Jump to content
DakkaDakka12

Lets fix large base ships

Recommended Posts

Pick a large base ship and then explain what would improve it without causing it  to become too powerful.

 

lancer pursuit craft

Swap to firepower 2 primary and firepower 3 single arc turret(and change price accordingly), or remove the base turret, give it a turret slot and gunner slot(and change price accordingly)

it would be cool if the banshee title were available as well for this ship.

Banshee title-(+1 crew slot -1 illicit) the banshee had extra holding cells

Shadowcaster title-(-1 turret firepower +1 front arc firepower) ketsu’s ability wants front arc)

scum has 2 turreted large base ships (jm5k/lancer)that want to only use their front arc, it would be cool to fly the lancer the way it used to fly, besides it is squishier now anyway.

Edited by DakkaDakka12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Da_Brown_Bomber said:

jumpmaster needs help. should be cheaper. its not playable as is with possible xception of Dengar. its been nerfed out of the game.

I was focusing on a ship with a fairly easy fix. The jm5k kinda feels like a lost cause, ffg is so scared of the jm5k showing up in a tournament that it has no hope.

 

Maybe if the jump was dirt cheap and had a non-stressful turret rotation it could be a nice bumper?

Edited by DakkaDakka12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mobile arc on the caster is fine

both sabine and asajj use it, and if you're adept at positioning you can use it to your advantage to get attacks where you'd normally get none

alternatively, just play it as a primary arc only

these are all fine options; costing as much as Boba Fett is not

Share this post


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

Every large base ship, except perhaps the scum yt-1300

 

*drop point costs

 

that's it

This is it entirely.

That said, what I would really like to see FFG do is get to an "Equipment Points" solution for certain ships. The idea would be ships would cost a certain amount (say 36 for the base TIE Bombers), but would have a certain amount of free points to spend on upgrades either certain slots or in general (for the Tie Bomber example call it 6 points of ordinance upgrades). The reason being there are certain ships that could become problematic or even just frustrating with too many on the board, but are expected to have upgrades to function the way they were built to. With this model a lot of the large base ships could be kept the same price just given anywhere between 5 and 20 points of free upgrades depending on their function. It would also work well for a lot of the high hull ordinance ships (TIE Bomber, Punisher, Gunboat, Y-Wing), and a couple other oddball cases (TIE Advance x1).

This also gives FFG a third nob to turn on some ships without having to errata (base points, slots, and equipment points)

Share this post


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

This is it entirely.

That said, what I would really like to see FFG do is get to an "Equipment Points" solution for certain ships. The idea would be ships would cost a certain amount (say 36 for the base TIE Bombers), but would have a certain amount of free points to spend on upgrades either certain slots or in general (for the Tie Bomber example call it 6 points of ordinance upgrades). The reason being there are certain ships that could become problematic or even just frustrating with too many on the board, but are expected to have upgrades to function the way they were built to. With this model a lot of the large base ships could be kept the same price just given anywhere between 5 and 20 points of free upgrades depending on their function. It would also work well for a lot of the high hull ordinance ships (TIE Bomber, Punisher, Gunboat, Y-Wing), and a couple other oddball cases (TIE Advance x1).

This also gives FFG a third nob to turn on some ships without having to errata (base points, slots, and equipment points)

Conceptually cool but makes squad building even stupider if you arent using the app.  you could probably achieve the same results with a title esque card though, just to have it written down and not variable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aside from the obviously necessary points reduction, how about a modification upgrade?

Large base with turret primary only;

Gyroscopic Targetting... after you perform a non-straight manoeuvre, you may perform a turret rotate action.

Edited by DexterOnone
Spelling

Share this post


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

Conceptually cool but makes squad building even stupider if you arent using the app.  you could probably achieve the same results with a title esque card though, just to have it written down and not variable

Cards get back into the thing like Chardaan Refit which feel like hard coded patches to thing. Having that third dial be something easy to change is part of the point. And it really doesn't make the math that much harder (and putting it in title cards isn't going to help and just adds more cards on the board).

 

43 minutes ago, DexterOnone said:

Aside from the obviously necessary points reduction, how about a modification upgrade?

Large base with turret primary only;

Gyroscopic Targetting... after you perform a non-straight manoeuvre, you may perform a turret rotate action.

While general large modifications may help provide options, the specific idea provided is a very shaky step back towards 360 degree turrets, which is not good. There is a reason why Gunner Luke is so expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ficklegreendice said:

Every large base ship, except perhaps the scum yt-1300

 

*drop point costs

 

that's it

Yup, this is it. 

FFG costed the large base ships like they're still still the monsters capable of soloing half a list they were in 1e.

Thing is, that wasn't so much the large base and fat statline as it was the huge range of large base 360 turrets and the massive advantage of large base boost, available to all large base ships because Engine Upgrade had no restrictions. 

Those two facets were absolutely gutted with 2e, but the prices haven't changed to reflect that large base ships are now basically just normal ships but bigger... And therefore easier to hit. 

All their old favourite talents are gone too, or changed into uselessness. Predator especially just isn't ever worth it on a large base now because of the bullseye restriction. Expertise and PTL are gone, Lone Wolf is once a round... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DexterOnone said:

Aside from the obviously necessary points reduction, how about a modification upgrade?

Large base with turret primary only;

Gyroscopic Targetting... after you perform a non-straight manoeuvre, you may perform a turret rotate action.

 

6 hours ago, Phelan Boots said:

If the shadowcaster has a Gunner slot, I might actually consider playing them.  Double tapping primary weapons would be fun.

 

10 minutes ago, GuacCousteau said:

That's not what power creep is. 

