There are lots of ways they could take the b-wing and bomber, but many people haven't considered how pilot skills and ship upgrades might effect the ships.

Lets assume the B-Wing has 2 or 3 torpedo icons, and the bomber has 2 torpedo icons and a missile icon, then try a few of these:

Elite Pilot Skill:
Barrage (2 points): When this ship spends a target lock to fire a weapon with header Attack [Target Lock], it may fire any number of weapons with the header Attack [Target Lock]

Ship Upgrade:
Extended Ordanance Bays (4 points): If a secondary weapon requires you to discard the card to performe the attack, do not discard until you have performed 2 attacks with that weapon.

Advanced Guidance Systems (2 points): When this ship spends a target lock to fire a weapon with header Attack [Target Lock], you may reroll any number of attack dice on that attack.

tinnitus said:

And I've already illustrated what they can do for X-Wing:

TIE Bomber is a warhead attacker. Low natural attack, primary reliance is on what kind of warheads it is given for upgrades. If you want a minefield, give them bombs. If you want ranged attackers, give them Torpedoes. It won't last long if X-Wings tag-team them but the idea is that their slow move with a TIE Fighter screen can keep the Rebel fighters at a distance for the Bombers to attack them.

The B-Wings have high attack and great resiliency but no speed and almost no dodge. So they'll wade into the fray firing left and right and hoping to kill as many enemy TIEs before they succum to their pathetic dodge in the face of so many attack dice. They'll wallow like a YT, but have similar hitpoints and a greater attack value with better direct-attack upgrades and a smaller base. You'd loose the turret attack but be greatful for an autoblaster that can, say, re-roll all blank results in a primary attack?

Both of these ships would be vulnerable to the Interceptors introduced in Wave 2, but the idea isn't to introduce successive expansions to counter the previous ones like Magic. The purpose of expansions is to introduce different ways for you to play the game.

And given the fighters I just illustrated above, I kind of look forward to trying a bomber build with Torpedoes escorted by a TIE Fighter screen, or a tide of Death with as many B-Wings as I can to go killing unprepared players in a straight line.

Ok. Long post following. I ran a battle using the B-Wings today. I'm certainly not claiming I did everything tactically right, but here it is.

2 B-Wings (Farlander and Blue Squadron Pilot) vs. 5 TIE fighters (Howlrunner, Backstabber and three Obsidian Squadron Pilots). B-Wings upgraded with Autoblaster and two Proton Torpedoes, Farlander also had Elusiveness. Howlrunner upgraded with Expose. 77 points on both sides. Order of movement is TIEs 3-5, Blue Squadron Pilot, Backstabber, Farlander, Howlrunner. Attack in reverse order. I also gave Farlander the pilot ability to gain an evade when acquiring a target lock (as I suggested this morning).

First round: TIEs in a vee formation, charging straight across the board (straight 5). B-wings side by side, about range 2 from each other and turn right 2. No combat first round.

Second round: TIEs Bank 3 left, B-wings Turn 3 left. Howlrunner is at range 2 to Farlander. All TIEs focus, B-wings acquire target locks (Farlander to Howlrunner (gains Evade token), Blue Squadron to TIE 3). Howlrunner fires, two hits (using Focus), Farlander rolls one evade and uses evade token. No damage. Farlander fires Proton torpedoes at Howlrunner at range 2. Rolls 2 Damage, 1 Critical, 1 Focus. Changed Focus to Critical. Howlrunner rolls 2 evades, 1 blank. Two critical hits (Injured pilot and Direct Hit - 2 dmg). Howlrunner is destroyed. Backstabber fires at Farlander at range 3, rolls two hits. Farlander rolls two evades. Blue Squadron fires at TIE 3 with Proton Torpedoes. Rolls four Damage, TIE 3 rolls 1 evade and 2 blank. TIE 3 is destroyed.

Third round: TIEs Bank 2 right and Focus. B-Wings go Straight 1, Farlander acquires target lock on Backstabber (gains evade token), Blue Squadron Pilot focuses. Farlander attacks with primary weapon, rolls 1 damage, 1 critical, 1 focus and 1 blank. Spends Target lock to reroll focus and blank and gets 2 damage. Backstabber rolls 2 evades and 1 blank. 1 damage and 1 critical to Backstabber, critical is another Direct Hit, Backstabber is destroyed. Blue Squadron Pilot attacks TIE 5, rolls three focus and 1 blank. Changed all focus results to damage results. TIE 5 rolls 2 focus and 1 evade. Spends focus token to change focus results to evades, no damage. TIE 4 attacks Farlander at range 1, rolls 2 damage, 1 focus. Changes focus to damage. Farlander roll 1 focus and 1 blank. Spends evade token to cancel 1 damage, 2 damage to shields. TIE 5 attacks Blue Squadron pilot and rolls 1 damage, 1 critical and 1 focus. Blue Squadron rolls 1 blank and 1 focus. Both ships already spent their focus tokens, so Blue Squadron takes 2 shield damage.

