Following Yoshiyahu's advice, and reposting my remarks minus the "Armor 3 X-wing" thing...

Basically... what's up here? In the sense of why is it that the TIE/D Defender is actually worse than the TIE/LN both maneuverability-wise and speed-wise (in the latter it's also worse than the X-wing), much less the TIE Interceptor? Moreover, in return for its armament (two more laser cannons than a Y-wing) it's only a single-seater so it's only got a pilot who can take actions, whereas a BTL-S3 Y-wing's ion cannons are gunner-controlled and Fire Arc All, making the Y-wing more versatile in that sense, to say nothing of the astromech socket... seems like under this ruleset, a two-seater Y-wing can just plain "do more".

TL;DR : If this is somehow "working as intended"... then what's actually intended? Because it certainly doesn't reflect many players' impressions of what the TIE Defender is "supposed" to be lore-wise and how they would be utilized.

To nerf a sue so it doesn't overshadow the movie fighters.

I'm also somewhat perplexed by the stats given in the beta. If FFG's design intent was to simulate the ships established canon using the rules, the stats given for the TIE/D seem unfaithful to the source material. We're not just talking video games, here: we're talking about supplements, reference books (The Essential Guide to...), and novels.

Even if one doesn't accept the 'stats' given by previous RPG's or video games, there are some attributes that the TIE/D is known for in-universe, while the specifics vary from source to source.

For example, the TIE/D is supposed to be an extremely maneuverable craft with a top speed comparable to the TIE Interceptor or A-Wing (some sources say faster ), four laser cannons, two ion cannons, shields, torpedo/missile tubes, and a hyperdrive.

That's not really what's being represented in the stats we've seen so far.

That said, if FFG's intent was for Imperial starfighters to follow the Minion, Rival, Nemesis formula, (as some very astute forum posters have suggested) it would make sense for the TIE/ln to be the minion, the TIE Interceptor to be the Rival, and the TIE Avenger or TIE Defender to serve the Nemesis role.

That 'design' perspective doesn't make much sense either, though, given that there is no TIE Avenger/Advanced x1 in the beta, and the TIE/D as presented is less maneuverable, slower, and only marginally more survivable than The TIE Interceptor that it was supposed to replace. At 300,000 per unit, the TIE/D is also six times more expensive than a standard TIE/ln, and it's heavy attack mission is already more than covered by the much cheaper TIE Bomber. Given the stats that it has now, there's literally no reason for it to exist in Universe. Maybe that was the point, but it seems like a waste of ink.

All that to say, I agree with Chortles, and would also like to understand the design philosophy that led to the TIE/D being statted the way it is.

But yes, as with Yoshiyahu we'd like to see what FFG had in mind in making the TIE/D Defender worse than the frontline TIE/LN -- a 50,000 credits/rarity 4 fighter! -- in both Speed and Handling, much less the TIE Interceptor in Speed.

Me and some of the people I game with were thinking the speed should be 6 and up the handling abit but I also think one more shielding to the front as well. When I played x-wing alliance on the p.c one of the best feeling i got in that game was taking down a tie defender as you had to work hard. But also the fear I felt when facing one. but with the stats in this beta I do feel cheated of any of the feelings. I believe players should fear to face one and have to work hard to take one down. But they should never face more then one

I think maybe it is a " Monkey Model " for frontline imperial use. instead of a super duper prototype.

I think maybe it is a " Monkey Model " for frontline imperial use. instead of a super duper prototype.

Works for me.

I think maybe it is a " Monkey Model " for frontline imperial use. instead of a super duper prototype.

The problem is, where's the basis on which it's claimed to be an "export variant"-type model? I've never heard of a canonical source for this, much less that those depicted in TIE Fighter are merely a "super duper prototype" instead of the actual production fighters -- if anything, the prototypes depicted in Renegade Squadron are worse , and not in a way consistent with what's depicted in the AoR beta stat block anyway -- whereas multiple sources have the TIE Defender capabilities seen in TIE Fighter (i.e. " in many ways far superior to any other starfighter of the time ") as representative of the TIE Defender, period, thereby setting players' view of the AoR beta stat block as " underpowered "... there's no canon representation of it as slower than a TIE/LN, much less worse-handling!

