Jump to content

Killionaire

Members
  • Content Count

    133
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Actually there's a very good point to be made: We now have two new Scum sub-factions, to go with Black Sun and Hutt colorings!
  2. This is a horrible decision and utterly defeats the point of a new deck. The point of the new deck was for crits to matter, always. Now, by being able to PICK deck, we've made crits matter less than ever before! Hooray! Why not just remove the mechanic from the game completely?
  3. I believe some earlier sources had some of the GR75s as fireships. You'd kamikaze an explosives-laden GR75 into an ISD, and have the crew bail out before hand on a shuttle or something.
  4. Squadrons are terribly ineffective at doing damage, unless they utterly change the squadron rules at an efficient cost (ie, Rhymer) Look at Enhanced Armaments on an AF. Very efficient, and you'll get 4 shots out of that thing probably every game. More if you combo it with anything (ie, gunnery team) Look at a single bomber. Perhaps a Y-Wing or Tie Bomber or even an A-Wing. You'll get what, maybe two attacks on an enemy ship? At a higher cost than just upgrading the cannon on a ship of the line? And extra awkward if you use the strongest bomber, the B-Wing? If anyone's suggesting that their non-Rhymer attack ships are getting off more than 2 bombing runs per game, I'd think they're crazy. But any warship really ought to be firing at well over 4 targets over the course of the game. Most likely 6. In addition to enhancing your flexibility (more ships means more activations), while Squadrons require exact timing to do ANYTHING (and use up valuable dials on big ships). I'm still convinced through experience that you'll do more damage with a bomber squadron's weight in CR90Bs or Raider Is over a course of a game, than with gimmicky bombers attacking at most twice a game and robbing you of precious activations, and unable to do objectives. (Again, Rhymer is an exception due to effectively circumventing a major squadron rule). Rogues may help, but they pay a lot for it. Firesprays are way more expensive than Raiders for the output they produce.
  5. What makes sense is that that's literally every ship the Rebels could scrape together, vs a small Imperial squadron. Vader's personal unit. After the Emperor dissolves the senate in EpIV, Tarkin states that 'Fear will keep them in line. Fear of this [soon to be vaporized by teenagers] battlestation'. Presumably after the Death Star's gone, systems start falling out of line. The Empire doesn't have enough garrisons and ships even to keep every system under it's thumb, vs powerful defenses (thus, the need for a Death Star to begin with). This allows planets to obviously and openly throw in for the Rebels (Mon Calamari). I'd expect both the Rebels and Imps had similar ship forces at Endor, with an advantage to the Imperials particularly because of Executor (ignoring the Death Star). The GR-75s are interesting in the battle. They don't have visible cannons, what role do they serve? ECM? Fireships? Also, check out this video at 7 seconds or 8 seconds in... lots of unknown ships made of random parts in the background! One looks like a Dreadnaught sorta, and another looks like a longer MC30. --- Fun Fact: In Return of the Jedi, fire between capital ships is shown only once on screen: A Nebulon-B and an ISD-II exchanging BROADSIDES at point blank range. We know that that would end up like in Armada...
  6. There's a difference of sorts that's very important. With tourney rules where 'quality of win matters', instead of 'number of wins or who you win against', sometimes the best move is to LOSE IN A SPECIFIC WAY. That's really weird. I feel like the games should always feel self contained, the goal is to win against your opponent. After all, that's the focus of the game, right? Beating your enemy's ships and accomplishing objectives. But let's say your goal is to not lose by more than 7-3. Do you take any risky moves trying to win? No, that's sub-optimal. You may feed them a ship to slow them down and lose 6-4, but you shouldn't try to win. That's more of a risk and damage than an assured loss... which is weird. --- This happened in the old Netrunner rules, and had a lot of arguments. The example was, at the last table: If I try to score an assured singe point out of 7, that's a bad move now. It costs me too many resources and will weaken me for the rest of the game, likely leaving a loss. The smart move if I was playing to win is to do other stuff instead of this suicidal move to score one point but lose seven. BUT if all I need to win the tourney is 1 more point, regardless of loss, I'd do it and throw the game. Yet, that would win me the tournament. What the hell? It just feels counter intuitive and very gamable. It also means your biggest advantage in the whole tournament is crushing the ever living snot out of a poor newbie who has been unluckilly assigned to you for a 10-0 win first game, as opposed to defeating another fellow skilled player barely by 6-4.;
