• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About SkullNBones

  • Rank
  • Birthday 11/19/1971

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • MSN
  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Location
    Hubbard, Ohio, United States
  1. IMHO "Targeting Synchronizer" was one of the simplest cards that the latest FAQ really STP'd on. This card should simply allow ships carrying ordinance with the header "Attack:(Target Lock)" to utilize the TL a friendly ship with TS has, period, end of story. Now it has basically become a situational "treat my blue target lock as your own", which since that language already existed in the game, should have been used or FAQ'd to. Nothing like not keeping it simple.
  2. I had this asked in our last casual session. In which step does the condition get applied? If at step 8 or 9 then hitting and killing a ship in one shot with a harpoon missile should apply the condition and trigger splash damage on the attack. Or does it apply after step 10? I can see the argument for Step 9, as other damaging abilities trigger at this point as well (Dengar, Gunner). But the language there says abilities that trigger after that perform an attack. Again this is one of those times when I wish FFG would have made a stand outright instead of turning it over to the players to playtest while we wait for an FAQ.
  3. Hot potato, hot potato, crit... bang...I'm blind. It can be a pain, but it also serves as a deterrent to a certain point. No one wants to shoot at Kylo if they are caught between an asteroid field and the barrels of a Upsi with either blinded or stunned pilot sitting on the card.
  4. Now give Quinn Jast Sat Slavo, MF and Homing missiles and play hit and run all day long without a care *P, if you miss you hit and if you hit you hit and only have to reload when you hit all for a tidy 27pts.
  5. Yep 3 ACSWs with Adv Slam + CM (or Harp) + OS1 = Move 3, slam 3, TL and Fire with 4 dice, next round 3 hard turn + slam 3 hard + Reload and Fire, rinse repeat. Harps keep the dice at 4 each turn, but have their drawbacks. You can always go UGM with a constant 1-3 range and 3 dice and only need to focus rather than TL (and allows for a more forgiving hard 2 +slam hard 2). But I like the TL, throw PTL on them so you can reload and either re-TL or Focus as needed. Sure you have to clear stress the next round, but I can live with that for 12 dice around. Might take 40 acres to turn truck around but she has a bite on the other side.
  6. You could always make up a "Contracted" condition to apply to each S&V ship, assign loyalty tokens to it (based off a system like I've used or another). Maybe tick off tokens for each point of damage the S&V inflict too. As long as you are having fun with as you please.
  7. since its casual play, I wouldn't be bothered by paying extra points (besides a boba or kath firespray as the same base cost either way). I've played with a "loyalty" rule before allowing scum to fly with rebel or imperial: Give the S&V collectively a # of tokens equal to the Hits of their employer's ships. Each time either they (the S&V) or their employers suffer dmg, tick off a token. When the tokens run out the S&V bail. The less employers ships (point wise) present means less loyalty on the S&V side, though a deci goes a long way to enforcing the contract *).
  8. (I'm going to blow +thespaceinvader 's mind here and agree with him): yeah, if this thing had a crew, you could then drop Sabine on it (giving you another bomb slot), add in its Ordinance Silos and load out with 8 bombs (4x 2 types). Here's a crit and damage for you, a crit and damage for you, and you and you....everyone get a proton surprise today... As it is TS on 3 Punishers with Proton Bombs (two of them with extra munitions) is pretty much going to eliminate swarms in formation for a while.
  9. I've flown this a few times now. It is a lot easier than you might think to pull off more than once a game. I've used it to melt Doni in 1 round as well as burn an angry Chewy out in two. The thing is, even if you do not pull the 9, more often than not your getting 6 to 7 dice/results with Nora. Plus you get to tic away with Jan and Shara as well if you focus fire. The biggest weakness to this is a high PS swarm. Even if you can pop a ship a round, the low defense of the two Arcs and Hwk means a swarm can keep up with the attrition and becomes a race of the dice.
  10. remember too that with Expose, those 4 dice are at 360. Another approach is to through an Upsi in to the mix so it can coordinate: Something like Striden w/ FO and EI + RAC w/ Expose. Can give you RAC with a focus and target lock plus 4 dice at 360.
  11. Looks like we will be seeing a lot of Harpoon Missile. Can't wait till Saturation Salvo gets added to that mix.
  12. Yep me again and I'll do this all day. Read ISYTDS " When this card is assigned, if it is not already in play, the player who assigned it searches the Damage deck for 1 Damage card with the Pilot trait and may place it faceup on this card. Then shuffle the damage deck. When you suffer critical damage during an attack, you are instead dealt the chosen faceup Damage card. When there is no Damage card on this card, remove it." Please note where it says WHEN you "suffer", yes you are INSTEAD dealt the chosen card, however to get to that point where you are dealt the card you must "SUFFER" critical damage. Now the sad part is, I am in agreement with you all again. I am not arguing any point, just stated in response to a question that you could in-fact suffer damage without loosing shields. WHICH IS EXACTLY what ISYTDS does. You "suffer" critical damage, do not lose a shield because you are dealt the chosen card.
  13. yeah do that, the key word is not instead, its suffers in this instance. If Ship A "suffers" the crit result and Ship B "suffers" it instead and is thus not the defender, CJ can shoot at Ship B, because it "suffered" the damage. And my point stands valid. A ship can "suffer" damage but not lose shields. Maybe you should read the original post or in this case the follow-up.
  14. If it requires you to remove shields, then explain to me the ruling on ISYTDS? Sequence as follows: Condition applied to ship A (ISYTDS - Stunned Pilot) Ship B attack Ship A, rolls: Hit, Hit, Crit Ship A defends, rolls: evade, evade Ship A has 3 shields, but rather than loose a shield to the noncancelled crit. Since the ship "Suffered" a crit it receives the Stunned Pilot card ISYTDS through its shields. "...If a ship with this card assigned to it suffers critical damage during an attack, it must suffer the Damage card assigned to I'll Show You the Dark Side instead (even if it has shield tokens)..." (p9 FAQ 4.4.0) It does not suffer the card and loose a shield token. Thus you can suffer damage without loosing a shield. DTF allows Ship C to suffer the crit instead of Ship A: "When a friendly ship at Range 1 is hit by an attack, you may suffer 1 of the uncanceled critical results instead of the target ship." And if Ship C had ISYTDS applied to it when it did this even if it had 4 shield remaining it would be dealt the ISYTDS card and again suffering the crit without loosing shields. BMST does not say it causes the chosen stressed ship to suffer damage, only to be dealt a facedown damage card. So the necessary trigger word of "suffer" is not present regardless of the ship receiving a damage card. (...If an effect instructs a player to deal a Damage card to a ship, this is different from the ship suffering damage. The card is dealt to the ship regardless of whether the ship has any shield tokens remaining...RRp9)
  15. Keep in mind though that suffering does not require you to remove shields, only to have not negated the hit/crit via defense results. This is why "I'll Show You The Dark Side" applies even to a ship that has shield remaining. "When a ship suffers a damage or critical damage, it loses one shield token. If it does not have any shield tokens to lose, it is dealt one Damage card instead. For normal damage, the Damage card is dealt facedown; for critical damage, the Damage card is dealt faceup and the text on the card immediately resolves." (RR p9)