Roll a boatload of d6s and try to beat a difficulty number. Overall, it's a fairly easy system compared to what's popular these days.

I think folks have done a good job discussing the Gain the Advantage as it is written and I have little to add there, but I have been experimenting with it recently and can share my experiences and how this action has evolved for us with use.
 
Probably the part we fiddled with the most was, "his check is one step more difficult for each time he or his opponent has successfully Gained the Advantage against the other."
 
We first tried it assuming your own successes counted against you too, and as others have noted it is counter-intuitive as you can become a victim of your own success. For characters and minion groups with large dice pools, this wasn't a big deal as GtA rolls often started trivially low, but for low or moderate dice pools or slower ships regaining GtA could become effectively impossible by the second roll even against equivalent opponents.
 
After that we experimented with only the opponent's successful attempt increasing the difficulty, we even eventually went back redid some of the previous encounters to get a feel for how they might have change. Here we found equivalent pilots, and ships had a fighting chance when their second roll came up. For advanced pilots with big dice pools (though not necessarily limited to just them) spending Advantage and Threat became a more salient factor on how challenging the next roll would be, and the give and take was often more variable and exciting. 
 
We have since settled on using the latter style at our table, as it plays out in a way we find more enjoyable, but we did also agree the former was more likely the closer interpretation to RAW. We also see the former as a better stylistic choice if you are going for a more sudden and cutthroat feel to your dogfights.
 
Now how long Gain the Advantage lasts also has a baring on the options above. If you stick to the first option, but have the difficulty increase end after the end of the following round, like GtA's primary benefits, then the difficulty shouldn't increase by more than two steps, keeping it somewhat in check. Unfortunately two steps can be enough to make it effectively impossible to succeed again, particularly if your ship is slower than your opponent's. Despite succeeding on the first roll, and almost because of it, failure becomes the most likely outcome on the next. You might find yourself questioning why you'd even bother with GtA in the first place if it means you're nearly guaranteed to lose it before a shot is fired. Without limiting the increased dificulty by the end of the following round will eventually lock out GtA as an option for both parties. These were additional factors for us settling on the second option, believing it gives pilots an incentive to be pilots instead of just gunners.
 
Getting back on the time limit, though the primary benefits only last until the end of the following round, my group hasn't bothered capping how long the difficulty increases lasts. You could say we play it lasting until the end of the encounter, but that would be deceptive. It would be more accurate to say it lasts until the opponents mutually move on, or it makes sense to end it in the narrative. As long as they are scrapping their successful attempts continue to add up until they reach a conclusion, whether that is one defeating the other or disengaging to deal with other threats or objectives. If they re-engage  at a later time in the encounter then they would start at again at zero.
 
For some reason doing it this way hasn't felt like we're tracking much of anything, the increase is there as long as we're dogfighting, then it is gone when we're not. Similarly with the primary benefits of GtA, if we have the advantage then on the following round can we apply them, then they're gone. I'm not sure if that observation makes any sense or not. . .
 
Another area we have experimented has been, "Once the advantage has been gained, on the following turn the opponent may attempt to cancel out the advantage by using Gain the Advantage as well." If successful do they merely cancel out your advantage or do they cancel your advantage and gain it themselves. In the beginning we were inclined to say in merely negates your advantage, leaving neither party with advantage, but we found it drew the duel out more than we liked, or at least in a way that created spaces of ineffectiveness. These times of ineffectiveness felt intolerable when our own successful attempts counted against our future rolls, and when our successful attempts didn't count against us, these dogfights didn't need stretching out. So having advantage trading hands made for a swifter encounter, and we generally agreed it felt more exciting. Though we haven't used it yet, I felt Koiogran Turn remains a little more unique when counter-rolls of GtA don't just merely negate advantage, but swaps it instead. 
 
 
 
One problem I think people have with actions like Gain the Advantage is it is very easy to look at the basic benefits and costs and come to the conclusion that it is a sub-optimal choice, and discount it. Admittedly, ignoring an instance or two of Evasive Maneuvers and choosing which facing to hit on a fighter likely sporting relatively weak shields isn't all that impressive.
 
Its for this reason I so strongly remind and emphasize the use of excess advantage/threat/triumph/despair. Spending these resources are what helps you maintain your advantage, let the boost and setback dice fly, and as Jegergryte says, use Gain the Advantage creatively! For me, that last point is much of the point of this whole system to begin with!
 
With that in mind, we've codified a  variable or two we found make Gain the Advantage more interesting:
 
One part of Gain the Advantage that hasn't really been discussed here is when multiple opponent's have advantage against you. With the rules as written it doesn't appear to explicitly be a factor, you pick one opponent, then try to counter their advantage with a roll of your own. And of course Koiogran Turn allows you to negate all their advantage with a maneuver.  One thing we started doing after we stopped counting our own successful attempts against our future rolls of GtA, was to increase the difficulty for each opponent with advantage over us. For example, I'm about to counter TIE/ln Alpha 1's advantage over me with a GtA roll of my own, but Alpha 3 has advantage too, assuming we're all moving at speed 5, the base difficulty is 2, and I increase it two more steps for a new difficulty of 4. If I succeed I break Alpha 1's advantage, gaining advantage of my own, while Alpha 3 still has advantage over me. The logic behind this choice was simply that the more opponents with advantage over you the more difficult it would be to escape any one instance (I need to break left, but if I do I'll fly right into Alpha 3's line of fire - if I roll a despair, that is probably exactly what happens). I'm interesting in using more Challenge dice, we might try Upgrading instead of Increasing Difficulty. Admittedly, I don't consider this so much of a house-rule as, like I said, merely codifying one potential variable influencing a character's dice pool, though I doubt everyone would agree with me there.
 
