Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

From the new FAQ:

Marksmanship
After a ship performs the Marksmanship action, its
effect may be applied during each attack it performs
until the end of the round.
When a ship uses the Marksmanship action, during
each attack that round the controlling player must
choose to apply the entire effect of Marksmanship or
not. If using the Marksmanship effect, 1 result
must to be changed to a (crit) result before any
results are changed to (hit)results.

I'm wondering if this changes (potentially) the thoughts of some folks here that Marksmanship is a terrible card-- if only for ships that get multiple attacks and/or have a good action economy.

For example, with Vessery in a Defender- D, you get 2 attacks per round and rarely need to target lock. So I could see it being useful to take the action instead of a focus early in the game or when not in much danger of return fire.

Likewise on a ship with TLT (or the Y-wing title) or gunner (especially the Imperial Kath Scarlet where cancelling a critical causes stress) I could see marksmanship being useful.

Thoughts?

It's terrible because it costs points and the focus action is free and usable on defense.

There are just so many better options for just about any ship that can take it.

Additionally, nothing has changed. Marksmanship isn't in magenta, which means it hasn't received any change from previous FAQ, subsequently, nobody's opinion will have changed either.

I can address some specific examples.

Apostasus wrote:
From the new FAQ:
For example, with Vessery in a Defender- D, you get 2 attacks per round and rarely need to target lock. So I could see it being useful to take the action instead of a focus early in the game or when not in much danger of return fire.

The main issue here is that TIE-D Vessery has a huge target painted on his head, and he's already getting a dice modifier buff from his pilot ability. There are diminish returns if you want to boost Vessery's attack further, and defenders don't have the Evade action, and so a defensive focus action is often more valuable than the Marksmanship action. The low-price cannons that you would use with a TIE-D don't benefit from the critical-hit generation of marksmanship.

Likewise on a ship with TLT (or the Y-wing title)

The only turret-capable ships with EPT slots are Kavil and the Attack Shuttles.

or gunner

Predator works better with gunner, as it doesn't require an action.

(especially the Imperial Kath Scarlet where cancelling a critical causes stress)

Mangler cannon works better with Kath, as it doesn't require an action.

The only turret-capable ships with EPT slots are Kavil and the Attack Shuttles.

Not strictly true. One of the few really good uses for Marksmanship is a Y-wing.

Horton Salm - Twin Laser Turret, Marksmanship, R2-D6, Bombs to taste.

Horton already gets rerolls with his twin laser turret (so predator wouldn't help), but marksmanship gives him focus-to-hit on both attacks. Yes, you don't get focus on defence but an agility 1 Y-wing rarely dodges much anyway.

Mangler cannon works better with Kath, as it doesn't require an action.

Yes and no. For one shot, I agree, but Marksmanship + Gunner as a combination can be quite good.

The main issue here is that TIE-D Vessery has a huge target painted on his head, and he's already getting a dice modifier buff from his pilot ability. There are diminish returns if you want to boost Vessery's attack further, and defenders don't have the Evade action, and so a defensive focus action is often more valuable than the Marksmanship action. The low-price cannons that you would use with a TIE-D don't benefit from the critical-hit generation of marksmanship.

Definitely. When you've got an expensive fighter with agility 3, you will get use out of that focus token.

It's a terrible EPT, and will alway be so, arguing corner cases where it nudges up to near playable is somewhat fruitless as you'd never fly those set ups, 'nuff said

locarno24 wrote:

The only turret-capable ships with EPT slots are Kavil and the Attack Shuttles.

Not strictly true. One of the few really good uses for Marksmanship is a Y-wing.

Horton Salm - Twin Laser Turret, Marksmanship, R2-D6, Bombs to taste.

Horton already gets rerolls with his twin laser turret (so predator wouldn't help), but marksmanship gives him focus-to-hit on both attacks. Yes, you don't get focus on defence but an agility 1 Y-wing rarely dodges much anyway.

I very strongly disagree that this is an effective way to spend points. Horton's overly expensive on his own with a TLT, clocking in at 31pts. Bumping him up 4 more points so that you can modify one attack that already has a re-roll modifier does not math out. You can almost buy an extra Z-95 for the points you're spending on him compared to a Gold Squadron.

We have a similar effect on the Scum side with the R4 Agromech astromechs, which allow you to modify both TLT attacks for 2 points. And what we have been seeing in tournament results is... it's not that effective compared to just taking a 1 point unhinged astromech (two of the world championship top 32 results used the Unhinged Y-Wings). I think that's telling - it means that an effect like Marksmanship is only maybe worth 2 points on a Y-Wing with TLT, a ship who can take maximum advantage of a multi-attack buff. On ships without multiple attack capabilities, it's worth 1 point at best.

