If you could change one thing about X-Wing what would it be?

If I could change one thing about X-Wing, What would I change. It really is a toss up:

1) How the points cost don't really seem to add up. I would adjust the points system, for example missile and torpedoes just seem to expensive for what the do.

2) Set up, Set up should be "SET UP" off board and moved on the playing area, just like if the battle was real. (The Empire or Rebel force fly in formation when going into battle. All "Formations" move towards the play area from out side the play area. To set up all your ships on the play area helps the side with few ships. You have to do some really funky maneuvers to set up a formation during the game, (I know it can be done). The set up rules really do not make sense from a realism perspective.

Just my humble opinion! I am interested in your opinion, and not a analysis of mine. So what would you change.

Your setup suggestion seems pretty cool. That would be a neat feature or addition to a mission. Perhaps divide your forces and have them come out onto the board in waves.

Make a change to C-3PO, either one of the following:

1) Can't be paired with MF title

2) Can't guess "0"

Change missiles and torpedoes to make them make more sense. Give them an attack value that represents whether they hit or not and then give them a set value for damage if they do, or a roll for damage after a hit is determined. Ordinance is majorly under powered right now and this would be a more realistic depiction of missile evasion. This way smaller craft that evade the missile will be missed entirely, but if they are hit it will better represent a missile hit, and likely destroy them. Larger ships will be easier to hit, but because of their stronger shield and hull values might not die anyway. Primary weapon attacks can partially miss, but a missile is going to do its damage if it hits.

I started a thread a few months ago regarding the chance to hit vs damage output, and couldn't agree more.

If I only had 1 thing I could change, I would add more campaign support. Currently, I think the non-100 pt dogfight support is simply tacked on. I'd prefer deep campaign's built it, rather than house ruling

Make it possible to buy all the cards separately if you choose. I do buy lots of ships, but I can understand someone not wanting to buy 5 of one model just to get the cards.

I think I'd like to see how to make pilot cards independent of ships. Pay a base cost for an empty X-Wing at 3-2-3-2 at price X and then have pilots that add separate statistics, so say a Wedge adds an agility for example, or just keep the same stats and have the pilots with their abilities.

It wouldn't make thematic sense to put Han in an X-Wing (though you could say that certain pilots could be large ship only and other pilots small ship only), I know, but Maarek for instance flew everything with wings and Rogue Squadron too.

That way you could even easily switch ships to certain lists while the pilots remain faction-bound.

I would remove focus action, change half the eyes to hit/evade and the other half to blank. Then i would add the focus action again, but this time, it would allow you to reroll 1 blank result, either when deffending or attacking, before you remove it.

Make the E-Wing have either 4 attack or reduce all of their pilot costs by 3 points.

Make the E-Wing have either 4 attack or reduce all of their pilot costs by 3 points.

Ewing is great right now. You reduce it by 3 pts and it's broken. The 1 PS might not be great but both of the named pilots are amazing.

Every turn during the combat phase you will look at which shot is your most opportune (assuming you have multiple opponents in your arc). In a dog-fighting scenario you would generally be focused on tailing one opponent and taking snap shots at others.

Therefore I would have liked a bonus for repetitively shooting at the one opponent / penalty for taking snap shots at your designated target.

As the game has progressed this far without it, I doubt it would happen... Maybe just an EPS for the bonus side or AOE pilot ability to inflict the penalty on opponents from a support style ship.

Having this would harm the flexibility of the game a little... But it would have made more sense from a fluff point of view.

Make people stop whining and complaining and let FFG make the game. (not referencing this topic)

Make people stop whining and complaining and let FFG make the game. (not referencing this topic)

I like you, don't like whining, but I see nothing wrong with suggestions. I've always been of the opinion that if you can't think of a better idea, then don't argue with the best one out there.

Remind FFG that launchers carry more than one shot! First shot tap the PT, tap to 180 on 2nd shot, 270 on third and flip on the 4 Roth when it's empty. Special case: if you already have a target lock and the following turn keep your target in arc you may take a free target lock action on the target. Discard both locks to fire linked (2 PTs). Double lock may be maintained as long as the target remains in arc at the beginning of the combat phase.

Can I get an angle deflector shields?!

Remind FFG that launchers carry more than one shot! First shot tap the PT, tap to 180 on 2nd shot, 270 on third and flip on the 4 Roth when it's empty. Special case: if you already have a target lock and the following turn keep your target in arc you may take a free target lock action on the target. Discard both locks to fire linked (2 PTs). Double lock may be maintained as long as the target remains in arc at the beginning of the combat phase.

Can I get an angle deflector shields?!

Not the worst idea at all, but that would have to make ordnance quite a bit more expensive...

Can Barrel Roll and Boost in Fighters (Crash and loos Action) and on Asteroid. I think no Action, maybe a Hit/Crit and cant Shoot is hard, but nice.. If you make a mistake with Boost/Roll... It is your Problem

Flip ordinance after firing, action to reload and flip face up. Keep target locks as they are, possibly able to modify attack dice after firing ordinance that requires it to be spent.

Instead of two Rebel Epic ships, there should be one Rebel and one Imperial. Or better yet, two Rebel and two Imperial epic ships.

Instead of two Rebel Epic ships, there should be one Rebel and one Imperial. Or better yet, two Rebel and two Imperial epic ships.

Well, hopefully that's what we'll learn about tomorrow,

Probably make the Y-wing agi 2

change the overlapping mechanic,instead of bringing the ship back along the template, the ship should continue forward until it clears the base.

Remove the "spend your target lock" condition from most, if not all missiles and torpedoes.

Give Tantive and Transporter 1 Evade!!! I think the Ships are to fast down... Shilds loading will not help...Need more energy

I want this game in 3D!

There should be mechanics for adding and subtracting base pegs. That way you can fly over other ships and asteroids. Also, it would increase range slightly (see Pythagoras).

I want this game in 3D!

There should be mechanics for adding and subtracting base pegs. That way you can fly over other ships and asteroids. Also, it would increase range slightly (see Pythagoras).

I like the idea from a tactical standpoint, but I think at some point complexity detracts from the game.