Another area I'm 'codifying' a little (okay, so this is more of a house-rule, and still untested) is allowing a character to spend additional successes with Gain the Advantage rolls (and potentially other pilot checks), rewarding those pilots with more skill or an impressive roll. I've found a character can succeed at a Gain the Advantage roll spectacularly, but since excess successes are not usually counted, the opponent can very easily counter advantage on their next roll, so we're letting the character upgrade their opponent's next pilot or gunnery check once for every two excess successes they rolled. 
 
Say I'm playing a highly skilled pilot who nets six Successes and two Advantage on their Gain the Advantage roll. With a positive result, she successfully gains the advantage over her opponent and with five excess successes she get to upgrade the opponent's next pilot or gunnery roll twice and chooses to spend the 2 Advantage to apply a Setback die on their next pilot or gunnery check. If the opponent chooses to counter her advantage, the base difficulty is increased one step for the successful roll, then upgraded twice for the excess successes, and they suffer a Setback die as well.
 
The aim of such a ruling is to reward skilled pilots by giving them an additional means of influencing dice pools and their own survival with said skill, while generally increasing the number of Challenge dice rolled in space combat. It may be that these upgrades are too fiddly to track, or that they are too dangerous or destabilizing, that is one reason I decided to use two excess successes instead of one per upgrade.
 
Regardless of what you think of my little, er, codification. I'd like to emphasize that Gain the Advantage is a means for a pilot to really use their piloting skill in aerial/space combat instead of relying almost solely on the gunnery skill, proving they are indeed the superior pilot.
 
Don't be afraid to use it creatively, Jegergryte, for example, pointed out some interesting alternative aims and goals that GtA could be used for.
 
Oh, and don't forget to apply Advantage/Treat and Triumph/Despair! They are game changers and narrative gold!
 
To summarize how Gain the Advantage has come to be used at our table, at least for the moment:
 
Gain the Advantage (Pilot-only Action; Silhouette 1-5; Speed 4+; Difficulty determined by relative Speed)
Ignore any penalties imposed from the Evasive Maneuver starship maneuvers until the end of the following round. You may choose what defense zone you hit with your attack until the end of the following round. If an opponent has advantage over you, you may counter it by making a Gain the Advantage action on your turn. Increase the Difficulty by one step for every time your opponent has successfully Gained the Advantage against you. If successful, you have advantage now. House Ruling: Increase the difficulty for every opponent beyond the first holding advantage over you. House Ruling: For each pair of successes beyond the first Upgrade your opponent's next Piloting or Gunnery check once.

He is not removing options, he is asking for techniques that give advantage to Kakita in duel (Similar to techniques that make a Shiba a better Yojimbo and a Hida better at hunting a giant oni. I also hope for a few exclusive dual wield techniques to the Mirumoto, as an example.)
And yeah fire opportunity is a strong thing to "fish" in duels.
Answering Crimsom_Red:
When you make the Assesment check (initiative) both duelists decide their stance (if you roll earth you are in earth.) The bonus of being first in the first turn, i guess its that you can attack before the opponent makes a defensive action (like center) himself. So if you think you can damage him well, i suppose its a nice starting advantage. 

Yes, that Strife = Character Emotions is going to be an issue for a lot in the groups I play with.  Im thinking already of making Strife into a choice of either take the emotion hit or take a narrative disadvantage instead.

Honestly I thought the decision to make Hoturi into Hotaru this time was a bit clever.
I might be reading to much into the writers love for the original lore but i figured it was more of a reference towards the original Crane Thunder(s) Doji Konishiko who shared the soul of her twin brother, Yasurugi, whod died before the 1st day of Thunder and were regarded as the twin thunders.
Seeing as the main players of the second day of thunder are relatively the same and its unlikely that it wont come to pass to a similar if not divergent plot line i figured it was more of a symbolic subversion than a attempt at any progressive relationship ideas.
While there some people who have mixed feelings about how unhinged the scale of the AEG timeline got in regards to large deific good vs evil wars went i thought it offered alot of fasinating possibilities and settings for your own stories in the RPG.
You could still have your classic samurai conflicts of political intrigue and martial warfare with settings like the Yasuki wars or clan border disputes, and your conspiracy venues by roping in a mix of scorpion/kolat plots or the mysteries of gajin or the phoniex or dragon clans hiding nemuranai
But it also provided truely unique settings in the timeline where you could have occurances that wouldnt make sense elsewhere like returned spirits during the spirit wars hunting hooks from their unresolved pasts, a rokugan without a sun on the brink of erasure by the Lying Darkness, and espicially everything ivory kingdoms thank you.
To each their own but as outlandish as some of the plot twist with personalities and the Throne got it was never boring
Also does this mean Shahai isnt a bloodspeaker this time around? 

Most of my experience is in Solo/Duo games. I'd recommend generalizing is the better choice, to give the greatest chance of succeeding in the broadest array of challenges.
That said, in Solo/Duo games I tend to let the PC(s) stretch the rules for Additional Obligation, allowing them to select the same options multiple times, for example, selecting '+10 Starting XP' twice. In Solo games I've also raised Starting Obligation per player, or allowed the player exceed starting XP when selecting Additional Obligation options. Note, none of this is by-the-book, but can give a Solo/Duo the option to specialize without leaving too many holes in their competence. This can change the tone of the narrative though. 

