I'd second Major Tom. 150 shakes things up a lot and breathes new life into the existing ships. Much as I may agree with some of the points which have been well made (on this and other threads) about the phantom being a bit too much, fat turrets being too fat, or the x wing being not quite good enough at 100; larger games do not seem to magnify the flaws of certain ships as much as 100 pts seems to (probably because you have more room to address them). It gets you out of thinking in terms of net listing and min/maxing builds and allows your creative (or crazy) juices to flow. I mostly play 150 now, though sometimes we dip back into 100 pts (and other sizes) to keep things fresh. As has already been said, I'd advise anyone who is feeling a bit jaded by things at the moment to try it.

Moving the point limit proton torpedoes the metagame wisdom. All the bets are off, and the impact of a single ship is vastly diminished.

In short:

Git gud

It the original poster isn't having fun, he isn't having fun. Nothing to really be done about it. Everyone enjoys the game differently.

That said, it is amazingly eerie to see all these Falcon complaints practically match up with the complaints people were having with the first X-wing Regional season. Or how I now refer to it as, the Summer of the Double Falcons. The results would probably be similar to how Falcon builds are doing currently. The difference, there is more variety in the builds, and more variety in the non-Falcon builds winning (seriously, 6 A-wings?!?!?!?!).

If the current meta has you down, take a break. Wave 6 will shake things up (though probably not to the degree most want). And who knows what else will be coming this year. There is nothing wrong with taking a break from the game.

It the original poster isn't having fun, he isn't having fun.

I agree, and "go do something else" is a completely valid answer to that. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

If you're not having fun with X-Wing as it currently stands, you have a number of options.

150 point lists

Epic games

list building restricted league

Do something else for a while and see what S&V offers.

But my problem with the OP is he isn't looking for answers or help, he just wants to bash something a lot of us love. If were to take any of the advice offered then this would of gone differently, instead he does little more than lash out at anyone who tries to help.

That said... Anyone who claims a Phantom can't be beat with a 4 X, XXBB, XXYY or 6 A list, has already lost the game. If you refuse to accept it can happen, (and it does in fact happen, and seems to happen fairly often) then you will never be able to do it.

I think the overall topic is a bit harsh, but imo, there's really no question that the named phantoms limit builds more than any other ship and I wish that weren't the case.

I have a ton of lists I won't bring to a competitive setting solely because I know that a competent phantom player will shred them even though those lists would be competitive against any other list if I fly well enough. There just isn't another ship like that.

I couldn't disagree more with OP.

this game keeps adding more and more. the more they add the more options we have. the store championship I went to last weekend had so many different lists that if you built to counter 1 you would definitely have a harder time against others. the variety was awesome to see. when turrets were super popular with ywings and yt1300's. I won a tournament with a 4 interceptor list.

you need to not psyche yourself out because of what your opponent is bringing. play to your strengths and his weakness. this game is nowhere near as broken as GW's 40K. (shameless dig)

also, if you think this game is rock paper scissors, you are not playing it right. tactics and out thinking your opponent are what will set you up for victory, yes list building helps, but it is not the be all end all.

there's really no question that the named phantoms limit builds more than any other ship and I wish that weren't the case.

Yes and no...

What Whisper + ACD + VI has done, is require a greater level of skill to fly a number of other lists. Lets use made up numbers... a Player with a skill lvl of 6 used to be able to take on almost any list and have a good chance of winning against a player with a skill lvl of 6 or lower.

The Phantom IMO requires that you be 1 or 2 points better than the phantom player to win. Although a lot of that is subject to change in a week or two, when S&V show up.

I think the overall topic is a bit harsh, but imo, there's really no question that the named phantoms limit builds more than any other ship and I wish that weren't the case.

I have a ton of lists I won't bring to a competitive setting solely because I know that a competent phantom player will shred them even though those lists would be competitive against any other list if I fly well enough. There just isn't another ship like that.

This is my view on the VI+ACD Phantom. It is the only ship you absolutely must have an idea on how to counter in a list. Other builds like Fat Han/Super Dash/Super Deci don't define lists that can be beaten only by ensuring you have a specific counter. That is the issue with the VI+ACD+FCS+Gunner named Phantom.

