i would like a sensor slot for Passive Sensors especially to make better use of missiles though that would overlap with the Assault Gunboat. Additional turret options (the missile turret concept suggested earlier sounds cool and unique) would be ideal, of course, though they need to be carefully thought out to avoid balance issues like TLT in the first edition without stuff getting priced so high it never sees any use. Additional named pilots would be an option as well, interesting and well priced abilities would elevate the lackluster chassis from mediocrity.
11 hours ago, Woorloog said:To make the TIE Aggressor better, i would like a sensor slot for Passive Sensors especially to make better use of missiles though that would overlap with the Assault Gunboat.
With a Sensor slot, you could potentially run Howlrunner with three Seiner Specialists w/ FCS, Ion Cannon Turret and VTG, and an Academy pilot for a blocker. Once you establish locks, the Aggressors will have two rerolls on primary and one reroll on secondary. Might be gross, but might not as establishing lock at I2 isn't super easy.
1 hour ago, 5050Saint said:With a Sensor slot, you could potentially run Howlrunner with three Seiner Specialists w/ FCS, Ion Cannon Turret and VTG, and an Academy pilot for a blocker. Once you establish locks, the Aggressors will have two rerolls on primary and one reroll on secondary. Might be gross, but might not as establishing lock at I2 isn't super easy.
Seems like 4 really squishy ships that want to joust.
13 minutes ago, ClassicalMoser said:Seems like 4 really squishy ships that want to joust.
5. If they focus an Aggressor, they're ignoring Howl. If they focus Howl, they are ignoring 3 Ion shots and 4 regular shots. Probably not great, but not great is par for the course for an Aggressor currently. So no harm in giving it a Sensor slot, I guess. It was what I suggested in my Fall 2019 points change article, so I think I have to agree with @Woorloog on principle.
3 minutes ago, 5050Saint said:5. If they focus an Aggressor, they're ignoring Howl. If they focus Howl, they are ignoring 3 Ion shots and 4 regular shots. Probably not great, but not great is par for the course for an Aggressor currently. So no harm in giving it a Sensor slot, I guess. It was what I suggested in my Fall 2019 points change article, so I think I have to agree with @Woorloog on principle.
Why not just drop it to 25, 26, 28, 29?
It’s basically just a less maneuverable torrent or a less punchy Scyk. Basically, when you get to that point it becomes much easier to fit them as beefy blockers or cheap little missile/turret spammers.
Also I think missiles should generally be cheaper (at least ion, cluster, and concussion) and Dorsal should be 2. 1-2 points sometimes goes a really long way.
8 minutes ago, ClassicalMoser said:Why not just drop it to 25, 26, 28, 29?
It’s basically just a less maneuverable torrent or a less punchy Scyk.
Honestly, because I thought the base Aggressor cost was at 25 points. You could even dip the uniques even more and no one would notice. I will disagree that they are less maneuverable than a Torrent, but more comparably maneuverable for different reasons. But nevertheless, I agree in the price dip.
2 hours ago, ClassicalMoser said:Why not just drop it to 25, 26, 28, 29?
It’s basically just a less maneuverable torrent or a less punchy Scyk. Basically, when you get to that point it becomes much easier to fit them as beefy blockers or cheap little missile/turret spammers.
Also I think missiles should generally be cheaper (at least ion, cluster, and concussion) and Dorsal should be 2. 1-2 points sometimes goes a really long way.
1 hour ago, 5050Saint said:Honestly, because I thought the base Aggressor cost was at 25 points. You could even dip the uniques even more and no one would notice. I will disagree that they are less maneuverable than a Torrent, but more comparably maneuverable for different reasons. But nevertheless, I agree in the price dip.
<sees above posts> <looks at availability of ship in question to be purchased> <shakes head sadly>
1 hour ago, 5050Saint said:So no harm in giving it a Sensor slot, I guess.
Other than the fact that the Gunboat now pretty much doesn't have a reason to exist.
1 hour ago, ClassicalMoser said:Also I think missiles should generally be cheaper (at least ion, cluster, and concussion) and Dorsal should be 2. 1-2 points sometimes goes a really long way.
I'm starting to think Dorsal Turret should be 0 points (Ion @ 2 or 3), but every ship with a turret slot goes up 2-3 points.
//
I'll generalize this: the only changes FFG should consider making to TIE Aggressors should be to lean harder into turrets.
18 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:I'm starting to think Dorsal Turret should be 0 points (Ion @ 2 or 3), but every ship with a turret slot goes up 2-3 points.
I like it being a viable choice, it’s just too hard to take right now. Honestly I think most non-mod slots should be filled about 50% of the time. Currently elites and sensors are seeing much more and cannons, missiles, etc. are seeing much less. To me that means decreasing some upgrades and increasing some chassis (though admittedly some like AB and possibly homing/concussion don’t need much help).