I would also note that the designers have previously been clear about intended vision for elements like the "lack" of Jedi, the lack of an official Lightsaber skill for PCs, the specific setting of Edge of the Empire and Age of Rebellion , and so on, even in errata and individual answers to user questions about rules, and that the designers have clearly heeded player feedback on such elements as the X-wing's Armor and the Massive quality.

Therefore, I hope that it would not be too untoward for FFG to elaborate on where exactly the basis for the decision comes from for a stat block that's so divergent from the canon depictions of the TIE Defender (or rather, such a consistent element of them!) so noticeably, and I would hope that FFG would be willing to consider corresponding increases... at least to Speed 6 and Handling +3 as well.

P.S. To anyone reading this thread: please note that ErikB is on ignore and therefore I won't necessarily get the context of any ambiguous remarks that you may have meant to be in his direction.

I assume that, the Defender being in the beta, it's possible that changes might be made to it prior to rulebook release? Points like the above might be taken into consideration from these forums. Maybe.

In all honesty, I'm not too well-versed about the capabilities of the different Imperial fighters, so I couldn't make an educated comment or theorem regarding why stats are as they are. It's something I'd need to read up on first.

Perhaps they've not gotten around to it yet. Changes take time to kick through, so it could be scheduled for a future update; like, if they picked a few issues people brought up and went to work on them, rather than doing it by section? I can't say, not being an FFG employee, but perhaps that's why.

The only issue I have with the TIE Defender is easily rectified by increasing the speed to 6 and handling to +3.

The stats as is don't seem to represent the defender as presented in universe. The TIE/D was supposed to be the equivalent of 4 regular TIE's in terms of power.

I still believe that the defender should be an end boss equivalent of a fighter. It is a ship that strike fear into all but the best rebel pilots, because not only is it faster, better armed and equipped with shields, it has the best pilots of the imperial war machine. These pilots actually have names.

If Fantasy Flight wanted a TIE that was marginally better, I think they should remove the defender and put in the advanced. Change the weapons to a linked laser cannon and concussion missiles, keeping everything else the same and you have the TIE x1.

When thinking about the astromech slot kn rebel fighters you do get the equivalent of an extra character in a one man fighter. Get the droid to pilot and the 'pilor' to be a gunner. The y-wing could have two gunners effectively. I really like that idea. Y-wing with full crew equals rebel superfighter.

It's funny that people were all but screaming for the X-Wing to be nerfed, and now there's outcry that one of the most munchkin ships every introduced into the EU has itself gotten nerfed.

Strictly using video game performance is a horrific measuring stick when translating something into an RPG, as video games only care about providing an enjoyable experience for the one person playing that game and to reflect the PC as the "special snowflake" of that game. Case in point: Starkiller from Force Unleashed. There's no way he'd make a balanced PC in any Star Wars RPG, and yet he works just fine for the video games that he stars in.

As for the TIE Defender, it's main "selling points" are that it's tougher, actually has defensive shields, and has a hyperdrive and a broader weapons suite. And the AoR Beta stats have all three of those. True, it's listed Speed and Handling are one point less than the standard TIE fighter, which is not a deal-breaker by any means. But given that the TIE Defender didn't start rolling out until near the Battle of Endor (the tail end of the Rebellion Era in which these games are set), it's quite likely that this version of the TIE Defender is an earlier model, one that hasn't quite yet hit the high performance marks that later designs would (seeing as how this ship was used up into the Legacy Era (guessing the novels, as the comics have the Predator-class TIEs instead).

Besides, maybe FFG got information from the Lucasfilm archives that better supports the stats in the Beta rather than what's listed on Wookieepedia, much like there was information that the HWK-290 was much smaller (being closer to a starfighter in size than a light freighter) than what Wookieepedia has listed.

Perhaps they've not gotten around to it yet. Changes take time to kick through, so it could be scheduled for a future update; like, if they picked a few issues people brought up and went to work on them, rather than doing it by section? I can't say, not being an FFG employee, but perhaps that's why.

Or they don't think it needs updating.

There were plenty of things that a lot of people were asking/demanding be "fixed" during the EotE Beta (lightsaber stats being one of them, even after the initial nerf that removed Defensive & Deflection from the weapon) that FFG didn't touch. Folks whined about how FFG was using "Encumbrance Capacity" instead of Tonnage for starships as had been done with every prior Star Wars RPG.

