Personally, Expose is still not a good card. The fact that many seem to want to use points to that opinions are divided on it, and it boils down to play style.

Back stabbed would indeed a good candidate for Expose, if only he had veteran skills.

I've had Mauler reduce fresh x wings to space debris in single gunnery runs. Then repeat the performance over again in the same game. 4 points well spent. 5 attack dice at range 1 is just pure love.

Personally, Expose is still not a good card. The fact that many seem to want to use points to that opinions are divided on it, and it boils downto play style.

You sir hit the nail on the head, and so correct. I personally believe that a card is worth it if the person wants to incorporate it into their play style, some cards recently got no love cause they couldnt be comboed well. That is why I am liking this expansion. Its adding so much to the customization of the game. It helps take away from cookie cutter builds and increases the chances of fighting a team you never would of thought of in a tourney situation. I have hope that this is the trend to come.

@Hujoe

You said that errata would be a terrible and confusing precedent as a way to fix the A-Wing's cost. But that precedent has already been set. Is it really any more confusing than them changing Daredevil to be a white maneuver? There are STILL people who get that wrong on the forums. Even just today. And that's among people who spend time on here and are far more likely to know than your average joe out at the FLGS.

So clearly making an errata that might cause confusion is not the issue here.

I'm really late to this party but here goes round 1 of thoughts...Still fuzzy over the BWING getting better and no love for the Ywing.

Holy crap

They've acknowledged that the A-Wing is overcosted

Called it! for the Awing and the Advanced. I had it at 1 cost, heck Advanced might get a 3 pt discount with this logic.

Tycho + Chardaan + Prototype Veteran + PTL + Opportunist/Expose (31)

Jake + Chardaan + Prototype Veteran + PTL + Opportunist/Expose (29)

And I still have 40 points!?!

I'm thinking 2-3 z95's with upgrades. Going to be gross.

It seems a little early for April Fools, but some of this stuff is pretty insane. zKeyan Farlander is just flat out ridiculous. Lose a stress token for a focused attack? Give him opportunist or PTL and it's a joke. That better be a "gain a stress" and it starts being reasonable.

I do realize that all of this will create really expensive B-Wings, but c'mon. Now that they have Z-95s, you're going to see a couple ridiculous B-wings per list in tourneys and still be 4-5 ship builds.

Did B-Wings need to be better? No. Y's and A's needed some love, perhaps, but not B's.

Bwings may not be showing up in quite the #'s that were expected (see my other thread) but wow. They didn't need a boost.

Advanced sensors lets you focus prior to a red maneuver for 3 points, and you can use it on defense.

Powerful, sure... but the jury's still out on 'broken.'

I don't think you're considering the possibilities.

Farlander is a B-wing Fel. Push the Limit for 2 Actions and a Stress. Spend the Stress as a Focus. He's a 3-action beast that's honestly BETTER than Fel, because he'll end each turn without stress and free to maneuver.

Or you combine it with Opportunist, stress yourself, and unstress immediately.

The B-wing is already stomping all over the meta, and it just got one of the top 3 abilities in the game.

Comparing any of the elite interceptors with this elite bwing makes me a little sick. The fact that the comparison is so obviously in favor of the bwing means I am physically getting ill thinking about it.

But acting like a pre-teen troll who just slammed too many Monsters on a dare isn't going to convince anyone of anything.

This so perfectly describes all of his posts.

As far as Kath/Rebel Captive, as someone who enjoys flying that particular combo, I actually think it may become more useful in a weird way. Here we have all these Rebels who are good at dealing with stress, so they plan on repeatedly taking stressing maneuvers/actions of their own ...then Kath/Rebel Captive flies in and gives them 2-3 times as much stress as they were prepared to handle. Now instead of using their own stress to maximum effect, they have to hold off hoping to be able to correctly handle the stress you are giving them, therefore disrupting the plan behind selecting a stress-shedding pilot in the first place.

Combine with abilities that shed stress + native green maneuvers + ways to get more green maneuvers and stress just isn't a problem for the rebels any more: meanwhile, stress already hurt the imperials, it's now deadly to them.

