So if a named pilot works and the generics don't work as well the ship is broken? That really doesn't make sense...

How do we then explain the bwing? Whose named pilots mostly suck but the generics are widely used? Is that ship broken too?

A named pilot is a lot easier to fix than a generic, and harder to spot when a fix has been implemented. In the case of the named bwing named pilots there have been numerous fixes that have come out or are en route. Ibtisam gets better it Kyle on board. Ten Numb gets better with a mangler cannon.

The attitude of the designers seems to be to try and make as much variety in the lists that people can play at any level. Adding a card to another ship (such as we see with autothrusters in the star viper pack) doubles up the variety of ships in the game by both adding a completely new ship and making less frequently played ships more likely to be played due to an upgrade card in the pack.

Sometimes when new ships come out they can have a negative impact on variety in lists by replacing other ships in builds. When the Headhunter came out it effectively replaced both the rookie pilot and the prototype pilot. In response the prototype got chardaan refit but the humble X wing has yet to receive something that will bring it back into the mix.

I posted this in the other thread but I figured i would post it here also. The developers have already practically said that a new X-Wing fix is coming in their interview with the Scum and Villainy podcast.

Alex Davy's exact words were "like the A-wing and like the Y-wing, the X-wIng needs a little boost, in the form of an upgrade card or something, like a title card or whatever. But we can't really talk about it..."

He then says it needs "a little nudge" and then says it may be something like Autothrusters or what they were planning for the Tie Advanced.

It is about 38 minutes into the podcast.

Well it does really need this little nudge, and i am happy to hear that!

And i am really annoyed by guys still saying. What? Everything is fine with it. You're just whining.

That is not helpful behaviour.

It is not fine, and if FFG know it, they will do something sensible about it, that's great.

Here is the link. http://teamcovenant.com/scumandvillainy/2014/11/26/scum-villainy-interview-with-x-wings-designers/

The whole interview is great but the x-Wing part is about 37 to 38 minutes in.

Just put a turret on every ship and let's just call it a day.

-Cal

Rule #1

Allways assume that you use them the wrong way.

If your car crashes a lot, It might be the case that not everyone else is a bad driver:P

If three x-wings were able to even target a phantom, the x-wing player was probably psychic, incredibly lucky, or the phantom wasn't being played very well. Usually they can arc dodge x-wings with relative ease.

Right, so ignoring the fact that you don't seem to have a single clue how to fly the X-Wing effectively (as others have pointed out above), what you're really saying here is that the X-Wing doesn't need a fix, the Phantom needs a nerf.

Occam's Razor, people - if the Phantom is the root cause of the problem, then fix the problem. Don't try and fix everything else instead.

Would you rather FFG stop releasing stuff for old ships?

YES! I would rather they stop.

I won't disagree that the A-Wing and Advanced needed a bump. Fine. As I've said before does the bomber? Some think so in order to make it see more play. But me, even as an imperial player I'm good not getting one. Use them in Epic. The X-Wing sees lots of table time. Perhaps not all of the pilots but most more than many others. Not all pilots have to be balanced. Using merge/joust values DOES NOT take into account the dial, upgrades, actions or abilities. Honestly I don't feel it is possible to balance every ship unless you all fly the same X-Wing with same pilot using the same upgrade.

You are going to take a quick and easily played games and turn it into and over costed (4 expansion to get the upgrades for a single ship), overly complicated 2 hour deck building game before you even put a piece on the table to play a 1 hour game.

Using merge/joust values DOES NOT take into account the dial, upgrades, actions or abilities.

...and that's just for starters.

The bomber is worse then any if he ships listed.

It had zero ships in the top 32 at worlds while every ship your complaining about in this thread had at least one. Furthermore rebel ships sre still predominantly the best builds and lists even the advanced fix still won't be able to beat the rebel large ships.

The Ewing is just as useful as he defender and rely on upgrades for thier viability.

The y wing is getting upgraded

The x wing still has some of the best pilots in game. Not just one either. At least three are still heavily used.

