So your 1st complaint is only about "lore" that probably won't stay the same...your second complaint is that more options are bad? A single auto include that will continue to offer more future choices seems like a pretty solid start to me.

Need unlike button.

And about the options, Getting a sensor slot doesn't provide enough options somehow ?

Everyone who keeps saying this is completely (and I mean completely) missing what we're saying when we say there is no "choice". Yes there are choices within the Systems upgrade itself. What is not a choice is whether or not to add the Systems slot in the first place. There is literally zero downside to taking the title. You get a strictly superior ship for exactly the same cost. That part is not a choice (yes, you can choose not to take the title, but there is literally no reason not to). And that is where some of us see a design flaw.

But it's also a hack solution - there is never any reason NOT to take the "x1" title, right now. IMHO, the point of this thread, is that it would have been better to implement a fix to get us to the same place but leaving important choices to be made, still. The Chardaan Refit, BTL-A4 title, and autothrusters all provide good counter-points as to 'how to make something plainly better, but still make it a choice'.

This. 100%. Chardaan Refit at least makes you choose between a speedy, defensive (expensive) missile-carrier and a speedy, defensive (cheap) blocker. BLT-A4 makes you choose between a 360 turret and a dogfighter. /x1, what, makes you choose between a decent ship and a sh*tty ship? That is not actually a choice.

@Rakky: The words "auto-include" are the problem, not the choice of upgrades once you slap on the *ahem* AUTO-INCLUDE.

The choice is what Sensor upgrade you equip Xanderf.

Chaardan refits doesn't allow for options, even if you think it does. The moment you equip a missile, which are already overcosted, you are paying an extra 2 points for it.

And in case of the Ywings, it's not a fix to the ship itself since it's actually fine as a turret, but making it able to play as a straightforward fighter.

The choice is what Sensor upgrade you equip Xanderf.

The choice is what Sensor upgrade you equip Xanderf.

So you are not only geniunely obtuse, but also a ******. Good to know.

Of course there is no option for you because as i frekkin said before, they wanted to keep the ship at the 21 cost. But sure, i am the one missing the point, for christ sake.

This thread kind of just seems like whining for the sake of whining. Look FFG fixed an underwhelming ship that every one loves and they did it in a way that doesnt make the ship overpowered. At least FFG is a company that goes back and fixes its mistakes, alot of other companies dont. If people keep whining about stuff that doesnt really mater maybe FFG will stop fixing stuff and that would be sad because great ships like the advanced need to be on the table, not collecting dust on a shelf.

FFG GREAT JOB ON THE FIX.

The choice is what Sensor upgrade you equip Xanderf.

No we get your point. The point that YOU are not getting is that any fix at all would have required a "choice" on the part of the player to take the fix or not anyway. There's precedence from every other fix released so far.

And what is this "choice" costing you? There's no other actual option on the table for you to take. Are you really saying that any other option that was bandied about on these forums for YEARS was superior to what the designers came up with?

ANY fix would have been "auto include" The Advanced is terrible as is. Thats an undeniable fact. Anything FFG released would have been "auto include" to make it playable again.

The BTL-A4 does even apply to your argument because you actually have to make a trade off for the y-wing. 360 or double attack? With the Advanced your trade off is what? Choosing between AC or ATC? Oh wait you still need the title to do that.

The only reason i can fathom as to why you guys are upset is that FFG didn't pick "your" solution, which seems to be a flat -2 point decrease. Oh yes, lets make another lazy fix like Chardaan, that worked out ever so well. There's no design space for a 2 attack dice ship above 20 pts in the imperial lineup. If you can't see that then there's no helping you.

So you are not only geniunely obtuse, but also a ******. Good to know.

Of course there is no option for you because as i frekkin said before, they wanted to keep the ship at the 21 cost. But sure, i am the one missing the point, for christ sake.

Still missing the point... There are any number of other ways to make a fix that also leaves the players some choice. Why FFG settled on this choice only they know. But just because they chose this as the fix does not mean there were no other ways to fix it. See my suggestion about subtracting 2 from the cost instead of 4.

1. No we get your point. The point that YOU are not getting is that any fix at all would have required a "choice" on the part of the player to take the fix or not anyway. There's precedence from every other fix released so far.

And what is this "choice" costing you? There's no other actual option on the table for you to take. Are you really saying that any other option that was bandied about on these forums for YEARS was superior to what the designers came up with?

ANY fix would have been "auto include" The Advanced is terrible as is. Thats an undeniable fact. Anything FFG released would have been "auto include" to make it playable again.

