I'd be perfectly fine with a few small tweaks to the rules, but with a change that drastic it's just not X-Wing anymore. :\

So, follow-on question: would playing a tournament with these House Rules be OK? I may run one someday if there is interest.

Your rules have a lot more justification, even if I don't agree with all of them. The problem, as Herowannabe says, is the scope of the changes: it's a lot to absorb and process.

Additionally, one of the things a lot of people look for in a non-sanctioned tournament is practice for the "real" tournaments, particularly this time of year. And from that perspective, a lot of small changes are just as bad as a single big change like Theorist's X-wing "fix": no sanctioned tournament will feature 26-point Biggs + Hull Upgrade any more than they'll feature a 35-point Biggs + R2-D2 + Combat Refit.

Yeah, I wouldn't want to run a non an "Alternate Universe" tournament anytime around Store Championship season and certainly not around Regionals. Nationals and Worlds season would be a better time frame as less people go to those.

There are certainly a lot of little changes. If I were to limit the changes though, I'm not sure which ones I would get rid of. I would rather just include them all, and give people time to absorb the changes up front. Since these are all new ideas I would let people add or swap out a list every other week, rather than being "locked in" to the same lists all from the start. That way as you figure out the balance tweaks you can change your lists later.

I guess it's a lot to process, but has it been considered how Extra Munitions will work with the House Rules?

I guess it's a lot to process, but has it been considered how Extra Munitions will work with the House Rules?

Not yet. They will likely end up being mutually exclusive, with the original house rules being more effective. I'll have to change the House Rules to adapt to FFG's fix.

I am also a fan of your new X-wing refit. It is a nice, versatile solution to the problem. I also look forward to your ordnance Math Fu.

We have been using the new TIE Advanced upgrades as proxies till the Raider comes out at my shop. The TIE x/1 Title and Advance Targeting Computer seem to be a great fix.

That being said the X-Wing seems even more underpowered in comparison.

My big concern for the X-Wing was not only the hull issue, but also its lack of maneuverability and inability to arch dodge.

So sticking with the fluff/EU theme of the ship; "The Incom T-65 X-wing is the fighter that killed the Death Star. An almost perfect balance of speed, maneuverability, and defensive shielding make it the fighter of choice for Rogue Squadron," I came up with another option for a fix.

It is a title card style fix.

Icom T-65

X-WING ONLY. TITLE.

Increase your hull value by 1.

If you equip an (astromech) upgrade, its squad point cost is reduced by 1 (to a minimum of zero) and your action bar gains the barrel roll action icon.

Squad points 0

This fix makes the X-Wing tougher and gives it some arch dodging as well as giving a benefit for taking an astromech. It also beefs up the x-wing by making astromechs a bit cheaper.

The draw back is that is Biggs and Wedge are still OP like they were back in Wave 1 and 2. It also makes the X-Wing in general boarderline OP if not OP due to the cheeper astromech benefits.

Still I think the X-wing should be border line OP and a “star” ship in the game (see what I did there?).

I am still taking it though trials and determining if the fix is OP, and it is tricky.

Changing the second sentence on my experimental title card to: ‘If you equip an (astromech) upgrade your action bar gains the barrel roll action icon,” may be a less over powered fix.

I ran the numbers through your system using the TIE Bombers defense value because I could not reverse engineer 4 hull and 2 shields and adding the barrel and hull gelled mathematically aside from Wedge and Biggs. (Unless I botched). So taking the astromech is adding at least 1 point for the barrel roll but you also get mechs benefits which makes the point a better by and less OP. But but having to take an astromech to get the barrel roll may take good to okay, because while you get a mech benefits you are still adding a point cost to the ship to get the arch dodging necessary for elite pilots.

The middle of the road would be to have the tiltle card give the X-Wing 1 hull and barrel roll and just leave astromechs out of it.

So while not the end all of fixes I thought it might be of interest to some people as it is working out well with table testing and has made the X-Wing more fun to run and feel more like one of the better ships and more inline with its theme.

Thanks again for the formulas, they definitely help bring in more objective assessment tools for us mechanic tinkerers.

So why not simply make the -3 for any upgrade across the board? I understand it doesn't match their absolute mathematical values you have measured but it certainly is far simpler and smoother. To simply apply it to all X Wing pilots and end up with two pilots (Biggs and Wedge) punching above their weight wouldn't be the worst thing. It's a far more concerming issue to have pilots and ships over costed than slightly under costed.

For a munition, fix, have you consiered redacting the last line off R5K6?

"After spending a target lock, (3/8 chance dice roll). If successful, immediately aquire a new target lock on the same ship. You cannot spend this target lock on the same roll as the first."

