Thanks! My primary PhD adviser frequently says the same thing. I actually did teach a freshman engineering class one semester, it was an educational experience and I generally got very good feedback. I work full-time so serious teaching isn't really in the cards. I would be more interested in teaching power electronics, audio amplifiers, transduction and acoustics than I am MathWing though. Well, you could ask the Scum and Villainy podcast to ask them that question when they interview Alex next time! But I seriously doubt that's one of their main design objectives. I think they just want to make a high quality and balanced game. Ordnance is still fundamentally a one-off so I don't think that trying to shoehorn it into the conventional jousting model is the correct approach. You really have to look at the increased damage that you get from that one attack, and convert that into how many more points worth of the opposing squad you can erase from having a higher burst damage. The exception would be if a ship had so many missiles and torpedoes that it never ran out of ordnance and therefore never took a primary weapon shot, but even with TIE bombers that is generally rare. Maybe we will see that happen with wave 7, for 26 points you can get Scimitar + Extra Munitions + Cluster Missiles + Proton Torpedoes. 4 secondary shots is a lot. I plan on doing a thorough post / whitepaper on the Missile / Torpedo topic eventually. I would like to do it soon, but I don't have an ETA. My approach would be to weigh the health of the defender, and look at one-time damage increases as being worth it if they remove more than their cost from the opponent's fleet. A few pages back I did something like that, relating the removed joust value of a defender to a single volley from a given primary at a given range. Doing the same for a proton torpedo, I then calculated the difference. I am not satisfied with the results and need to tweak model assumptions to gain insight into the value of the ordnance.

I agree with this reasoning. I could almost see them going down to 19, because everyone agrees the X-wing is overcosted at 21, and like you said, this is slightly worse than the X-wing I would have thought we'd gotten over this as a community, but apparently not. Does anyone think the Lambda would stay at its current cost if it had the YT-2400's dial? Of course not. Would the X-wing still have a cost-effectiveness problem if you could swap its dial for an Interceptor's dial? No, I don't think it would. So let's back off a little bit on being disappointed in (or excited about) the base cost of the Kihraxz, until we know: (1) What the base cost of the Kihraxz actually is, and (2) Whether it has a dial better than an X-wing (like an Interceptor), worse than an X-wing (like a Y-wing), or very similar (like an E-wing). [EDIT: Not aimed specifically at UnfairBanana or Danthrax, but rather at the thread in general.] Indeed, the dial could surprise us, as well as the cost. However, everything I read about the kihraxz is making it sound like a scummy x-wing competitor. The PS9 (who, unknown dial aside, looks like a good value) pilot matches cost with the x-wing's Wedge Antilles, which leads one to believe there may be more parallels to be drawn that are less exciting about the ship. You are right, though, we won't know until they release more spoilers and the speculation we do here is really just hot air.

Well, it seems to drop as an action, big D after the header is probably to discard. Then from zooming and squinting at pixels, "when... maneu... overlaps... token..." My guess for this is that "When a ship base or maneuver template overlaps a conner net token, it detonates" Keyword detonates is not really shown, perhaps the token persists, but that is unprecedented. Curious what it may do, possibly the equivalent to an ion proximity mine, seeing how they added ion bombs. Could be fun.

Doesn't really matter, because we're not actually talking about an X-Wing here, and I don't wish to derail this thread into a debate about X-Wings. The Kihraxz looks to fill a role that the S&V doesn't really have anything for currently. A heavy assault/jousting fighter. None of the current ships in S&V work in that role, and so the Kihraxz looks to be a good ship for this faction. The x-wing "derail" is about the "scum x-wing" that will materialize soon, and the questionable value of the PS2 generic kihraxz if it sees the same cost plan as the x-wing does. We still haven't seen the actual cost of the generics or the dial, but I'd be lamenting--not celebrating--an emulation of the x-wing. Disagree there, too. BTL-A4 y-wings kick open doors far better than x-wings or the hypothetical "scum x-wing" if it gets priced the same. And if you need just jousting fighters, scum has M3-As and z-95s which will also be better values for the points.

