10 hours ago, FastWalker said:

Special Forces Tie Fighters would like a word with you.

LWF were stapled on TieSF in 1.0. In 2.0, FFG has NO business bringing it back. I love my TieSF babies. But LWF would destroy the balance FFG has given us with 2.0.

If they brought it back, you'd need a detriment. My suggestion would be that the first 2 damage cards are exposed when you take damage because lightweight = more easily damaged. Use charges to track the hits. Price by agility: a few points for single agility (Punisher, Reaper, Brute), moderate points for 2 agility (Bomber, Striker, Aggressor, SF), and super steep pricing for 3 agility.

13 hours ago, 5050Saint said:

If they brought it back, you'd need a detriment. My suggestion would be that the first 2 damage cards are exposed when you take damage because lightweight = more easily damaged. Use charges to track the hits. Price by agility: a few points for single agility (Punisher, Reaper, Brute), moderate points for 2 agility (Bomber, Striker, Aggressor, SF), and super steep pricing for 3 agility.

Wouldn't the fact that Lightweight Frame only works when the opponent is rolling more attack dice than you have defense dice already make it less useful for 3 agility ships?

On 8/3/2020 at 10:11 AM, svelok said:

pretty much every time someone wants a 1.0 card back

What if we just brought back Expose?

10 hours ago, Lysus said:

Wouldn't the fact that Lightweight Frame only works when the opponent is rolling more attack dice than you have defense dice already make it less useful for 3 agility ships?

Range 1 attacks and missiles/torps are a thing.

The way mods and such work would make these ships extremely hard to hurt without spending a mod offensively, like 4 red vs 4 green with a focus is 0 damage 3 out of 4 shots, while its 0 damage 60% of the time and averages out to .5 damage a shot, rather than .3

Even double modding a 4 dice attack you still only do an average of 1.3 damage. Your basic TIE goes from taking 2.2 double modded attacks to pop, with a 5% chance to pop on the first attack, to 3.1 attacks, which means generally a full extra attack, and their 1 in 25 chance of dying to a single double mod goes down to 1%. Vs a single mod 4 dice attack, you go from 3.3 attacks, to 5.1, which is absolutely a titanic shift. For perspective, assuming you never shot more than once a turn, that means a random TIE/Ln takes more shots to kill than a VCX.

X-wing gets kinda... terrible when a very agile, manuverable, and underpriced ship also gains the ability to require inordinate amounts of focus fire to kill. Attacks feel better when someone generally (but doesn't always, you want the defender to feel a thrill rolling too!) do something. Once you get to very high defense values, even in limited windows like range 1 vs a 3 dice attacker (especially because to push damage on a TIE single modded you kinda want range 1 ANYWAY because range 2 vs no defensive mod with a focus your taking 3.33 turns average to kill it, and with a defensive mod your looking at 6 turns, so its never really in your advantage to not be at range 1 even vs this upgrade), ships become stupidly unfun, compared to a similar ship with lots of health.

While this upgrade wouldn't be that good without focus, it creates a scenario where every random 3 defense TIE basically can't die unless two arcs willing to spend focus are on it at once for multiple turns. Not a great place for the game to go. You could fix this by making range 2 better, so that it actively becomes a value loss when your opponent isn't pushing to 4 dice vs you (As once you defensively mod its basically is as good as always being at range 2 where it is very hard to hurt you with an initial attack), but that is hard to thematically justify in a way that also is conveyed by the card (Like I could imagine overcharged thrusters make you better at evading close up but make it easier for the ship to track you at range, for example. No idea how to name it to make it clear that is happening) and still isn't great unless the downside was big and made it a full blown Dynamic where the TIE is getting the reward of a range 1 shot while their opponent doesn't, but if they go to range 2 they pop super hard.

11 hours ago, Lysus said:

Wouldn't the fact that Lightweight Frame only works when the opponent is rolling more attack dice than you have defense dice already make it less useful for 3 agility ships?

Yes. But when you do get 4 dice, it would be abyssmal to fire against this ship. Every Interceptor or Baron getting Fenn Rau levels of defense dice at range 1 is unwelcome. You could write its wording so that the 3 agility TIEs couldn't take it, but is seems simpler to price it exorbitantly and save text space. The only problem child that I see for this upgrade is Phantoms. Whisper does not need to be harder to hit. Certainly the risk of the first two hit cards getting exposed is big, but folks would need to get past the the upped agility and the shields. You could always fix that by taking away the mod slot which is largely unused, though.

every TIE ace is fenn rau?

I didn't want to talk too much about Lightweight Frame because I assumed most people would agree it's a very dangerous upgrade in 2e, but has anyone talking about LWF here actually read the card lately?

LWF added one extra die when there would be more attack dice than defence dice, but could not be equipped on any ship with agility 3 or higher.

