Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Velvetelvis

We've been crying about TLT long enough.

Recommended Posts

It's going into the "years" of bellowing about TLT. 

Believe me, I hate it as well. I would prefer some change to it that knocks it down a peg.or at least makes other turrets a choice worth taking.

But dudes.

Years...

 

I know ffg is slow to make changes but...It's probably time to move past bargaining and into whatever the next stages of grief are. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Vineheart01 said:

Theyre still broke what you talking about?

Besides, its common knowledge that any gaming company would rather nerf a problem than buff a flop.

Well, yeah, but we are getting another "fix" for them, maybe this one will do it (I am optimistic)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TLT is fine. Moderately undercosted (1 point, ish), but if it were "broken", the meta would be solid y wings with TLT. The issue is we keep seeing it on platforms that break it situationally. Miranda breaks it because her regen ability isn't "primary only". The ghost breaks it with the penalty free second attack (no disabled token like Coran's double tap).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JasonCole said:

TLT is fine. Moderately undercosted (1 point, ish), but if it were "broken", the meta would be solid y wings with TLT. The issue is we keep seeing it on platforms that break it situationally. Miranda breaks it because her regen ability isn't "primary only". The ghost breaks it with the penalty free second attack (no disabled token like Coran's double tap).

At one point, 4 TLT Y's were a meta choice.

I agree that there are ships that take it that break it far more than it should, but the problems are a bit broader than that. The three issues I have are 1) is IS undercosted 2) especially when you consider the cost of other turrets out there and how none of them are taken really and 3) it's weakness isn't really that big of a weakness - again though, this is mainly applied to the Ghost, Nym and Miranda, who are the worst offenders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The Penguin UK said:

At one point, 4 TLT Y's were a meta choice.

I agree that there are ships that take it that break it far more than it should, but the problems are a bit broader than that. The three issues I have are 1) is IS undercosted 2) especially when you consider the cost of other turrets out there and how none of them are taken really and 3) it's weakness isn't really that big of a weakness - again though, this is mainly applied to the Ghost, Nym and Miranda, who are the worst offenders.

I'm thinking it's taken because it can attack out to R3 moreso than it can deal a maximum of 2 damage. The mechanic they applied to make it "realistic" (i.e. death by "paper cut") actually is pretty good, I think. 

If ICTs were range 1 - 3, I'd never run TLTs.  Control > max 2 damage in my book. 

If BT wasn't "Spend the Focus" (gads, what a HORRIBLE condition) and was range 1 - 3, I'd never take TLT.

The rest? I take ABT all the time because I always manage to fly against the one guy who always rolls evades. And I do mean always. In both instances in the previous sentence.

What I wish for is that TLT was to be used on ships that attempted to shoot down opposing ordinance. It couldn't be used to attack other ships; it would be more like a countermeasures type weapon. 

Alas, that, too, would probably not be good,but I think it's a neat idea. Old school Battletech had such a weapon. It made LRMS a bit less scary, but only until the AMS ran out of ammo.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Vineheart01 said:

4 ywings were a meta for a long time. The ability to just nuke them down and being the most boring list in the game possible killed them off.

That's my point though. Most stuff that can carry a TLT isn't particularly threatening. Heck, can you get 3 wardens with TLT in a list? That wouldn't be too bothersome. The exceptions, however, shouldn't be setting the rule. The problem with "Cancer" though is that there are so many breaks in it that it's wicked messed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Vineheart01 said:

Theyre still broke what you talking about?

Besides, its common knowledge that any gaming company would rather nerf a problem than buff a flop.

Eh, not really. FFG can make us pay for buffs, but they have to give us nerfs for free. They make more money by selling buffs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tvboy said:

Eh, not really. FFG can make us pay for buffs, but they have to give us nerfs for free. They make more money by selling buffs. 

One of the reasons I was pleasantly surprised with the Heavy Syck title buff, that it was done via errata instead of selling us yet another card.