On top of the above there are fixes in the next wave for most rebel ships.

You have massive hwk fixes which are worse then any rebel ship u listed.

You have y wing fixes

You have a wing and interceptor fixes

I rather see a fix for the bomber and a nerf to rebel large ships before any more rebel lists get out of hand, and then a fix for x wings down the line. That involves the astromech and torpedoes. The xwing is no where near the level of being as bad as the advanced was where even vadar who was considering as having one of the best abilities in game wasn't being used competitively. The advanced was flat out broken whereas range xwing at most needs a slight nudge on some generics.

Even in the Team Covenant pod cast the designers said only the generic was the only lacking. X-Wings get plenty of game time and the best point for point pilot is Tarn Mison. So why upgrade one of the best ships out there? To start a cycle of upgrades and fixing fixes?

So why upgrade one of the best ships out there? To start a cycle of upgrades and fixing fixes?

I smell the start of an Xzibit meme...

Here is an interesting Poll over at BGG

Results: Overwhelmingly the X-Wing does not need fixing.

http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1290384/does-x-wing-need-fix

Here is an interesting Poll over at BGG

Results: Overwhelmingly the X-Wing does not need fixing.

http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1290384/does-x-wing-need-fix

Do you realize there is already an interview dating back at November when Xwing's developers feel like Xwing generics need some love ?

Nonetheless, why don't you make one on this forums which have a lot of more trafic when it is related to Xwing ? I will be pleased to vote.

Here is an interesting Poll over at BGG

Results: Overwhelmingly the X-Wing does not need fixing.

http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1290384/does-x-wing-need-fix

Do you realize there is already an interview dating back at November when Xwing's developers feel like Xwing generics need some love ?

Nonetheless, why don't you make one on this forums which have a lot of more trafic when it is related to Xwing ? I will be pleased to vote.

That's wonderful...you have an interview. I don't think anyone around here said it wasn't going do happen....just slot of us, given current circumstances don't feel it is necessary...no dev interview will change that opinion. We are not the devs and we don't make that decision. I'll trust that if a fix does come it will be in response to things coming down the road...and when it does I look forward to the immediate calls to make the bwing better...

He can't make a poll...there is no option for that here...if there was someone would have made it already and I am sure the results would be enlightening for all involved...glad to see public opinion over there matches with mine...

Strawpoll works just fine for your information. Takes 5 seconds.

But sure, i am not saying you can't have your opinion, but when you post "a poll" from somewhere else, which has a limited amount of people voting on it, i will wonder what kind of legitimization you are trying to get from posting it in the first place, and to see if he is atleast "a bit" aware of why people do think they have a footing ground for Xwing's to be unbalanced, outside tournament stats, theorycrafting, and in game experience.

Most people in here and in there don't even play the game competitively to really have an acquainted opinion in the subject, and certainly not better than what a FFG dev could speak of. So why do you guys get so defensive for people having their designing fun encouraged by either their feelings toward the Xwing state right now and FFG dev comments on the subject. I do really wonder. It's completely irrational.

Strawpoll works just fine for your information. Takes 5 seconds.

But sure, i am not saying you can't have your opinion, but when you post "a poll" from somewhere else, which has a limited amount of people voting on it, i will wonder what kind of legitimization you are trying to get from posting it in the first place, and to see if he is atleast "a bit" aware of why people do think they have a footing ground for Xwing's to be unbalanced, outside tournament stats, theorycrafting, and in game experience.

Most people in here and in there don't even play the game competitively to really have an acquainted opinion in the subject, and certainly not better than what a FFG dev could speak of. So why do you guys get so defensive for people having their designing fun encouraged by either their feelings toward the Xwing state right now and FFG dev comments on the subject. I do really wonder. It's completely irrational.

Never heard of strawpoll before...but thanks for letting me know. I guess if I ever care enough to poll people on something I know where to go.