2. The only reason i can fathom as to why you guys are upset is that FFG didn't pick "your" solution, which seems to be a flat -2 point decrease. Oh yes, lets make another lazy fix like Chardaan, that worked out ever so well.

3. There's no design space for a 2 attack dice ship above 20 pts in the imperial lineup. If you can't see that then there's no helping you.

1. Yes, everything about this game is a choice. That's not the choice that's being discussed. Yes, you can choose to field a Prototype A-Wing for 17 points. But you're paying 2 points for literally no return. As with the /x1 title, if you're going to run an A-Wing sans missiles, there is literally zero reason not to take Refit.

2. I'll wait here while you check my post history and see that I've never tried to suggest a fix for the TIE Advanced, aside from this thread (which wasn't even an original idea, just a tweak to the real thing to make it better, IMO). And if you thought my suggestion was to subtract 2 from the cost of the TIE Advanced, then I have a hard time believing you really do understand my point (hint: that wasn't what I was suggesting).

3. Oh, excuse me Mr. Designer. Please, enlighten us to everything that is and isn't possible with the future of this game. Will there be a 20+ point 2-Attack Imperial ship? Will apes rule the planet one day? And, for god's sake, when do we finally get our flying cars?!

If we're resorting to personal attacks, I'm out. Consider yourselves on my ignore list.

DAT!

The guy who insults people with a graphic is the one getting upset? Natch.

And in any case, the "ANY fix would be an auto-include" fails to address... well... most of the points brought up.

First off - you are starting from an assumption without a basis to back it up. A fix could certainly be implemented that INCREASES the cost of the fighter, by a small amount, but provides a CONSIDERABLY greater value than the cost would imply. *Bam*, your argument is invalidated - you still get (when you take the upgrade) better-point-balanced pairing... but there are also plenty of times when you would take a TIE Advanced and choose NOT to take the upgrade. It's a choice, then, not an "auto-include".

Or as suggested in the very first post of the thread - they could include multiple titles instead of just 'x1'. Now, again, your argument is invalidated (by the very first post!)...the fix from the 'x1' title is no longer an "auto-include", as there would be other titles available for it to compete for the slot.

As stated in the OP, and practically every other post since, YES we understand the TIE Advanced needed a fix. And this IS a fix. It works! It would have been preferable to do it slightly differently, though, instead of appearing like such a Band-Aid solution. Other titles, so a choice has to be made for "x1" vs something else... an "x1" title that introduces enough value that it does still increase the cost of the fighter so that taking it is still a decision that needs to be made, or not (I mean, it's not like Darth Vader is a slouch on his own!)
, etc.

Lots of options! Why they went down such an... inflexible... path I don't like.

(And yes, this is less flexible than SOME OF THE OTHER CHOICES THEY COULD HAVE MADE. In that - at the very least - FFG has basically just announced that we should forget about the TIE Advanced fighters we currently have, as they don't exist anymore. Instead, the TIE Advanced looks, acts, and is priced the same, but also has a system upgrade slot that it gets heavily discounted. Surely you can see that it would be better to have a solution that adds the same options, but ALSO leaves the current Advanced on the table as something someone might take as an alternative?)

I can see where it isn't a perfect fix, but it is an exciting fix, and I think that was the point, excite players about their old and new tie advanced.

That said, I quote our old friend the T 800 when I say " I know now, why you cry, but it is something, I can never do. " - Exit, lowered into molten steel, cue crying child and sad music, fade to black -

I can see where it isn't a perfect fix, but it is an exciting fix, and I think that was the point, excite players about their old and new tie advanced.

Right, well, yeah - that's why the thread title is "kinda bummed about the fix" and NOT "wow, FFG really blew it this time" or "holy crap, what a terrible idea - what were they thinking?" or variations along those lines.

I have no doubt that this will fix it, but I equally have no doubt that it's pretty far from a 'perfect' fix.

Which is a shame, as they've got the time - why not polish that fix a little more and MAKE it a 'perfect' fix, instead of an obvious band-aid? I'll take it, either way, I'd just prefer it a bit cleaner a fit into the game.

And in any case, the "ANY fix would be an auto-include" fails to address... well... most of the points brought up.

First off - you are starting from an assumption without a basis to back it up. A fix could certainly be implemented that INCREASES the cost of the fighter, by a small amount, but provides a CONSIDERABLY greater value than the cost would imply. *Bam*, your argument is invalidated - you still get (when you take the upgrade) better-point-balanced pairing... but there are also plenty of times when you would take a TIE Advanced and choose NOT to take the upgrade. It's a choice, then, not an "auto-include".