TIE Defender (if it even has the rumored white-K, I doubt) I'm starting to feel unconcerned.

I'm solidly on record as saying we'd never see a white K-turn. But after seeing this.. with two rebels who can so effectively shed the stress from the K-turn, making it effectively white, I'm not so sure it's all that unrealistic any more.

I think it would be a horrible thing for the game, but I don't know that FFG agrees with me at this point.

Suddenly the white kturn AND "yellow" evasive maneuvers don't sound so overpowering on the 30pt defender do they?

I am not going to react this time, I havn't even recovered from the last rebel boost. Wow I'm disappointed.

Let's not rehash the pro-Expose/anti-Expose debate for the 1,000th time. It's not very good overall due to cost and having to waste an action on it. If it were like Opportunist and you could decide when you came around to attack, it would be hugely better, but it doesn't.

The A-Wing (and the bonus EPT) mitigate it somewhat, but let's not confuse it for a good card. It's still not that great and you're shoehorning it in when there are better EPT you can use. That being said, seeing A-Wings have some punch ain't terrible either.

You are talking about a single upgrade card, that only had a slight change due to X-wing boosting with a green maneuver where as an errata for an A-wing cost would require SQUAD points being different on MULTIPLE copies of cards and causing people an issue with over costing their squad if they didn't know about the update. So if you don't find that confusing and harmful to the player base, well, I don't know what would.

@Hujoe

You said that errata would be a terrible and confusing precedent as a way to fix the A-Wing's cost. But that precedent has already been set. Is it really any more confusing than them changing Daredevil to be a white maneuver? There are STILL people who get that wrong on the forums. Even just today. And that's among people who spend time on here and are far more likely to know than your average joe out at the FLGS.

So clearly making an errata that might cause confusion is not the issue here.

Oh, and really it would be more confusing than daredevil, because it involves point costs. The very last thing you want is for there to be different point costs for the same thing, it can create all sorts of confusion and illl will when someone shows up to a game with what someone else thinks is an illegal list.

Let's not rehash the pro-Expose/anti-Expose debate for the 1,000th time. It's not very good overall due to cost and having to waste an action on it. If it were like Opportunist and you could decide when you came around to attack, it would be hugely better, but it doesn't.

The A-Wing (and the bonus EPT) mitigate it somewhat, but let's not confuse it for a good card. It's still not that great and you're shoehorning it in when there are better EPT you can use. That being said, seeing A-Wings have some punch ain't terrible either.

I'm not rehashing anything. I am stating a combo I wanna try and sounds fun. It now has some viability and I wanna try it out. I'm not saying its a good card, I'm saying it is an interesting option and the choice to actually gain use out of the card is now there. People will disagree with me and they are welcome to do that, I am not forcing my opinion on them. If they don't like the card alright, cool, move onto another combo then. I'm not looking for an argument I am just posting interesting options that might be of use to people.

Stop talking. Its time to defect.

BOO!

Unless you mean to the Empire...then, carry on...

but BOO! if you mean defect to the rebels.

I'm really excited for the new awesomeness. Keep up the good work FFG.

Stop talking. Its time to defect.

Defect?

Never Give Up, Never Surrender!

We are Imperials, we shall fight on.

Stop talking. Its time to defect.

BOO!

Unless you mean to the Empire...then, carry on...

but BOO! if you mean defect to the rebels.

Oddly enough, this expansion means that I'll be focusing on Imperials more than I already was. I don't generally like playing mirror matches and the pacing and choice of FFGs new releases (whether or not they turn out to be the "better faction) means that rebels will get fresh toys for some time now and I have a hunch we'll continue to see an overwhelming number of rebel players. Wave 4 will be interesting in that respect, but I don't think it will stem the tide especially because players who like playing a swarm will likely have an option on both sides now and the TIE swarm will be a tired option (and already seems to be).

We are in a post Episode VI feel in terms of the galactic situation...

Like Opportunist, expose would seem to work well on turreted ships like the Falcon. Other ships can use squad leader to give the turreted ship an extra action, which is useful when that other ship doesn't have a shot. The best candidate is probably Jan ORS. Other ships with an EPT are too low PS, or need their action for something else (e.g. Kyle needs to be focusing).