Fourth round: Both remaining TIEs do Koiogran 3 maneuvers to get behind the B-Wings. No actions due to red maneuvers. B-Wings turn 3 Left, Farlander acquires target lock on TIE 4 (who is at range 2) and gains an evade token. Blue Squadron pilot also acquires a target lock on TIE 4 at range 3. Farlander has no one in arc, so Blue Squadron Pilot fires his Autoblaster twice. First attack rolls 2 damage, 1 focus. TIE 4 rolls 1 evade and 3 focus, so 1 damage on TIE 4. Second attack, Blue Squadron Pilot rolls three blanks, spends target lock to reroll and gets 3 damage. TIE 4 rolls 1 evade, 2 focus and 1 blank. 2 more damage, so TIE 4 is destroyed. TIE 5 attacks Blue Squadron Pilot, rolling a damage and a focus. Blue Squadron Pilot rolls 1 evade and 1 blank. No damage.

I stopped at this point, because the game was pretty heavily in favor of the B-Wings. It might have taken a turn or two to get the last TIE into arc based on the relative positions, but with only a couple points of shield damage on each, I don’t see the TIE whittling them down before they nail him.

Recommendations: I’m sure I could have played the TIEs better, but the B-Wings seem a bit strong. I’d say reducing their agility to 1 would be a start. I didn’t barrel roll with them, but I agree that that action doesn’t really fit with this ship. Farlander got a lot of use out of the target lock – evade token ability. I’m not sure what to think about the Autoblaster that was proposed. It destroyed a TIE at range 3, rolling two attacks with 3 attack dice vs. 4 defense dice, though I grant that the TIE did not have any focus or evade tokens available. I like the idea of attacking twice, but I sure wouldn’t want to be on the receiving end of this weapon.

I would also like to propose a change to the Upgrade bar. According to canon, the B-Wing has a laser cannon, autoblasters and 3 ion cannons. What about adding a second cannon upgrade icon? If we consider the autoblaster to be the primary weapon, then the existing heavy laser cannon and the ion cannon would neatly fill out the “official” weapons loadout with no additional cards needed. Thoughts?

Also, I noticed that removing the Koiogran turn from the maneuver chart means the B-Wing has no red maneuvers at all. I propose making the 4 Straight maneuver red.

Sorry for the length of this post, but I wanted to give as much detail as possible. I think the B-Wings are certainly playable, if a bit overpowered as proposed but a bit of tweaking should take care of that. I started a game with the TIE Bombers, but realized I'd forgotten the bomber-specific upgrades and gave up. The bit I did seemed quite in line with the official ships, though.

Norsehound said:

New ships are added to the game to increase the number of ways to play the game, I completely agree with you there. A new wave is not added to counter the last one, I concur. That's why I started this thread, to find out how they could enhance the game.

If a B-wing is a slow cumbersome heavy hitter then it isn't much different from a double torp fitted y-wing, is it? Though with a couple of tweeks I bet it could find its way into many commanders list of viable options of ships to bring into battle.

To field a maximum fitted TIE Bomber in a dog fight is playing with really high stakes. As I see it there's a high risk it's going to get blown up before it has gotten to launch all its firepower, screened or not.  I can't remember it being used in a dog fight anywhere in the movies and I suppose it's for a reason. One way to go about it though could be to add some sort of incentive to make the Bombers exit the board alive. They shoot once or twice, then leave. Maybe you could buy waves of Bombers, you unlock the next one by exiting the board.

tinnitus said:

Well, of the two the TIE Bomber would be the closest to a double-torp Y-Wing because that's how it's so dangerous. It would have less hull though, with a greater magazine/upgrade capability (concussion missiles and bomb slots). The TIE Bomber would join the ranks of ships that are best when attacking at range, like double-Torp Y-Wings and Firesprays with Heavy lasers.

The B-Wing is similar to the Y-Wing only in resiliency and manuver capabilities. It would have a much higher natural attack (at 3), and be able to equip the cannon upgrade instead of the turret upgrade. Instead of pointing and laughing at the Y-Wing for being so ineffectual and special-purpose, the B-Wing would be the first thing the empire wants to destroy because if left alone it can wipe out half your squadron!

I think some are approaching the Tie Bomber in the wrong way. It is a bomber and should be used to attack ground or capital ships. Fighters would be in an escort roll much as Mustangs were in WWII for the B-17s.  Scenarios along those lines make perfect sense for additions to the game. Adding another gee wiz capability to make it an interceptor or attack fighter is looking at it wrong.

VR
James Mattes

Er…no, I think we're approaching it the right way. We're trying to think of ways to make the TIE bomber a viable option in a space dogfighting game, not dismissing it for a role that will never happen in the engine. Capital ships as we know them will never appear outside of fanmade productions.