Correct we are allowed to have our opinions as are you...I don't claim to know more than the devs and have full faith in them. I don't think the naysayers are being defensive...most of these "fun design ideas" suck in my opinion. They want to turn the xwing into an interceptor, turret, or tank. And there doesn't seem to be much thought as to how these could affect the named pilots and the other ships in general. I have heard some say "well yeah it makes biggs stronger but helps the generics too" like it's some kind of justification. How is making Biggs even better going to get your "overcosted" generic used? How will it fix the perceived problem? It won't. Now I will admit there have been one or two decent ideas thrown around...but the danger comes from the inevitable arms race this will create that people are also ignoring...once the xwing is fixed I guarantee you people will move to "fix" the bwing.

I have watched this go full circle. Everyone wanted to have high PS uniques valued and used...they made that happen...now everyone complains their generics never see play...or, at least, not the right generics...getting what you ask for and then demanding back what you had before is also "irrational."

It's fine that some want to see fixed and make attempts to design their own...but they need to be prepared to deal with the occasionally aggressive criticism their detractors will present. That being said we will see what comes down the pipe...the deva know more than any of us...they have made a **** fine game. I trust them not to destroy it.

Strawpoll works just fine for your information. Takes 5 seconds.

But sure, i am not saying you can't have your opinion, but when you post "a poll" from somewhere else, which has a limited amount of people voting on it, i will wonder what kind of legitimization you are trying to get from posting it in the first place, and to see if he is atleast "a bit" aware of why people do think they have a footing ground for Xwing's to be unbalanced, outside tournament stats, theorycrafting, and in game experience.

Most people in here and in there don't even play the game competitively to really have an acquainted opinion in the subject, and certainly not better than what a FFG dev could speak of. So why do you guys get so defensive for people having their designing fun encouraged by either their feelings toward the Xwing state right now and FFG dev comments on the subject. I do really wonder. It's completely irrational.

Never heard of strawpoll before...but thanks for letting me know. I guess if I ever care enough to poll people on something I know where to go.

Correct we are allowed to have our opinions as are you...I don't claim to know more than the devs and have full faith in them. I don't think the naysayers are being defensive...most of these "fun design ideas" suck in my opinion. They want to turn the xwing into an interceptor, turret, or tank. And there doesn't seem to be much thought as to how these could affect the named pilots and the other ships in general. I have heard some say "well yeah it makes biggs stronger but helps the generics too" like it's some kind of justification. How is making Biggs even better going to get your "overcosted" generic used? How will it fix the perceived problem? It won't. Now I will admit there have been one or two decent ideas thrown around...but the danger comes from the inevitable arms race this will create that people are also ignoring...once the xwing is fixed I guarantee you people will move to "fix" the bwing.

I have watched this go full circle. Everyone wanted to have high PS uniques valued and used...they made that happen...now everyone complains their generics never see play...or, at least, not the right generics...getting what you ask for and then demanding back what you had before is also "irrational."

It's fine that some want to see fixed and make attempts to design their own...but they need to be prepared to deal with the occasionally aggressive criticism their detractors will present. That being said we will see what comes down the pipe...the deva know more than any of us...they have made a **** fine game. I trust them not to destroy it.

This is pretty well said. I do disagree with the omnipotence of the designers however.

In general, there is too much overlap (or potential for it) on the Rebel side between their ships and the wave 1 X-wing pilots are so powerful that they have an outsize impact on any buffs to the ship. This is exacerbated by the fact that ordnance sucks - these ships were likely not designed to be compared in a vacuum with no torpedoes or cannons but that's the best way to run them. A really comprehensive fix will involve addressing those concerns as well.

Would you rather FFG stop releasing stuff for old ships?

YES! I would rather they stop.

I won't disagree that the A-Wing and Advanced needed a bump. Fine. As I've said before does the bomber? Some think so in order to make it see more play. But me, even as an imperial player I'm good not getting one. Use them in Epic. The X-Wing sees lots of table time. Perhaps not all of the pilots but most more than many others. Not all pilots have to be balanced. Using merge/joust values DOES NOT take into account the dial, upgrades, actions or abilities. Honestly I don't feel it is possible to balance every ship unless you all fly the same X-Wing with same pilot using the same upgrade.