Huh -- I'm the exact opposite. Pre-game history has lots of cool moments (as AtoMaki pointed out) that you could use as plot fodder. The player-driven story, on the other hand, is a seventeen-car pileup of one disaster landing so hard on the heels of the previous that they lose all impact for me. Many of the plot developments ring false, because they were driven by marketing concerns rather than narrative logic, or else were shoehorned in because somebody won a tournament so that meant X needed to happen, and the consequences to things frequently got under-explored; to avoid the third rail here, I'll name the Agasha defecting to the Phoenix as my example. Basically, I look at everything from after the Second Day of Thunder and see a world so crammed with Important People and Giant Threats that there's no room in there for me to tell my own story, no room for the PCs to really shine. I'd rather play in a quieter era, where I can get as loud as I want.

At last.  I'm sure it's not perfect, but here's 2.0.  Please let me know anything you find that doesn't work so I can release bug fixes.
Release 2.0
This release can be installed using the following links:
Manual Install               Web Install
Note:  If you previously used the web install to install the software, you will automatically be prompted to update to the new version the next time you launch the software from your desktop.  There is no need to re-install.
 
Release Notes
New/Changed Data:
Added all new information from "Savage Spirits", including specializations, species, talents, motivations, backgrounds, moralities, signature abilities, the Foresee Force power, plus all equipment, attachments, vehicles, and riding beasts. Added all new information from "Forged in Battle", including specializations, species, talents, motivations, backgrounds, duties, signature abilities, plus all equipment, attachments, vehicles, and trophies. Added all crafting data from "Special Modifications", "Keeping the Peace", and "Forged in Battle". Added the Enhanced Hyperspace Shields attachment from Special Modifications. AD-1S starfighter had its name mispelled in a number of places.  This has been fixed. Fixed misspelling in the Optimized Energy Cell attachment. The Wilderness Survival Kit had an incorrect source for the Age of Rebellion CRB.  This source has been removed. Fixed spelling and key of the "Command" specific motivation for "Drive". Modified the Shaped Nozzle attachment to only work on the ion thruster gun. The Blaster Energy Dampener was subtracting 2 from the damage of the weapon.  It will now correctly subtract 1. The Sleight of Mind talent was incorrectly set to an Incidental.  It is now properly set to Passive. Cratala's Vision Cycling Implant had a misspelling.  This has been corrected. Speaks Binary (Supreme) talent was incorrectly classified as Passive.  It is now a Maneuver. Careful Planning talent was incorrectly classified as an Incidental.  It is now an Action. Coordinated Assault talent was incorrectly classified as non-ranked.  It is now ranked. Updated Heavy Proton Torpedo Launcher from "Strongholds of Resistance" with better guesstimates on price, silhouette limits, and rarity, extrapolated from other vehicle weapon info. Language files will now be automatically updated with any new phrases that are added to the code.  These phrases will be in English across all translation files.  I don't want to hold up releases waiting for translations to be made, so all new translations passed the initial implementation of the translation feature will need to be performed by the user.  Users are urged to share these translation files with others who would like the new phrases to be in their native language, and I would love to have any completed translation files so I can include them in future releases! New Features/Enhancements:
The character generator now has an "Companions" button.  This allows you to save companions with your character.  Companions use the same editor as Adversaries in GM Tools and now have their own pane in the generator.  Companions can be added, edited, or imported from standard Adversary files. Added a new crafting system.  Items can be crafted in the character sheet from the equipment pane.  Droids can be crafted from the new Companion NPC pane.  Fortifications can be crafted from the vehicle pane.  All crafting buttons use golden text.  All crafting from "Special Modifications",  "Keeping the Peace", and "Forged in Battle" is supported, including all templates, effects, and personality traits for droids.  Also included is a crafting summary report that you can print out to keep track of your crafting sessions. Crafting will also keep track of schematics.  Schematics are stored with a character and are automatically used by the crafting system when it displays the required check.  Whenever the "Schematics" effect is selected for an item, the schematic level for the template is automatically increased by 1 when you finish your crafting session.  You can also directly edit and add template schematics for the character from Step 1 of the crafting dialog. Note:  The Lightsaber Hilt Construction Modifications attachment will remain for backward compatibility with the lightsaber construction rules on page 23 of the Force and Destiny Gamemaster's Kit adventure module.  A future release will support standard lightsaber crafting through the new crafting system as outlined in the "Endless Vigil" source book.  This release does not support standard crafting of lightsabers.
Removed all item templates and template attachments, since they are no longer needed.  If you created an item using these items, they will be removed from your character.  Please recreate the items using the new crafting system. Added an editor for Droid Traits in the Data Editor.  Droid traits are used by Droid Directive effects in the crafting dialog. Certain gear items will allow you to create companions.  These are normally items such as droids or riding beasts.  A new "Create Companion" button can be found in the equipment pane.  By clicking on that button, the selected droid or riding beast will be added to the character's companion list.  Of course, the new companion can be customized. Standard riding beast abilities for adversaries (Domesticable, Trained Mount, Beast of Burden, Stubborn, and Domesticated) have now been added as talents.  Any beast given these as special abilities will be automatically upgraded to the talents.  If you've added your own riding beasts, be sure to check the ranks of these talents, however.  It will pick up ranks specified in the name (ie, "Trained Mount 2" ability will be converted to Trained Mount 2 talent), but if you just put the name, the talent will have only a single rank. Updated adversaries so that they support silhouette and a flag stating whether or not they can be used as a mount or riding beast. Silhouette will be automatically upgraded if it exists as a special ability.  The mount flag will be set if any special mount abilities or talents exist. Updated all riding beasts in the "Stay on Target" import to support the new riding beast features.  If you've already imported them, you may want to remove them from your adversaries collection and add them again. The Adversaries list in GM Tools, and the new Companions list in the generator, now support a "Create Mount" button.  If the currently selected adversary/NPC is a mount, clicking this button will convert the item into a vehicle that will appear either in the stock vehicle list, or the character's personal vehicle list.  The vehicle version of the mount can be used during combat when used as a mount, and to keep track of encumbrance for carried items (just add items to the riding beast "vehicle"). Mount vehicles support their own "attachments", such as riding tack, saddle bags, and the new cargo handling system from "Savage Spirits".  Some of these attachments may also show up as gear. All fonts have been updated to make the applications look closer to the fonts used in the books. All apps have been upgraded to use .NET Framework 4.5.  This is the latest version of .NET that is supported by Mono for the Mac. The caching database has been updated to SQL Server CE 4.0. A lot of window features, such as grid text, combo boxes, etc. have become more standardized, especially with fonts and text sizes.  This should provide a more uniform UI. Changed the way HTML is processed.  