I agree with the OP and have not been having as much fun with the game for a few different reasons.

Lots of options. A good problem to have for some, but it takes more time to prepare and makes it harder to practice (and practice against) various squads. I just don't have the time (and maybe not even the interst) to do this.

Lots more players. Another good problem to have. But, I used to get to go to a tournament, play 3-4 games, and be done in 4-6 hours. Now our minimum tournament is often 8 hours, and many of our store championships are running 12 or more hours (i.e., 5 rounds, cut to top 8). I'm just ot interested in playing for tht long most of the time.

On a related note, with more players came more bad attitudes. Still lots of great folks out there, but I feel I'm runing into more not so great ones these days. This is in no way the games fault (though I do think part of it has to do with wanting to win top prizes which can be valuable), just an observation.

Unfamiliar ships, I've noticed this with other Star Wars games, too. They start off with the original trilogy and the ships/characters everyoen knows and loves. Then it gets successful and they run out of OT stuff ad start going into EU stuff that many people are less interested in. I've actually read 20+ EU books, but it's still not my favorite part of the story, and if I had my choice I'd rather run just OT ships (and I do this to the extent that I can).

Playing vs. the same squad over and over again... At worlds this year 3 of my 6 matchup ser vs. YT and 3
Zs. BORING!

Play style has changed quite a bit. At worlds, people sometimes took forever to engage. Not slow play, but flying back and forth on their side of the board or trying to avoid combat for long periods of time. A valid tactic, yes. But, even though I don't mind chasing them down, this is also very BORING!

The Phantom... no matter how you slice it unless you have a counter for it it is hard to beat. I hope they find a small change that keeps it competative but not quite as powerful.

My current solution, the one that is helping keep the game the most fun for me, is to help my friends prepare for events. If they have a list they want to test or something they want to test it against, I can still have a lot of fun playing. Otherwise, it's just not as fun for me any more. But, as others have said, I'm keeping my stuff and will keep buying since (1) there is still some fun in the game for me, and (2) things could always change in a way that brings back even more fun for me.

what happened to just playing games cause they are fun.

why does everything has to be competitive.

if the tournament scene turns you off, just play for fun with your friends. I took a few months off of tournament games because I was sour to the atmosphere around them and just played casual games with my buds. the 300-400 point games have been the most fun. the tournament lists don't matter in big games, I have actually found the fewer upgrades you take the more fun the game. more ships, more shots, more action.

to summarize, the game is ultimately what we make it. FFG has given us this car to drive, lets have fun with it.

Here is an interesting post:
http://boardgamegeek.com/article/18179088#18179088

It's interesting I'm seeing this post today.

We played a scenario last night that one of the guys in my game group designed. It was team match for four. I've played X-Wing... oh, about 4 times now. Maybe 5.

What I noticed this time around is that the game seems to be designed for two types of players:

Type 1 - The guy that likes to agonize over lists, research different ship/upgrade/pilot interactions, crunch numbers, and in general devote (probably) more time to the game in "prep" than is actually spent playing the game.

This type of player is what I call the "Warhammer" player. S/he might also be the sort of player that generally enjoys doing things like planning out their D&D character progressions for all 20 levels.

In short - they derive enjoyment out of crunching, organization, min/maxing, etc. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. To them, the game itself is a hobby, moreso than the game is part of the hobby of gaming.

Type 2 - This is the sort of player that basically wants to see little ships flying around on the board. S/he is (mostly) unconcerned with the data and mechanics under the hood. That player is there for one thing, and one thing only: having a good time with a buddy blowing up Imperial/Rebel/Scum, and enacting an epic dogfight in miniature. For this player, upgrades, pilots, and card synergies are pesky things at worst, and eye-glazing at best.

In short - they derive enjoyment out of watching little ships blast other little ships. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. To them, the came is part of the hobby of gaming. Nothing more or less.

Now here's the problem:

While X-wing does a great job at supporting each style of play individually, it does a lousy job, IMO, of supporting BOTH types of players at the same table. A type 1 will almost surely trounce a type 2 player based mostly on the superior build of their list. So while you could have equally experienced players, if one of those players is not into the buildy/fiddly part of the game, it becomes less fun for both.