What that means is that it turns the Punisher and Reaper into 2 agility ships 95% of the time (unless a Depleted / Weapons Failure Crit 2 dice ship attacks it), and Strikers, Bombers, Phantoms and TIE/sfs into "2.5" agility ships. 2 Agility vs 2 dice attacks, 3 agility vs 3+ red dice.

That's really strong as is. But consider that in 2e the Phantom has a mod slot it's barely using since Stygium became a ship ability....

It's not a 2e card. No way. @svelok can I get a Michael Scott or General Hux gif up in here?

EDIT: Well, I timed that well 😄

11 minutes ago, 5050Saint said:

You could write its wording so that the 3 agility TIEs couldn't take it, but is seems simpler to price it exorbitantly and save text space.

Are we paying for our upgrade cards by the letter now?

Who cares about saving text space? Just outright bar it on 3 agility ships to avoid breaking anything and leave it as is.

On 8/5/2020 at 2:46 PM, 5050Saint said:

My suggestion would be that the first 2 damage cards are exposed when you take damage because lightweight = more easily damaged.

I like the feel, but honestly I don't think that's a strong enough detriment to balance just how good LWF is.

You'll block way more attacks altogether with the extra agility. Crits happen to TIEs anyway.

25 minutes ago, GuacCousteau said:

Are we paying for our upgrade cards by the letter now?

Who cares about saving text space? Just outright bar it on 3 agility ships to avoid breaking anything and leave it as is.

I acknowledge it is just my preference, but one just seems cleaner than the other. I used the text from the 1st Edition restriction "You cannot equip this card if your agility value is 3 or more". Likely that could be shortened to "1 or 2 agility only", but then you'd have rules lawyers arguing that a 3 agility ship has 2 agility. Just skip the whole rigmarole and simply price it stupid high for the 3 agility ships that can take it.

32 minutes ago, GuacCousteau said:

I like the feel, but honestly I don't think that's a strong enough detriment to balance just how good LWF is.

You'll block way more attacks altogether with the extra agility. Crits happen to TIEs anyway.

The 1 die ships wouldn't be unbalanced with LWF, so I'm gonna assume you mean the 2 agility ships. The Aggressor and Bomber would likely be fine. The Striker could get dodgey, but not unbalanced dodgey in my assessment as crits would hamper them immediately. Pure Sabacc would love to get more than one powerup shot off. The Phantom and the SF seem to be the most enabled by the upgrade. The Phantom could easily have the mod slot dropped. The SF is the one ship were balance might be a problem.

why do strikers and phantoms need more agility????

Cripes. Whisper with LWF, even if it gave you all face up damage once shields were down, even if you only got the extra die if your opponent had 3 hits and not just 3 dice... Yeah, that'd be we don't need.

LWF just shouldn't exist in 2e.

4 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

LWF just shouldn't exist in 2e.

Thank you.

I always get irked when i see a post asking, sometimes demanding, certain 1.0 abilities or upgrades return to 2.0.

1.0 is still playable with TLT, GhostFenn, Harpoon missiles, and whatnot. For me, no thanks. I'm still suffering PTSD from 1.0.

FFG will resurrect some. But only a shadow of their former form.

In the meantime, let the past (1.0) die. Kill it if you have to.

14 minutes ago, FastWalker said:

FFG will resurrect some. But only a shadow of their former form.

I'm very concerned about the return of Thread Tracers, and now with 2 charges.

I'm not sure how it's worded, but at least it's an ATTACK [Lock] instead of ATTACK [Focus]. Still, I would rather see it as something that works like Probe Droids than something that works like 1.0 Thread Tracers 😕

Not that I don't want low-initiative missiles to be good. Of course I want low-initiative missiles to be good. But I'm not convinced that this is the way.

17 minutes ago, ClassicalMoser said:

I'm very concerned about the return of Thread Tracers, and now with 2 charges.

I'm not sure how it's worded, but at least it's an ATTACK [Lock] instead of ATTACK [Focus]. Still, I would rather see it as something that works like Probe Droids than something that works like 1.0 Thread Tracers 😕

Not that I don't want low-initiative missiles to be good. Of course I want low-initiative missiles to be good. But I'm not convinced that this is the way.

Thread tracers on the any Inquisitor sounds particularly dangerous to me. You can drop Jendon at that point. We'll needs to see what the card text actually says, but if it is anywhere near similar to 1st Ed, things could get harsh.

2 hours ago, FastWalker said:

Thank you.

I always get irked when i see a post asking, sometimes demanding, certain 1.0 abilities or upgrades return to 2.0.

1.0 is still playable with TLT, GhostFenn, Harpoon missiles, and whatnot. For me, no thanks. I'm still suffering PTSD from 1.0.

FFG will resurrect some. But only a shadow of their former form.

In the meantime, let the past (1.0) die. Kill it if you have to.

There's a few things that could safely come back... but mostly stuff that never got played in 1e. My pick is Countermeasures.

Anything good and common and impactful? Yeah, nope. There's no wisdom in 1e that we don't already posses.