Or as suggested in the very first post of the thread - they could include multiple titles instead of just 'x1'. Now, again, your argument is invalidated (by the very first post!)...the fix from the 'x1' title is no longer an "auto-include", as there would be other titles available for it to compete for the slot.

As stated in the OP, and practically every other post since, YES we understand the TIE Advanced needed a fix. And this IS a fix. It works! It would have been preferable to do it slightly differently, though, instead of appearing like such a Band-Aid solution. Other titles, so a choice has to be made for "x1" vs something else... an "x1" title that introduces enough value that it does still increase the cost of the fighter so that taking it is still a decision that needs to be made, or not (I mean, it's not like Darth Vader is a slouch on his own!)

1. So you mean like ATC? Increases cost by one, gives a really good benefit? That seems to fit your argument to a T right there. But why would you choose to not take the upgrade, when NOBODY TAKES THE ADVANCED NOW. I simply don't understand what your logic is here. You want to be able to field the Advanced just like it is now and still have that a viable option? Cause thats what you're coming off across as saying:

"...but there are also plenty of times when you would want to take a TIE Advanced and NOT to take the upgrade. It's a choice, then, not an "auto-include."

Right there, that implies that you want to be able to take any of the TIE Advanced with no upgrade. Sooooooo how's your Advanced lists working out for you right now? There is no choice here. The Advanced simply doesn't work. It HAS to have a fix. What you're asking for isn't a fix. You just seem to want a tradeoff. Like when you put Outrider/HLC on a 2400. That's not what the Advanced needs.

2. Why should the Advanced get multiple titles at once when no other ship but the Firespray has multiple titles announced? What ideas do you have for other titles?

3. So this fix just doesn't go far enough for you?

I don't get the people saying it's an auto-include and thats a problem. if it needs fixing than no one will take it without the fix because it needs a fix and without it isn't worth it. (or it wouldnt need a fix)

1. So you mean like ATC? Increases cost by one, gives a really good benefit? That seems to fit your argument to a T right there.

Quite so! The ATC being a +1 cost adjustment is a good example. I have other issues with the application of that card (IMHO, making it "Imperial Only" instead of "Advanced Only" would have been sufficient, but whatever).

The thing is the inclusion of so many other systems for free, making the upgrade a no-brainer, combined with no cost to it.

ObiWanka's idea of the offset being '-2' instead of '-4' accomplishes much the same - as with the current solution, the cost of the base fighter is not changed. And, heck, you do get the Advanced Scopes and FCS for 'free' with that solution, still. Yet Accuracy Corrector and Advanced Sensors become 1-point upgrades, instead of 'free' (as they are now) and Sensor Jammer is 2 points (instead of also being 'free', as it is now). You now have a compelling reason to not take the upgrade - to make a choice - you don't need/want the FCS or scopes, and don't want to pay even the minimal fee for the other options. A decision is made!

But why would you choose to not take the upgrade, when NOBODY TAKES THE ADVANCED NOW.

...

Sooooooo how's your Advanced lists working out for you right now? There is no choice here. The Advanced simply doesn't work. It HAS to have a fix.

Ah, here, see, there is a bit of a misconception. True, people rarely take the Advanced in standard tournaments. But that doesn't mean every pilot is not fair for its price. Vader works GREAT if you do as little as extend the tournament time to 90 minutes, instead of 75. The problem with the Advanced is that it's very survivable, but doesn't hit hard...which, when you are pressed for time to kill things, he performs very poorly. Maarak Stele, on the other hand, is really quite the beast in Epic format - being able to choose a crit from 3 on the large ships (who have some pretty rough crits, and a fairly small deck) is BRUTAL. He fits well worth his cost in those games.

(The generics, I'll grant, are a pretty tough sell. I can't see people taking them very often. But original-Maarak and original-Vader absolutely have their place, so the wholesale replacement of them with x1-Maarak and x1-Vader is unfortunate, IMHO.)

Why should the Advanced get multiple titles at once when no other ship but the Firespray has multiple titles announced? What ideas do you have for other titles?

Well, the Firespray, Rebel Transport, Rebel Corvette, and Imperial Raider already have multiple titles. Given the likely longevity of the game, I'd be more than a bit surprised if other ships did not get more titles.

As to 'other ideas' - sticking with a theme makes sense. Maybe change a set to:

"TIE Advanced x1: cost 0, adds [system] slot. Any equipped [system] upgrade costs 2 points less."

"TIE Advanced x2: cost 0, adds [cannon] slot. Any equipped [cannon] upgrade costs 2 points less."

"TIE Advanced x3: cost 0, adds [bomb] slot. Any equipped [bomb] upgrade costs 1 points less."