And as FFG (understandably) releases more and more material, the game implicitly starts supporting the type 1 style of player.

Anyhow...

That's all I got.

Just sharing something I read.

Your thought?

I am seriously conflicted about how to answer to this post. On one hand, I sympathize with OP's feelings on the game, although I don't approve of their cause. On the other hand, I dislike whiny threads. Having a certain unnamed Master Chief Whiner like every post from OP makes me roll my eyes even more.

This is a forum about a game with tiny plastic ships. If you don't like tiny plastic ships, don't play. If you don't like a subset of the tiny subset of the tiny plastic ships, don't play with those. The game doesn't have to go on. It stops where you want it to stop: wave 1, wave2, wave3, wave4 - Phantom, whatever. Just spare us the doom and gloom drama, please.

Did that sound aggressive? I didn't mean to sound aggressive...

Here is an interesting post:

http://boardgamegeek.com/article/18179088#18179088

....

That's all I got.

Just sharing something I read.

Your thought?

I like it. I remember reading something about what is involved in a winning strategy in X-wing (the numbers are crap because I forgot them but the point will still stand).

You win based on:

A) 40% ability to fly, tactics

B) 30% quality of your list-building

C) 10% asteroid placement

D) 20% initial starting position and moves

And yes the initial moves were so important they warranted their own category, although most people ignore them. So your type 2 player will ignore B and C (because the asteroids need to be random, you can't control Nature). I'm also going to assume he's going to fail at D because he doesn't care/know about the two lists' strengths and weaknesses. In my country we call this "chopping the branch you're standing on", that's of course if it's important that you win. It may not be, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Is this a failure from FFG? I don't think so. Do we want this game to be even on luck-to-strategy balance? I don't think so.

I can understand the OP quite a bit. To me, when you play "competitive" lists these days, you see certain builds. If you want a decent chance to win, you have to either build a standard "netlist" or build a list that is meant to defeat those lists. It's hard to build a generalists list that doesn't have things built to specifically beat Fat Hans, Decimators, and Phantoms. Overall, this means you are seeing the same things in every list. It gets repetitious. It limits the creative fun of the game. It gets stale. Oh, the meta might shift, but it's still "you need x, y, or z to win". OK...you can win with other lists, but it usually takes a lot of practice and good playing to do it. The type of playing most people don't have time for.

So, the way I see it, the game is a lot less fun.

What do you do? Should you quit? I say no. Just change how you play. Try some Epic games. Do some scenarios. There are a lot of great scenarios out there now. Have you tried any? Do things like games with only generics. You can even go to play regular games at the game store, but tell people that you refuse to play a list that has a large, turreted ship or a Phantom. Just say you want to play something different. You might find more people wanting to play like that besides just your friend.

There are 3-4 of us who play every week at my game store. We play what we want to play. We never fly a Fat Han or even a YT-1300. My friend does like Phantoms, but I've learned some tricks to beat them. I could easily ask him not to fly one if I didn't want to face it, too. We do 3 way fights. We do 4 way fights. We do epic fights with all generics. We do scenarios and campaigns. It's a lot of fun! We do crazy stuff and just try different ideas. It's a lot less pressure and a way to have fun with the game again.

Ken: interesting post, though a bit black and white. Between type 1 and 2 there will be a whole slew of players who don't fit neatly into either category and I count myself among those. I'm probably closer to 2 than 1, but I enjoy a good scheme over my new idea for a build that I can try out (even if it fails) and finding out those fun synergies and effects is often worth a bit of time and thought. I rarely play the same list twice though I have favourite ships or ideas which show up throughout my games. This is a big game (now) and getting bigger and there's room for all different types of players. I think part of FFG's task for balancing the games is to prevent one style of play precluding all others. So far I think they have mostly managed that. Though there will always be minor bumps in the road with a game as complex as this.

Here is an interesting post:

http://boardgamegeek.com/article/18179088#18179088

....

That's all I got.

Just sharing something I read.

Your thought?

I like it. I remember reading something about what is involved in a winning strategy in X-wing (the numbers are crap because I forgot them but the point will still stand).