The apps now use a managed solution instead of the built-in WebBrowser control.  This means that it should work with Mono on the Mac or other cross-platform implementations of .NET.  Also improved the display of dice and symbol images, and HTML descriptions use the same new fonts as the dialogs. All apps now use GDI+ exclusively, also to help with Mono support. Made the UI of the character generator much more responsive.  Updating the UI during a character load has been reduced by about 60-65%.  There should be noticably shorter delays between selecting various UI elements, such as careers, talents, Force abilities, etc. Added a "stat block" feature to inventory.  This works very similarly to the stat block features for adversaries and vehicles.  It is accessible through the inventory pane. The optional mods list in the Item Attachment selection dialog can now support special symbols and HTML text.  You are no longer required to use plain text for optional miscellaneous descriptions. Names of items in grids on printed sheets would scale to fit the width of the grid column.  Names will now automatically wrap to the next line so that they remain readable. To support the stun-only blaster rule, a new attachment has been created called Stun-Only Blaster Modification.  Just purchase the weapon at half price and add this 0 HP attachment.  It will convert your weapon into a stun-only blaster.  This can only be applied to blaster pistols and blaster carbines. Characters with the Gearhead talent should see a 50% reduction in the cost for adding mods to items or vehicles. The cache will now automatically be cleared between versions.  This should help eliminate issues where the cached object is in an older format. When creating skill mods in the mod editor, you may now select rank count and career skill at the same time.  This would increase the skill rank, as well as make the skill a career skill.  As an optional mod, the career designator will show up for each rank, but will only be applied to a character once. New inverse (white, or white-bordered) symbols have been included to support dark backgrounds.  These symbols can be accessed in text by adding an "I" at the end of a symbol tag.  For instance, [ADI] or [ADVANTAGEI] will use the inverse version of the advantage symbol.  This should only be used if you explicitly change the background of something using HTML.  If the text will be displayed in a grid, the apps will automatically choose the right version of the symbol based on the pre-set background. Vehicles now have a new "vehicle type".  This can be a standard vehicle, a riding mount, or a structure.  Depending on the type, the stat block display will be modified to conform better to the role of the "vehicle".  Riding mounts and structures will use melee and ranged defense instead of normal vehicle defense.  Mounts will display "Wounds" instead of "Hull Trauma" and "Strain" instead of "System Strain", and "Soak" instead of "Armor".  Structures will display "Trauma" and "Strain". A warning message is now displayed if you select options from more than one mechanic between obligation, duty, and morality (as-written, options may only be obtained from one of those mechanics).  As always, the generator will still allow you to choose from more than one mechanic. Descriptive text has been added to obligation and duty options, telling the user how much of the mechanic is needed, or not needed, to enable options.  This seems to be a major hurdle for a lot of people, so I'm being more explicit now.  Hopefully, this will make things clearer. In the equipment pane under the weapons grid, "Type" has been replaced by "Skill".  You can still filter by type, and you may now sort by skill. In the vehicle pane, when selecting a weapon to add or upgrade, weapon information is now displayed in the dialog. Added a splash screen for the data editor. The data editor will now default to not displaying the help text on the right, which can be a distraction.  Click the "Help>>" button to show or hide this panel. The help text in the data editor has been updated to reflect new changes. Bug Fixes:
The 1.8 beta release caused an exception when the Deadly Accuracy talent was selected.  This has been fixed. When determining defense ratings for a character, some sources of weapon defense would be applied twice, or possibly three times, depending.  This will no longer happen. Fixed, and simplified, logic in the routine that totals the counts of item descriptors for weapons. In the Edit Reports dialog, some invalid properties were listed in the property list of step 2.  Now, only proper base properties of the item will be listed. In the Edit Reports dialog, the Prev button would sometimes be enabled even if you couldn't leave the step (if something in the step wasn't valid, for instance).  Now, the Prev button should be enabled or disabled properly. In the Edit Reports dialog, checks to enable or disable controls for step 3 were actually checking for step 4, and vice versa.  It now check the proper controls in the proper step. will be disabled in this situation. There was an error in the efficiency routines for custom data that would cause saved XML files to be truncated.  This will no longer occur. Signature Vehicle mods to custom or new talents weren't being saved properly.  They will now be saved. Fixed a bunch of incorrect sources in master data.  These sources would show up in the Options source list.  They were a remanent of the automation process that added page numbers to sources. The warning dialog about deselecting a duplicate unranked talent was showing up all the time if you had both Seer and Force-Sensitive Exile.  This was due to the Forager talent being in the top row of both trees.  The check for this condition will now only look at duplicate talents that are actually selected, so the dialog will now only show up when it's supposed to. When inserting existing special armor or weapons into adversaries, nothing would be displayed in the insert dialog, since the description field for those items is blank.  An armor or weapon summary will now be displayed. In the talent editor, if you copied a talent, it would replace the original talent.  This will no longer happen. When adding die modifiers from descriptors, a 0 count miscellaneous descriptor would not display the proper modifiers.  0 count descriptors should have been treated as having a count of 1 in this case.  This has been fixed. "Select Specialization" from the specialization pane would sometimes intersect the specialization combo box.  This was because I hadn't removed the Autosize feature.  It should now stay where it should and just resize itself if the translation gets too long. Removed all autosizing from labels, check boxes, and radio buttons throughout all applications.  Autosizing caused display issues when a language translation was larger than the original text.  All of these controls will now have their text resized by changing the font size if a translation is too large for the control. The specific motivation HTML display was having its bottom border cut off.  This has been fixed. The portrait selection dialog wasn't formatted correctly.  This has been fixed. In GM Tools, there was an issue adding characters to a group's membership.  This has been fixed. In GM Tools, if a new group was created, but cancelled, an exception would occur.  This has been fixed. When printing a group, character summaries would revert to the default names.  This has been fixed. The Spread Barrel attachment would add to an existing Blast quality.  However, it's description says that it "grants" Blast 4.  To fix this, added a new property to item descriptors called "QualSet" which is similar to the "QualReplace" property.  If "QualSet" is true, then the quality will be added if it does not exist, and will replace existing qualities, but only if the count is less than the new count ("QualReplace" will replace no matter what).  Spread Barrel now as "QualSet" at true to use this new feature. For quality descriptors with the "QualReplace" or "QualSet" properties set to true, the description now better matches what will happen.  That is, instead of "4 Quality (Blast 1) Mods", it will display "1 Replace Quality (Blast 4) Mod" or "1 Grant Quality (Blast 4) Mod". There was an issue with selecting sources in the Options dialog where removed sources would sometimes not be removed the next time the dialog was opened.  This will no longer happen.
 

