21 minutes ago, dezzmont said:

There is the issue where this limits the design space still of putting 'ace pilots' at I5 and I6. And it is weird in cases where I5 and I6 characters aren't ace pilots. Obi-Wan is a fantastic example, as lore wise he is downright an 'anti-ace.'

Well... Crap, you're right. Leia as well. Hmmm.

This discussion just got that much more difficult.

IMHO, Ace means someone who can leverage extremely well a high initiative value . Mostly mobility, but somewhat also offense and defense. It's also related to cost. If an ace is too inefficiently priced, that's not really leveraging their Init well, is it?

• Rebel Han , but not Scum Han , since Scum Han doesn't have the firepower to leverage high Init.
• Lando , but not Rear Admiral Chiraneau , because RAC doesn't have the mobility to leverage high Init. Meanwhile, RAC's offense is good, but not out-of-proportion to his cost.
• Rebel Fenn Rau doesn't have the mobility or firepower. His coordinate doesn't go far enough to be ace-like. To that end, someone like Jan Ors is a support, not an ace.
• Wedge is, but Thane isn't, because Wedge is higher Init and has an extra step more firepower (but more properly, I'd call Wedge or Quickdraw an Ace-Killer than a true Ace). Likewise, Maarek Stele /x1 or Bomber Tomax Brenn aren't quite aces, since they just doesn't leverage that I5 hard enough.
  • Some of that is defense for the three "not an ace" here. None of them can really turn that i5 into strong defense while having good offense.
• Norra doesn't have the offense or mobility and her defenses are too passive (someone can just ignore her, or attack her from range), and someone like Y-Wing Anakin ... hrm... he's maybe a bit gray, but I'm leaning no. Strong offense enabled by high initiative, but... eh... I don't think he really makes it. Like, his cost is high enough that his offense needs to be stronger than it is to qualify as an ace for me.
  • Norra's good , but she's just not an ace . Being an ace and being good aren't the same thing. I mean, I3 Norra would probably be just about as good as now. I3 Wedge or Soontir Fel? Not so much.
• Some I4s are baby-aces, IMHO. Skull Fangs and FOTP Silencers and Pentaxian Arena Nantex stand out. They've only Init 4, but they make the most out of that Init 4. Highly mobile, and able to leverage that mobility and initiative into strong offense and defense for their cost. Like, you can't just be an OK i4 to be a baby-ace ( Rogue E-Wings or Braylen or Ten Nunb aren't), but if you have a lot of strong ace-tools, I kinda think some few I4s can mostly count.

23 minutes ago, dezzmont said:

There is the issue where this limits the design space still of putting 'ace pilots' at I5 and I6. And it is weird in cases where I5 and I6 characters aren't ace pilots. Obi-Wan is a fantastic example, as lore wise he is downright an 'anti-ace.'

I keep gravitating to the idea that low initiative should shoot first. Then initiative is about how *fast* they are.

• Han and Kylo are quick and impulsive. Move First, Shoot First.
• Soontir is patient, and Fenn Rau is daring--waiting through incoming fire for the perfect shot. Move last, shoot last.
• Luke is probably in the middle, likewise Academy Pilots.

If Initiative is more of a trade-off, and less about "higher = better" it might be easier to have strong pilots all across the initiative range.

But that's a concept for 3e.

3 minutes ago, ClassicalMoser said:

Leia as well. Hmmm.

I don't know that Leia is canonically a bad pilot, but I still like her at I5, since she's the most quick-thinking and clear-headed one of the movie-mains.

5 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

Some I4s are baby-aces, IMHO. Skull Fangs and FOTP Silencers and Pentaxian Arena Nantex stand out. They've only Init 4, but they make the most out of that Init 4. Highly mobile, and able to leverage that mobility and initiative into strong offense and defense for their cost. Like, you can't just be an OK i4 to be a baby-ace ( Rogue E-Wings aren't), but if you have a lot of strong ace-tools, I kinda think some few I4s can mostly count.

