Jump to content



Photo

Lambda Shuttle Weapons


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 DB Draft

DB Draft

    Member

  • Members
  • 511 posts

Posted 04 May 2013 - 10:16 PM

Sorry if this has been talked about on another post but I noticed that the Lambda shuttle picture does not have a rear facing fire arc on the ship card that fits on the flight stand.  It seems they can carry extra crew, a cannon upgrade and sensors.  Apparently the standard configuration for the shuttle was just a rear facing twin turret and the model shown would suggest an upgunned "military configuration" with forward weaponry.  Perhaps there is an upgrade card that would allow for the rear defence (the "cannon" icon), but even so I would have thought it would have the fire arcs marked on it like Slave 1.

Hopefully I am just making a small deal over nothing… 

Still it is great to see all the new ships even the "mystery ship"!


Nerfherder in Training


#2 kmanweiss

kmanweiss

    Member

  • Members
  • 179 posts

Posted 06 May 2013 - 04:23 AM

Slave 1's main weapons were on turrets that allowed the weapons to swivel to a rear firing arc.  This is why the Firespray has a rear arc with it's primary attack.

The Lambda shuttle in all armed configurations has the majority of it's weapons forward facing.

The standard config is 4 forward twin lasers with 1 rear twin laser.

The military config is 8 forward lasers and 2 rear lasers.

 

Thats a 4 to 1 ratio of weaponry.  If it's primary attack is a 3, the rear arc could only really have a 1 at best (basically worthless).  Beyond the rear arc having little firepower, you'd have to have rules (exclusive to that ship) that could be confusing.  My guess is they decided to keep things simple and just dump the rear arc.



#3 DB Draft

DB Draft

    Member

  • Members
  • 511 posts

Posted 06 May 2013 - 10:27 AM

I agree that if the rear defence was included it should only be Attack 1 as it is a defensive weapon.  I do however see it as being better than useless, if there is a target in the rear arc then it works as well as anything else.  If it were an option then it should be use either the forward guns OR rear defence in the same round even if there are targets in both arcs.  I am also assuming the shuttle can not perform the K turn, hence the need for rear defence, but if it doesn't have a rear gun option then perhaps it can K turn.

I am sure people will "homebrew" there own interpretations of how a rear defense weapon could be worked in without much problem. 


Nerfherder in Training


#4 Stormtrooper721

Stormtrooper721

    Member

  • Members
  • 330 posts

Posted 06 May 2013 - 12:36 PM

I was also very disappointed with the lack of a rear arc. I have the action figure Imperial Shuttle and the rear turret is there, so I do wish it was reflected in the card in some way.


The 731st Imperial Flight School - "The Vornskrs" - 1 TIE Advanced, 3 TIE Interceptors, 10 TIE Fighters

23 Victories, 1 Defeat, 0 Draws - 69 kills versus 46 losses


#5 saiharris

saiharris

    Member

  • Members
  • 52 posts

Posted 06 May 2013 - 08:22 PM

Im glad it doesnt have a rear shot. This is by far an undercost ship. 10 hits in total for a low low cost!



#6 Hida77

Hida77

    Member

  • Members
  • 709 posts

Posted 07 May 2013 - 02:24 AM

saiharris said:

Im glad it doesnt have a rear shot. This is by far an undercost ship. 10 hits in total for a low low cost!

I agree, if they had given it the rear arc, even with just 1 attack, they likely would have had to cost 10+ points more.  I expect that the dial and the limited arc are what balances the lambda's cost.  Otherwise, it is severely undercosted.


2013 Star Wars: The Card Game Worlds Top 16

X-Wing Ships:

8xX-wing, 4xB-Wing, 2xYT-1300, 4xY-Wing, 4xA-Wing, 2xHWK-290, 3xE-Wing, 5xZ-95, 2xGR-75, 1xCR-90

8xTIE/LN, 11xTIE/IN, 2xTIE/Adv, 4xTIE/as, 3xTIE/Ph, 3xTIE/D, 3xFirespray-31, 3xLambda


#7 ForceM

ForceM

    Member

  • Members
  • 589 posts

Posted 07 May 2013 - 02:45 AM

I think it is a very solid choice with the skill 8 Pilot for 27 points. You will be able to have 4 Shuttles on the table if you take generic pilots. And that with 10 hitpoints per ship and 3 frontal attacks. If that thing had a rear arc it would be a slave 1 for cheaper.