You are going to take a quick and easily played games and turn it into and over costed (4 expansion to get the upgrades for a single ship), overly complicated 2 hour deck building game before you even put a piece on the table to play a 1 hour game.

What are you afraid of?

Every miniatures game goes through such processes. There is nothing you can do about it. And they are necessary to keep the game going. 40k is an extreme example of this. They bring out new editions and Codices at a staggering pace. Warmahordes is a bit slower, but the game is (usually) well-balanced anyway. But they also have their ways of fixing stuff.

In the case of X-Wing this is a bit complicated because we have chits, dials and cards that can't be changed that easily. But as we now start seeing FFG has solutions for anything.

X-Wing didn't have a lot of power creep until recently, but nonetheless now some of the stuff released at the beginning now falls off in effectiveness. That's normal. We also had stuff that was very bad from the start (Advanced) or very powerful from the start (Tie Fighters). Playtesting can't show every combo or idea that especially competitive players will have with new releases after all, so better balancing can only be had if the game designers are prepared to put sone further work into the game.

And that's what FFG is doing!

If you look at what's coming, they didn't only try to fix the A-Wing and the Advanced. They also give plenty of free new options to the Y-Wing, and to ships with natural boost action. Balancin is now going on and nothing will stop it thankfully!

There is a legitimate concern in TIE Pilot's argument that each expansion that fixes legitimate issues adds to the buy-in, but that's more reason for FFG to issue things like card packs and reasons for them not to package the Raider with the advanced fixes, not reasons for them to do no fixes at all.

There is a legitimate concern in TIE Pilot's argument that each expansion that fixes legitimate issues adds to the buy-in, but that's more reason for FFG to issue things like card packs and reasons for them not to package the Raider with the advanced fixes, not reasons for them to do no fixes at all.

Exactly, bravo!

Here is an interesting Poll over at BGG

Results: Overwhelmingly the X-Wing does not need fixing.

http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1290384/does-x-wing-need-fix

Do you realize there is already an interview dating back at November when Xwing's developers feel like Xwing generics need some love ?

Nonetheless, why don't you make one on this forums which have a lot of more trafic when it is related to Xwing ? I will be pleased to vote.

To take you up on your suggestion how do you make a poll on this Forum? From what I've seen Board Game Geeks is quite popular too, even with X-Wing fans. You're experience with that forum appears to be quite different than mine.

What are you afraid of?

Every miniatures game goes through such processes. There is nothing you can do about it. [...]

Well...

I don't know if 'every' miniature game goes through this but I'm rather sure that many do, especially in this current market environment. I don't personally feel it is a required market plan but it is often a very profitable one.

As to what I'm afraid of. We have (or had to some degree) a very simple game to setup and play. Good strategy and tactics given the amount of upgrades good combinations and variety. Then as more upgrades are added what appears more variety also creates more and equal amount of complexity. Fewer pickup games that don't take just as long to build a squad as it does to play. After that, for all of the 'variety' of combos we actually begin to see fewer squads because now there are squads who's builds are so synergistic that it is foolish not to play them. Then begins the fixes. Some are to fixes other fixes. Others are more of a rebalance. Then you need a minimum of 4 expansions to properly field a single ship because the upgrades and fixes are spread out.

Then you've gone from two quick games in a 2 1/2 hours window with a game that costs a few hundred dollars to one game in a 3 plus hour time-frame, 2 hours of which is setup with a 17 plus page FAQ. Plus now everyone is waiting for the next purchase so they can fix the last fixed that broke the fix before that. Finally you end up with a game at an over whelming complexity level and price point on expansions that slowly pushes away new players. Die hard fans won't think twice dropping $1,000 on their favorite game but like the argument between other games that 'used' to be fun and simple were dropped because this market model caused power creep, complexity and over pricing.

