during worlds I flew vs a total of 6 falcons.

if they were dual falcons I got the win, if it was fat han, it was not a win, close but not a win. I knew they were the top overall meta, so yea, do I like flying vs them....not really, but they are in the game, and once you can take away some of there actions or take away c3p0 (outmaneuver) they don't bite as hard.

Yea the overload of turrets now with Wave 5 is pretty annoying. It's not the turrets so much, but the fact that the ships that have them continue to get more and more awesome abilities/crew/upgrades that makes them super powerful when combined with a 360 firing arc.

Autothrusters were a nice bit of help, mainly for interceptors, but does nothing for the majority of the ships who can't use it. I really think at a minimum they should be available to all agility 3 ships or higher, ideally all agility 2 ships or higher.

Well, we just wrapped up a 22-player charity tournament this weekend, which seems to counter the argument in this thread.

Top 4 lists (who all played each other in a set of 'championship' rounds):

• 1st: Airen Cracked with Veteran Instincts, Wedge Antilles, Garven Dreis and Biggs Darklighter
• 2nd: Dash and 2x Blues
• 3rd: Han and Wedge (not quite a 'Fat Han' list, but close-ish)
• 4th: Cmdr Kenkirk and Kath Scarlet

Technically, yes, 3 of the 4 lists brought a turret of some kind. However, only one was a YT-1300, and it wasn't particularly 'Fat' (IIRC., just had Luke, an Engine Upgrade, and VI).

There were a few players running true 'Fat Han' lists that showed up, although none ended up placing in the top 4.

I have to agree with this, comp I was at a few weeks ago and the top 4 was

Shuttle, Fel, Echo

3 Y wings X wing

Fat Han

4. X wings

So there was about 20 people here and there were prizes up for grabs, so why did not most people bring Fat Han, didn't happen. I played against some really random builds that I never see here. In fact the most prevalent build was Shuttle,defender, Phantom/Fel there was 5 versions of this( including me)

All the competitions I have been to recently and I have never played a Falcon, I think we get carried away with what people post on the Internet is what is happening and in reality in the local community it just isn't true.

My next comp is this Saturday and my list choice is two defenders or Keyan and 4 A wings, I am not alone in bringing these kind of builds and as long as other people do the X wing tournament scene is in a healthy place.

Of course local communities will vary, and it's great that yours has more variety. However, the OP is referring to his own and not some internet hysteria, so it is his reality (though I think that the latest numbers from World's prove it's not internet hysteria, anyway). Any argument that says Wave 5 is going to change that must have a very creative argument.

That's not to say that most are unbeateable, but there are certainly a couple that are very frustrating (I've seen players who were regulars at the bottom of tournament standings go to the top once they take Han and Super Friends). Either way, it is deflating to see the game turn into turret-wing for whatever reason -- whether they are strong or just popular.

Saying it's great for "our local meta" is being a bit dismissive - Portland has a pretty big scene, and we had a bunch of players drive up for the event from Salem and Corvallis. So it was practically representative of 'all of Oregon'. I mean, no, that's not California or New York...but it's still a group representative of a pretty significant chunk of players.

IMHO, the game hasn't particularly "turned into turret wing". As it happens, I lost my round one of the event to the 'technically overweight but not fat' Han list, but it was a close-fought battle until I flubbed a maneuver, and I was running a pretty traditional doomshuttle and mini-swarm list (about the only thing really "new"-ish on my list vs older variants of it was my putting Predator on Howlrunner).

Yes, there are now a lot of turreted ships in the game, but, honestly, they just aren't that game-breaking. About the only real problem with turrets is that they 'break' the mechanic around arc-dodgers, as arc-dodging has no point against them so units that rely on it for survival are having a hard time...but that's really, really not a large number of craft. TIE Interceptors are the only obvious standout candidate for it. So, yeah, sucks to fly Interceptors at the moment - but the fix for them is coming.

And, everything else? I dunno, just not seeing the problem. And the "local" (by which I mean 'basically the entire Pacific Northwest') meta seems to reflect that.

Predator on howl?seems a bit strange. I suppose it would mean that then everyone gets the re roll, but it would make her even more of a target. I'd think defensive upgrades would be better, no?

If everyone is flying Falcons without fail then they're all wearing big red "Hard Counter Me" hats.

Hard counters didn't exist on wave4. And i am not sure they exist now either. Anyways, the Fat Han will get dilluted with the release of new large base turret ships.

Not to speak that people seem to ignore the point. The OP is obvious to had played by the end of wave 4 a tournament, you guys should realize that the game on Wave 4 has been very stagnant with very little variance on lists, as much as you like to lie to yourselves.

The amount of variance really depends on how indepth you look at a squad. Most go "Falcon!!! It must be the exact same as all other Falcon squads, thus confirms my theory that Falcons are bad for the game". The usage of Falcons is high, but I wouldn't say that there is a critical lack of diversity.

I was going to answer this, but Buhallin basically did it for me. A falcon with VI and another with Predator, doesn't give much variance, except if you are playing a whisper, since the gameplay with any list against it that is not featuring whisper will be the same against both.

Now, this is not directed at you Sithborg. But you guys realize the OP isn't crying that it is overpowered ? He is just complaining about the little variance on lists on his zone ? It's certainly sad to read this thread.

He even mentioned "my local meta". And you guys are acting like condescending pricks all over. Is it really neccessary ?

In my local scene falcons were a norm for the last tourneys, if in your local area, Falcons weren't the norm on wave 4, you just can't understand having to play 4 tournament round against Falcon builds can get tiresome. And being dismissive about it, is just obnoxious.

And now on topic.

For the first two tournaments featuring handful of Falcon builds, i was a bit baffled (more like bored tho, i won most games anyways, but it was really boring). I ended up saying, well, then it is what it is. Instead of taking internet wisdom about Tie swarm, i went for a XXXZZZ swarm, which is actually pretty good against Fat Han's varieties with gunner.

Now you have to accept (if you want to of course), that wave 5 will feature a lot of turret large ships. It's just a fact. Call it popularity, small reliance on rolls and more on maneuvering, whatever. They are just solid lists, and in general, decent take all comers, so good and bad players will gravitate towards them, and also, because they are new! Good thing, now there is true variance, not just Fat Hans.

So with that in mind, you have two options. Just join them. Really, once you get that out of your system, you will be able to enjoy the game again, and it will teach you a lot of lessons about dealing with them. Or you could prepare lists against the specific meta. I am playing 3X's lately to suprisingly good results. I am also going to dust off my 3 interceptor lists and try it out in the new meta, to take a dive.

Just experiment and have fun. If you still don't have fun in tournaments on wave 5. Just stop playing tournaments, and find like minded people to enjoy the game with. Cheers and best of lucks to you.

I was going to answer this, but Buhallin basically did it for me. A falcon with VI and another with Predator, doesn't give much variance, except if you are playing a whisper, since the gameplay with any list against it that is not featuring whisper will be the same against both.

Now, this is not directed at you Sithborg. But you guys realize the OP isn't crying that it is overpowered ? He is just complaining about the little variance on lists on his zone ? It's certainly sad to read this thread.

He even mentioned "my local meta". And you guys are acting like condescending pricks all over. Is it really neccessary ?

In my local scene falcons were a norm for the last tourneys, if in your local area, Falcons weren't the norm on wave 4, you just can't understand having to play 4 tournament round against Falcon builds can get tiresome. And being dismissive about it, is just obnoxious.

I don't know, I see going for Predator over Veteran Instincts implies different tactics. Same as R2 vs Gunner. I really, really like those intricate differences. It makes it a fascinating game.

The thing I see is now there are two things that have unbalanced the game.

The first thing is ships with 360 degree fire in it´s main weapons (or now the YT-2400) with no penalty. To make this different I would make this:

- When a ship with 360 degree fire shoots outside de fire arc, you can´t use target lock, focus or whatever, unless you have a gunner. And the gunner is only to be able to use things to make a better roll, not to repeat an entire roll. This way if you use a falcon or something, you won´t hit almost every time and a good mobility would be encouraged (A-wings, Interceptors etc)

- Phantoms: I would make the phantom decloak just before the planification phase. So phantoms decloak, then everybody, including the phantoms, put maneuvers in dials... and so ever. I think this would allow the phantoms to have the same great mobility they have, but not sou unbalancing as now.

Hi from Spain to everyone

I don't know, I see going for Predator over Veteran Instincts implies different tactics. Same as R2 vs Gunner. I really, really like those intricate differences. It makes it a fascinating game.

C'mon sithborg, upgrades are hardly game changing except against their respective counters. You wouldn't play a VI Fat Han differently than a predator Fat Han against a swarm, neither you would play the swarm differently, it would be a little easier with predator, but the strategy and tactics employed are at the end practically identical. Same with a R2. Yes, if you play whisper it would be different, but that's because it's intended to be more/less favored in one match up. Same with R2 against gunner Fat han ships. There are details that may vary in some localized match ups, but it's not game defining in most match ups to really speak about real variance.

If we talk about facing a Dash, or a Stressimator Oicunn, or a Fat Han, now we are talking about real and more depth in variance. I think wave 5 is fine to add more depth to list building and game interactions with large turret ships, specially considering how stale wave 4 meta was with Phantom or Fat Falcon being the most dominant and played lists at tournaments by a large margin, even tho, i am really waiting for more interesting options outside of large base turret ships.

I just think they're making the Rebel pancakes a little too effective.

A reminder as someone said: "No other ship currently has all of the 1-3 speed maneuvers" PLUS the 4k (I think thats the only k right?)

SERIOUSLY. WHY? WHY?

As for Decimator. I'm going to have to wait and see. So far, sky hasn't fallen yet with this one.

I just think they're making the Rebel pancakes a little too effective.

A reminder as someone said: "No other ship currently has all of the 1-3 speed maneuvers" PLUS the 4k (I think thats the only k right?)

SERIOUSLY. WHY? WHY?

In the YT-2400's case, it's because the rest of the stat-line is very uninspiring/average so the dial remains the sole stand-out quality until you drop 12 points on HLC + Title in which case there's a range 1 dead zone to contend with.

The YT-1300 does not have hard rights at speed 3 but it does have 2 k turns. Of the lot, it's definitely the most fluff justified for big maneuverable ship because of the OT movies.

The first thing is ships with 360 degree fire in it´s main weapons (or now the YT-2400) with no penalty. To make this different I would make this:

- When a ship with 360 degree fire shoots outside de fire arc, you can´t use target lock, focus or whatever, unless you have a gunner. And the gunner is only to be able to use things to make a better roll, not to repeat an entire roll. This way if you use a falcon or something, you won

Any fixes would have to be in keeping with the relative simplicity of the game rules.

For example, they could just make the auto-thrusters in-arc clause standard across all ships to encourage more people to actually use their firing arcs.

I'd favor something more complex myself, but it's never going to happen. The ships would need four firing arcs and a little turret token to show its facing. After maneuvering, the turret could pivot to an adjacent arc to show where it is facing.

It would just make the usage of the fatties a little more engaging and thought provoking since they, like everyone else, would actually have to predict where the enemy would end up.

Sadly, the turrets as they are aren't going anywhere. They're boring as sin and incredibly easy to use, but they are balanced by having half or even less than half the offense of their equivalent points of arced ships. Sure, they turn the game from one of maneuvers to one mainly of dice since they'll always have a shot if you do, but they can't trade straight dice with multiple ships for more than one or two turns.

I just had some crazy ideas thinking how the falcon worked in the movies in terms of attacking enemy fighters.

You only see this happen in ANH & ROTJ. In ROTJ, everytime the falcon fires at ties it is doing so from the forward firing arc, even though they have gunners onboard. Heck, they don't even bother to fire backwards in the death star tunnel to take down the pursuing ties! In ANH Han & Luke obviously are shooting all over the place. But it appears that the falcon is either dead stopped, or mostly flying in a straight path.

Conclusion? If you're doing crazy movements, it's bunch less effective to have the gunners shoot in other directions (anyone who has played a gunner in xwing alliance can attest to that). So maybe some kind of change where the 360 arc is less effective if you do any non-green moves.

Not crazy idea, but very hard to implement this late on the development phase of the game.

Not crazy idea, but very hard to implement this late on the development phase of the game.

Ships with Turrets roll 1 less red die when attacking outside primary firing arc. Boom: game fixed.

I'm still thinking that ordnance ignoring shields will help the game.

I just had some crazy ideas thinking how the falcon worked in the movies in terms of attacking enemy fighters.

You only see this happen in ANH & ROTJ. In ROTJ, everytime the falcon fires at ties it is doing so from the forward firing arc, even though they have gunners onboard. Heck, they don't even bother to fire backwards in the death star tunnel to take down the pursuing ties! In ANH Han & Luke obviously are shooting all over the place. But it appears that the falcon is either dead stopped, or mostly flying in a straight path.

Conclusion? If you're doing crazy movements, it's bunch less effective to have the gunners shoot in other directions (anyone who has played a gunner in xwing alliance can attest to that). So maybe some kind of change where the 360 arc is less effective if you do any non-green moves.

I think that was more a limitation of special effects capabilities than a representation of some sort of restriction on firing.

Whiny rage quitters are more of a problem than turrets, IMO.

I've said it before and I'm sure I'll say it again, spend half the energy you waste complaining on figuring out a workable solution and you'll be much further ahead.

Here, I'll even get you started:

You're struggling with turrets. Start writing swarm lists and practice flying them. Be ready for the next turreted ship.

I think that was more a limitation of special effects capabilities than a representation of some sort of restriction on firing.

I'm ... not sure what your point is?

Not crazy idea, but very hard to implement this late on the development phase of the game.

Ships with Turrets roll 1 less red die when attacking outside primary firing arc. Boom: game fixed.

FAQs are employed to explain in game interactions and to answer and clarify current rules.

Don't get me wrong, i would be totally behind it, but it's just quite hard to ask for FFG to just change the general rules in a FAQ. Anyways, large base turrets are not really overpowered, they just can be frustrating to play against if you happen to play them all the time.

The same can be said about interceptors or phantoms tho, i had to stop playing a 3 interceptor list against more casual approached fellahs because i could just outfly them hard with them and when you can't shoot back at something, in a game about flying and shooting at stuff, well, it gets boring for them.

Whiny rage quitters are more of a problem than turrets, IMO.

I've said it before and I'm sure I'll say it again, spend half the energy you waste complaining on figuring out a workable solution and you'll be much further ahead.

Here, I'll even get you started:

You're struggling with turrets. Start writing swarm lists and practice flying them. Be ready for the next turreted ship.

I was about to be snarky about judgements, but then it would be highly hypocritical from to ask you to read the first post before answering, when you may have just missread the thread and quickposted this.

Whiny rage quitters are more of a problem than turrets, IMO.

I've said it before and I'm sure I'll say it again, spend half the energy you waste complaining on figuring out a workable solution and you'll be much further ahead.

Here, I'll even get you started:

You're struggling with turrets. Start writing swarm lists and practice flying them. Be ready for the next turreted ship.

You realize that part of the problem is just seeing the same lists over and over again? It's not really rage quitting when you just quit b/c the game has become dull. Coming up with tactics to beat Fat Han is do-able, but that doesn't mean I want to face Fat Han in over half my matches when I go to a tournament. It might mean I win, but sometimes the tournament is just to have fun. If the tournaments are not fun, people will stop going.

FAQs are employed to explain in game interactions and to answer and clarify current rules.

Don't get me wrong, i would be totally behind it, but it's just quite hard to ask for FFG to just change the general rules in a FAQ.

Ideally, you'd expect rulings and clarifications to conform to the rules and explain them, but that's just not how FFG does things. They're more than willing to make rulings which completely and directly contradict the printed rules/abilities. They've gotten a little better about it recently, but still plenty of it going around.

I'm ... not sure what your point is?

Straight lines. Was trying to find a gif of the Falcon...

Most of the time, it seemed to me that it was because they didn't manage to match their intention with the written rule, instead of just completely changing or adding new game mechanics. Turrets using their primary full dice seems like intended to me. But i get your point, it's kind of iffy to discuss this.

Boom: game fixed.

First off, the game isn't broken in the first place.

Second, this FAQ better come with a point reduction for all turrets or ships with turrets.

You realize that part of the problem is just seeing the same lists over and over again?

That problem will be fixed if people start flying against those lists. If you keep playing scissors while you know the opponent is always playing rock, don't complain but throw some paper out there. Or Spock.