Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About streamdragon

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

659 profile views
  1. Sorry, I meant Gunner, not turret. It's a new type of card, and that's not a crew icon on the new Solo card. The YT-1300 losing a crew slot for a gunner slot seems pretty likely to me. It also fits that 'fluff' everyone likes to think should determine rules.
  2. There's three issues here as I see it: 1. Trying to compare old and new versions of the YT. We know, at this point, that there is no real reason to do so. Thanks to the Lando Falcon preview, we know that the new version has a turret slot, where as the old YT did not. So saying "we can put these two crew on the new YT because the old one had two crew slots" doesn't really work. 2. Assuming the Lando Falcon and the Han Falcon will have the same slots, but we already know that the ships are different. They're two different faction ships, and crew slots especially are the most faction-specific. 3. Using fluff to justify mechanics. This usually ends poorly.
  3. The Rebel Falcon also has more primary attack and more shields. There is no reason to assume this has the same slots.
  4. How is it power creep to give it the stats of an already existing version of the same ship? A 3-dice primary, double turret ship with that exact same action bar already exists. This may come as a shock, but that ship is also the Millennium Falcon! Shock, gasp, surprise.
  5. An entire faction that is electronically neutered by Ion? Also as much as I love the Clone Wars era (despite the actual movies that set it up), I highly doubt we're ever going to see it in game. FFG has had years before the new movie era to include Prequel ships and factions AS prequel ships and factions. That they have explicitly chosen not to do so speaks rather loudly. That is a rather large assumption, given that there are currently 6, maybe 7 droid pilots in the whole game. There will certainly never be enough to even closely match the number of meatbag pilots, which rather limits the likelihood of a line of upgrades specifically for those pilots. Maybe, maybe, when the Scum line gets reworked and we see new IG pilots, but until then? I am doubting FFG is that forward thinking. It also does nothing for the time between now and then, and months of "man, these pilots are sure underwhelming" doesn't exactly seem like a smart place to start.
  6. All I know is Calculate better be effin amazing, or droid ships are basically trash. And Ion doesn't really change how good Force users are. They're still better than non force users. This mostly just hurts droid ships. All ... 6 of them. Like, why bother designing this mechanic. So far it seems like a stellar example of "why fluff should not influence mechanics".
  7. Depending on placement, sure. But that's not something to be relied on. R3 monsters are a thing, have always been a thing, and probably always will be a thing. edit: not to mention if she had Focus instead of Calculate, she could theoretically stack 2 focus, which is in every way shape and form superior to a focus and a calculate.
  8. Cheaper than what though? If there was a 100% equivalent pilot (there's not) in a 100% equivalent ship (there's not), then saying "it's cheaper" might be useful. But there's not, and so it's not. I also don't really care if my "cheaper" pilot is constantly getting blown out of the sky/space because she has the worst of all mechanics. Not as good as focus, almost as good as Force except Force ships ALSO can Focus.
  9. Having Calculate instead of Focus is, so far, a complete nerf. It's 100% an inferior action on its own, and Guri has (that we have seen) no way to stack Calculate tokens. So in that regard, it's pretty inarguably a nerf.
  10. PS6, not IN6. And no, the points won't balance it. It would practically be the first game in table top history for that to happen.
  11. I did say "generally superior". Then again, there is nothing that they've shown us for non-IG droid pilots (see: Guri, 4-Lom) to get more than 1 calculate token, which makes them worse than Focus except in the exact circumstance of rolling 1 eyeball, in which case you break even. Not a great look. IG-88A is a net neutral. You transfer the token, so they have to 1) be in range, 2) have the calculate action and 3) you have to NOT need the token on IG-88A. There is literally 0 times I would not want to replace "Calculate" with "Focus" in any card that shows "Calculate" so far. It is an inherently weaker action. It's weaker than Force even, since at least Force 1) doesn't require an action to get and 2) is usually on top of having Focus as an available action. Basically, unless Calculate lets you do something seriously great (maybe like the old EPT instead of turning Eyeballs to Hits you turn them to Crits?), it is completely weaker than a standard Focus. I'm hoping FFG is smart enough to realize that. Then again, they actually nerfed Dace it seems, so who knows at this point.
  12. True, I should have phrased that better. "If they want" was in reference to spending tokens/TLs/whatever to make sure they had enough hits or whatever. Previous ion was a 'one and done' type affair, since you did damage/ion and then canceled results.
  13. so... it is basically like a Force token for Droids, who lose the (generally superior) Focus action for it?
  14. They had a chance to change the "all or nothing" feel to initiative, but flopped on that also. With the compacted PS, it means there will be plenty of games where basically one player will do everything, then the other will react with whatever is left of their ships. Changing tied PS to an alternating activation would have added a tactical layer to the game that wasn't present before (ship activation selection on tied PS). Plus side, I guess the "activate when dead on your PS" rule will see a lot more play. *finger twirl*
  • Create New...