...you've now got multiple choices, so it's not a no-brainer to just ALWAYS take the 'x1' title. And none of the titles get you everything you'd be able to use for free, so you may well choose not to take any of them.

It's a silly complaint.

Yes, the title is auto include, but it has to be because it's purpose is to fix a ship that had no place in any list. The reason we haven't seen it this blatant before is because we have never had a ship as objectively terrible as the Tie Advanced.

You'd have more grounds to complain if the title was supposed to be an option, rather than a fix. But it's not, it is a fix, so it's auto include. The thing you're either missing or don't value highly enough is that while the fix is auto include, it increases the options via a new system upgrade slot, a new system upgrade and a discount on all system upgrades.

Also, there will be more system upgrades in the future, giving you even more options later down the track.

Tell me, would you have the same complaint if FFG had just released an FAQ and said "The TIE Advanced is now 17 points"? Would you have complained that players should be able to choose between using the new FAQ cost of the ship and the original print cost of the ship? Because that's what you're doing here.

I don't get the people saying it's an auto-include and thats a problem. if it needs fixing than no one will take it without the fix because it needs a fix and without it isn't worth it. (or it wouldnt need a fix)

They were expecting something along the lines of Chardaan Refit/A-wing Test Pilot. The thing is, those aren't a "fix". They are enhancers to a ship, that are not necessary for a ship that is still on the borderline. The X1 title is a fix, because it is so essential it redefines the ship. It's a no brainer to take, unlike the others that are not super necessary. I like the fix, because it is something that will evolve as we get more systems upgrades.

The lore complaint I have no idea on. Might as well complain that they made generics of the Advanced.

The current TIE Advanced has a hard time fitting into the 100-pt, 75-minute, standard tournament format for its cost, sure.

That's a pretty far cry from "has no place in any list as it currently is", though. Increase even the standard tournament to 90 minutes, and suddenly current-Vader is a solid choice. Play in Epic format AT ALL, and current-Maarak becomes an absolute steal.

Any fix that treats the TIE Advanced as completely valueless for its price, just because it doesn't work very well in the standard tournament format - which is only one part of the game - should be immediately looked at as suspicious from the start.

The current TIE Advanced has a hard time fitting into the 100-pt, 75-minute, standard tournament format for its cost, sure.

That's a pretty far cry from "has no place in any list as it currently is", though. Increase even the standard tournament to 90 minutes, and suddenly current-Vader is a solid choice. Play in Epic format AT ALL, and current-Maarak becomes an absolute steal.

Any fix that treats the TIE Advanced as completely valueless for its price, just because it doesn't work very well in the standard tournament format - which is only one part of the game - should be immediately looked at as suspicious from the start.

The problem with that is that this game was originally designed as a 100pt dogfight game and epic was tacked on later. Also the game is driven by the 100pt players as that is by far the most popular form of the game and therefore the group that buys the most product.

The current TIE Advanced has a hard time fitting into the 100-pt, 75-minute, standard tournament format for its cost, sure.

That's a pretty far cry from "has no place in any list as it currently is", though. Increase even the standard tournament to 90 minutes, and suddenly current-Vader is a solid choice. Play in Epic format AT ALL, and current-Maarak becomes an absolute steal.

Any fix that treats the TIE Advanced as completely valueless for its price, just because it doesn't work very well in the standard tournament format - which is only one part of the game - should be immediately looked at as suspicious from the start.

The problem with that is that this game was originally designed as a 100pt dogfight game and epic was tacked on later. Also the game is driven by the 100pt players as that is by far the most popular form of the game and therefore the group that buys the most product.

100-point-tournament-regulars* are the most populous (and vocal) on the internet. In the wild, there are far, far more casual players.

*To be clear, it's the tournament players who have the biggest issue with the current TIE Advanced, not just any old 100-point dogfight player.

Well, they definitely could have done the 'fix' better.

Compare the A-Wing Test Pilot to this, you get an incredible, unique ability to have two (TWO!) EPTs on a single ship... for free. Except that you have to pay for the actual EPTs themselves.

With the Interceptor's Royal Guard title, you also get an amazing ability that is unique amongst the current X-Wing lineup, for free. I mean, there's no reason not to equip it on every ship you can. It just doesn't do anything on its own, though (except give you a sweet paint job!). You still have to pay for each modification.