As for the TIE Defender, it's main "selling points" are that it's tougher, actually has defensive shields, and has a hyperdrive and a broader weapons suite. And the AoR Beta stats have all three of those. True, it's listed Speed and Handling are one point less than the standard TIE fighter, which is not a deal-breaker by any means. But given that the TIE Defender didn't start rolling out until near the Battle of Endor (the tail end of the Rebellion Era in which these games are set), it's quite likely that this version of the TIE Defender is an earlier model, one that hasn't quite yet hit the high performance marks that later designs would (seeing as how this ship was used up into the Legacy Era (guessing the novels, as the comics have the Predator-class TIEs instead).

I'll reiterate (for probably the third time on this page alone, but that's not your fault) that what you describe about the AoR beta TIE Defender representation is why I focused on Speed and Maneuverability, because those being represented as less than the standard TIE Fighter is what sticks out so much without any canonical source... I want to be clear that I'm specifically avoiding relying TIE Fighter or X-Wing: Alliance in that regard.

You've got an interesting solution that what's represented is " an earlier model, one that hasn't quite yet hit the high performance marks that later designs would ", which I find to be a neat and clean resolution to the canon consistency issue, by specifically not being the TIE Defender represented in TIE Fighter and other sources (for which my sentiments are with others in this thread).

I certainly would be amenable to the " earlier model " idea, but in that case Age of Rebellion should specify that much, maybe even call it "TIE Defender Prototype" as well. Might I hope that we have common ground on that front?

Donovan morningfire yes the three things you say abit the selling point of the tie defender but would also be the selling points of the tie advance the earlier ship. If the stats in the beta with afew lass weapons were for the tie advance maybe as fast as a tie to I would understand. And with the hawk-290 I remember read a in the x-wing minatures forms about the size and someone put up a pic of a poster they got with one the dark forces game showing there they did have it right in size.

It's funny that people were all but screaming for the X-Wing to be nerfed, and now there's outcry that one of the most munchkin ships every introduced into the EU has itself gotten nerfed.

Ah, you poor naive boy. They don't like rebels but they despise Jedi. How hard do you think these guys are going to fight to make sure no one can have any fun playing F&D?

It's funny that people were all but screaming for the X-Wing to be nerfed, and now there's outcry that one of the most munchkin ships every introduced into the EU has itself gotten nerfed.

Respectfully, I think that's a gross oversimplification of the issue, here. People asked that the armor rating for the X-wing be reduced from 5 to 3 because the X-wing as originally written possessed the armor of a capital ship. To most of us, that made no sense in-universe or in-game. People were complaining not that the X-wing was too powerful, but that the X-wing as it was presented was not consistent with the rest of Star Wars. I understand that you disagree.

Strictly using video game performance is a horrific measuring stick when translating something into an RPG, as video games only care about providing an enjoyable experience for the one person playing that game and to reflect the PC as the "special snowflake" of that game. Case in point: Starkiller from Force Unleashed. There's no way he'd make a balanced PC in any Star Wars RPG, and yet he works just fine for the video games that he stars in.

To be fair, I don't think most people here have used video game performance as a sole reference point. T IE Fighter and X-Wing: Alliance have been mentioned in this thread mostly to let people know that they're not being used as reference material.

While I can't speak for others, I've been using Star Wars reference material such as The Essential Guide To Vehicles and Vessels , which states that:

The TIE defender is one of the fastest production fighters ever used by the Empire: it's nearly 40 percent faster than the standard TIE/ln.

and:

Maneuverability has also been improved significantly through the addition of triple arrays of maneuvering jets on the triwing assembly, making the ship capable of dives and twists that would put even the remarkably agile TIE interceptor to shame.

Now, I'll be the first to admit that sometimes these books are prone to errors or subject to retconning, but even given the errors and contradictions in Star Wars canon about the specifics of the performance of the craft, there are some traits that remain consistent, even if their specifics vary. Namely, the TIE/D's comparability to the TIE Interceptor and A-wing in terms of maneuverability and speed.