Well, I've updated the release notes, finished the documentation and FAQ and created PDFs for them, and just did a new round of updating the translation files.  These are things that I do right before a release...
If I can get through tomorrow without doing any more tweaks, I'll do the release on Sunday.  Also, I've decided to make this one 2.0, since I've added so many things to it, and changed the appearance quite a bit with new fonts, etc.
No promises, but look for 2.0 to be released on Sunday.

Also, just a point or two, a ship that's had its HTT exceeded is no more destroyed than a character with their WT exceeded.
Likewise minion rules can roll over to vehicles. So you got a group of 4 TIEs? A crit will remove a minion outright.
 

Now you've gone and made me cry. Don't mind me, I'll just be over here blubbering.

I've got what we need for penguins right here...
 

Click here for SW:EotE Character Generator - Latest Release
 
 
Hi everyone.  Thought I’d let you all know that I’ve been working on a SW:EOTE character generator for the past month.  It is very close to completion; I’m mainly still adding data (some descriptions are not in place yet).  It pretty much allows you to create any character you can possibly create from the Core Rulebook.  It also supports special talents such as Jury Rigged, Dedication, etc., and allows you to add any weapon or armor attachment you want.  I’ve created a four-page character sheet that you can print, based around the design concept from the characters in the Basic Game (which I thought was cleaner than the sheet found in the Core Rulebook).
 
Future additions will include starships/vehicles, group sheets (including obligation tables), and NPC and encounter group generator.
 
I've written this in .NET using C#, so it'll be for the Windows platform and will require the .NET 4.0 framework.  The data files are all in XML, so they can be easily modified if you want to add your own piece of equipment, new skills, etc.  I currently do NOT have a data editor in the works, but I may write one if I get enough requests.
 
I’m including some screen shots here so you can take a look at how the screens are laid out and what the character sheets look like.  I'd appreciate feedback on how the layout could be improved, features I may have missed, requests for new features, organization of the character sheets, etc.  If you have any specific questions concerning how features are implemented, just ask!
 
Again, I'll be releasing the actual product for testing shortly, so please bear with the screen shots for now.
 
Thanks in advance,
 
OggDude
 
 
 
Screenshots:
 
Character load screen
Description
Description with portrait selection
Background
Obligations
Species
Species (human with skills option)
Career
Characteristics
Specializations
Specializations with Dedication talent
Motivations
Skills
Equipment
Force Powers
Attachments
New attachment example
Character sheet page 1 (Stats/Skills/Weapons)
Character sheet page 2 (Description/Motivations/Obligations/Background)
Character sheet page 3 (Features/XP/Talents/Force Powers)
Character sheet page 4 (Encum/Money/Equipment)

Minions can also be not dead when their wound threshold is exceeded, so you can just stress them into fainting or something. Or narrate them as being so flustered they accidentally grenade or shoot themselves.
 