So i think they did not do it because it would have upped the cost severely and to differentiate it from the Slave!

Also even like this it must have a very bad manoeuver dial or it will be too powerful with those stats at that price!



#8 ForceM

ForceM

    Member

  • Members
  • 589 posts

Posted 07 May 2013 - 02:45 AM

Sorry for double post but it didn't work at first so i pushed twice and doubleposted apparently!



#9 Hida77

Hida77

    Member

  • Members
  • 709 posts

Posted 07 May 2013 - 02:56 AM

I would also not be shocked if the lower skill pilots have a reduced statline.  If we consider the one that was previewed as one of the best pilots (likely flying the best ship), it would make sense if they reduced the attack, hull, and/or shields for a cheaper, more standard Lambda, similarly to what they did with the YT-1300.


2013 Star Wars: The Card Game Worlds Top 16

X-Wing Ships:

8xX-wing, 4xB-Wing, 2xYT-1300, 4xY-Wing, 4xA-Wing, 2xHWK-290, 3xE-Wing, 5xZ-95, 2xGR-75, 1xCR-90

8xTIE/LN, 11xTIE/IN, 2xTIE/Adv, 4xTIE/as, 3xTIE/Ph, 3xTIE/D, 3xFirespray-31, 3xLambda


#10 Endgame124

Endgame124

    Member

  • Members
  • 291 posts

Posted 07 May 2013 - 02:59 AM

I can see 3 or 4 shuttles just getting shot to pieces by interceptors and X-Wings, especially if the shuttle doesn't have a K Turn.  All you'll have to do is survive the inital pass (and that happens against X-Wings all the time) and then just hang in the rear arc.



#11 Hida77

Hida77

    Member

  • Members
  • 709 posts

Posted 07 May 2013 - 04:04 AM

Endgame124 said:

I can see 3 or 4 shuttles just getting shot to pieces by interceptors and X-Wings, especially if the shuttle doesn't have a K Turn.  All you'll have to do is survive the inital pass (and that happens against X-Wings all the time) and then just hang in the rear arc.

Not to mention the player using the lambdas would have the nightmare of keeping his large bases from bumping everything constantly in asteroids.


2013 Star Wars: The Card Game Worlds Top 16

X-Wing Ships:

8xX-wing, 4xB-Wing, 2xYT-1300, 4xY-Wing, 4xA-Wing, 2xHWK-290, 3xE-Wing, 5xZ-95, 2xGR-75, 1xCR-90

8xTIE/LN, 11xTIE/IN, 2xTIE/Adv, 4xTIE/as, 3xTIE/Ph, 3xTIE/D, 3xFirespray-31, 3xLambda


#12 kmanweiss

kmanweiss

    Member

  • Members
  • 179 posts

Posted 07 May 2013 - 04:34 AM

Looking for a rear arc when only 1/4 of the weapons are aimed in that direction is kinda lame.  First off it would require additional rules which could be confusing.  A rear arc at the same attack value isn't that bad.  A 360 arc isn't bad.  Having multiple firing arcs with different attack values is difficult to convey.

Heck, lets just play it mathmatically and say that 1/4 of 3 is .75….so really it does have a rear arc but it's attack value is .75 of a die, and since we don't have the appropriate die, we can't use it.  Or wait, maybe they can give us a new 6 sided attack die just for the lambda shuttle's rear arc.  It could have a hit, an eye, and 4 misses.