Munitions spend the target lock, you have a chance of keeping the target lock, then you can spend it again on the torpedo roll.

So what's the math on Tarn + R7? That bugger is tough -- I dislike flying against him more than Biggs.

IIRC Tarn+T7 is worth the points. But no more than that.

FYI I'll try and get to all of these most recent posts this weekend, but my schedule is pretty full so it might take a couple more days.

Tarn + R7 is hard to calculate because his damage reduction is non linear, it only affects one attack per round. Its in my extended backlog to take a closer look at!

Working on some house rules of my own right now, so just wanted to say I appreciate the work you've put in here MajorJuggler! Hoping you can somehow find the time to catch up to the latest releases, but definitely understand if you never do. Too bad life doesn't revolve around only x-wing, eh?

So I'm working on Arvel right now. I really like your new ability wording, but I was wondering if maybe it could even be taken a step further and still be balanced. My thought is to add along with your house rule fix the ability to do an action which causes Arvel to overlap?

For example, he finds himself in rng 1 of a phantom, but decides he doesn't want to get squished, so he boosts into the phantom to assure he gets a shot without being shot back at. Obviously, the high PS pilots that dominate the meta will be moving after him, so this shouldn't be game breaking, and it sounds fun. But the more I think about it the more I think maybe it's just a fun idea that in reality would make his ability too wordy for a very situational addition. Or maybe I just love the idea of making Arvel amazing and that really is making him too powerful (considering a possible PTL, Intimidation EPT scenario, he could do some maaaajor damage).

Anyways, just wanted to throw that out there. I'm not as good at the wording on the abilities as you and some of the others here are, so sorry if my thoughts are pretty amateurishly explained! Again thanks for all your work MajorJuggler!

MajorJuggler; I might try 'your' houserules in a local tournament I am organising.

But in order to 'sell' this to the masses I need some input on Scum I think.

Any preliminary take on that?

(looking mainly at the M3-A Scyk)

Some feedback on Colonol Jendon:

I'd prefer enabling Colonol Jendon to "overwrite" target locks, instead of a range increase. Overall, the "if it does not have a blue target lock" restricition feels more clunky to me, than the range restriction.

When flying Jendon, I found it less of a problem to keep ships in range 1. I think his ability is mostly meant to provide ordnance carriers with target locks, who otherwise would struggle getting one on a valuable target. In this case, you typically joust and fly in formation anyway and feed your ordnance carriers target locks onto the desired target. This is all fine and dandy, until your opponent decides to just keep this target out of range or out of arc and you can't fire your rockets or torpedoes. Additionally, later down the line, you can end up in a situation, where the ordnance carrier has problems to get rid of an existing target lock, which prevents you from making the most out of Jendons ability.

If you could provide target locks to ships that already have a blue target lock marker, but remove the ship's own target lock in the process, you'd have a few more cards up your sleeve.

Right after placement, you can try to stay out of range for two turns and provide two of your ships target locks onto two different valuable targets. This way, in the next round, you can choose between two targets to apply your ordnance to. Additionally, if one of your ordnance carriers is lined up for a nice shot later down the line, but has a target lock on the wrong target and couldn't lock on himself because of low pilot skill or being blocked (or you simply want a focus with your Concussion Missiles), Jendon can step in and provide the target lock.

Working on some house rules of my own right now, so just wanted to say I appreciate the work you've put in here MajorJuggler! Hoping you can somehow find the time to catch up to the latest releases, but definitely understand if you never do. Too bad life doesn't revolve around only x-wing, eh?

Yup - although right now my X-wing free time is spent prepping for Pittsburgh Regionals, and putting some finishing touches on wave 7 analysis. I will be revisiting these House Rules soon though, and taking a fine-tooth comb over everything again. I plan on putting out a PDF for rule consolidation, and also a printout that you can use to print small "fix" cards. No ETA, but probably sometime in August.

MajorJuggler; I might try 'your' houserules in a local tournament I am organising.

But in order to 'sell' this to the masses I need some input on Scum I think.

Any preliminary take on that?

(looking mainly at the M3-A Scyk)

Yeah I'm overdue on wave 6 House Rules.

Y-wings

PS4: cost reduced by 0.5 points

Drea: TBD

Star Vipers

PS1 Star Viper: cost reduced from 25 to 23 points.

PS3 Star Viper: cost reduced from 27 to 25 points.

HWK

PS1 HWK: same as Rebel HWK

Dace Bonearm: TBD

M3-A

Complicated because of the title, TBD! At a minimum the generics and Laetin will get touched up.

Firespray

PS5: TBD

Some feedback on Colonol Jendon:

I'd prefer enabling Colonol Jendon to "overwrite" target locks, instead of a range increase. Overall, the "if it does not have a blue target lock" restricition feels more clunky to me, than the range restriction.