Let's not rehash the pro-Expose/anti-Expose debate for the 1,000th time. It's not very good overall due to cost and having to waste an action on it. If it were like Opportunist and you could decide when you came around to attack, it would be hugely better, but it doesn't.

The A-Wing (and the bonus EPT) mitigate it somewhat, but let's not confuse it for a good card. It's still not that great and you're shoehorning it in when there are better EPT you can use. That being said, seeing A-Wings have some punch ain't terrible either.

The green X-Wing deal isn't the ONLY affected case; there are other issues, like Tycho can now use it with his stack of stress.

And while I agree with you that it is more clear this way. I don't think that necessarily means better. And my point was that FFG is obviously not above legitimately changing things with errata.

What it comes down to is a disagreement on what is fundamentally best for the game:

1. Correcting Mistakes with errata

Pro- safer for game balance

Con- potential for confusion

2. Correcting mistakes with upgrade cards

Pro- zero confusion

Con- potential to break portions of the game - i.e. no more missiles on A-Wings.

Having played many other systems that use errata to fix things. (Even points costs!) I much prefer that method. But that's a matter of taste.

Edit for random aside:

Did anyone here play the old decipher SWCCG? That games errata was a legitimate book. Hundreds of pages iirc.

1. Correcting Mistakes with errata

Pro- safer for game balance

Con- potential for confusion

There's nothing inherently safer in terms of game balance about using errata. That assumes among other things that they'll get the change right, and not have to make additional tweaks, which means additional errata.

FFG with X-Wing at least only uses errata to fix something that is broken, say like with Daredevil that clearly was broken because the original let you break the can't do the same action twice rule. It's also something they have limited to only a very few cases.

In fact the only errata they've released so far is from stuff from the core set and wave 1.

It is safer for game balance because they can immediately rescind an error.

Let's say they realize that making daredevil a white maneuver breaks something else. It's a simple matter to update or change the errata.

If they make a mistake with a new card, like Chaardan Refit (hypothetically of course , then they now have two errors on their hands.

So, I'm sorry, but it is safer.

It is safer for game balance because they can immediately rescind an error.

No they can't... They can change the errata, but then you have even more versions of the errata floating out there, causing more confusion. If someone doesn't know about the updated FAQ they'll be playing with the old version of the errata. I fail to see how in any sense this is inherently safer.

Which considering FFG's track record so far seems to only be released when they publish a new expansion... Means you could have bad errata or at least unbalanced errata out there for months.

So not safer, but it can be a lot more confusing.

That's why errata has version numbers. No more confusion. Easy.

And not worth arguing any further on.

That's why errata has version numbers. No more confusion. Easy.

And not worth arguing any further on.

Since FFG isn't going to do errata for X-Wing except in extreme cases.

I think that the arguments against erattas are unreasonable boardering on obtuse.

Any company with a website simply has to have a location where the most up-to-date version is contained - there is absolutely no potential for multiple versions causing confusion. None. No one would bother looking anywhere than the FFG website for the most recent version.

The benefit of an eratta is that it is nothing more than text on a website. It can be changed at any point, acessed from any internet-capable device in seconds (i.e. cell phones), and costs nothing to implement.

But, whether an eratta is better or not isn't really the issue. My biggest concern is that I now have to pay the cost of missiles +2 when I want to use them on my A-Wings. Any kind of negative squad point upgrade card developed in response to a ship costing to much has some serious potential to mess with the use of the ship that it applies to. What that card should really say is, "All A-Wings cost 2 less squad points." I still don't think that it is a good idea, but at least it would not result in a missile tax.

The existence of the refit card is an admission that A-Wings cost too many squad points. The fact that the refit only applies to A-Wings without missiles means that FFG thinks that A-Wings with missiles do not cost too many squad points. The issue with A-Wings is that they are too expensive - with or without missiles. Why not just fix the problem instead of using a wonky half-measure?

I think that the arguments against erattas are unreasonable boardering on obtuse.

Any company with a website simply has to have a location where the most up-to-date version is contained - there is absolutely no potential for multiple versions causing confusion.