If you want to get this technical then why aren't we fighting for different firing arcs on other ships?  An Xwing's weapons are 'fixed' which means you have to line the fighter up directly on target at the right distance to actually hit with all or any of the weapons.  However an A-wing has tracking laser cannons that have a wider firing arc.  It should really have 3 arcs.  1 main arc that is represented on the current bases, but then it should have two wider side arcs that have less attack value (where only 1 laser can reach).  If it flew on it's side (compaired to the other models) it would have a full attack 60 degree forward arc!  Some even could fire behind them, so really if they were the advanced models and flew on their side they'd have a 360 degree arc!  The YT1300 (the falcon at least) had additional weaponry that tracked also (the small retractable laser cannon).   The standard lambda shuttle has some fixed forward lasers and some tracking mounts, so it should have a standard firing arc, a rear arc, and a wider secondary forward arc.

Imagine the base of a LAAT.  There'd be at least 5 attack arcs!  Yes, yes, thats not OT, but I think you get the point I'm trying to make.  In games, we have to suspend disbelief sometimes to allow the game to flow and play easily.  The no rear arc of the lambda is just another minor foot note in a long list of modifications made by FFG to make the game fun and quick instead of a complicated mess of miniature rules.

 



#13 DB Draft

DB Draft

    Member

  • Members
  • 511 posts

Posted 07 May 2013 - 09:57 AM

Fact: The shuttle has a rear gun.

To say thay for pure playability and to avoid confusion that this cannot be represented in the game is pretty poor.  The game has plenty of complexity with combos and the like.  I am not looking at it for points cost effectiveness just the simple fact that the shuttle was designed with a rear gun, why is this not represented? 

So feel free to saw the gun barrels off your models as having these could also cause confusioncomplice


Nerfherder in Training


#14 Hida77

Hida77

    Member

  • Members
  • 709 posts

Posted 07 May 2013 - 10:16 AM

DB Draft said:

"Fact": The shuttle has a rear gun.

To say thay for pure playability and to avoid confusion that this cannot be represented in the game is pretty poor.  The game has plenty of complexity with combos and the like.  I am not looking at it for points cost effectiveness just the simple fact that the shuttle was designed with a rear gun, why is this not represented? 

So feel free to saw the gun barrels off your models as having these could also cause confusioncomplice

Fact: Star Wars is a fictional universe and X-Wing is a game based on it. Based; as-in not identical

I whole-heartedly disagree.  What value does having the rear gun represented add, aside to make you feel better about the fluff? Pretty much none.  It makes perfect sense to abstract this out.  If it bothers you so much, design your own cards, but good luck representing and balancing it within the bounds of the existing cards.  Obviously adding multiple varying arcs to the same ship would over-complicate the game, as was already noted.

Its a GAME.  Abstractions are needed unless you want a game that is way over-complicated with every "real life" situation.  That no one will play.  Do you really think that pilots look out the windows and say "hmm… I think that that TIE is going to go left, so I will too. ohsnap! I ran into him.  Guess that broke my ability to do anything…"? No? well then I guess you've already given into some level of abstraction in the game. Why is this such a problem? 

I'd much rather the Lambda NOT have the rear gun (which I would argue makes little sense game-wise anyway) and be distinct from the Firespray, than have the gun and be basically the same ship.


2013 Star Wars: The Card Game Worlds Top 16

X-Wing Ships:

8xX-wing, 4xB-Wing, 2xYT-1300, 4xY-Wing, 4xA-Wing, 2xHWK-290, 3xE-Wing, 5xZ-95, 2xGR-75, 1xCR-90

8xTIE/LN, 11xTIE/IN, 2xTIE/Adv, 4xTIE/as, 3xTIE/Ph, 3xTIE/D, 3xFirespray-31, 3xLambda


#15 DB Draft

DB Draft

    Member

  • Members
  • 511 posts

Posted 07 May 2013 - 11:01 AM

Fact: this is hilarious!reir

"Sir we have the new design for our Imperial Shuttle… it has many outstanding and highly advanced features…. one of which is a rear gun that cannot be used…. EVER…."

I really love this game and the models are exceptional.  If you were playing a WW2 air combat game and had the chance to fly a SBD Dauntless dive bomber that could only use its forward firing guns I think you would also feel something is missing when a Zero parks on your tail.