Hm, the stock wording on Jendon is there to make sure that the friendly ship doesn't get two target lock tokens. But yes you could also word his ability to allow him to "overwrite" the friendly ship's target lock if it already has one, and you want to toss it a different one. I still think the range restriction also needs to be range 1-2, not just range 1. Good thoughts - I'll think about rewording this one too.

I'm just going to point out that the new integrated astromech is pretty close to a free hull upgrade, which was your original X-wing fix.

....COINCIDENCE?

Played an Aturi Cluster mission yesterday with a Rebel Operative Hwk. The mission rules increased the shields from 1 to 3, and that seems like a good fix for the ship. It was able to take some extra shooting, but not really all that much more because of the low Agility.

Have you looked into the effect such an upgrade would have? Is adding shields to an Agility 1 ship worth less than adding shields to an Agility 2 or 3 ship?

Even with TLT, we aren't seeing a lot of HWK's in the meta (other than the odd named Scum).

Congrats, Major Juggler, on your recent success at tournaments. I like this thread.

Played an Aturi Cluster mission yesterday with a Rebel Operative Hwk. The mission rules increased the shields from 1 to 3, and that seems like a good fix for the ship. It was able to take some extra shooting, but not really all that much more because of the low Agility.

Have you looked into the effect such an upgrade would have? Is adding shields to an Agility 1 ship worth less than adding shields to an Agility 2 or 3 ship?

Even with TLT, we aren't seeing a lot of HWK's in the meta (other than the odd named Scum).

Congrats, Major Juggler, on your recent success at tournaments. I like this thread.

I would have to say that TLT makes HWKs really good. we don't see them much for a number of reasons I believe. 1st- the consensus seems to be that the ywing is the superior TLT platform. This does not mean the HWK TLT is bad, it just means most players find the ywing variant to be better. And 2nd- There just aren't a lot of players who own multiple HWKs. That often restricts the building with them to, as you stated, the named HWKs.

Make Captain Kagi's ability intercept FCS.

Make Talonbane Cobra's ability also gain the range bonus against secondaries, this way when facing TLT's he doesn't just get blown away anyways.

I'm just going to point out that the new integrated astromech is pretty close to a free hull upgrade, which was your original X-wing fix.

....COINCIDENCE?

it's better than free hull point, that's a one time Chewbakka xD

Played an Aturi Cluster mission yesterday with a Rebel Operative Hwk. The mission rules increased the shields from 1 to 3, and that seems like a good fix for the ship. It was able to take some extra shooting, but not really all that much more because of the low Agility.

Have you looked into the effect such an upgrade would have?

Stay tuned.... I'll get back to updating these House Rules, but first I'm updating some MathWing analysis that I may or may not publish.

Short answer: yes. Long answer: see here .

Even with TLT, we aren't seeing a lot of HWK's in the meta (other than the odd named Scum).

yes, shields are MUCH more valuable on ships with higher agility. The difference between a 4 shield ywing and a 3 shield ywing is not much. But the difference between a 1 shield syck and 2 shield syck is huge.

I would have to say that TLT makes HWKs really good. we don't see them much for a number of reasons I believe. 1st- the consensus seems to be that the ywing is the superior TLT platform. This does not mean the HWK TLT is bad, it just means most players find the ywing variant to be better. And 2nd- There just aren't a lot of players who own multiple HWKs. That often restricts the building with them to, as you stated, the named HWKs.

Yeah, TLT is VERY strong, but the Y-wing is by far the more point efficient platform for TLT - this was predicted by the math as well as observed by the tournament results.

Make Captain Kagi's ability intercept FCS.

Make Talonbane Cobra's ability also gain the range bonus against secondaries, this way when facing TLT's he doesn't just get blown away anyways.

You can't do that to Kagi's ability without changing FCS wording, or over-ruling the base rules via an FAQ for Kagi. He does need help but I would rather not break the rules to do it.

All of the K-fighters have needed some help from day 1, not just Talonbane. At least one generic made it into Top 32 at Worlds.

For a munition, fix, have you consiered redacting the last line off R5K6?

"After spending a target lock, (3/8 chance dice roll). If successful, immediately aquire a new target lock on the same ship. You cannot spend this target lock on the same roll as the first."

Munitions spend the target lock, you have a chance of keeping the target lock, then you can spend it again on the torpedo roll.

Why not?

It's like Drea Renthal

YOu take a TL

You spend it to fire

You use ability to take another one

You spend it on re-rolls

you use ability to take another one (here the fun begins)

you spend it on making the enemy re-roll his defence dice!

Rebel trolltastic Dutch does almost the same

Take TL

Spend to fire

3\8 to take another one

[somebody nearby takes TL due to ability]

Spend to reroll

3\8 to take another one

[somebody nearby takes TL due to ability]

Chances are SLIM to say the least, but still funny if dice have the mood

Played an Aturi Cluster mission yesterday with a Rebel Operative Hwk. The mission rules increased the shields from 1 to 3, and that seems like a good fix for the ship. It was able to take some extra shooting, but not really all that much more because of the low Agility.

Have you looked into the effect such an upgrade would have?

Stay tuned.... I'll get back to updating these House Rules, but first I'm updating some MathWing analysis that I may or may not publish.

Is adding shields to an Agility 1 ship worth less than adding shields to an Agility 2 or 3 ship?

Short answer: yes. Long answer: see here .

Even with TLT, we aren't seeing a lot of HWK's in the meta (other than the odd named Scum).

yes, shields are MUCH more valuable on ships with higher agility. The difference between a 4 shield ywing and a 3 shield ywing is not much. But the difference between a 1 shield syck and 2 shield syck is huge.

I would have to say that TLT makes HWKs really good. we don't see them much for a number of reasons I believe. 1st- the consensus seems to be that the ywing is the superior TLT platform. This does not mean the HWK TLT is bad, it just means most players find the ywing variant to be better. And 2nd- There just aren't a lot of players who own multiple HWKs. That often restricts the building with them to, as you stated, the named HWKs.

Yeah, TLT is VERY strong, but the Y-wing is by far the more point efficient platform for TLT - this was predicted by the math as well as observed by the tournament results.

Make Captain Kagi's ability intercept FCS.

Make Talonbane Cobra's ability also gain the range bonus against secondaries, this way when facing TLT's he doesn't just get blown away anyways.

You can't do that to Kagi's ability without changing FCS wording, or over-ruling the base rules via an FAQ for Kagi. He does need help but I would rather not break the rules to do it.

All of the K-fighters have needed some help from day 1, not just Talonbane. At least one generic made it into Top 32 at Worlds.

If you take 1 HWK with Recon Spec, does that have a higher damage potential?

Why is a Y wing the most efficient? Compared to what? Naked HWK? HWK with recon?

What happens if you take one YTLT and one HWK TLT and have the HWK not get shot at? Or, have the Y wing take shot before the HWK.

The only reason I prefer YWing over HWK with TLT is the title. Otherwise it's HWK any day (I play Scums here). Although I tend to use Blaster more often (on Palob, with Outlaw tech, just sweet, considerable less points spent than the usual Moldy Recon and almost guaranteed focus token each turn to fire the turret!), or even better Blaster Palob and a titled YWing TLT behind...

Played an Aturi Cluster mission yesterday with a Rebel Operative Hwk. The mission rules increased the shields from 1 to 3, and that seems like a good fix for the ship. It was able to take some extra shooting, but not really all that much more because of the low Agility.

Have you looked into the effect such an upgrade would have?

Stay tuned.... I'll get back to updating these House Rules, but first I'm updating some MathWing analysis that I may or may not publish.

Is adding shields to an Agility 1 ship worth less than adding shields to an Agility 2 or 3 ship?

Short answer: yes. Long answer: see here .

Even with TLT, we aren't seeing a lot of HWK's in the meta (other than the odd named Scum).

yes, shields are MUCH more valuable on ships with higher agility. The difference between a 4 shield ywing and a 3 shield ywing is not much. But the difference between a 1 shield syck and 2 shield syck is huge.

I would have to say that TLT makes HWKs really good. we don't see them much for a number of reasons I believe. 1st- the consensus seems to be that the ywing is the superior TLT platform. This does not mean the HWK TLT is bad, it just means most players find the ywing variant to be better. And 2nd- There just aren't a lot of players who own multiple HWKs. That often restricts the building with them to, as you stated, the named HWKs.

Yeah, TLT is VERY strong, but the Y-wing is by far the more point efficient platform for TLT - this was predicted by the math as well as observed by the tournament results.

Make Captain Kagi's ability intercept FCS.

Make Talonbane Cobra's ability also gain the range bonus against secondaries, this way when facing TLT's he doesn't just get blown away anyways.

You can't do that to Kagi's ability without changing FCS wording, or over-ruling the base rules via an FAQ for Kagi. He does need help but I would rather not break the rules to do it.

All of the K-fighters have needed some help from day 1, not just Talonbane. At least one generic made it into Top 32 at Worlds.

Just make an exception for Captain Kagi. These are already house rules.

Hey Man,

First of all I would like to thank MajorJuggler for making all of these house rules.

Second is there a way to fix a ship without simply lowering its cost (titles, mods, etc.)?

Thanks!

CHF