You win based on:

A) 40% ability to fly, tactics

B) 30% quality of your list-building

C) 10% asteroid placement

D) 20% initial starting position and moves

And yes the initial moves were so important they warranted their own category, although most people ignore them. So your type 2 player will ignore B and C (because the asteroids need to be random, you can't control Nature). I'm also going to assume he's going to fail at D because he doesn't care/know about the two lists' strengths and weaknesses. In my country we call this "chopping the branch you're standing on", that's of course if it's important that you win. It may not be, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Is this a failure from FFG? I don't think so. Do we want this game to be even on luck-to-strategy balance? I don't think so.

But what if the the number are changing.

A) 60% List Building

B) 20% tactics

C) 20% Asteroid and starting position

I know this is exaggerated but is that the way the game is going. And if so then we should also recognize that list building is becoming harder with each wave.

P.S. above. With a game as complicated as this. Wasn't one of it's features that the game was simple? Not just to play but to set up too? Diversity brings it's own complications.

I also agree with the above that missions, epic, etc... can keep the game fun.

@OP: I'm sorry to hear that you're not enjoying the game, but I'm not sure why you're here. It doesn't sound as if you're interested in reconsidering your position or even in waiting a few weeks to see what happens to the game when we drop Scum and Villainy in the middle of it, so... why are you here instead of on eBay writing up an ad for your collection?

Thanks for the condolences, I appreciate the sentiment. I'm partly venting, partly requesting agreement to show myself I'm not wrong and partly looking for help or signs of hope for the future.

I am not resistant to changing my mind, but this is not just my opinion based on nothing. Many many others share it, and I've seen it played out over hundreds of games. I'm not being boorish and inflexible because someone on here posts that they beat a phantom or a fat dash one particular time and so therefore I'm wrong.

Mainly I'm here because it sucks, I used to love this game and now it's just not interesting. To me anyway.

But. I'll hold off for scum and villainy, however I see a worrying trend in this game as of wave four. Too much drastic change, too much departure from the icons of the original trilogy, too-rigidly defined rock paper scissors archetypes.

Maybe I'll just sell everything after wave 3

I didn't mean to suggest that you were simply being boorish and inflexible, and I'm sorry if I gave that impression. And I'm happy to hear that you're open to at least listening to counter-arguments.

And here's the biggest gun I have: I'm absolutely certain that the current domination of the metagame by Large turrets and Phantoms is a temporary phenomenon. FFG is limited both in the number of tools they have and in the lead time they need to address emergent problems, but as someone upthread mentioned, Alex and Frank have admitted that they were surprised by the degree to which concern about facing Phantoms paralyzed the metagame, and that probably means they're working on it. In addition, results from early Store Championships seem to indicate that the late Wave 5 tournament game is becoming more diverse than the late Wave 4/early Wave 5 game--personally, I think a critical mass people have finally gotten bored with fat turrets and are starting to look elsewhere.

But more importantly, Wave 6 and the Raider are on the horizon and they're going to throw things into disarray. Fel + Autothrusters and Vader + Advanced Targeting Computer are serious threats to both Phantoms and to Large turrets, and in fact I think Maarek + Advanced Targeting Computer is going to be a fearsome sight to any Large ship (except Chewie, who's the honey badger of critical hit effects). When you place those in line with novelty effects (people like to play with the sexy new stuff) and with the fact that the metagame is starting to evolve away from its frustratingly static Wave 4 state anyway, I think there's a lot of hope to be had for the state of the game six months from now.

Maybe OP just doesn't find the game fun anymore, an opinion he's more than welcome to have without being accused of being a rank 1 amateur. "Git gud" is hardly a reasonable argument in favor of the current state of the game.

Agreed. "Git gud, nub" is just as out of place here as it is on video game forums (where it's an obnoxiously common response to literally any concern about game balance.)

So, if you don't like the current meta, don't fly the current meta. Nevertheless, learn the current meta, and figure out what its Achilles heels are. If you're good at this, then you can punish people for playing the meta.

This, however, is a totally reasonable response. The right way to understand and handle the metagame is to figure out what you're likely to face and then decide how you're going to beat it, not to treat last wave's winning lists as a menu from which you select your own list. The former leads to a damped system, like a swinging pendulum; the latter leads to a system with positive feedback, like a squealing microphone.