As for the TIE Defender, it's main "selling points" are that it's tougher, actually has defensive shields, and has a hyperdrive and a broader weapons suite. And the AoR Beta stats have all three of those. True, it's listed Speed and Handling are one point less than the standard TIE fighter, which is not a deal-breaker by any means. But given that the TIE Defender didn't start rolling out until near the Battle of Endor (the tail end of the Rebellion Era in which these games are set), it's quite likely that this version of the TIE Defender is an earlier model, one that hasn't quite yet hit the high performance marks that later designs would (seeing as how this ship was used up into the Legacy Era (guessing the novels, as the comics have the Predator-class TIEs instead).

The lower Speed and Handling scores given to the TIE/D compared to a TIE/ln do seem like dealbreakers when every canon source that discusses their performance mentions that they're faster and more maneuverable than a standard TIE/ln.

No, the TIE/D wasn't a production craft until near the Battle of Endor, but the same is also true of Rebel fighters such as the B-wing and especially the A-wing, which never saw large numbers until after Endor. To assume that the TIE/D presented in the beta is an early or 'prototype' version of the craft seems illogical to me, considering how unlabeled 'prototype' models do not have any precedent in FFG's published Star Wars material.

Even if the TIE/D presented in the beta is a 'prototype,' where are the statistics for the production model TIE/D?

Perhaps they've not gotten around to it yet. Changes take time to kick through, so it could be scheduled for a future update; like, if they picked a few issues people brought up and went to work on them, rather than doing it by section? I can't say, not being an FFG employee, but perhaps that's why.

Or they don't think it needs updating.

There were plenty of things that a lot of people were asking/demanding be "fixed" during the EotE Beta (lightsaber stats being one of them, even after the initial nerf that removed Defensive & Deflection from the weapon) that FFG didn't touch. Folks whined about how FFG was using "Encumbrance Capacity" instead of Tonnage for starships as had been done with every prior Star Wars RPG.

Agreed, that was the alternative. I was just giving voice to one of the options.

The lower Speed and Handling scores given to the TIE/D compared to a TIE/ln do seem like dealbreakers when every canon source that discusses their performance mentions that they're faster and more maneuverable than a standard TIE/ln.

[...]

Even if the TIE/D presented in the beta is a 'prototype,' where are the statistics for the production model TIE/D?

I agree that the stats for the Tie Defender don't represent known canon or previous incarnations of the craft. Like someone said before, I believe that speed 6 and handling 3 would be more fair for that ship. But the real problem i see here is that the Tie Defender was a prototype starfighter that never really got any mass production done before the New Republic Era. In a game mecanic sense, the Tie Defender would the starfighter that a Nemesis flies, a fighter you might only fight once in all of life. Frankly, more then fifteen years of gamemastering for Star Wars, I have never brought that fighter against my players.

But...

there is a but...

I really like the stats for the Tie Defender has an Empire equivalent of the X-wing. With this in mind, the Empire now has a fighter to pit against the Alliance's X-Wings. I just think that FFG just got the wrong fighter for the job. A mass produced imperial starfighter that has an hyperdrive, shields, lasers, missiles and ions canons... that's the Alpha-class Xg-1 Star Wing Assault Gunboat.

So FFG can keep the exact same stats and just rename it Starwing Assault Gunboat and be done with it.

If they want to put the Tie Defender, they can give it the stats it really deserves.

So ??

Do you guys like the idea that those stats would be perfect for the Assault Gunboat ??

Frankly, more the fifteen years of gamemastering for Star Wars, I have never brought that fighter against my players.

If there was a rebel equivalent cheesy munchkin fighter for your players to fly maybe you could without them throwing things at you.

If there was a rebel equivalent cheesy munchkin fighter for your players to fly maybe you could without them throwing things at you.

I've been thrown a few things in those fifteen years

My players usually have to work hard for their share

If I were to include the Tie Defender in my game, it would be a kind of RED BARON... the super pilot of the Imperial forces in this sector that leads the hunt for the rebels. But the rest of his starfighter squadron/wing would have lesser fighters, Tie Interceptors or Assault Gunboat.

This red baron in his uberfighter sounds pretty cool. Can't I play him instead?

I agree that the stats for the Tie Defender don't represent known canon or previous incarnations of the craft. Like someone said before, I believe that speed 6 and handling 3 would be more fair for that ship. But the real problem i see here is that the Tie Defender was a prototype starfighter that never really got any mass production done before the New Republic Era. In a game mecanic sense, the Tie Defender would the starfighter that a Nemesis flies, a fighter you might only fight once in all of life. Frankly, more then fifteen years of gamemastering for Star Wars, I have never brought that fighter against my players.