Personally I don't feel it is possible to balance everything without diluting the game entirely. I actually like that idea that ships are different and not every single ship is perfectly balanced to every other ship. They play differently, feel different, fly different, used differently in different missions for different uses and merge values are a poor (but useful to a point) measure of balance. It is a balance of facing each other and squeezing the trigger without another other considerations. Pilots can make an average ship great. Didn't the Rebels invest heavily in their pilots according to lore. Not all ships will fly well in a 100 point skirmish game but the variety of ships gives fantastic options for missions and scenarios and campaigns. But if every ship is perfectly balanced who cares what you field from one game to the next? Yes there should be an all round ship that is master of none.

And you are right. There is nothing I can do about it, save voice my opinion as unhumble as it may have come across. Sorry if that's the case honestly not my intent. I'll get down off my soap box and I apologize if it comes off preachy but I've been advocating a point and ForceM asked a very reasonable question. I hope I answered it well.

Game on.

I don't really put a lot of faith in the polls at BGG for balance discussion. The last one that I recall had the Lambda Shuttle as the worst or 2nd to worst ship.

I don't really put a lot of faith in the polls at BGG for balance discussion. The last one that I recall had the Lambda Shuttle as the worst or 2nd to worst ship.

I don't know what faith I put in it. It is a poll of people's opinions at a given moment. Maybe at the time when everyone, even here, was decrying our poorly the Shuttle maneuvered was when the poll was released. Not sure.

That poll recently came out and asked the same question being discussed here, 'does the X-Wing need fixing' and at this moment most agree it does not. Now as we said that just opinions and clearly doesn't make anything factual. Maybe it does or maybe one of the X-Wings do or maybe not.

I just posted as food for thought given other peoples thoughts, so to speak

I believe the larger question is still: If you give me a penny for my thoughts and I give you my two cents who gets the change.

WHY!!!!?!???? Why does everyone suddenly have OCD to fix things that AREN'T BROKEN!! You're killing me guys!

X-wing - Isn't broken, doesn't need fixing

Y-wing - Is getting new boosts, but wasn't even that broken to begin with

E-wing - Sure the generics suck, but Corran hardly needs a boost, and E'tahn's pretty good to

Stop trying to fix stuff that isn't broken guys!

But can I add a Stereo System?

@Ken

Yeah i understand what you are saying, but i don't see any solution to this but bringing out a perfectly balanced game and never bring an expansion that could ruin the balance.

And i don't want X-Wing to be such a game. If they go on bringing new ships we are going to see overwhelming ones and underwhelming ones, power creep and such things. And if you don't react to this some stuff will hardly be played. Which is very sad in case of awesome models like Advanceds or X-Wings!

Look at it positively. FFG seem very good at this. I have seen very few new A-Wing nerf or buff threads since Chardaan, and Protos and named see playtime! Also i have seen no one complain about the Advanced fix. So why should they mess up in the future?

Also i don't find the game overly complicated. I create my lists online, save them and put them together. Doesn't take longer than in Wave 1 honestly. The only thing i have more on the table is some stealth counters and debris fields. Sure you have to buy stuff, but you can't blame FFG for wanting to make money with a very good game they bring out. Although i advocate for cards and cardboard chits only expansions! At some point we might see that to encourage new players to get in i think!

all ships are fine.

WHY!!!!?!???? Why does everyone suddenly have OCD to fix things that AREN'T BROKEN!! You're killing me guys!

X-wing - Isn't broken, doesn't need fixing

Y-wing - Is getting new boosts, but wasn't even that broken to begin with

E-wing - Sure the generics suck, but Corran hardly needs a boost, and E'tahn's pretty good to

Stop trying to fix stuff that isn't broken guys!

But can I add a Stereo System?

Depends on what you plan on blasting with it...

Play me some DefTec, Enomine, or Ketsumeishi and you have a deal.