Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
FTS Gecko

Suggested "Fix" For Missiles & Torpedoes: Usable At Range 5?

Recommended Posts

How about just adding a different form of lock into the Target Lock rules? Could call it something like "Ordnance Lock"? Suppose any ship able to carry ordnance is allowed to acquire a lock on any ship in the play area and with such an "Ordnance Lock" is allowed to fire specifically declared "Long Range Ordnance" at the target up to range 5 with additional defense bonuses for the target at ranges 4 and 5? 

 

Also this way the title card for ST-321 wouldn't lose its value do to the fact that it would still remain as the only non-ordnance carrying ship in the game that is able to acquire an original Target Lock on any ship in the play area.

 

I know such an addition to the rules would require some major play testing and would probably require the adjustment of point costs to some ships and upgrades. However, if FFG were to ever do a reboot on the game to fix wording and game quirks, it would be some good food for thought. I personally would like to see this happen as I have always felt that most ordnance is quite marginalized. 

 

As far as the posts about the game being a "Dogfighting Game", I do believe that ordnance does play a pretty major roll in Dogfighting and in my opinion the value of ordnance is not fairly represented in this game. Plus lets not forget that FFG did decide to add Huge ships to this game, which are not Dogfighters, and do make tempting and easy to hit targets at long range for some kinds of ordnance.

 

That's my 2 cents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the problem is the question.  When was the last time you saw missiles or torps used in a list.  this last week-end we played a tournament, had 14 players used 130 points.  No one had missiles or torps.  the main problem is you have a 1 shot weapon that is very expensive and really has to do the job.  Longer range is an idea.  Maybe let them shoot to 4 or 5, but deduct one point of attack strength for each additional range band.  Another possible solution would be to give missiles and torps a reload or second shop capability.  Say have an upgrade for 1 or 2 points that would let you fire the missile or torp weapon a second time on a later turn. 

I agree with what your saying. I think FFG realizes this problem due to the fact they released the Munitions Failsafe upgrade. For an extra 1 point your at least guaranteed something from your ordnance, if you get the chance to hit with it before your ship gets blown up or the game ends that is. But even with the Failsafe, I still think ordnance isn't quite what it should be in the game.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The benefit is no extra evade dice at range 3, however since they extended that rule to all secondary weapons you have HLC which use it like crazy. It would be nice if they errata no extra evade dice for Torpedo and Missile Weapons at range 3 but as of now it is all secondary weapons.

Edited by Marinealver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather than trying to fix the game by brainstorming things that aren't going to happen, why don't we just play it instead? The expression "less QQ, more pew pew" comes to mind.

I'd love to play more, but since I've spent most of the last month in and/or near the hospital with my Dad and his leukemia diagnosis, all I have time for is thinking. And sometimes thinking about X-Wing and new ideas means less time pondering dark thoughts.

So just let those of us who want to have "thinky thoughts" have them. You go run along and play for us.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WonderWAAAGH, when was the last time you used missiles or torpedoes successfully?  When I was watching at Indy I did not see any in any of the lists I saw.  Sometimes a lack of use shows a problem with the system that needs to be discussed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In XWA, you absolutely had to fire them point-blank or else they'd get shot down. Similar mindset applies here. Torpedoes should flat out never be used against small vessels, but only larger ones. For smaller vessels, missiles are advised, but never fire at them coming head on. At least that's how it is in XWA.

People aren't willing to take chances on ordnance. However I imagine it'd go better than one would expect if people did it more often rather than absolutely dismissing it. Z-95s have proven to be fairly effective missile platforms.

I'll tell you what the real issue is. We don't have enough larger ships to effectively utilize these things on. The only way to fix ordnance to be usable at this point is to release a 2.0 rulebook.

First and foremost I'd say that Torpedoes get a bonus attack die when used on large base and epic ships, but gain nothing with small base. furthermore I'd say that Missiles should get a plus one attack die on small ships, but not large ships. Simply different types of weapons.

 

Munitions need to be lethal. Ever so sliiiightly unbalanced. Why? Well, they f*cking are. This is what should make every Rebel Ship absolutely deadly. A rule revision like this would make A-Wings THAT much more effective, since they didn't get a 180 arc. (oddly enough...)

This would also make the TIE Advanced extremely playable. You want your fix? Make ordnance better and you've got all the fix you could possibly want.

Then maybe people could finally run canon-ish Y-Wings and B-Wings with some success. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather than trying to fix the game by brainstorming things that aren't going to happen, why don't we just play it instead? The expression "less QQ, more pew pew" comes to mind.

I'd love to play more, but since I've spent most of the last month in and/or near the hospital with my Dad and his leukemia diagnosis, all I have time for is thinking. And sometimes thinking about X-Wing and new ideas means less time pondering dark thoughts.