Yes I did, did you? You said the Y-Wing is better, but it's not. The PS2 X-Wing is 88.3% The PS2 Y-Wing is 83.5% The PS1 A-Wing is 82.8% All the YT-1300 are under 80% All the HWK-290's are under 80% All the E-Wings are under 80% In the Rebel faction there are 2 ships with better jousting values then the X-Wing. the B-Wing and the Z-95. Some ships get better with given upgrades, but those upgrades are not given, or increase the cost. I'd hardly call 5 out of 7 ships a short list. But hey continue with your pointless ranting, doesn't matter to me. It's not like you have facts to back up your points. -PS2 Y-wing with the BTL-A4 and ion are around 100% joust efficient, not actually beaten by generic x-wings in joust efficiency -PS1 A-wing with refit is 93.8% joust efficient, also not being beaten. Ships 'beaten' in joust efficiency by the x-wing: -YT-1300s that aren't the generic are less joust efficient without upgrades, indeed, but are within a point of their predicted values or exceed it because of the turret and dial considerations -rebel HWKs are not a great value across the board and see use that hardly makes them a standard for being a good ship -YT-2400s are great value with cannon and outrider plus they skirt around the same joust efficiency of the x-wing while still having a turret and barrel roll on the action bar -generic e-wings are in a similar boat in that they are overcosted If you want to start going across factions to imperials, -generic x-wings are beating the tie advanced...until the raider comes out -they're neck and neck with generic interceptors on joust efficiency, though interceptors also benefit from having boost and barrel roll. Overall they are closer to their predicted value than x-wings are. -imperial firesprays and defenders are not quite as joust efficient, but MJ has even flagged their predicted values orange, meaning he believes those numbers are suspect due to their unique non-jousting features -phantoms unupgraded are about as bad a value as x-wings, but quickly exceed as you add the practically autoinclude -decimator has the same story as the yt-1300s and in scum, -scum hwks are in the same boat as rebels, except the elite ones actually beat x-wing joust efficiency and are good values -scum firesprays skirt around similar numbers for joust efficiency, but has a much better predicted value close to the printed cost -starviper generics are also overcosted by ~2 points Every other ship in the game has a better joust efficiency out of the box. Out of these ships that have lower joust efficiency, they still make it closer to their predicted values for non-joust considerations like turrets or repositioning actions with exceptions of non-scum hwks, generic starvipers, generic defenders, generic big turret ships, generic unupgraded phantoms and generic e-wings. None of the aforementioned ships are within the same role of x-wing either or see much use. X-wing is literally worst in class of all jousting ships in-game.

No it actually isn't. Look at MajorJugglers numbers and you'll see it's not that bad of a ship. No where near as bad as you claim it is. It's not as cost effective as Tie Fighters or B-Wings, but it's better then Y-Wings, HWK's and a host of other ships. Also the pilot abilities make and break the X-Wing, and it looks like the ones we know about for the kihraxz are pretty good, well worth the points. Major Juggler's numbers put the joust efficiency of the rookie pilot at 88% there is a short list of ships with less joust efficiency, and they have either turrets or autoinclude upgrades that put it above x-wing in value. His predicted value for the PS 2 is 18.4 points. Actual cost is 21 points. As far as pilot abilities go, only biggs and wedge are within 1.5 points of their predicted values. Did you even read his thread?

The X-Wing is only underpowered compared to the B-Wing. If the B-Wing was more expensive than the X-Wing would still have a place in Rebel fleets. Seeing how there's nothing S&V side comparable to the B-Wing then something that is on par with the X-Wing is fairly good. I don't see how anyone can say the S&V X-Wing is bad, when the the only thing it has to compare to, is other S&V ships. That's like saying the B-Wing is bad because of the Tie Phantom. No, the x-wing is underpowered compared to the tie fighter, the a-wing, the z-95, the y-wing... The list goes on. You can practically name a ship and know it is more worth its points than an x-wing with a few exceptions. The crux of the matter is cost effectiveness. With no actions for repositioning (no barrel roll or boost stock), the ship has to rely on being able to beat other ships in a slug-out, but you are not getting much for the points you pay.