Or the Politico has a Weirding Module and likes to shout "Muad'dib" a lot.

So far, for that matter, we don't even know that Ezra even constructed his current saber. It could be that he picked up an existing saber when leaving Malachor.
When the Jedi and clones arrived on Geonosis, a pair of "loaner" sabers were tossed to Anakin and Obi-Wan. Between that and Luke's use of Anakin's saber, we have precedent showing that, while lightsaber construction (including obtaining a crystal) was an important (possibly mostly ceremonial?) aspect of a Padawan's training, a Jedi could use any existing lightsaber effectively.

I think folks have done a good job discussing the Gain the Advantage as it is written and I have little to add there, but I have been experimenting with it recently and can share my experiences and how this action has evolved for us with use.
 
Probably the part we fiddled with the most was, "his check is one step more difficult for each time he or his opponent has successfully Gained the Advantage against the other."
 
We first tried it assuming your own successes counted against you too, and as others have noted it is counter-intuitive as you can become a victim of your own success. For characters and minion groups with large dice pools, this wasn't a big deal as GtA rolls often started trivially low, but for low or moderate dice pools or slower ships regaining GtA could become effectively impossible by the second roll even against equivalent opponents.
 
After that we experimented with only the opponent's successful attempt increasing the difficulty, we even eventually went back redid some of the previous encounters to get a feel for how they might have change. Here we found equivalent pilots, and ships had a fighting chance when their second roll came up. For advanced pilots with big dice pools (though not necessarily limited to just them) spending Advantage and Threat became a more salient factor on how challenging the next roll would be, and the give and take was often more variable and exciting. 
 
We have since settled on using the latter style at our table, as it plays out in a way we find more enjoyable, but we did also agree the former was more likely the closer interpretation to RAW. We also see the former as a better stylistic choice if you are going for a more sudden and cutthroat feel to your dogfights.
 
Now how long Gain the Advantage lasts also has a baring on the options above. If you stick to the first option, but have the difficulty increase end after the end of the following round, like GtA's primary benefits, then the difficulty shouldn't increase by more than two steps, keeping it somewhat in check. Unfortunately two steps can be enough to make it effectively impossible to succeed again, particularly if your ship is slower than your opponent's. Despite succeeding on the first roll, and almost because of it, failure becomes the most likely outcome on the next. You might find yourself questioning why you'd even bother with GtA in the first place if it means you're nearly guaranteed to lose it before a shot is fired. Without limiting the increased dificulty by the end of the following round will eventually lock out GtA as an option for both parties. These were additional factors for us settling on the second option, believing it gives pilots an incentive to be pilots instead of just gunners.
 
Getting back on the time limit, though the primary benefits only last until the end of the following round, my group hasn't bothered capping how long the difficulty increases lasts. You could say we play it lasting until the end of the encounter, but that would be deceptive. It would be more accurate to say it lasts until the opponents mutually move on, or it makes sense to end it in the narrative. As long as they are scrapping their successful attempts continue to add up until they reach a conclusion, whether that is one defeating the other or disengaging to deal with other threats or objectives. If they re-engage  at a later time in the encounter then they would start at again at zero.
 
For some reason doing it this way hasn't felt like we're tracking much of anything, the increase is there as long as we're dogfighting, then it is gone when we're not. Similarly with the primary benefits of GtA, if we have the advantage then on the following round can we apply them, then they're gone. I'm not sure if that observation makes any sense or not. . .
 
Another area we have experimented has been, "Once the advantage has been gained, on the following turn the opponent may attempt to cancel out the advantage by using Gain the Advantage as well." If successful do they merely cancel out your advantage or do they cancel your advantage and gain it themselves. In the beginning we were inclined to say in merely negates your advantage, leaving neither party with advantage, but we found it drew the duel out more than we liked, or at least in a way that created spaces of ineffectiveness. These times of ineffectiveness felt intolerable when our own successful attempts counted against our future rolls, and when our successful attempts didn't count against us, these dogfights didn't need stretching out. So having advantage trading hands made for a swifter encounter, and we generally agreed it felt more exciting. Though we haven't used it yet, I felt Koiogran Turn remains a little more unique when counter-rolls of GtA don't just merely negate advantage, but swaps it instead. 
 
 
 
One problem I think people have with actions like Gain the Advantage is it is very easy to look at the basic benefits and costs and come to the conclusion that it is a sub-optimal choice, and discount it. Admittedly, ignoring an instance or two of Evasive Maneuvers and choosing which facing to hit on a fighter likely sporting relatively weak shields isn't all that impressive.
 
Its for this reason I so strongly remind and emphasize the use of excess advantage/threat/triumph/despair. Spending these resources are what helps you maintain your advantage, let the boost and setback dice fly, and as Jegergryte says, use Gain the Advantage creatively! For me, that last point is much of the point of this whole system to begin with!
 