Running a TIE swarm is useful with Marksmanship.

Howlrunner - predator
Youngster - Marksmanship
Wampa
3x Black Squadron Pilot - crackshot

Marksmanship helps seal the deal with wampa. It's a scary list to fly against. I prefer expose on my TIE swarm and an additional black crack pilot to Marksmanship and wampa, but to each his own.

3 defense dice on the TIE's is still survivable, even if they don't get the defensive focus. That little push from a crit really helps with crackshot and wampa. Every crit helps.

Mr ghoti wrote:
Running a TIE swarm is useful with Marksmanship.

Howlrunner - predator
Youngster - Marksmanship
Wampa
3x Black Squadron Pilot - crackshot

Marksmanship helps seal the deal with wampa. It's a scary list to fly against. I prefer expose on my TIE swarm and an additional black crack pilot to Marksmanship and wampa, but to each his own.

3 defense dice on the TIE's is still survivable, even if they don't get the defensive focus. That little push from a crit really helps with crackshot and wampa. Every crit helps.

No it is not, Focus is mathematically stronger in all cases and doesn't cost any points, Youngster is just a trap card that people keep trying to use, just accept that there are no current EPT to make him good enough and move on

As for the theory that 3 unmodified green is survivable, again its just not, there is a good article on (I think) Team Covenant by Theorist posisting that Red Dice have got stronger and stronger over time, whereas green, especially unmodified, are getting weaker and weaker, I think he might be onto something

 Turnip Jedi wrote:
, whereas green, especially unmodified, are getting weaker and weaker, I think he might be onto something

That's just stupid. Unmodified dice are not "getting weaker". Unmodified are unmodified. While they are being overcome more often by the numerous adding and modifying of red dice, they are not, in themselves, changing at all.

I just got shouted down for saying the generic TIE fighter is outclassed, because it's "100% efficient" (being the baseline on which the efficiency is measured) so your basic 3 green dice can not be outclassed because its 100% efficient when comparing against 3 unmodified green dice.

You missed the point somewhat.

The game has moved on from wave 1-3 (ish) where the limited range of upgrades available meant the average result of 3 unmodified green dice was sufficient to mitigate a given percentage of incoming attacks.

As the range of upgrades has expanded, the focus has been on attack, meaning the average number of incoming hits per attack per game has been on a steadily increasing curve, therefore devaluing the average defensive output of 3 unmodified greens relative to the number of hits produced.

Simply put, when it was just X Wings vs TIEs, 3 green was godly, these days, less so.

 Azreal13 wrote:
You missed the point somewhat.

The game has moved on from wave 1-3 (ish) where the limited range of upgrades available meant the average result of 3 unmodified green dice was sufficient to mitigate a given percentage of incoming attacks.

As the range of upgrades has expanded, the focus has been on attack, meaning the average number of incoming hits per attack per game has been on a steadily increasing curve, therefore devaluing the average defensive output of 3 unmodified greens relative to the number of hits produced.

Simply put, when it was just X Wings vs TIEs, 3 green was godly, these days, less so.

I understood exactly what you meant. But your logic is unsound. Just because red dice have been buffed does not mean green dice have been nerfed. That's not how game design works. If they made Range 1 shots take away a green die as well as grant a red die that would be a nerf to green dice. But no such change has been implemented. Paladins don't become weaker because rogues got stronger. Just because they became a less attractive choice to you, or everyone in general, and the perception is that your ships with unmodified greens are weaker, does not mean green dice are weaker. Maybe a victim of power creep but they have not been particularly targeted to decrease their power level.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also Azreal, IIRC you were one of those people shouting me down for saying TIE swarms ain't what they used to be. What you're saying now, about how TIEs are weaker because there's more red die/offensive tricks in the game seems to be in direct contradiction to your earlier stance.

If you changed your mind that's fine, but I would like to know which it is.

The fact that you're addressing me for points that Turnip Jedi made, and accusing me of "shouting you down" about TIE swarms suggest you're not following the thread of the conversation very well.

But then, you're arguing that making one half of a diametrically opposed equation (red vs green) stronger doesn't inherently make the other weaker, so I think we're done here.

 bocatt wrote:
Just because red dice have been buffed does not mean green dice have been nerfed. That's not how game design works. If they made Range 1 shots take away a green die as well as grant a red die that would be a nerf to green dice. But no such change has been implemented. Paladins don't become weaker because rogues got stronger. Just because they became a less attractive choice to you, or everyone in general, and the perception is that your ships with unmodified greens are weaker, does not mean green dice are weaker.