No errata ever increased the power of anything, they were almost always nerfs.

Don't be silly. 

The above suggestions are buffs, not nerfs.

But if you want to chase me around to piss in my soup for fun, more power to ya.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RAC + super whisper is way better than what people give it credit for. The lambda is leagues ahead of what it used to be. That being said, what is needed is:

Lancer: a decent mechanic to distinguish it from the scum falcon, the obviously better choice

Scum falcon: slight point drop, but rather decent right now.

Jumpmaster: would it kill it to have a hwk turret and arc? Also, can it take R4 please, since basic maneuvers are to be basic. Even that considered, way overdosed.

YV: cost it like a cookie with extra stuff. That is all it is.

Ghost: good naked, upgrades are useless. Upgrades need to mean something aside from saw and magva.

Rebel falcon: pretty good where it is, but rebel turrets like crew. And rebel crew is ungodly expensive. That needs a fix.

YT 24k: A points fortress more or less, but the extra points in crew don't do too much. It isn't too terrified of its cost, but the crew don't add that much action efficiency. And without that efficiency, it would much rather become a brawler in a 3 ship squad. But its cost prohibits that.

Ironically enough, the faction that saw big bases as boring is the only one with consistent big bases.

Edited by player3010587

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

really confused about how people see the Lancer

it is an incredibly unique ship that is sharply distinguished not just from other scum ships but all large base ships in general

1.) 3 die forward facing primary with 2-die mobile, only Moldy crow imitates

2.) Great dial with blue turns, something Moldy DOES NOT imitate (can't even K-turn)

3.) Unique and potent pilot abilities

4.) Unique and potent title

5.) Asajj is the only force using pilot in the faction

 

literally only problem is it's too expensive. Once they're at reasonable costs, fearless Sabine w/Maul and Asajj in general (perhaps with Latz at most) will be forces to be reckoned with

EDIT: Oh right, it can evade. So if you coordinate Sabine or simply stack it with Asajj forcus, you're getting an extra irritatingly difficult to kill tank of a ship

Edited by ficklegreendice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn’t want to focus purely on the lancer but.

1 the lancer has always had a stronger turret than primary in any ship specifications ive found.

2 2nd edition changed how the ship flies, and a forward arc only large base is akward with terrain and bumping.

3 it is reasonably costed at 64 pts considering its survivability.

 

A point reduction can help any ship, but the ship’s playstyle has changed, and the turret is a wasted existence, it is essentially a front arc ship atm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ficklegreendice said:

mobile arc on the caster is fine

both sabine and asajj use it, and if you're adept at positioning you can use it to your advantage to get attacks where you'd normally get none

alternatively, just play it as a primary arc only

these are all fine options; costing as much as Boba Fett is not

Lambda Shuttle is one of the most-improved-ships of 2e, and that owes a lot to a fixed 2-dice rear arc.  Simply having an extra arc can go a long way.

But certainly the Lancer is too expensive.  Not quite everything but the Scum YT-1300 needs a cost reduction, though.  Lambda Shuttle is also fine where it is.

//

Others have suggested Gunner slot on the Lancer... I dunno.  At first, my thought was "oh, of course."  If the "only" gunner they had access to was Han Solo gunner, they'd be "fair." It'd be a great way to use the wonderful blue moves on the Lancer dial.

But Veteran Turret Gunner would be scary, since 2-dice double-taps and double-triggers on the Shadowcaster title are possible.  Ketsu could pretty easily toss around a *large base* ship with that.  Move into Range 1, get the first tractor token, then throw 4 and 3 dice attacks against reduced agility.

Yeah, the more I think about it, VTG and Lancers would just be a massive problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were designing the large-based turrets I would have done this:

YT-1300, YT-2400, Decimator:

I'd have given each of these ships two Gunner slots.  Each Gunner equipped grants a Mobile Arc Indicator that makes an attack in the combat phase.  Special ID Tokens could be placed on the Gunner upgrades to know which Gunner is represented by each mobile arc indicator (e.g., Mobile Arc Indicator A and Mobile Indicator B are used on the base, then an "A" ID token is placed on Agile Gunner's card and a "B" ID token is placed on Bistan's card.

Each mobile arc can attack during the ship's activation, and they can both be stacked on the same arc, allowing the ship to double-tap out of that arc.  The Gunner upgrade card ability can only be used on its corresponding mobile arc.  So if the Falcon had an Agile Gunner (Mobile Arc A) and Hotshot Gunner (Arc B), then only Arc B's attack would "strip" a Focus off of the Defender and only Arc A could rotate for free during the end phase.

Many of the Gunner abilities would need to be reworked, and the Rotate action would still only rotate a single mobile arc indicator.  So by forcing the turret ship to rotate its arcs, you're going to make it waste two rounds of actions to get both turrets spun to the needed arc (barring using gunners like Agile Gunner).



The Fat Turrets need to be able to attack twice per round to be worth their high cost, as you're typically paying the price of two ships, except you're only bringing half of the attack power, half the action economy, and generally about the same overall HP (though with more vulnerability to Crit effects piling up).   It would not be broken for Fat Turrets to attack twice per round, and thematically it would certainly make plenty of sense as there are dorsal and ventral guns on each of these ship classes.

Only twice have I seen the large-based Rebel Turrets win a game of 2.0, and in both cases the ship was using the Han-Gunner + Roarke trick to double-tap out of the same arc.  Even then, I've still seen these builds lose more than they've won.  But I do think the only chance these fat turets have at ever being competitive again is being able to attack twice per turn (or else being seriously, seriously lowered in price).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×