Some I4 definitely qualify. Echo would be the best example. Colonel Vessery, Countess Ryad, Prince Xizor, and SViper Dalan Oberos would all likely apply, but they are likely filed under cost prohibitive I4 Aces.

5th Bro, 7th Sis, and Major Vynder are all edge cases, but in the wording of the questionnaire (no upgrades) they all lean more towards not-Ace. Snap, Kaz, Ember, Kad, and Mace all lean towards the same category as the Skulls and FOTPs as marginal aces..

Rush is the quirkiest example of an ace, being 100% not an ace at game-start, then 100% an ace after dropping 3 health.

1 hour ago, theBitterFig said:

Ace means someone who can leverage extremely well a high initiative value

By this definition, RAC and Rebel Fenn (and many others not normally considered “aces”) would be considered aces.

RAC gets perfect information for his reinforce or other action Choice (including I5 coordinate), with blockability mitigated by the Dauntless title.

Scum Han has Greedo and Hotshot going for him, as well as I6 large-base boost, which is exactly why he’s the only scum YT ever flown.

Rebel Fenn is an I6 coordinate. If that’s not getting mileage from initiative I don’t know what is.

And what about VCX Hera? Would she ever be flown at a lower initiative? She EXCELS at I5, but few would define her as an Ace.

You somewhere implied that “support” doesn’t count as an Ace, but you failed to define any meaningful distinction.

Honestly I think you also would agree with the quite astute earlier definition of an Ace as something optimized for soloing multiple generics in an endgame situation. This actually is a definition that encompasses leveraging high-initiative and rules out support pieces, but not to the absolute exclusion of I4 or some tank builds.

46 minutes ago, 5050Saint said:

Rush is the quirkiest example of an ace, being 100% not an ace at game-start, then 100% an ace after dropping 3 health.

Especially that he has now the possibility of getting his calc token early out of his card because he can carry automated target priority. Same as Null. That gives him a BIG buff. At least he cannot add pattern analyser AND ATP.

1 hour ago, ClassicalMoser said:

Leia as well

Leia is apparently a fairly fantastic pilot in the EU, but we don't see it often.

New EU made a point of not having every major character also be a pilot, and made 'ace pilot' a bit more specialized, but I think she is still really good there too. A big problem though is the usage of the term 'ace' combined with the fact a lot of characters who are really good pilots get put at I5 makes it weird any time we see a character at I5 or I6 we don't consider a specialized pilot.

Like yeah sure, you can tell me that initiative is no longer pilot skill so its not weird that Obi Wan is I5, but its 100% still pilot skill and its weird that Obi Wan is I5 when that makes him behave almost identically to Anakin in play.

Quote

If Initiative is more of a trade-off, and less about "higher = better" it might be easier to have strong pilots all across the initiative range.

But that's a concept for 3e.

I mean they could do it in 2e too, and equalize the prices for low and high initiative. It might make generic swarms not a thing and helps solve the 'I4 pilots get taxed for initiative they generally don't use' problem. Probably a bit too radical, but its possible.

Quote

By this definition, RAC and Rebel Fenn (and many others not normally considered “aces”) would be considered aces.

I have a strong shadowrun background so I am super skeptical of 'genre' based definitions. This is why: People often try to define them in ways that they aren't used, which means that definition is incorrect.

If you say that aces represent any late game piece, more power to you, but the point of words is to convey meaning between two people. Trying to apply linguistical prescriptivism here is going to result in failure because it matters way less what you think SHOULD be an ace and way more what people perceive as aces.

19 minutes ago, ClassicalMoser said:

By this definition, RAC and Rebel Fenn (and many others not normally considered “aces”) would be considered aces.

Rebel Fenn is an I6 coordinate. If that’s not getting mileage from initiative I don’t know what is.

See, when was the last time you saw Rebel Fenn leverage his coordinate well enough to actually win games and form the backbone of a winning list?

I'll tell you the last time I saw such a thing. First Edition.