But...

there is a but...

I really like the stats for the Tie Defender has an Empire equivalent of the X-wing. With this in mind, the Empire now has a fighter to pit against the Alliance's X-Wings. I just think that FFG just got the wrong fighter for the job. A mass produced imperial starfighter that has an hyperdrive, shields, lasers, missiles and ions canons... that's the Alpha-class Xg-1 Star Wing Assault Gunboat.

So FFG can keep the exact same stats and just rename it Starwing Assault Gunboat and be done with it.

If they want to put the Tie Defender, they can give it the stats it really deserves.

So ??

Do you guys like the idea that those stats would be perfect for the Assault Gunboat ??

That's perfect!

Hell, while ignoring stat numbers from X-Wing as game mechanics, what you describe is lore-consistent -- weren't they depicted as the (first) Imperial response to Rebel fighter doctrine? Moreover, they were appearing way earlier than the TIE Defender did, which completely bypasses the timeframe issues. All that you have to do with the existing stat block (besides the renamings) is remove two of the laser cannons (so it's only got Linked 1 for all three weapon types), and reduce the Cost and Rarity (a Wookieepedia glance says 125,000 credits) commensurate to what you're getting.

The existing stat block being an Assault Gunboat is what I'd like to see too, good show JP_JP, I did not think of this suggestion at all!

In all honesty, I'm not too well-versed about the capabilities of the different Imperial fighters, so I couldn't make an educated comment or theorem regarding why stats are as they are. It's something I'd need to read up on first.

Wookieepedia is a great start, if you've got hours and hours to kill. Another great resource are the Essential Guide To... books, if you can find them.

Also: I've been trying to send you a Private Message and have thus far been unable to. It says you can't receive PM's for some reason. Is there perhaps another way I could contact you off-board?

That's perfect!

I agree that the stats for the Tie Defender don't represent known canon or previous incarnations of the craft. Like someone said before, I believe that speed 6 and handling 3 would be more fair for that ship. But the real problem i see here is that the Tie Defender was a prototype starfighter that never really got any mass production done before the New Republic Era. In a game mecanic sense, the Tie Defender would the starfighter that a Nemesis flies, a fighter you might only fight once in all of life. Frankly, more then fifteen years of gamemastering for Star Wars, I have never brought that fighter against my players.

But...

there is a but...

I really like the stats for the Tie Defender has an Empire equivalent of the X-wing. With this in mind, the Empire now has a fighter to pit against the Alliance's X-Wings. I just think that FFG just got the wrong fighter for the job. A mass produced imperial starfighter that has an hyperdrive, shields, lasers, missiles and ions canons... that's the Alpha-class Xg-1 Star Wing Assault Gunboat.

So FFG can keep the exact same stats and just rename it Starwing Assault Gunboat and be done with it.

If they want to put the Tie Defender, they can give it the stats it really deserves.

So ??

Do you guys like the idea that those stats would be perfect for the Assault Gunboat ??

Hell, while ignoring stat numbers from X-Wing as game mechanics, what you describe is lore-consistent -- weren't they depicted as the (first) Imperial response to Rebel fighter doctrine? Moreover, they were appearing way earlier than the TIE Defender did, which completely bypasses the timeframe issues. All that you have to do is drop two of the laser cannons (Linked 1 for all three weapon types), reduce the Cost and Rarity (a Wookieepedia glance says 125,000 credits) commensurate to what you're getting, do the renaming (i.e. class, manufacturer), and it's an Assault Gunboat.

That's actually a very tidy solution, though there's a part of me that says, "Why not both?" Let's get a canon-consistent TIE/D and a sweet Assault Gunboat .

[sarcasm]But wait! [Exaggerated Gasp Here] That's another fighter whose origins are found in a video game. Whatever shall we do?! [/sarcasm]

In all seriousness, there's a fairly interesting tidbit to be found if you read the Behind The Scenes section in the Xg-1's Wookieepedia article. Apparently, despite being far more numerous in-universe than the TIE/D, the Xg-1 is mentioned in real-world novels and outside sources far less. That's not really all that relevant to the discussion, but I thought it was somewhat telling.