I appreciate your comments.

 


Nerfherder in Training


#16 esmolinski

esmolinski

    Member

  • Members
  • 75 posts

Posted 07 May 2013 - 12:24 PM

Fact: Luke Skywalker costs 28 points. Fact The top rated Lambda pilot costs you 27 points and will fire at the same time Luke fires. Fact, Luke Skywalker blew up a Death Star and is one of the best pilots in The Star Wars Universe. Fact: If you drive what is considered by most to be a transport / support ship (it's not like the military grade ones were fighting in dog fights) you should not be allowed to fire at an 8. Fact 10 total hull/shields for said Lambda Shuttle pilot costs you 27 points, X-Wing has 5 total hull/shields for Luke (and Wedge) and The YT-1300 at Chewbacca's Level of 42 has 13 total Hull/Shield. Fact: The Lambda shuttle is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyy undercosted, adding a rear gun is adding insult.



#17 DB Draft

DB Draft

    Member

  • Members
  • 511 posts

Posted 07 May 2013 - 02:45 PM

Fact: you are all missing my point.

If you want to talk about the cost of this and that then I cannot defend any of this because it is a game with a point system and therefore is designed for people to "maximise" their list with the best combos etc….. Take it up with management.

What would make the shuttle play differently from Slave 1? No K turns, turns like a brick.  Now that would be "worth" the "undercost" wouldn't it?

Why would someone design a ship that couldn't handle that well in a dogfight? Well they give it a defensive armament… look there it is on the back!

Rear defense has been around since the very first aircraft so why not introduce it to the game?  Surely other ships could benefit from this.  Does this suddenly become a cheesy combo… nope.

 

 


Nerfherder in Training


#18 Boomer_J

Boomer_J

    Member

  • Members
  • 315 posts

Posted 07 May 2013 - 04:17 PM

 

I agree with DB Draft. I remember the lambda shuttle kicking my butt in the x-wing vs. tie fighter game. You definitely had to keep your distance or take advantage of its blind spots. To model a ship with a tail gun and not be able to man it with a tail gunner is just lame. If a tail gunner would up the cost let the player be able to make the choice at least if he wants to spend the points on the upgrade or not even if it means small squad.  

This would make a squad made up of:

One Lambda Shuttle

Two academe tie fighters

So freaking awesome!!!

But this is coming from a guy that only plays casually. So take my rant with a grain of salt. :P 



#19 esmolinski

esmolinski

    Member

  • Members
  • 75 posts

Posted 07 May 2013 - 09:50 PM

DB Draft said:

Fact: you are all missing my point.

If you want to talk about the cost of this and that then I cannot defend any of this because it is a game with a point system and therefore is designed for people to "maximise" their list with the best combos etc….. Take it up with management.

What would make the shuttle play differently from Slave 1? No K turns, turns like a brick.  Now that would be "worth" the "undercost" wouldn't it?

Why would someone design a ship that couldn't handle that well in a dogfight? Well they give it a defensive armament… look there it is on the back!

Rear defense has been around since the very first aircraft so why not introduce it to the game?  Surely other ships could benefit from this.  Does this suddenly become a cheesy combo… nope.

 

 

They did the same thing to the Y-Wing (did not give it a rear weapon), which could be flown by 2 pilots for the same reason you give about the Lambda. Same thing could be said about later model B-Wings. I think FFG made it clear that this is a support ship. If you make it too powerful, it's not much of a support ship, it would become most player's squad leader. Take it for what it is, the Lambda Shuttle will be very useful, even without that rear firing weapon.



#20 commuterzombie

commuterzombie

    Member

  • Members
  • 175 posts

Posted 07 May 2013 - 09:51 PM

Looking at the pixelated card spreads FFG have distributed there seems to be a modification card in the Shuttle expansion pack that adds a rear-firing laser - either an anti-missile one or anti-pursuit. 

You may yet get to fire out of the rear arc of your shuttle ;)






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS