5 minutes ago, Formynder4 said:

The attack step happens before the maneuver step. That's all that phrase means.

So the second attack isn’t considered as occurring “during the attack step.” I can see that logic though think the card’s wording could be improved.

(E.g., ”... can perform a second attack after...” or “perform an attack after...”)

So can demo title now only ever attack once per round? Or only when it uses its ability to attack after it moves?

Also yeah wtf no liberty adjustment?! 😑🤨

*outrage

6 minutes ago, Uncrustable said:

So can demo title now only ever attack once per round? Or only when it uses its ability to attack after it moves?

Once per “attack step” (before maneuver step) and once after the maneuver step if it chooses. Thanks go to @Formynder4 and @Grumbleduke for the explanations above.

not sure who was the driving force here, developers or playtesters. Would be very interesting to know how these things work, is there a panel of player-playtesters saying we dont like x, and the developers go along? Or do devs say find a way for y cause it has to change? Who decides what changes and what stays the same?

I am fine with a lot, but for my life I cant understand why pass tokens are needed. Slicer was really such a problem? For whom? And good old Mon Karren wasnt winning one tournament after another.

Anyways, I dont mind a more tricky resource management overall and I look forward to play. But pass, really? Have the big ships fared so badly?

11 minutes ago, NebulonB said:

not sure who was the driving force here, developers or playtesters. Would be very interesting to know how these things work, is there a panel of player-playtesters saying we dont like x, and the developers go along? Or do devs say find a way for y cause it has to change? Who decides what changes and what stays the same?

I am fine with a lot, but for my life I cant understand why pass tokens are needed. Slicer was really such a problem? For whom? And good old Mon Karren wasnt winning one tournament after another.

Anyways, I dont mind a more tricky resource management overall and I look forward to play. But pass, really? Have the big ships fared so badly?

I think the pass token stuff was them trying to find a way to get rid of Strategic Advisor/Pryce/Bail without sending large ships back to being unusable again.

13 hours ago, NebulonB said:

Slicer was really such a problem? For whom?

Maybe that has more to do with the new factions and the fact that they have ships other than flotillas that can equip them? Maybe they thought that would be a problem or it was discovered in playtesting that it would be. Not everything that changes has to have been a problem in the past it may be considered to be a problem in the future.

not sure if a Hawk is unusable, but admittedly I dont had several months of seeing it all working in context. Time will tell, looking forward to it.

11 hours ago, Triangular said:

Yavaris

SQ: Each squadron you activate may choose to only attack during your activation. If it does, while attacking, it may add 1 die to its attack pool of a color already in its attack pool

Hahahahaha yes. Looks like ffg is finally cracking down on squadron bs

15 minutes ago, Flengin said:

I think the pass token stuff was them trying to find a way to get rid of Strategic Advisor/Pryce/Bail without sending large ships back to being unusable again.

I suspect it was less about getting rid of them, and more about trying again to fix the problem they were an attempted solution to; activation advantage. They tried fixing it by limiting to 2 flotillas, but that just meant almost every competitive list had two flotillas in. They tried with SA - but that just meant almost every large ship list had to "waste" an officer slot on SA (and you had SA-SA match-ups). Bail didn't get much use, and Pryce created the monster of Imperial 2-ship, but was probably the closest to a solution for the Empire.

I think if they'd wanted to fix SA, Pryce and Bail they would have modified those cards; changing the point costs, changing the mechanisms a bit, maybe requiring a token to refresh SA. But instead they went back to the original problem of activation advantage and tried something different, which they had seen kind of work with the SSD.

Hmm. With pass tokens, does this mean we might go back to more than 2 flotillas? I suspect not, as flotilla spam is boring, but it might not be quite as necessary in a world with pass tokens.

1 hour ago, NebulonB said:

not sure who was the driving force here, developers or playtesters. Would be very interesting to know how these things work, is there a panel of player-playtesters saying we dont like x, and the developers go along? Or do devs say find a way for y cause it has to change? Who decides what changes and what stays the same?

Anyone who could tell you would be violating an NDA if they did.

At least now as a primarily rebel player but I do dabble in imperials a little bit. I can now get the cards that were locked behind the SSD paywall.

I had hoped expanded launchers might of got a points reduction as it’s the most expensive upgrade in the game. But apparently not As it is not often seen used in the game.

1 hour ago, XR8rGREAT said:

I had hoped expanded launchers might of got a points reduction as it’s the most expensive upgrade in the game. But apparently not As it is not often seen used in the game.

Honestly in a player hand who knows they will use it at least twice a game. I think expanded launchers is kinda tempting with the change to evade and black Crit cards, don't want to depend on crits just moar damage. It does have to compete with exracks, but if you can get two front attack with it I think it can be worth thr points even at that price point.