I reject any gotcha "but by your own definition" stuff.

There's enough room to fudge results with "leverage extremely well."

RAC, Hera... they've got that 5, but do they go above and beyond what a 5 should be able to do because their ship design and pilot abilities let them go above and beyond what a 5 should be able to do? I kinda don't think they do.

I'm not necessarily saying it's a great set of rules for anyone else to follow to determine what an ace is. Probably isn't perfect. But it's how I focus my own thinking.

Anyhow, as to support not being an ace... thinking about it, I kinda think there's probably a degree of independence required to be an ace. Like, if a ship can't function on it's own--not solo a list on it's own, but simply do it's job without a dedicated helper--then I don't think it can really be an ace. Maarek Stele with coordinate help is a BEAST. Had a really fun game ages back with Maarek/Vader/Feroph, and when someone is tossing him a free Focus, he's lights-out. Flipside, someone like Jan Ors can't handle her business on her own. She could help just about anyone, but can't really work alone. While folks like Vader or Soontir have often had support and that makes them better, if deprived of support, they can still get stuff done.

16 minutes ago, dezzmont said:

I mean they could do it in 2e too, and equalize the prices for low and high initiative. It might make generic swarms not a thing and helps solve the 'I4 pilots get taxed for initiative they generally don't use' problem. Probably a bit too radical, but its possible.

I don't think they could in 2e, since all the named pilots are already high Init. I think for it to be fun, you'd need to have meaningful pilot abilities at every initiative level, and generic choices at various points on the spectrum.

15 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

See, when was the last time you saw Rebel Fenn leverage his coordinate well enough to actually win games and form the backbone of a winning list?

Counterpoint: If he was priced anything like the other Sheathipede pilots, he would be the only Sheathipede taken. He costs 56% more than AP-5, and it's for a good reason, because he actually is strong. The fact that he's morbidly overpriced is totally beside the point. Or is this definition dependent on cost as well as initiative?

On the other hand, I do concede that Jan Ors gets relatively little leverage out of her I5.

15 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

RAC, Hera... they've got that 5, but do they go above and beyond what a 5 should be able to do because their ship design and pilot abilities let them go above and beyond what a 5 should be able to do?

Okay now I don't just disagree with your definition but I 100% don't understand it. They're I5 pilots, and they're extremely good pilots, and I5 is an enormous part of what makes them so good. Soooo... I just have absolutely no idea what you're trying to say, unless it comes down to something pertaining to "Arc-Dodger" or "Endgame." But then, you do count Wedge. Why Wedge and not Hera?

Quote

I reject any gotcha "but by your own definition" stuff.

That's not the point. I'm trying to demonstrate the problem with your definition. In a thread where we're all trying to come up with a good definition, challenging every proposed definition is kind of the whole point, or so I thought. I don't like Gotcha either, I was just trying to say it's not a solid definition because it doesn't completely define the distinctions as you made them in your post. I would think "enough room to fudge results" is something you wouldn't want in a definition. Maybe I'm just totally barking up the wrong tree and you didn't mean it to be a solid definition that others could get mileage out of. I don't know.

I think Ace is such a vague term, as Ace is basically the best pilots for their respective chassis, and should be broken into sub categories. Arcdoger Ace, Fighter Ace, Jouster Ace, Support Ace. Like so:

Ace = i5 or i6

----Arcdodger = access to boost and barrel roll on action bar. Soontir, Scum Fenn, Kylo, Obi, etc.

----Fighter = 3+ attack dice Access to either Booster or Barrel roll in action bar. Han, Boba, etc.

----Jouster = 3+ attack dice. No access to reposition actions on action bar. Hera, RAC, etc.

----Support = 2 attack dice, May have repositioning. Rebel Fenn, Non title Jan HWK (title turns her into a Fighter).

Upgrades can bounce a ship around sub categories, like Moldy title on Jan makes her a fighter than just support. RAC with Jerrjerod boost could be categorized as Fighter, etc.