With that in mind, we've codified a  variable or two we found make Gain the Advantage more interesting:
 
One part of Gain the Advantage that hasn't really been discussed here is when multiple opponent's have advantage against you. With the rules as written it doesn't appear to explicitly be a factor, you pick one opponent, then try to counter their advantage with a roll of your own. And of course Koiogran Turn allows you to negate all their advantage with a maneuver.  One thing we started doing after we stopped counting our own successful attempts against our future rolls of GtA, was to increase the difficulty for each opponent with advantage over us. For example, I'm about to counter TIE/ln Alpha 1's advantage over me with a GtA roll of my own, but Alpha 3 has advantage too, assuming we're all moving at speed 5, the base difficulty is 2, and I increase it two more steps for a new difficulty of 4. If I succeed I break Alpha 1's advantage, gaining advantage of my own, while Alpha 3 still has advantage over me. The logic behind this choice was simply that the more opponents with advantage over you the more difficult it would be to escape any one instance (I need to break left, but if I do I'll fly right into Alpha 3's line of fire - if I roll a despair, that is probably exactly what happens). I'm interesting in using more Challenge dice, we might try Upgrading instead of Increasing Difficulty. Admittedly, I don't consider this so much of a house-rule as, like I said, merely codifying one potential variable influencing a character's dice pool, though I doubt everyone would agree with me there.
 
Another area I'm 'codifying' a little (okay, so this is more of a house-rule, and still untested) is allowing a character to spend additional successes with Gain the Advantage rolls (and potentially other pilot checks), rewarding those pilots with more skill or an impressive roll. I've found a character can succeed at a Gain the Advantage roll spectacularly, but since excess successes are not usually counted, the opponent can very easily counter advantage on their next roll, so we're letting the character upgrade their opponent's next pilot or gunnery check once for every two excess successes they rolled. 
 
Say I'm playing a highly skilled pilot who nets six Successes and two Advantage on their Gain the Advantage roll. With a positive result, she successfully gains the advantage over her opponent and with five excess successes she get to upgrade the opponent's next pilot or gunnery roll twice and chooses to spend the 2 Advantage to apply a Setback die on their next pilot or gunnery check. If the opponent chooses to counter her advantage, the base difficulty is increased one step for the successful roll, then upgraded twice for the excess successes, and they suffer a Setback die as well.
 
The aim of such a ruling is to reward skilled pilots by giving them an additional means of influencing dice pools and their own survival with said skill, while generally increasing the number of Challenge dice rolled in space combat. It may be that these upgrades are too fiddly to track, or that they are too dangerous or destabilizing, that is one reason I decided to use two excess successes instead of one per upgrade.
 
Regardless of what you think of my little, er, codification. I'd like to emphasize that Gain the Advantage is a means for a pilot to really use their piloting skill in aerial/space combat instead of relying almost solely on the gunnery skill, proving they are indeed the superior pilot.
 
Don't be afraid to use it creatively, Jegergryte, for example, pointed out some interesting alternative aims and goals that GtA could be used for.
 
Oh, and don't forget to apply Advantage/Treat and Triumph/Despair! They are game changers and narrative gold!
 
To summarize how Gain the Advantage has come to be used at our table, at least for the moment:
 
Gain the Advantage (Pilot-only Action; Silhouette 1-5; Speed 4+; Difficulty determined by relative Speed)
Ignore any penalties imposed from the Evasive Maneuver starship maneuvers until the end of the following round. You may choose what defense zone you hit with your attack until the end of the following round. If an opponent has advantage over you, you may counter it by making a Gain the Advantage action on your turn. Increase the Difficulty by one step for every time your opponent has successfully Gained the Advantage against you. If successful, you have advantage now. House Ruling: Increase the difficulty for every opponent beyond the first holding advantage over you. House Ruling: For each pair of successes beyond the first Upgrade your opponent's next Piloting or Gunnery check once.

That is a misconception. You need only tricky target once and add on top of that two mods or one mod which reduce your silhouette to zero against enemy attacks (one is enough for hapan Miy'til starfighter) and btw tricky target is not ranked anyway, so you only can take it once. Defensive driven at the other hand is ranked, but rather limited of use as defense for vehicles is capped at 4 and there are much easier and cheaper ways to raise your defense against incoming attacks to 4.
Speaking of brilliant evasion, you can use it against a target which you are not controlling via GtA or shutdown a expert gunner or ace that way, you have as well access to signature abilities which shut down every other ship, while you shutdown your target via brilliant evasion. Furthermore, unless the enemy has GtA on you, you pick your defense zone, which means if you can turn your speed up to 11 5 or 6 that the pilot checks are nearly impossible for bad pilots to get GtA on you. That it is trivial to get defense 4 in one zone I already mentioned. 
 
Lastly, if you are an ace, you should have a squadron to back you up if you go against larger numbers of enemies. If you don't have that luxury and are outnumbered heavily than running away and using the case rules together with the environment and the occasional collusion via corillian send off or just triumphs from your piloting checks are a solid way to reduce your enemies or at least reducing incoming fire. Anything which has significant range is bigger than a star fighter and has a hard time to hit you in a fighter anyway, so if you can keep your distance you are mostly fine as well. A 5Y Ace:Hotshot is freaking dangerous to follow into an asteroid field or nebula even if you are in an imperial star destroyer and he the hotshot is flying just a modified YT-1300. 
 
How you fly, what you can engage and what not is all about your pilot skill, your allies and own vehicle. You don't run into the enemies when outmatched on the ground either. 
 
 
You can combine all those tools rather easy into giant defensive options, I would say it is a lot easier to become a hard target in space combat than it is in personal combat, as you can layer on layer on layer your defenses, lure opposing forces via the chase rules as well to force them either to split up or disengage from you, while your wingman picks them apart from behind. Vehicle combat is a real beauty. 

