We are taking wild guesses as to the balance of the game. For awhile it was the Tie Swarm killing the meta and now it's the B-Wings. Several post are calling for the balance of the factions. How can you balance something when we are all operating in the dark? FFG has no system to track Tournaments for SWXM. We have a feeling as to how things are going but no hard data. We hear all kinds of shenanigans going on with tournament kits out there. From the selling of the contents on eBay to the TO's keeping the regional byes and worse. Magic the Gathering has had a solid system for years to track it's FNM and Pro-Tour events. They even assign unique ID numbers to all players to track personal records. We have by far less pieces to track than MTG and a software to both track the squads and players could go a long way.

Here is what I purpose FFG do for all of us. Provide an Official Tournament Organizational software to run events with. Have a player registration to participate in sponsored events. Only provide Kits to registered TO's to run events. During the set up of a tournament both enter the registered players FFG event number and Squad. This software will report back all match information and squads so the data can be analyzed.

I disagree, and here is why. I stopped playing Magic, outside of friendly games, because of how short, rude and competitive the players were becoming. MTG set up a system that seem to promote this kind of play.

FFG has created a casual and fun feeling game. Even in tournament situations. Opponents helping each other through out the game is a common occurrence. Heck, we all say (and some wear) "Fly Casual"! I believe this is because A) if you can't have fun pushing Star Wars minis around a table then something is wrong with you, and B) FFG has not set up a system that people will get overly competitive over. Show up, play, and maybe you'll get a cool prize. At the very least, you'll meet other Star Wars buffs and have a fun time.

I think the point that Osoro is trying to make is that there's a lot of theorycrafting done on squad building, but the data that would truly be useful in determining how effective any given point expenditure really is is lost due to lack of tracking software for tournament play.

I don't really see the connection between having useful data collection tools and players becoming ravenous jerkwads. I think that mentality spawned in MtG due primarily to the fact that there tends to be large quantities of cash on the line in the MtG competitive scene.

I can agree there would be an element of competitiveness to tracking players records. we can leave off tracking that to keep the fly casual aspect the same. however, adding stability to the operation of tournaments can be beneficial and tracking the meta to keep things from spiraling out of control if one build becomes dominant.

I think part of the casual element of this game is the belief that any 100 point squad can beat any other. I largely think this statement is true. I would hate to see players discouraged from playing the ships and pilots they have an affection for because of a trend found in an Excel spread sheet.

My friend who just started playing is a prime example. The first ship he bought was an Advanced. He doesn't read the forums, and has a blast every time he plays Vader. I would never tell him NOT to build a squad around his favorite pilot or attempt to use math to ruin his fun.

Now here's the real kicker, I'm not even saying that FFG should share the data collected from an official tournament software. I would rather they just have the info to help keep things balanced. The benefit to the community is to provide a stable platform to run an event with.

Major Juggler and I are starting to compile this stuff just via google docs and the reports from this page (regarding Store championships, regionals, worlds last year and this). It's not pretty but it's what we have right now.

There should be balance to the game which i think ffg are doing brilliantly. but also why should it be set on tournament results. There are plenty of players that just want to play the game for what it is a Star Wars game. As a product it probably does sell more to tournament players, especially with certain cards being with certain ships (Lambda+Bwing) (PTL in Awing & Imp Aces). But for worldwide marketing shouldn't it just be what will people spend money on. I'm in England trying to get some ships at a good price is a major problem. (Awing £35 seriously)

We don't all want the best combos. A lot of players only want ships from films. Recreate the best movie scenes. Hopefully the new cinematic rules will make this possible.

For balance I foresee Wave 4 being the changer, it'll be the first complete Wave of EU ships. For some it might make the decision to not do tournaments as they don't like the new stuff. Others might prefer new combos and more likely go.

I would like to be able to take part in an event but work/life prevents me. I'm not but Might be the best pilot and dice roller the world has ever scene, I could be the one that brings Balance to the Force, will never know.

So I leave it to FFG to make my wallet decisions for me.

This is a terrible idea. You can't tie the Tournament Kits to registered TOs, because they may not be used for tournaments. They are just the Game Night kits renamed.

As for tracking tournament results, it just isn't fruitful. One, because tracking of just what won isn't producing the full picture. Two, local metas are different, and can provide different pictures of the game. Thirdly, who is going to analyze this data? And how will this data be easier to analyze than the playtest data they already get? We are talking a logistical nightmare, that will not provide anywhere NEAR the results you think it will.