Tell that to 40K players who have to deal with around 70 pages of FAQs and Errata that only gets updated once a year or so. If your lucky, when they publish a new edition of the rules they manage to get out a FAQ within 6 months.

The fact that the refit only applies to A-Wings without missiles means that FFG thinks that A-Wings with missiles do not cost too many squad points.

Or it means that A-Wings weren't meant to be missile boats and that was the way to adjust things while causing the least disruption in how the ship is played.

Errata is a very hard way to maintain a game. This game sells a lot of units at Barnes and Noble and Target. You don't even have a mechanism to let people know there is errata.

I played Arkham Horror for years without looking at the web FAQ.

I think that the arguments against erattas are unreasonable boardering on obtuse.

Any company with a website simply has to have a location where the most up-to-date version is contained - there is absolutely no potential for multiple versions causing confusion. None. No one would bother looking anywhere than the FFG website for the most recent version.

The benefit of an eratta is that it is nothing more than text on a website. It can be changed at any point, acessed from any internet-capable device in seconds (i.e. cell phones), and costs nothing to implement.

But, whether an eratta is better or not isn't really the issue. My biggest concern is that I now have to pay the cost of missiles +2 when I want to use them on my A-Wings. Any kind of negative squad point upgrade card developed in response to a ship costing to much has some serious potential to mess with the use of the ship that it applies to. What that card should really say is, "All A-Wings cost 2 less squad points." I still don't think that it is a good idea, but at least it would not result in a missile tax.

The existence of the refit card is an admission that A-Wings cost too many squad points. The fact that the refit only applies to A-Wings without missiles means that FFG thinks that A-Wings with missiles do not cost too many squad points. The issue with A-Wings is that they are too expensive - with or without missiles. Why not just fix the problem instead of using a wonky half-measure?

Rapture, I cannot like this post enough.

As for saying that errata is a difficult way to maintain a game I have a few real world fixes for you.

1. Most companies, when they errata something, update the rules as well and then all subsequently shipped packages have the correct rules/cards in them. Why FFG wouldn't do that is beyond me. I haven't bought an A-Wing since the Daredevil errata, but I can say that, but it would be really dumb to me of the later printings of that set did not have the updated card in them.

2. Arguing that points values are tough to errata is also untrue. Look at Dust Tactics. A good while after their initial release, FFG (this very company!) completely redid the points values for every single unit. From what I understand, they fixed this by sending out new cards to everyone that requested them (perhaps requiring the proof of purchase). So don't tell me that it can't be done.

As soon as the current print run is sold out. All changed can be made official on the new cards and rules. You could even have a little star to show that a card had been updated. With a date or version number to clear up discrepancies. Truly easy.

I played Arkham Horror for years...

Okay, back to at least marginally on topic:

(1) Expose is a bad card. It's so bad that in most cases it wouldn't be worth running if it were free. The Prototype Veteran title ("A-wing Test Pilot"?) does technically open up a niche for it in combination with PTL, but at 7 points it's not going to be a popular option.

(2) Regardless of how any of us feel about errata, the policy is pretty firmly established at this point: the only two cards that have been errata'ed were actually broken. (Meaning they weren't simply unbalanced--the original Expert Handling arguably allowed you to barrel roll without an action, and Daredevil didn't actually cause any stress).

(3) Yes, Chardaan Refit increases the effective cost for missiles on A-wings. Missiles are already not a particularly competitive choice for the A-wing, and in the Wave 4 meta they were likely to be displaced almost entirely by Headhunters (with the possible exception of Green+PTL+missile). So the Refit allows you to buy back that slot, which is almost certainly unused, for 2 points.

(4) But no, the A-wing isn't completely done as a missile carrier. If you want EPT+missile, the weaker unique Headhunter pilot will be the only cheaper choice--regardless of the existence of the Refit, if you need a missile and that one Headhunter pilot won't work, you're going to be running it on an A-wing. (It just has to work harder to justify its cost.)

(5) Flip back to the big picture for a moment. Does anyone believe that A-wings aren't going to be entering the competitive metagame now, in their intended role as flankers/harriers? Isn't that a good thing?