Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About DarthRulesLawyer

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. But a speed 3 Jerjerrod ISD is insanely maneuverable and nearly impossible to chase down or block. Again a problem solved by speed 2 engine techs.
  2. Why wouldn't it be speed 2 with the ability to engine techs though? Would require a higher level of skill and represent the coordination that such a large ship would require. Base Speed 3 makes it nearly impossible to block and chase down, leading to so many frustrating games where an ISD limps away as you watch helplessly, because you literally cannot kill them fast enough before they get away.
  3. More interesting and variegated objective play. Not just most wanted, contested outpost, superior positions repeat.
  4. Crack open that upgrade pack and let us know what's changed.
  5. The ISD is speed 3 and not 2. The MC80 is, the Starhawk is, even the Victory is.
  6. Appreciate the feedback. Gunnery team does weigh in on the decision though because it determines whether it's a 200 dollar paper weight or not.
  7. I like the SSD and would love to purchase one to be able to take to a tournament one day but I heard a rumor they might be changing Gunnery Team not to work with huge ships. If that's the case, I would definitely pass because I don't think the SSD can manage without having at least two shots out the front to deal with enemy ships and a third to stave off enemy fighters. Can someone please give me a little hint or nudge in the right direction? Thanks.
  8. Anything that shoots outside of range 3 was a bad idea imo. It unfairly punishes one side more for wanting to play the game. Players are going to get really good at the cataclysm - manipulating speed, dropping to 0, and just pummeling anybody who actually wants to approach. That's terrible for the game. I respect everybody's opinion and appreciate your input. Honestly I am a little surprised that not one other person has agreed with me. But I am also glad this permanent record of my dissenting opinion will be stored in the vault of this forum as I believe it will vindicate me over time haha.
  9. Well, most of you are not playing against optimal Cataclysm builds. All they need to do is dial in a firepower command and roll 3 blanks + double hit + accuracy (or better). Sensor team spend a blank to get a second accuracy, Gunner Chief Varnillian to switch out a blank with a double hit. 4 hits and 2 accuracies and boom, your flotilla and all of its upgrades are gone. And if they don't get all four they have Intel officer to take a token and make darn sure they'll get you next turn. And not all fleets can just "split up". Your completely removing them from the meta. Cataclysm needs banning. Everything else with the onager is probably okay.
  10. Can someone tell me how Cataclysm is 5 points? Seems like more dartboard scoring. Barring the fact that it shouldnt even exist as it creates terrible, uncounterable, agency denying, 1st flipping turn NPE, it should have been at least 25 points as it let's you one shot flotillas and small ships right off the board. Even if it was just playtested ONE time anyone could have seen the ridiculous, obvious, clear as day greater than 5 point impact it had on the game. Which makes me wonder, was it playtested at all? Until they make ignition shots every other turn, or some other errata, the game is broken.
  • Create New...