Because the playtesters seem to be doing their job. There is no real imbalance in the game right now, nor after the Medium Transport releases. I can't speak for what it will be like when Rebel Aces releases, since that seems to be the point of contention for many on the "imbalance". We do not know nearly enough about Wave 4 to make any assumptions on what the Rebel Aces will do. All such judgments are based on the current releases. We don't know what the game will look like when Wave 4 releases. Just because the Imperial Aces aren't "OMG, SUPERZ SHIPZZZZ", like some are referring the Rebel Aces to (gross overreaction, imo), does not mean there is an imbalance.

Personally....I like the "Fly Casual" thing. I've helped opponents in local tourneys. I have no intention of getting into Nationals etc. It's just not my thing. If someone is seriously cometitive in this game, then so be it, but do not recoil if you get a little attitude back for what you give.

Sithborg you are making my point. I absolutely agree you don't get the full picture of the meta by just looking at the winners. The question of imbalance is at hand now because of the results being reported from the Store championship events. Currently from what has been shared the Rebels have a win rate of 58.5%. That number alone means nothing, you have to know how many of each side was flown to get a picture of the balance of the game. If the Rebels were flown at near 60% of the time things are fine, just the Rebels are more popular. If its 50/50 then a slight imbalance is there and if the Empire was flown at near 60% we have a problem. That only speaks to just one level of the data that can be collected. What if the B-Wing showed up in 70% of the builds and of those 95% had a winning record. Does that put the B-Wing as a must have to win? If you compile that with the overall winning record you have real data that can be used to develop your future releases to swing the pendulum back to balance. Play testers are great and you can get a lot of good information out of it. As this game grows and more and more cards come out, play testing all of it will become difficult.

Again, it's all how you look at the data. Some are focusing on just the factions. Some focus on ship type and usage. What I see when I look at the Store Championship results, is variety. And variety is the stuff of balance. Sure, it isn't the type of variety some people seem to want, but as we add more and more ships, it will be impossible for them to get the variety they want to see.

So I may have mis read these numbers but here a ruff look at the store champ winning decks.

70 matches reported

Rebels

41 wins 58.5%

145 ships total for the rebels

Average of 3.5 ships per squad

17 list included X-Wings

52 X-Wings for an average of 3 per squad

41% of the winning squads flew X-Wings

25 list included B-Wings

45 B-Wings for an average of 1.8

60% of the winning rebels squads flew B-Wings

Empire

29 wins 41.5%

Most list included either fire spray or tie fighters

99 tie fighters were flow for an average of 3.4 ties per fleet

21 Fire sprays for .7 per list.

The numbers really mean nothing or do they?

Awnings showed up 7 times only out doing the HWK at 4

The Ywing got some love 19 saw action out doing the YT-1300 who had 18

Only 2 Tie Advances showed the lowest of all the ships.

The lambda and bomber also did not show up often 5 and 8

If FFG was not operating in the dark the B-Wing would be the top dog on the rebels and perhaps seeing the data would have opted for the y-Wing to bring balance. Clearly the Tie Advance underperformed at only 2 and both were Vaders. These are the type of things people would be able to look at while deciding the upgrades and such to introduce to the public.

Those numbers mean nothing. Or, more importantly, the numbers that are being presented cannot tell you what you are trying to prove.

That list is helpful in showing trends in what can win. And if you truly, truly look at the squads in that list, you will find a diverse group. Not surprisingly, the world champion squad is popular. But ignore that one squad, there is a great amount of diversity in what people are bringing. Bringing Wedge is not the same as bringing Biggs or a Rookiee. That you insist on boiling them down to the same data point is silly. The squads are not the same, even if they use the same ships, the different pilots will make it fly differently.

But if you are looking for the viability of each ship, you need ALL the data. You need to know what everyone is bringing to a tournament. And what their win record looks like. Or, more data than you have to be making these balance calls.

Again Sithborg, you are making my point. I would love to have access to all the data. Those number absaloutly mean nothing at all. My point of the whole thread is we are all operating in the dark including FFG. I know there's little chance I can convince you I have no other agenda other then let's correct the tournament scene. A software to assist in the operation of running a tournament is what I'm after. The side benifits of collecting data is just that a side benifit.

Honestly, I find it funny that anyone things FFG is "operating in the dark". This has to be one of the most balanced miniature games I have ever played. We may not know HOW FFG play tests and decides how to expand the game, but how ever they are it is obvious they are doing a dang good job of it!