  7. Partly I see it as this: yes, the squadrons command is extremely efficient in the sense that it has the potential to cause perhaps 4 additional damage to a target. Downside: That 4 damage cost a command, great timing, and probably 60 points. And is unlikely to repeat turn after turn. Are 4 X-Wings really causing comparable damage to a CR90 or Raider? Who can do it turn after turn without really worrying too much about boardstate? That's the issue. You're already paying quite a few points for guys that don't give you an activation, and may not really have more firepower than their weight in light warships. The optimal case is better, but the 'average expected' and sub-optimal cases are far worse.
  8. I don't feel an intense need to grab squadrons due to their basic mechanics. Rhymer gets around a bunch, but it's just that they're so inflexible and unlikely to actually get attacks off without a lot of wrangling. If they were allowed to move 1 distance and still attack, it'd be a game-changer and they'd be fantastic. As it is, the inability of squadrons to consistently attack Speed 2 and Speed 3 (esp) targets makes them a lot worse.
  9. The point being: By making him Imperial Ackbar, you can intensify the forward batteries, because you don't want anything to get through. INTENSIFY FORWARD FIREP--- TOO LATE
  10. Admiral Piett Before a friendly ship's attack step, it may choose to only attack from it's forward arc this round. If it does, it may add 2 attack dice of any color to it's attack pool while attacking a ship or single squadron. We all know we want this. Only because it's the only naval command in the entire movies that meant anything.
  11. Scum fleets make a ton of sense. Why else would literally every ship in all of star wars (including in a time of peace where no major wars have been fought for 1000 years) be armed? Not only slightly armed, but usually military-grade armed. Those Pirates must be out there and they must be very heavily equipped. Why else have such a healthy bounty hunting industry? Why else would the Empire need star destroyers to patrol outer rim sectors instead of hordes of corvettes, if Pirates only used fighters and the space equivalent of armed fishing boats? The Rebels are probably as well armed as a large pirate band. Remember in ESB, the Rebel base, shield generators and other items were initially dismissed as 'Smugglers' until Vader said Luke was there. Why would Smugglers have trench defenses, turrets, and a big surface-space ion cannon, if not for fear of attack by large spaceships, presumably not just by the empire?
  12. Functionally, Fat Han, Dash, and RAC don't make a difference. They fall under the same category: An arc dodging, fat turret ship for your chosen faction that can absorb a lot of damage and win by margins on points. The Tie-Int is only there as an accessory for RAC. So instead of going 'Look, han is only 20-odd percent of the meta!' instead it's really 'Look, han-like equivilencies are effectively 65-70 percent of the meta!' That's horrid for diversity. Especially since most of those ships are only being used for one pilot or one build (do we really expect anything but loaded Corrans for E-Wings? Anyone but Fel really for Tie-Ints at such numbers?)
  13. Simple. Title Card: Fire Linked Weapons Cost: 2 (or something. Maybe 0? ) Gain a (cannon) slot. You may only equip Cannon Upgrade Cards that cost 5 points or less. The rest of the text is the same as BTL Y-Wings, only without the turret locking part XG-1 Assault Gunboat only.
  14. Just run AC + Engine Upgrade. You'll be fine as a fat gunship.
  15. That's a really dumb statement. turrets aren't OP. Attack 3 Primary weapon turrets on large bases that are also hyper mobile and able to survive huge amounts of fire are the problem, combined with MoV stuff.
×
×
  • Create New...