So just let those of us who want to have "thinky thoughts" have them. You go run along and play for us.

Whoa, let's be careful here. I'd hate for this to devolve into another EP-like meltdown, so please try not to take my comment personally.

We're all here to talk about X-Wing, so let's do that. I just wanted to make a point to anyone who might be against some of the more repetitive thread topics, like fixing things (that aren't broken) or complaining about Fat Han. Consider it a subtle homage.

Edited by WonderWAAAGH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rather than trying to fix the game by brainstorming things that aren't going to happen, why don't we just play it instead? The expression "less QQ, more pew pew" comes to mind.

The main issue I have with increasing the range beyond 3 is that the starters don't have a tool long enough for that. Having small or large ships with the ability to fire beyond that range complicates the game more then it needs to. I would be OK if say there was a Huge ship that would have that for an epic game as that would have it's own tool for that and wouldn't be involved in a normal 100 point game.

 

I love to brainstorm ideas for games that wouldn't mess too much with the mechanics but would add to them. My ideas seemed to have been put under by the greater then range 3 however. 

 

Bombers and B Wings seem to be the munition holders for their respective factions but it's harder to sell the B Wing as Heavy Laser Cannon is beastly on it. I don't think a price reduction for one ship's munitions would break anything but I'm open to ideas that don't make massive overhauls happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could also make a modification that reads "As long as this ship has a (missile/torpedo symbol) upgrade equiped you may perform target lock actions up to range 5 on ships within your firing arc. Missiles and Torpedos with a maximum range of 3 are increased to a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Rather than trying to fix the game by brainstorming things that aren't going to happen, why don't we just play it instead? The expression "less QQ, more pew pew" comes to mind.

The main issue I have with increasing the range beyond 3 is that the starters don't have a tool long enough for that.

 

Sure, but the 'starter' doesn't have the "modification" card that would allow longer range, anyway.

 

So just add the fighter-based 'modification' card that enables range 4-5 missile/torpedo shots alongside the inevitable Imperial "huge" ship (whatever it ends up being).  Since the 'huge' ship will have the necessary ruler to use with the cards it comes with - everything works out!

 

 

Sounds cool, but would have to try it for balance.  Also weird because you can only take a TL at Range 3 anyway.  

Deadeye becomes an amazing ET in this case.

 

 

LOL - ain't that the truth!

 

All my "best" anti-ship missions in X-Wing and TIE Fighter involved noticing which capital ships "didn't move" in the mission, so I just lined up the shot and "fired blind" from the spawn point (no lock, but aiming pixel-perfect at their current location).  Then switching to blasters to deal with the fighter escort... :D

Edited by xanderf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Rather than trying to fix the game by brainstorming things that aren't going to happen, why don't we just play it instead? The expression "less QQ, more pew pew" comes to mind.

I'd love to play more, but since I've spent most of the last month in and/or near the hospital with my Dad and his leukemia diagnosis, all I have time for is thinking. And sometimes thinking about X-Wing and new ideas means less time pondering dark thoughts.

So just let those of us who want to have "thinky thoughts" have them. You go run along and play for us.

Whoa, let's be careful here. I'd hate for this to devolve into another EP-like meltdown, so please try not to take my comment personally.

We're all here to talk about X-Wing, so let's do that. I just wanted to make a point to anyone who might be against some of the more repetitive thread topics, like fixing things (that aren't broken) or complaining about Fat Han. Consider it a subtle homage.

 

I'm new to using these forums so a lot of these topics I keep hearing people complain about being repetitive are new to me, and most possibly to others. Besides that, if people keep wanting to talk about the same topics, then so be it. I don't understand why I keep seeing people complain about repetitive threads while continuing to post on them. Its not like the forum is going to run out of threads for new topics. Everyone has the option to ignore a thread if its of no interest to them.

 

I also enjoy brainstorming about things that will probably never happen. I love this game and hardly get the opportunity to play it, so talking about any topic related to this game interests me. Even if its just a topic that I may be having a pipe dream over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to chime in and say our playgroup uses missiles all the time, not just epic. In fact my nationals list had Etahn, Airen, Banditx2 and Airen and one bandit each had Homing missiles. That squad took out a B-wing in the first exchange in two seperate games, a Wedge in first exchange, and generally rocked out. Thats some serious knock outs for a list that has three 2-firepower ships. If I hadn't botched a round where I forgot my bandits green bank was speed 2 and not 1, I could have potentially dropped a Corran with R2-D2 in the opening salvo which would have given me a shot. Instead I derped and got blown apart. So they aren't useless at all. I feel they are just under played. Yes your right, at the moment some of them suck, like basic protons. But for how they can change a game in a single well planned turn I think they are very appropriately costed.