5 hours ago, Rmcarrier1 said:

So the second attack isn’t considered as occurring “during the attack step.” I can see that logic though think the card’s wording could be improved.

(E.g., ”... can perform a second attack after...” or “perform an attack after...”)

I agree, the wording of the new Demolisher card could definitely be improved. The card should say that it can execute its second attack after its maneuver to clarify that it can't attack only once.

Upon my first reading, I panicked and thought, "Can Demolisher only attack once per activation? That's crazy!"

Then I realized that when Demolisher uses its ability, its Attack Step has always been been uniquely divided in two with its optional maneuver in-between. Now it appears that the maneuver isn't optional: It either executes its second attack after it moves or it just doesn't attack a second time during its activation.

I heard the rumours that Demolisher was getting nerfed, but out of all the possibilities, I think this is the most tame.

5 hours ago, geek19 said:

Anyone who could tell you would be violating an NDA if they did.

this is not a question regarding individual persons and their opinions, this is about how these things are set up in general. Its an intriguing thing to me, the question who makes the call on *what* will be changed. *How* it will be changed is secondary.

9 minutes ago, NebulonB said:

this is not a question regarding individual persons and their opinions, this is about how these things are set up in general. Its an intriguing thing to me, the question who makes the call on *what* will be changed. *How* it will be changed is secondary.

I believe “how these things are set up in general” is a major component of the NDA. I don’t believe play testers are allowed to discuss the process at all.

I dont necessarily believe that I get an answer, but it does not necessarily make me not curious about it. I might be the only one, admittedly.

I thought Commander Leia also got a points reduction?

7 minutes ago, Jamborinio said:

I thought Commander Leia also got a points reduction?

Yes. Spoiled a long while back. -10 pts

So do we know what is happening to strat advisor/gov pryce/bail org? Banned? Legal still? Complete change thay we don't know of just yet?

10 minutes ago, Uncrustable said:

So do we know what is happening to strat advisor/gov pryce/bail org? Banned? Legal still? Complete change thay we don't know of just yet?

We don't know for sure (and won't until the new Rules come out), but based on interviews etc. they are banned, but might re-appear eventually in a new form.

Wanted to let these sink in for a few days. Overall, I'm very disappointed with this "1.5" upgrade pack.

On the one hand, the vast majority of cards were left as-is, leaving a lot of bad upgrades still quite bad. Even Home One, the most iconic Rebel command ship, wasn't improved to add a few hull points (it's much bigger than most MC80s) or a Fleet Command Slot or anything? This is a disappointing release for binder-fodder cards, as they still have no reason to leave the binder. Also puzzling is how some dominant cards, like Intel Officer or Toryn Farr, have not been touched by these changes?

On the other hand, the stuff that did get changed was mostly an across-the-board penalization to black die ships. Did the devs and/or playtesters pushing these changes have some sort of axe to grind against torpedoes or something? Did the tournament data really support that MC30s, MC75s, Hammerheads, Raiders, and Gladiators were the overly dominant meta ships (ie, the only ships warranting debuffs in this 1.5 soft update)? I suppose if these changes were settled on 4 years ago, when MSU, Demo, and Admo were king, maybe these make sense? But that's been a hot second of quite a few meta shifts. Curiously, the Demolisher title change is odd... it was arguably the most degenerate upgrade in the game (allowing the ship to violate the basic flow of combat timing), and it's barely been affected by its change. It now can go back to shooting after an Engine Tech move (a pretty substantial re-buff), but it has to shoot once before and once after moving, which in practice isn't very different from how the ship already functioned?

Looks like the best way to kill ships in this game will remain as either Squadrons, Star Destroyers, or a combination of the two. No wonder Miniature Market's only Black Friday sale for Armada stuff was the MC30 expansion pack 🤣

There's a lot of changes to think about, but one thing that I've noticed is that FFG seems to want tokens to be a critical feature instead of a supporting element to the game. I don't really like that black dice brawlers got hit hard by the changes.

8 minutes ago, Piratical Moustache said:

There's a lot of changes to think about, but one thing that I've noticed is that FFG seems to want tokens to be a critical feature instead of a supporting element to the game. I don't really like that black dice brawlers got hit hard by the changes.

EST Mothma MC30s should do fine.

I have a feeling the reason why "binder-fodder" cards weren't touched was because neither the devs nor the playtesters even tried to use them in the 1.5 upgrade test.

16 minutes ago, Sybreed said:

I have a feeling the reason why "binder-fodder" cards weren't touched was because neither the devs nor the playtesters even tried to use them in the 1.5 upgrade test.

When the top cards are nerfed the poor cards become relatively better. Perhaps consider testing the new game before declaring everything to be awful?