I think there's no right or wrong yet. In a sense you're both right. I certainly agree that, either way, TIE Bombers will need escorts (I like your allegory with WWII, Vojvoda). Yes, they are built for targeting large things and not fighters, but unlike a B-17 they carry armaments that can be used to target fighters in a pinch. But then again, why bring them to a dogfight when a couple of TIE/ln are probably both cheaper and better suited for the job? I agree that introducing the TIE Bomber to the game without new scenarios would be something of a stretch. But not unthinkable.

I'm starting to like your take on the B-wings, Norsehound. Resilient ships with strong primary guns would be dangerous if left inchecked.

Bringing back the movies, the only scene they're in they aren't destroying anything they are searching the asteroid field for the Falcon. With this in mind, could it be possible to introduce non combat modifications (i.e. scanning equipment) for certain ships? Supposing a TIE Bomber scanning the satellites in the Dark Whispers-mission at greater range, or could transfer data to other ships. A dangerous and expensive strategy, but it could pay off in the hands of a skilled commander. (This alone wouldn't be enough to introduce it to the game, though.)

All playing information is public, so unless you'd make hidden objectives a normal and mandatory part of gameplay I don't see the use for scanning equipment on TIE Bombers.

Proton Torpedoes are one of the standard anti-capital ship munitions of the Star Wars Universe already. Not only were they used in the Death Star (which was hardly a strike craft), but the Flight simulators portray Proton Torpedoes as heavy anti-ship ordinance best used against slow-moving ships and transports (in dogfights it was effective against Rebel X, Y, and B Wings and TIE Bombers).

So anti-capital weapons exist in the game already in my opinion, just that this munitions class needs to be expanded. Heavy Rockets were another primary anti-capital weapon used by the Empire that had tremendous punch but a very reduced homing capability. Perhaps all hits are changed to crits for this weapon but the target can re-roll any of his dodge dice? Useful only against slow-moving ships and eventually capital vessels? The Mag-Pulse warhead is another heavy weapon that I wanted to see… kind of like an ion cannon but for attacks.

The most 'utility' I can think of to get out of a TIE bomber would be enabling Proton Bombs to remove asteroid terrain. Proton Bombs were used in TIE Fighter against capital ships, but since no capital ships exist yet I can't see how to implement them. Maybe if FFG does capital ships, they can introduce specialized anti-ship ordinance along with the vessel and scenario to help counter-attacks.

When FFG introduced proton torpedoes in the starter to use them in their dogfighting game I knew pushing the TIE bomber into a similar role was possible. What would make it extremely deadly is the ability to let the Bomber use another Target Lock in addition to the Target Lock it spends on the Proton torpedo.

Norsehound said:

Why does it have to be hidden? The mission rules state that you need to overlap to scan a satellite, then you put it on the card of the ship that scanned it. My proposotion is simply that a properly equiped Bomber could scan at a greater range and/or transfer the data (i.e. the satellite token) to another ship that is more likely to get off the board.

The utility you suggest (proton bombing asteroids) is a good idea, and doesn't need implemented capital ships for it to work as a mission. Objective: Clear the board of asteroids. Why? So the capital ship can move in, of course. As often with missions, it's a vital part of a bigger picture.

And my point was that this ability for the bomber is very scenario-specific. If we give the bomber capabiliites like that it would be better served if it had a wider flexibility and mission appeal. How often are you doing scanning in a pickup battle?

Besides, such a scanning ability might be better served for those ships that exist with special scanners… like the TIE Scout and TIE Vanguard. The Bomber is a pure attack craft and was never employed on special sensor missions unless no other vehicles were available. I still think it's very versatile as a missile truck if we give the bomber more kinds of missiles to carry.

The flexibility concern goes for Proton Bombs too. Not every scenario has terrain pieces. So while I brought up that suggestion i wonder if it might be over-specialized for general scenario play.

Norsehound said:

No, your point was that hidden objectives were needed. Other than that, your right - it IS mission specific.

Norsehound said:

The Bomber is a large ship that seems to be easily fitted whith what is needed. And it didn't look like it was blowing up asteroids in EP V. It's not everyday a commander has access to what is best suited for the task, so why not put a scanner in a Bomber.

Norsehound said:

Yes, mission specific.

I think a clarification from my part is in order; I don't mind playing missions - on the contrary. I welcome mission play since I think that a pitched battle is rather… dull. If the TIE Bomber comes out as a mission specific ship I would not hesitate to buy it! I'm not sure this oppinion is a general one, though, which may be why FFG chooses to make the Bomber non-mission specific.

tinnitus said:

Actually they were bombing the large asteroid to flush out the Falcon. Right after they show the bombers the next scene shows Hon or Leia in the falcon’s cockpit listing the bomb impacts as the bombers pass.    

Boomer_J said:

oops listening to not listing to

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phGlo_TNDp0