 

The meta will evolve and they will rotate around. wait for Nera Dantels. We've been playing her(?) a lot since Gen-Con and she is pretty sweet. she's a plenty fine counter to phantoms and with FCS+Flechette+Failsafe she can really stress you out and keep you locked down. She can be down right terrifying with Advanced torps too. Aw ****, dodged her arc but now I'm range one. Ka-boom. D'awwww.

 

Lastly in the Battle front games dogfighting portions, if you fired torps/missiles too far out they missed like 95% of the time. I always felt they were fine at their current range as in my mind it was actually a boost over their Battlefront counterparts.

 

No 'fix' is how I cast my vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Rather than trying to fix the game by brainstorming things that aren't going to happen, why don't we just play it instead? The expression "less QQ, more pew pew" comes to mind.

The main issue I have with increasing the range beyond 3 is that the starters don't have a tool long enough for that.

 

Sure, but the 'starter' doesn't have the "modification" card that would allow longer range, anyway.

 

So just add the fighter-based 'modification' card that enables range 4-5 missile/torpedo shots alongside the inevitable Imperial "huge" ship (whatever it ends up being).  Since the 'huge' ship will have the necessary ruler to use with the cards it comes with - everything works out!

 

That doesn't mean by any means the normal sized fighters should have access to that sort of range. By altering the range of the normal fighters beyond 3 you are effecting the main game's simplicity which is part of the joy I get from it. That's why when they could they didn't give Rhymer beyond range 3.

 

 

 

The meta will evolve and they will rotate around. wait for Nera Dantels. We've been playing her(?) a lot since Gen-Con and she is pretty sweet. she's a plenty fine counter to phantoms and with FCS+Flechette+Failsafe she can really stress you out and keep you locked down. She can be down right terrifying with Advanced torps too. Aw ****, dodged her arc but now I'm range one. Ka-boom. D'awwww.

 

This is how we make munitions better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting idea and thread regarding increased range, but I have to lean toward the arguments that it is a dog fight game. In epic play on a 6 foot mat I can see it being worth a try, but for normal 3x3 mats I'd rather see missiles just have their cost reduced by 2.

 

For example:

Ion Pulse & Proton Rockets cost 1, not 3.

Cluster Missiles & Concussion Missiles cost 2, not 4.

Assault Missiles & Homing Missiles cost 3, not 5.

 

Regarding torpedoes, I think the Flechette are accurately priced at 2, but Proton Torpedoes should also be 2 (not 4), and Advanced Proton Torpedoes should be 4 (not 6 which is a heck of an investment).

 

Overall cost is a better fix than range, and makes more sense given that these are typically one-shot items in a dogfight (granted Munitions Failsafe is reasonably priced but still not enough of a fix) and require a more complex mechanic to pull off effectively than any other weapon (target lock, ideally paired with focus, and flying your ship into the correct range of the ship you target locked).

 

Another fun rule would be to place a respectively sized debris field wherever a large or small base ship is destroyed by a missile or a torpedo. This could add some interesting logistical elements to the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont really like the idea of extending the range, due to practical concerns. 1stly the extended range ruler only comes from the Tantive, and while you could simply join 2 range rulers together, there are some practical concerns, mostly with accuracy. Imagine trying to gauge whether a borderline target is actually within your firing arc, even with the help of a laser guide it can get quite tricky.


I'm for the idea of ordnance dealing a fixed amount of damage when they hit though. eg. Imagine the proton torp in its current form, no changes whatsoever, except it now has " when this attack hits, cancel all dice results and deal the defender 1 hit 1 crit", or concussion missile being "when this attack hits, cancel all dice results and deal the defender 2 hits. If the defender has 1 or less damage cards, deal 1 additional hit"

something along those lines

Edited by Duraham

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say try out a test game at home. Throw out a couple of Y-Wings and a couple of Tie Bombers. Load'em up with ordinance Use the range 5 to acquire locks and fire at range 4 or 5.  I have a feeling you'd lay waste to the ships to early in the game making close combat dog fighting  non-existent. Which like others have said is the most interesting part of X-wing. Plus what would happen if one side runs missile boats and the other side had none?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about this:

 

Modification:

Long Range Targeting Computer

3 Pts

Add +1 range to target lock, Missiles and Torpedoes

Weapons modified by this no longer count as secondary attacks, when the target is rolling the defense dice.

 

This makes it more a risk, since the enemy can gain +1 or +2 defense dice versus the attack.

Edited by eagletsi111

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, obviously the range 5 ruler is (one of) the stumbling blocks for this particular suggestion, regardless of how it's implemented.

 

...of course, once we see a few more Huge ships on the board (or even large ships with long-range weaponry...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...