They are weaker than before...or, rather, do a worse job than before.

Defense Dice draw their use / strength from offering a defense mechanism against enemy attacks, they have been designed to counter-act red / attack dice. The problem is that in the current state of the game, a huge ton of cards extremely favor red dice, making the balance tip straight towards them. Green Dice can, with the current meta in mind, now counter-act less efficient than they coud before because they did not get the same treatment and didn't receive the same or similar buffs that red dice did.

They are now less effective than before when it comes to defending against enemy attacks and therefore, they were nerfed.

bocatt wrote:I just got shouted down for saying the generic TIE fighter is outclassed, because it's "100% efficient" (being the baseline on which the efficiency is measured) so your basic 3 green dice can not be outclassed because its 100% efficient when comparing against 3 unmodified green dice.

bocatt wrote:Also Azreal, IIRC you were one of those people shouting me down for saying TIE swarms ain't what they used to be. What you're saying now, about how TIEs are weaker because there's more red die/offensive tricks in the game seems to be in direct contradiction to your earlier stance.

No one "shouted you down" about TIE fighters. You were just plain wrong about multiple things and it was explained to you why, by me, and then backed up by Azreal. You may not have agreed with what was said, but don't try to play the victim here and act like you were just yelled at (over the internet, no less).

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

bocatt wrote:I just got shouted down for saying the generic TIE fighter is outclassed, because it's "100% efficient" (being the baseline on which the efficiency is measured) so your basic 3 green dice can not be outclassed because its 100% efficient when comparing against 3 unmodified green dice.

bocatt wrote:Also Azreal, IIRC you were one of those people shouting me down for saying TIE swarms ain't what they used to be. What you're saying now, about how TIEs are weaker because there's more red die/offensive tricks in the game seems to be in direct contradiction to your earlier stance.

No one "shouted you down" about TIE fighters. You were just plain wrong about multiple things and it was explained to you why, by me, and then backed up by Azreal. You may not have agreed with what was said, but don't try to play the victim here and act like you were just yelled at (over the internet, no less).

Emphasis is yours. It's just a turn of phrase. Settle down.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As you said, it's just an argument over the internet. No need to say I'm "playing the victim". I was just curious if Azrael changed his stance on TIE Fighters. Which I didn't receive an answer to, but if it's going to be so much trouble I'm not overly concerned with getting one.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Azreal13 wrote:
The fact that you're addressing me for points that Turnip Jedi made, and accusing me of "shouting you down" about TIE swarms suggest you're not following the thread of the conversation very well.

My mistake.

But then, you're arguing that making one half of a diametrically opposed equation (red vs green) stronger doesn't inherently make the other weaker, so I think we're done here.

It's not an equation though. It's not that 2+6=8 and if you increase 2 to 3 you must decrease 6 to 5 to still get 8.

You have two pools of dice. Every success roll on the green dice negates one success on the red dice, so even if there are more reds to cancel, you still evade some damage rolling unmodified green dice.

Juke could be considered to nerf to green dice. But I'm not entirely sold on that logic either, especially as the effect can (normally) be mitigated by readily available focus.

Yeaahh, but it is.

The probability of rolling a given number of evades on 3 unmodified green dice has not changed. Nobody was saying that.

The issue is that as the game has advanced, that exact same number of green dice producing exactly the same average number of evades has become less valuable as they're trying to mitigate an increasing number of hits on average per attack thanks to an higher number of abilities and upgrades that boost red dice.

This isn't a pure maths issue, it isn't that 3 greens today somehow magically produces fewer evades on average than two years ago, it's a real world thing where attack has gotten ever more potent.

 bocatt wrote:

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

bocatt wrote:I just got shouted down But I'm not entirely sold on that logic either, especially as the effect can (normally) be mitigated by readily available focus.

And that was broadly my original point of why Markmanship is so so bad, and that focus is just so much better especially on a base TIE that has neither the hull or shields to save it if the green dice fluff

Maybe the phrase weaker was ill chosen but as Az pointed out the majority of upgrades are designed to boost damage output with the few that boost defense come at a heavy cost either points wise or some other negative effect ie stress, but the point stands Red dice were already superior to Green by design (ie more positive results on red) and the gap seems to be getting wider


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Seemed to have fluffed to quote and unquoting there, hope it makes sense