Would that really be an issue for X-wing players as well?

True, half the game is already hidden, so adding more shouldn't really harm competitive play. You're already dealing with a lot of hidden info.

See here's the part I don't buy...

Knowing what weapons the other player has and their effective range allows both players to plan a strategy accordingly, rather than trying to guess what ranges might be safe to engage at.

How would not knowing the effective range make it impossible to plan a strategy? Why is trying to guess what range is safe such a bad thing? Especially when both sides have to do it.

I just don't believe this would have a huge detriment on competitive play. The only thing it would do is make people adopt a different mindset and plan more for unknown variables. Which to mean would seem to make for a more dynamic game, and a better test of player skill.

For now the basic rules say all cards are face up; rosters are also available to both players in Warmachine, Bloodbowl, Warhammer, and nearly every other game I've ever played. The idea of hidden upgrades is just for fun guys, no need to argue over it. Either try it with your friends or don't, it's up to you guys.

Personally I'm really looking forward to trying it once my friends and I are really comfortable with the rules and remembering all the upgrades. The biggest drawback to this is using a brand new card no one's seen but once everyone's comfortable with the stuff then it should be fun.

The old rule of "Know your enemy" should stand true, but you can't hope to know every little detail about your enemy. I like the concept of the hidden upgrades for casual play as it will keep players guessing and the surprise factor is always fun.

Not ordnance, but this has been used in a similar game and works quite well for "what the hell" moments. To wit: Kirk.

In Star Trek: Attack Wing, which (if you live under a rock) is essentially the same game re-skinned by WizKids for the Star Trek setting, James Kirk has a unique ability which would be something along the following lines in X-wing Terms:

You may choose 2 different elite pilot talents. These cost 3 points each, regardless of their normal cost. Place these face down until you use them, at which point they remain face-up for the rest of the game.

So abilities like Daredevil, Expert Handling or Adrenaline Rush could come as a nasty shock to an opponent who isn't expecting to see the fighter move like that. Conversely, either of your face-down cards could be a manouvre ability, which makes it much harder for the tea-leaf readers to predict where you're going to be....

Actually thats a good idea, you should not know the upgrades of enemy ships, bout the pilots I thinks its ok, I mean, the squadrons have their own decals so you can identify them, even famous pilots can be identify by their own decals. like the Red baron.

And that would change tactics a lot, I have suffer about that a lot, "oh so you have a proton bomb...mmm lets move away" its kindda frustrating.

I started out playing this way. My brother and I just thought it was the natural way the game was. When we played "right", I found that I liked the strategy better with all things revealed.

The thing that changed our minds was R2D2. It was really annoying not to know where he was at until it was the last ship on the board and all I had left was a few tie fighters.

Overall though, it can be fun to surprise your opponents. I would recommend not turning them face down, but have your list written out so no mixing the cards. That way your opponent does not no if you have a missile at all, not just be unsure what missile it is. Then just reveal when you use it.

Over all I think it would be an advantage for the rebs, they seem to put more, and more varied stuff on their ships.

I just want to counter your argument that hidden cards would be "terrible" competitively...

I think hidden upgrades could be quite a fun way to play. I also think it would add even more depth to the game. The reason why some would consider the change to be an issue for competitive play, is to be honest something I'm not sure I buy.It's not really adding randomness to the game, but rather adding uncertainty, which for some reason competitive TT gamers seem to be against. I saw it all the time in 40k, the very idea of hidden lists brought about howls about how that would destroy tournament play... Because apparently tournament players can't cope with surprises.Now I get it to a point, take Chess, everyone knows exactly what the other sides options are, they know what moves they can make and where they can attack or where they're weak. There is nothing hidden in Chess.Also the dice in these games adds a random chance that already has a factor on win/lose. But myself I just don't see how having to plan for the unknown is going to destroy tournament games. Not when both sides are playing by the same rules.

The problem is not having to deal with uncertainty, but with maintaining that uncertainty fairly in a tournament setting.

You'd have to ban players from watching other games after they finished their game in a round, or else you'll see what they've got hidden without then seeing yours. Cheating is also much more prevalent in games with hidden assets, since you can change them out with less risk of getting caught, or swap which upgrade is on whom in the middle of the game when your opponent isn't looking. You'd still have a list for a TO to check, but it'd be much harder to know when you needed to check. You'd have to start doing random "deck checks" like in serious magic tournaments, only worse because it could check out and THEN I switch who's carrying what.