The Kihraxz generic is almost for sure going to be 21. It is meant to be based on the x-wing, but trading a shield for a hull. I also almost guarantee that if the dial isn't magnificent, that the ps2 generic will see as much use as the ps2 generic x-wing. Which is practically none.

You can also use redline's ability with ordnance that doesn't spend your both of your TL. If you use 1, but not the 2nd, you hold onto one for a future round. Say you get your TL at range 3, spend 1 lock, get into range 1 next turn, focus, and let loose the advanced protons with focus.

The "Check Stress Step" is an independent part of the turn. Its why "Daredevil" was changed from being a red maneuver to being a white maneuver, and then gives you a stress. SLAM maneuvers don't check stress. If somehow you get a stress token but can still perform it as an action, you can SLAM a red. If you SLAM a Koiogran, you don't get a stress Sadly, SLAM will not be a NOPE button. But it does well enough on its own not to need my insanity added The big question about SLAM next is what the k-wing's dial looks like. If you SLAM a k-turn, you would have had to perform a maneuver of the same speed already. If there are no other moves of the same speed, or if they are red, you effectively cannot perform the k-turn SLAM without somehow removing a stress first.

Hate to say it, but good riddance. Blaster turret just sucks.

It would have a durability of {EDur} = 1.357 (same as tie bomber). If that 3 attack is a primary weapon, a good approximation would be to have 2x{EDO of a 3 dice attack} which is making an optimistic assumption about the same action economy being available for both attacks. {EDO} = 1.7058*2 JV comes to a lofty 27.94 However, because I assume that means you are talking about a bomber with cluster missiles, you won't be getting range bonuses, so the damage is not quite that high, it would be {EDO} = 1.592*2 The JV comes to 26.89. (PS 1 cost being 24.96, that is a 107.72% joust efficiency). The optimistic assumptions being made in this case would be that you never run out of cluster missiles, are never denied your cluster missile attack (from not having a TL or being at range 3), and that focus/reroll economy will be the same for both attacks and as good as any other ship. These may or may not be reasonable assumptions, and remember that without ordnance, the bomber has a 14.2 JV, so hopefully your early shots counted. If you want a more in-depth analysis, some of those assumptions could be removed with a better tailored model.

Put your ships on at least 3-4 pegs.

Make sure your target lock tokens spell something annoying, funny, or obscene.

Make a comment about that faux-cus token being all too real.

Have the "A Punishing Blow" from Darkest Dungeon set up as a sound-file on my phone? That is living the tie-life. To be obnoxious when firing ordnance, call out fox-1, fox-2, etc. When dropping bombs, play "you dropped a bomb on me"

every speed-2 maneuver you reveal, say "2-hard, some say not hard enough" after each hit by your punisher, call it "a punishing volley"

Use "redline" and play racing music from your phone while you play.

What if the new turret is R2-3? That would be an interesting upgrade. Adding a range band for extra points to the K-wing, donut hole effect on other turret-able ships. Just a thought. That is what I was thinking. I think it would be really cool for BTL-A4s to be able to shoot out to distance, too. The pack comes with 2, which is what made me say that--ffg intends it to be usable on more than just that ship. The issue will be what cost/damage/action(if any) mix would be involved. Given how conservative a lot of this wave has been, I worry that it will veer into the pile of upgrades that aren't worth using.

I would say "no" if there was a range 3 turret upgrade. Denying a range 3 defensive bonus with a turret is pretty strong. But because there isn't, I think "kinda" Blaster turret for a ship like that might not be good. In range 1, the primary attack is the same for no need to spend the focus. In range 2, without an extra focus from a recon specialist, your odds don't improve. That becomes 4 points on the blaster turret + 3 points for free focus capability just to do a marginal increase over your primary in the range 2 atc so long as you can maintain that action economy. Autoblaster...I doubt is worth bringing, but at least it is cheap. Ion cannon turret would bring some control option, which could be useful for extra-annoying slam business, but may be adding less utility than it adds cost. Perhaps we will have to wait and see what that new turret card does in the k-wing pack.

