What about having unique ships that have a negative 'ability,' like attackers may convert a blank result to a focus while firing on the rear edge of your base, in exchange for being undercosted? You'd get a pilot with an EPT slot, decent PS, all the ship's native abilities, and on the cheap -- in exchange for an ability that occasionally was detrimental?

I think it's a neat idea. Tarn Mison already is an example of a reverse of this - 1 lower pilot skill than Red squadron coupled with a decent ability.

A 23 point X-wing that has pilot skill 5, with a slight negative ability would be interesting. Much of the time that difference in pilot skill won't matter, but when it does, you'd get a big advantage. Against everything else, you'd be at a slight disadvantage due to the negative ability.

Of course, the theme of a high pilot skill pilot having a negative ability is a little wonky.

Of course, the theme of a high pilot skill pilot having a negative ability is a little wonky.

Highly skilled pilots also occasionally attempted the riskiest stuff or at least were put in those situations. Also, some pilots had weakness despite their talent (Corran Horn tended to rush into combat alone, Kell Tainer would occasionally flee combat, etc).

Ooh, Kell Tainer is a good example. He (almost) went psycho a couple times while flying, if I recall correctly. He's a perfect pilot for an ability like this. Myn Donos is another Wraith pilot that could work.

They already have, the YT-1300 Outer-rim smuggler.

I would just guess that low showing of the ship could have proven to FFG it wasn't a path to go down.

My own thought is it is a bad idea... Some people have trouble keeping track of and using pilot abilities. Not a big deal because the person that benefits is responsible for remembering.

Having pilots/ships with disabilities would force the opposing player to keep track of their pilots and their opponents' to ensure negatives were used/applied. The player would benefit from "forgetting" basically.

Love the idea but I think dandirk has a point. If it's a benefit to the player and s/he forgets then life goes on but if it's a detriment to the player does it become his/her opponents responsibility to "remind" them if they forget the negative ability? That would change the way players interact over the board and could lead to a less friendly game.

I'm thinking of abilities that are either one offs and then done ("when first...") or give opposing players incentive to remember ("attackers gain +1 to their primary weapon when firing on the rear edge of your base"). The first style will only need it remembered briefly and the second puts a target on an otherwise intimidating pilot to balance the cost.

All named pilots already have a glaring disability: they can't change ships (even if they did in their fluff)

Another problem beyond the needing to remember part is the psychology of game players. People don't enjoy playing with something that feels like a hindrance. WotC has done a lot of research on this for Magic and found that cards like this are just not popular, people just don't like them. So nowadays they try to phrase abilities as positives, because people won't like a card that is "stat 4, -1 when condition X", but they will like "stat 2, +1 when condition not X", even if mathematically they are identical.

I'd love to see some Named 1-3 PS pilots with maybe not negative abilities, but with small downsides for having high PS at low cost or much lower PS with a stronger ability. Make them unique and thematic for fun.

Academy Pilot Trainer: PS4. Tie Fighter. Cost-13(maybe even 12).

When a pilot with a lower PS rolls a focus and has none of their own to spend, you must use your focus to modify their die.

That Guy: PS1. Awing. Cost-18

You gain the BR action. You lose the Boost (or TL maybe) action.

IMO the biggest problem with this is the lack of space for rules text on the cards. You expect unique pilots to have a special ability, not just give you a bit of a PS boost or EPT, so what you really need here is a pilot with a special ability AND a drawback. And there probably isn't enough space to fit both of them.

Another problem beyond the needing to remember part is the psychology of game players. People don't enjoy playing with something that feels like a hindrance. WotC has done a lot of research on this for Magic and found that cards like this are just not popular, people just don't like them. So nowadays they try to phrase abilities as positives, because people won't like a card that is "stat 4, -1 when condition X", but they will like "stat 2, +1 when condition not X", even if mathematically they are identical.

This extends to more than gaming, it's also true for test options. Good test makers tend to put the least attractive choice in opinion polls first because people want to find something better. If the more positive options are first, people tend to simply answer and move on without considering all the options. Regardless, I find this the best objection so far.

The difficulty lies in the tradeoff being depicted in disparate parts (stats, point cost, EPT, etc. vs a burdensome 'ability) that cannot be spun positively. It's collectively positive, sure, but you can't "write" something and put a spin on it when it's so... disparate. The only thing I can think of is that the pros need to be so overwhelming it makes the burdensome ability an afterthought. This places everything in place. But you don't want to make it OP either obviously.

The only way a negative ability would work if it is part of their positive ability. Like Push the Limit makes you stressed when you use it.

Or the disabilities is in the stats.

Like Darth Vader has the best ability but he is stuck in his expensive 2 attack Tie Advanced. Cracken also has a good ability but he is in a 2 attack z-95 with a very average dial. Soontir Fel has a good ability but he can die very easily.

They already have, the YT-1300 Outer-rim smuggler.

I would just guess that low showing of the ship could have proven to FFG it wasn't a path to go down.

I think that the modified stats is the most obvious method to manipulate "Negative-Incentives" though I think the ORS suffers in the same vein as Vader in that your spending more than 20 points on a ship with only 2 attack, having said that the ORS performs other functions and it does see a little play.

I would think that PS reduction (like Tarn) is a good way add an effect at a similar cost to add a positive effect, but I still think the stats changing like the ORS is an under-explored aspect of design space.

Something like an X-Wing with a reduced agility but added hull points eg 3 atk, 1 ag, 2 Sheild, 5 hull could be something different, and whether that is more or less survivable than a regular X-Wing could determine if its more or less points.

Kinds like pre-built in modifications.

Awhile back I proposed "production" model versions of the Awing and Advanced. It reduced the cost of advanced by 2 and awing by 1 and in return you could not equip any type of modification. Now we have the Chardan refit and [insert name here] coming for the advanced to do the same. What about this idea:

Production Model. Xwing, PS1: cost 19.

You may not equip any upgrade cards to this ship.

Academy Trainer. Tie Fighter. PS0: Cost 11

You may not equip any upgrade cards to this ship (or only 2 hull to represent overuse).

OR

going the other way...

Prison Transport. Firespray, PS 2: Cost 28

Att: 2

Def: 2

Hull: 5

Shield: 6

Crew, Crew, Cannon