So both of these fixes addressed issues players were having with the ships -- A-Wings could get Barrel Roll through Expert Handling for free, essentially, with Refit, or boost its lackluster offense with EPTs like Predator and Outmaneuver that really emphasize its generous dial. TIE Interceptors could boost their survivability with Shield and Hull upgrades, or throw on a Targeting Computer mod with a stealth device to play fast and loose, which also emphasized the ship's particular strengths -- and they did it without ever making a ship "just better" than it was before. It was always balanced by having an expanded repertoire of options, all with their own costs and tradeoffs. Even for the Refit, while many people won't consider missiles on an A-Wing no matter what, it's still a meaningful trade-off and will be even moreso when they inevitably "fix" missiles or simply release better or more relevant missiles.

With the TIE Advanced, you just get a System upgrade. No drawback, it doesn't take the vaunted "modification" slot (Which would have at least made for some trade-off analysis with Daredevil Vader, or Experimental Interface Marksmanship Maarek), there are no other Titles for it to compete with, it doesn't remove another upgrade slot, heck, it doesn't even cost points.

We can already see the community reaction, with "The X-Wing is Obsolete" threads popping up all over the place. And it's certainly true that the Advanced will now cost the same points as an X-Wing, but with more Agility, a Barrel Roll, and have comparable (Accuracy Corrector) or generally better (ATC) firepower. I forget where, but some people have already quoted the developers as saying the X-Wing has a fix coming. So what happens if the X-Wing also gets a "just better" fix? Suddenly the "B-Wings are Obsolete" threads pop up because they were only about 1 point "better" than the X-Wing before and are now terrible? Then the B-Wing fix shows up, and we start this whole cycle again where every ship always needs to be fixed?

Really, the A-Wing and Interceptor fixes were quite well done, overall, but this fix seems dangerous to me for the precedent it sets.

The current TIE Advanced has a hard time fitting into the 100-pt, 75-minute, standard tournament format for its cost, sure.

That's a pretty far cry from "has no place in any list as it currently is", though. Increase even the standard tournament to 90 minutes, and suddenly current-Vader is a solid choice. Play in Epic format AT ALL, and current-Maarak becomes an absolute steal.

Any fix that treats the TIE Advanced as completely valueless for its price, just because it doesn't work very well in the standard tournament format - which is only one part of the game - should be immediately looked at as suspicious from the start.

The problem with that is that this game was originally designed as a 100pt dogfight game and epic was tacked on later. Also the game is driven by the 100pt players as that is by far the most popular form of the game and therefore the group that buys the most product.

100-point-tournament-regulars* are the most populous (and vocal) on the internet. In the wild, there are far, far more casual players.

*To be clear, it's the tournament players who have the biggest issue with the current TIE Advanced, not just any old 100-point dogfight player.

Think your just making up facts at this point.

Look its really this simple.....if you're a casual player that doesn't like the fix DON'T buy the Raider and DON'T play with the title card.......you're a casual player anyway so you're probably playing more laid back lists or using hombrew rules anyway.

The TIE/Ad fix has made me more excited for X-Wing that I've been in months - possibly since I actually unboxed the first core set I bought.

It needed a bigger fix than the A-Wing or Y-Wing or TIE/Int because, really, it was far "more broken" than any of them.

I'm psyched.

The problem with that is that this game was originally designed as a 100pt dogfight game and epic was tacked on later. Also the game is driven by the 100pt players as that is by far the most popular form of the game and therefore the group that buys the most product.

100-point-tournament-regulars* are the most populous (and vocal) on the internet. In the wild, there are far, far more casual players.

*To be clear, it's the tournament players who have the biggest issue with the current TIE Advanced, not just any old 100-point dogfight player.

Think your just making up facts at this point.

So the game being driven by 100-point players (tournament or otherwise) is a stone-cold fact?

I'm not even necessarily disagreeing that 100-point dogfights are the most common way to play the game; it is, after all, the way the game was designed to be played, as you say, so it just might be. However, the game was also designed with scenarios from the beginning. And Star Wars is a lore-rich universe with a lot of hardcore fanboys. So I would bet there are a lot of players out there who play mainly scenarios (heck, just Google and you can find tons of homebrew stuff, and FFG themselves even made a tool for it!). There are also plenty of players who play 35 points, 72 points, 489 points, and everything between.

There are hundreds of players on this forum alone, while only what, a couple hundred make up the field at worlds? There are national, regional, and local tournaments that account for many, many more players. But you know what's even more common than store championships? Games on the kitchen table. For every player at a 12-man tournament, there are 12 kids/adults hanging out at home enjoying flying around space and shooting each other in a living room.

100-point dogfights is a wonderful way to play the game, but it you think it's even close to the only one, you're fooling yourself.

EDIT: Everything in this thread is to say we're excited to be able to play a more competitive TIE Advanced, too. The fix just could've been better designed. That's all.