Here's a question I think everyone should consider: is there a tangible line we can trace that separates those competent enough to compete against the dominant lists from those who aren't, and if so, where do we place that line relative to the amount of fun we should be having?

I think making sure that line doesn't exist should be a design goal for X-wing. Magic has as an explicit design goal--or, at least, it used to--of including a spectrum of power levels among cards, so that separating good cards from bad becomes a critical player skill. I don't like that idea, and I don't think it should be part of X-wing; there will always be good lists and bad lists, because there will always be ways to leverage particular effects in more or less powerful ways, but simply including a particular set of game elements in your list shouldn't make your list more powerful.

If it does, or even if it's commonly perceived that it does, you create a barrier to entry for new players. And I think a huge part of the reason this game has been so successful is that it is so accessible; if you lose the accessibility, you cap your player base.

...

But what if the the number are changing.

A) 60% List Building

B) 20% tactics

C) 20% Asteroid and starting position

I know this is exaggerated but is that the way the game is going. And if so then we should also recognize that list building is becoming harder with each wave.

I think all categories are getting more and more difficult.

What do you do? Should you quit? I say no. Just change how you play. Try some Epic games. Do some scenarios. There are a lot of great scenarios out there now. Have you tried any? Do things like games with only generics. You can even go to play regular games at the game store, but tell people that you refuse to play a list that has a large, turreted ship or a Phantom. Just say you want to play something different. You might find more people wanting to play like that besides just your friend.

There are 3-4 of us who play every week at my game store. We play what we want to play. We never fly a Fat Han or even a YT-1300. My friend does like Phantoms, but I've learned some tricks to beat them. I could easily ask him not to fly one if I didn't want to face it, too. We do 3 way fights. We do 4 way fights. We do epic fights with all generics. We do scenarios and campaigns. It's a lot of fun! We do crazy stuff and just try different ideas. It's a lot less pressure and a way to have fun with the game again.

Amen.

You have to do crazy stuff. Rock the boat, change things up. Don't let the constant torrent of carping and naysaying (what do you 'spect. It's the internetz) to get you down.

My favourite crazy list so far has been 7 rookie Xs in 150 pts. There is something great in seeing that many of my favourite Star Wars ship ever (I have been asking for an X-Wing fighter for Christmas since I was like, 6 years old) flying around. I love the X -Wing in this game (yeah it needs a bit of a pick-me-up, but still...). I'm looking foward to flying 6 Warthog Y's, just cause I can.

I'll say that sometimes it's not just finding ways to beat Fat Hans, Phantoms, Super Dashes, and Decimators. It's not that they are OP. Sometimes it's just getting sick of playing them. I mean, how many times can you play nearly the same list and not get bored?

I mean, how many times can you play nearly the same list and not get bored?

2, maybe 3 times in a row. Unless the list has at least 2 X-Wings in it, then almost never. :

I'll say that sometimes it's not just finding ways to beat Fat Hans, Phantoms, Super Dashes, and Decimators. It's not that they are OP. Sometimes it's just getting sick of playing them. I mean, how many times can you play nearly the same list and not get bored?

That's where I stand.

It's not that Dash, Han, Whisper or any other ship is overpowered, it,s seeing them over and over and over and over and over... again... that gets boring. From the last 10 matchs or so that I played, only two of those were against a build without turrets. It does get repetitive and not as fun as it used to be the first time I played against them. You try to concentrate fire on them while not bothering about dodging their arc while they try to dodge your arc while not bothering about having a shot on you. This kind of match-up can be fun from time to time but lately, it's pretty much everytime.

Crossing my fingers for wave 6 shaking things up.

As for the named Phantom, I think it is a weird inclusion into the game. I won't get it out in casual play because not all my friends are as invested in the game as I am so unless they have a build against it, it will single-handedly beat them=Not fun for either of us. In tournament, you will get one or two match where your opponent came with a hard counter (usually a turrets since they're everywhere these days) for it so you're pretty much screwed from the start=Not fun. Verdict: it's in perfect symbiosis with the dust on my shelf.

I mean, how many times can you play nearly the same list and not get bored?

OK...I meant AGAINST the same list. I know some people are hung up on their lists.