Edited by kris40k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kris40k said:

One of the reasons I was pleasantly surprised with the Heavy Syck title buff, that it was done via errata instead of selling us yet another card.

I think that's the only errata that's actually improved a card correct? Otherwise every other instance of a ship being buffed has been sold to us in an "Aces" pack or Epic ship bundle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just had a crazy idea for a fix to TLT, and not sure I've ever seen it mentioned before.

What if it got updated to say you can only equip it if your primary attack value is 2 or less?

Hwks, ywings, kwings, and tie aggressors could still take it. But ghosts, scurrgs, and attack shuttles couldn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

100% positive the only reason the scyk got buffed was because of the CROC.

They liked the option it gave, but realized it was underpowered. Rather than literally give us the same title+1, they just faq'd it. I mean, what else could you have done to buff a "heavy scyk"? its a beefed out version of the ship and theres no way it could have all the upgrades at once strapped to it lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, markcsoul said:

I just had a crazy idea for a fix to TLT, and not sure I've ever seen it mentioned before.

What if it got updated to say you can only equip it if your primary attack value is 2 or less?

Hwks, ywings, kwings, and tie aggressors could still take it. But ghosts, scurrgs, and attack shuttles couldn't.

Not crazy.   I love that idea!  

 

While were at it.   harpoons missiles should take a missile slot and modification.    No more chips or LRS with them.    Just played in a campaign where we used this rule actually very cool

 

Edited by eagletsi111

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, markcsoul said:

I just had a crazy idea for a fix to TLT, and not sure I've ever seen it mentioned before.

What if it got updated to say you can only equip it if your primary attack value is 2 or less?

Hwks, ywings, kwings, and tie aggressors could still take it. But ghosts, scurrgs, and attack shuttles couldn't.

Miranda’s regen combined with TLT has been problematic for some time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You want to know what will fix TLTs, well no one is going to like this answer but Shield Regen will stop them. Problem is that it will stop a lot of other things too (such as 2 firepower ships).

The second thing would be and I intended this as a huge ship fix but to allow reinforce to cancel a damage instead of just adding evades. But according to the Kessel Run the Wookies are already the "easy mode" of X-wing and they don't need any more protection.

Of course I suggested an upgrade card rotation which would simply remove TLTs eventually. But again to set up a system requires more of a 2nd edition in order to not set up even more of a dumpster fire then what is already there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as people have been b!tching about TLTs, the truth is that they themselves are not broken.  On Y-wings, on HWKs, on Aggressors, TLTs are just not a problem.  You can quibble about whether they should have been 6 points or 7 points, but whatever ... they're not broken.

They just have really weird mechanics, and those really weird mechanics can be exploited by a few -- really just a couple -- of interactions: Miranda's pilot ability and the Mauler Ghost.

I personally think that the severity of how broken the interactions could be did not become apparent until the Mauler Ghost.  Sure, Miranda abused the crap out of TLT, but at the end of the day, she's a 45-pointish ship doing 1, maybe 2, damage a turn.  And there's so much problematic about Miranda, the TLT kinda gets lost as an issue.

Now, since the Mauler Ghost just puts the TLT front and center, making it impossible to ignore how hyper-accurate and problematic it can be on an almost unkillable ship, I genuinely expect FFG to take action against the TLT.  (Note that I am very deliberately not saying that FFG taking action against the TLT is the solution I want.)

In other words, yes, people have been complaining about TLT for years.  But, by and large, they were wrong to complain about TLT, so FFG did nothing.  Now that TLT is the linchpin of a proplematic super-ship worth 73 points (but only 27 for half!), FFG very well might do something.  Rightly or wrongly.

Things change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, eagletsi111 said:

Miranda needs to be changed to only work with primary weapons.      

That’s fine, too, but I think that TLT needs to be fundamentally changed beyond restricting it to certain ships because I think it will be problematic for accretion purposes and affects ship design, and really already has.

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...