1 point for this upgrade would have been undercosted. You forget that it gives you a second 4 or 5 point missle/torp/bomb for each you have equipped. 2 seems very fair 1 point would have been overcosted for some ordnance out there on ships that aren't the tie bomber or one of the new wave 7 ships. Just because you get a second missile/torp/bomb that has a printed cost of 4 or 5 doesn't mean it is worth 4 or 5 points, possibly not even 2 points. And that a second would be worth as much. Do you use Jonus with your torps? what about homing missiles? Proton Rockets? There are a variety of ways missiles and torps are great when stacked in pairs just currently we haven't had a way to do it. I don't think getting them off will be much of an issue as people seem to be making it. Shooting a cluster missile is better than just shooting 3 dice isn't it? You have to remember that for every time you roll 0 hits you will eventually roll all hits. Y-wings and b-wings can't be fielded with jonus. no but they do have FCS, token support (IE kyle garvin), free action support, (cracken, lando). I just named 4 different ships/pilots that would help your own ships fire their stuff more effectively. You can throw in squad leader, dutch, just for a few more options. This, exactly, is why people DON'T use ordnance. You need to spend a ton of points on less than efficient pilot options to get the most out of 1 or 2 shots. When you can even keep dutch, garven, kyle, and FCS and spend the 6+ points getting a torpedo and the extra munitions upgrade elsewhere and be better off. Any investment in ordnance-enabling action economy can just as easily be an investment in more primary or cannon improving action economy. My point is any extra damage you could do with a proton torpedo is not worth 4 points. TL spent or unspent with the ordnance, if I spend points to get free rerolls, or a free focus the turn I TL, the extra damage still fails to be worth 4 points, or even 3 points. The extra ordnance upgrade only has a chance to be worth taking on ships like tie bomber and the new wave 7 ships.

1 point for this upgrade would have been undercosted. You forget that it gives you a second 4 or 5 point missle/torp/bomb for each you have equipped. 2 seems very fair 1 point would have been overcosted for some ordnance out there on ships that aren't the tie bomber or one of the new wave 7 ships. Just because you get a second missile/torp/bomb that has a printed cost of 4 or 5 doesn't mean it is worth 4 or 5 points, possibly not even 2 points. And that a second would be worth as much. Do you use Jonus with your torps? what about homing missiles? Proton Rockets? There are a variety of ways missiles and torps are great when stacked in pairs just currently we haven't had a way to do it. I don't think getting them off will be much of an issue as people seem to be making it. Shooting a cluster missile is better than just shooting 3 dice isn't it? You have to remember that for every time you roll 0 hits you will eventually roll all hits. Y-wings and b-wings can't be fielded with jonus. e: and the argument you make about ordnance shots being better than a regular shot is a bit sideways; an ordnance shot is almost always better than a primary shot, but their printed costs generally do not line up with value, which is why they do not perform well competitively.

1 point for this upgrade would have been undercosted. You forget that it gives you a second 4 or 5 point missle/torp/bomb for each you have equipped. 2 seems very fair 1 point would have been overcosted for some ordnance out there on ships that aren't the tie bomber or one of the new wave 7 ships. Just because you get a second missile/torp/bomb that has a printed cost of 4 or 5 doesn't mean it is worth 4 or 5 points, possibly not even 2 points. And that a second would be worth as much.

Package size/weight is probably the main determinant of cost. These things ship across the globe from manufacturers to retailers. The difference in plastic volume per mini is probably insignificant, unless it affects quality control.

A lot will hinge on their cost and what upgrades will be available. Until we get more details, it is hard to say how strong one ship or another might be.