On 8/4/2020 at 4:45 AM, GuacCousteau said:

As a final thought on astros in general, I do wish they were seen as more of a necessity on the ships that can take them. It pains me a little seeing X-Wing builds usually leave the astro slot empty. I wish there was a 'default' astro that did something incredibly minimal and trade off driven for zero points, just because the ships are supposed to have astros in them. I think R4 comes closest to being a default for the astro slot, and that there's sort of an argument that the X-Wing dial is 'supposed' to have those blue turns, FFG just portioned that off into an upgrade card to try and encourage you to take astromechs.

This also bothers me, and I have to head-canon that they actually do have astromechs, they’re just ultra basic ones that don’t have any special abilities beyond calculating hyperspace stuff.

Im all for it. Price it a little high and if its still oppressively good raise it again. isnt that the whole point of fluid points updates?

On 8/6/2020 at 1:57 AM, PhantomFO said:

What if we just brought back Expose?

They already did.

On 8/3/2020 at 1:32 PM, GuacCousteau said:

. I'm guessing that no one except Striker and TIE Bomber players want to see Lightweight Frame come back, though, so let's talk about T.I.E MkII

Actually the idea of having the AA move green with the banks on Duchess and possibly shedding 2 stress in one turn sounds quite good.

On 8/6/2020 at 5:11 PM, svelok said:

why do strikers and phantoms need more agility????

Strikers actually should be 3 agility.
4 hps and no linked focus/evade make them die pretty fast.

9 hours ago, Hiemfire said:

They already did.

And they liked it so much they made a whole chassis worth of L'ulo!

On 8/15/2020 at 6:06 PM, Arma Quattro said:

Strikers actually should be 3 agility.
4 hps and no linked focus/evade make them die pretty fast.

But that's why we get them so cheap! I wouldn't have it any other way. Please don't change it.

What if LWF was a tie version of Reinforced Deflectors?

Lightweight frame: Lose 1 hull, and if an attack rolls more dice, than your agility, roll an extra green die.

3 hours ago, Rakaydos said:

What if LWF was a tie version of Reinforced Deflectors?

Lightweight frame: Lose 1 hull, and if an attack rolls more dice, than your agility, roll an extra green die.

I still don't want LWF, but if it were to exist, it should be based on the hits/crits the opponent has, rather than the dice. Like, an oppoent rolls Blank/Blank/Hit, you shouldn't get an extra green die.

4 hours ago, Rakaydos said:

Lightweight frame: Lose 1 hull, and if an attack rolls more dice, than your agility, roll an extra green die.

Math is complicated and hard to express, so I can show my work if people need to, but that sorta is weird because it pushes the upgrade to a point where for 2 dice defenders who are focused, it is an absurd level of damage resistance for the first attack against you, but if you get focused down your still not actually not in much of a worse spot TTK wise anyway.

Basically would be a nighmare vs Whisper, who is a massive design limiter in a lot of ways in terms of any potential defensive buff that could go in any slot they could equip, to the point where it may be time to kneecap them, as Whisper broke a LOT of stuff over the course of their existence. VS Whisper on uncloaked turns with Lightweight frame would result in an average first show damage with 3 focused attack dice of... .17, and follow up attacks of 1.2, as opposed to .57 and 1.5 respectively. Whisper would basically be unkillable 1v1 even after being severely wounded, and with how cagey they are it just... wouldn't be fun at all.

33 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

I still don't want LWF, but if it were to exist, it should be based on the hits/crits the opponent has, rather than the dice. Like, an oppoent rolls Blank/Blank/Hit, you shouldn't get an extra green die.

It is interesting as a hypothetical 'damage overflow protection' mechanic vs TIEs, but one of the weaknesses of TIEs is supposed to be that they can pop very easily after a bad turn, like if Vader accidently ends up in 1 too many gun arcs suddenly he goes from not expecting any damage to probably taking over half their health in one attack and potentially dying, which helps keep them fun to fight even though they are really powerful, so I am not sure it would be ideal. A lot of the negativity towards Boba, Jedi, and Droids is how annoying it is to land serious hits on them despite them making mistakes, and while the limit that it requires a good attack to kick in helps ensure you generally do some damage I don't think mechanics that just give unilateral defensive power without requiring setup are ideal. Even 'be in 1 range 1' turned out to be a biiiiit too easy to be fun to fight for most people who aren't at a tournament.

1 hour ago, dezzmont said:

It is interesting as a hypothetical 'damage overflow protection' mechanic vs TIEs, but one of the weaknesses of TIEs is supposed to be that they can pop very easily after a bad turn, like if Vader accidently ends up in 1 too many gun arcs suddenly he goes from not expecting any damage to probably taking over half their health in one attack and potentially dying, which helps keep them fun to fight even though they are really powerful, so I am not sure it would be ideal

I mean, I agree, and LWF shouldn't be in 2e.

All I'm saying is I'd want the effect to be nerfed to "If the enemy has more hits/crits than you have defense dice, you may add 1 die" before even considering--and rejecting--2e LWF.