My group is entirely new to the system, including the GM(me). We did some Saga for a long time, but never got anything commissioned for our campaigns. This time we decided to get a group commission outright, and we went to the awesome Will Nunes for it, who has already had some of his commissions posted here earlier.
 
So here are the members of the ISDT Corporation's First Survey Team.
 
From left to right we have R3-D0, Miriss 'Miri' Devani, Devora Abnawaa, Jhoren Zaul, Zeth J'raal, and Azalee Sivron.

Pretty well covered by snuffy, but as a military guy, there are a variety of air missions that might be flown by pilots. 

1.) Patrol: This means the pilots have to fly what is probably a routine patrol over an area of space supposedly controlled by their side. Patrols typically focus on detecting enemy activity, most often enemy air assets, but it could also include looking for enemy ground activity as well. (Key check: Vigilance to detect something is off)
 
2.) Attack Run: This means the ship is given designated targets (typically ground targets, but could also be enemy starships, logistics stations, etc). The missions is to go in, destroy a target, and leave. (Key check: Gunnery to hit a target)
 
3.) Air Support: Similar to flying a patrol, only it is being done in support of ground troops. This is chiefly concerned with enemy aircraft that might want to attack your friendlies. The friendlies might be required to take a location or escort a package or person somewhere. (Key check: pilot to engage and gunnery to destroy enemy fighters)

4.) Reconnaissance: Often done with stealthy ships, though can be done with fast ships as well, or through trickery to disguise a ship as a civilian or friendly craft. The goal is to gather information about the strength and disposition of enemy forces and then leave, most preferably without the enemy being aware. (Key check: Perception to use eyes and sensors to notice details of enemy disposition)

5.) Escort: Another craft needs protection from enemy craft. This might mean escorting a VIP shuttle, or a giant supply convoy filled with vital supplies, or a squadron of bombers on an attack run. (Key check: Vigilance to detect incoming attacks, Pilot to gain the advantage, and gunnery to destroy enemies)

6.) Inspection: Similar to a patrol, this mission typically involves checking civilian craft with visuals and scanners to ensure only those who belong at said location are there. Typically looking for enemy agents and criminals. (Key Check: Perception to detect contraband, Knowledge: Warfare or Underworld to aid in knowing where to look for contraband)

7.) Ground Support: Similar to air support, but instead of focusing on enemy air assets, this mission is focused on enemy ground assets that might threaten friendly troops in the field. Troops can call in strikes or request information from the higher vantage point. This can get tricky because you don't want to hit friendly forces, or mistake friendlies for enemies. (Key Check: Perception to notice and relay information, Knowledge Warfare to relay enemy activity and likely plans, Gunnery to destroy enemy and fire at designated points)

8.) Search and Rescue (or Search and Salvage): This mission involves flying a search pattern to locate an EVA pilot (or key technology or even scrap) or pilot in a damaged craft to bring them in safely. (Key checks: Perception to notice and locate targets, Mechanics or Pilot to safely tractor people or cargo to safety)

These are sort of tailored to the Star Wars RPG above to give you some ideas. Obviously you can string and mix and match the 8 mission types into larger epic combat encounters (maybe you must first escort a team in, then provide ground support while they do their mission, then air support when enemy fighters show up, then escort them out, etc). If you want a look at how the real military classifies various combat air patrols, there is a link below: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_air_patrol 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerial_warfare 

Another way to approach this is to ensure that you have some missions that encompass the various duties selected by your players. Some of these might require your squadron to be more like Wraith Squadron, where not all missions are exclusively from within the cockpit. Pilots might have to reach a location, land, do some commando stuff while others cover them, and then get back safely. 

The important thing is to mix it up. Don't stick them in the same starship all the time, and don't give them the same mission profiles all the time. These are PCs, heroes. They aren't the rank and file that ONLY specialize in one mission type or one aircraft. Having them switch from Imperials to Rebels is great too. I'd really suggest making sure they have some high value Rebel commanders they are aware of and have a bad opinion of as Imperials, that they later have to work for as Rebels, and play with their expectations versus the reality of who those people are and why they do what they do. Especially if they take down a Rebel ace or two, that'd make for some great drama trying to win the respect and trust of their new rebel allies. 

I had been crossing my fingers that he'd get the part once it was rumored they were in talks to bring him on board. I still hold out hope though that Billy Dee gets to reprise the role in an Ep VIII or IX. 

http://www.starwars.com/news/donald-glover-cast-as-young-lando-calrissian-in-upcoming-han-solo-star-wars-stand-alone-film
 
This one seemed fated to happen. Can't say I'm disappointed. I think he will strike the right balance.

Yeah, sorry guys... very soon now I hope... watch this space.

Honestly, I can totally see Martial Artist being a Spy specialization ... especially when one brings Bruce Lee to mind. Game of Death, after all, is a movie in which Bruce Lee is both well known for AND is playing a spy himself! Chinese Connection, The Big Boss, all these movies see Bruce go "under-cover" to thwart the BBEG. Perfect for spy. 

I've always played Perception as active, and Vigilance as passive, myself.
 
(And don't ask for rolls unless it's necessary.)
 
Hopefully this will be cleared up in 2nd Edition!  
 
#MarcyOpenlyTrollingFolks

I think it could work for a Spy spec, since infiltrating often requires a lack of weaponry and the need to make your own body one. Spy TV shows and movies are full of depictions of men and women who are deadly with a minimum of equipment.