Durability obviously allows you to maximize your firepower

If they roll 3 hits and a crit and it's a direct hit and you blank out or don't have your focus then your x wing dies

I'm willing to take those odds. B-Wings are tougher, absolutely. But don't pretend they are tanks and X's die if you sneeze.

Durability is the name of the game, it comes in so many different forms.

No, it's really not. You don't win by being durable, you win by doing more damage than the opponent. Durability only has value in so far as it allows you to maximize your own offensive firepower. The named X-Wing pilots can still do this. They don't need to live to the end of the match, they just need to earn their points back. They can't always do this, I agree. But we need to be clear about how we value ships. It is not for longevity, but for efficiency.

On paper these 2 ship builds are usually only throwing between 6-7 red dice a turn. That's considerably weaker attack then most lists. How do they win??? Because they can outlast the opponents ship because of durability. Ships like the falcon can take the evade action (x wings can't), have the c3p0 or r2d2 crew (also x wings can't), have incredibly high hit points(not x wings), arc dodge consistently (not x wings,) or consistsntly hide between high numbers of green dice (also not x wings).

If you don't have any of that kind of staying power you're not going to get much of a return on your investment. That investment at a minimum costs 21 points and 22 points makes you way better. Now if you're investment is between 12-18 points you really don't feel as bad because they were low point ships and it doesn't hurt as much losing them.

Agreed, but the X can also regenerate hull and shields. Though these are unique (R5-P9 etc), coupled with a defensive pilot, Luke being the best example, an X Wing can be annoying to kill and demand far more attention than they would deserve. Though maybe less so than the points you spent to achieve this would suggest. You are also only going to to be able to do this to maybe one or two Xs. I think Biggs has skewed perception slightly of the X Wing's durability as he has been a common sight in many Builds, though maybe not so much now.

As you pointed out the X can neither evade or arc dodge, nor even buff itself to a strong degree through natural actions, crew or upgrades. As I mentioned earlier when larger ships can evade and the X Wing, a dedicated fighter killer, cannot it further weakens the X's attractiveness.

There is some comparison to the situation with the TIE advance in that though the advance had good survivability (combination of HP, BR and Evade) it's offense was poor and that was what FFG addressed. The X on the other hand needs a fix to its defensive capability in a similar way. It's guns are good, but it struggles to use them the best of its capability due to its less impressive survivability and lack of manouever options (no Evade or BR). The Adv and X always kind of mirrored each other and it would be nice to see the X getting similar attention. I don't see why they couldn't have the same, if not similar action bar, as they fill a similar niche in terms of capability. Advanced, heavy fighters with ordnance capability.

(edited) Oops: Meant to say skewed

@red I think people just want it to be worth the points. Wes, jek, and Hobbie have terrible survivability. If the opponent is smart they will focus these guys down and kill them by the 2nd round of combat and scoring about 1-3 of your total points.

I don't understand isn't this part of the game. Any ship should die under focused fire and smart opponents chosing the best target. Are you saying you want X-Wings with withstand focused fire from all of the opponent's ships and still come out on top? How is that not over-powered?

The x wing can be 1-shotted and the b-wing can't

And most of the TIEs can die from one shot even at range 3 plus most TIEs don't have shields so a single hit could cripple a TIE.

IMO, there are three important things to understand in this discussion:

(1) The X-wing's durability is what's off, not its action bar or upgrade bar. The B-wing survives, on average, one additional attack--meaning the B-wing can still attack when an X-wing would be dead. That's a small advantage, but not a trivial one. (The action bar and upgrade bar are also showing their age a little bit and could do with a bit of a touch-up, but they don't need fixing.)

(2) The X-wing's durability is what's off, not the B-wing's. This is true whether you look at MajorJuggler's work or simply consider the fact that FFG can make the X-wing better but can't make the B-wing worse.

(3) The gap between where the X-wing is and where it should be is small--about 1.5 points (meaning more than one point, but less than two). If you're flying one or two X-wings in conjunction with other ships, and particularly if you're flying the best named pilots, you won't see that 1-2 point difference in every game. I think that's where a lot of the differences in opinion are coming from: the X-wing can be flown successfully, and has been.

It is very hard to balance a game with so many variables. Some ships will be not as good as others, that is not a problem. But did it have to be the X-Wing? This is game is not called B-Wing, if I remember correctly.

Well you see, people ran out of ships to whine about because FFG is a good father to its creations, and balances them properly

But seriously, people are acting like the X-wing is a horribly overcosted crap stats ship, when it is really a very balanced deadly killer. It could use some fresh content sure, but I don't think it is the unplayable wreck that people make it out to be.

If they roll 3 hits and a crit and it's a direct hit and you blank out or don't have your focus then your x wing dies

I'm willing to take those odds. B-Wings are tougher, absolutely. But don't pretend they are tanks and X's die if you sneeze.

Durability is the name of the game, it comes in so many different forms.

No, it's really not. You don't win by being durable, you win by doing more damage than the opponent. Durability only has value in so far as it allows you to maximize your own offensive firepower. The named X-Wing pilots can still do this. They don't need to live to the end of the match, they just need to earn their points back. They can't always do this, I agree. But we need to be clear about how we value ships. It is not for longevity, but for efficiency.

This reminds me of Age of Empires 3, most civilizations get the Hussar as a light cav, but the Prussians get the Uhllan. The Uhlan is a glass cannon sacrificing the rounded health and attack of the hussar for flat out damage. They are also cheaper and faster. In the end, the hussar is probably the better unit, but the uhlan is still extremely cost effective, and still gets the job done.

I wonder if XXXXX is a very powerful squad to fly. You could set the limit for standard points matches to 105. This would benefit the X-Wing more than the B-Wing, while not imbalancing the game (if it does, then X-Wing miniatures is in a very sorry state!)

Agreed, but the X can also regenerate hull and shields. Though these are unique (R5-P9 etc), coupled with a defensive pilot, Luke being the best example, an X Wing can be annoying to kill and demand far more attention than they would deserve. Though maybe less so than the points you spent to achieve this would suggest.

Your last sentence is ultimately the point. If the X-wing is point-for-point not as durable as it should be, that's a problem. When you can spend a point more for a more durable B-Wing or a couple more points for 2Zs, there's no real reason to take the ship except in very specific roles. It does fill a couple of those roles very well, but as the iconic star wars ship and the ship in the game's title, I think most people would like to see it as the backbone of rebel lists and not as a specialist role.

As for regeneration, both methods of regeneration come at a points cost and opportunity cost. For R5-P9, the X-wing might need to choose to sacrifice offense or choose to spend the focus on defense. R2-D2 requires a green move which can often put the ship in a spot that it doesn't want to be and I see players make the mistake where they end up putting the ship in position where they'll end up worse the turn after rather than just skipping the green and getting to safety. I think they're both good droids, but the fact that they don't see much play either should speak for itself.

IMO, there are three important things to understand in this discussion:

(1) The X-wing's durability is what's off, not its action bar or upgrade bar. The B-wing survives, on average, one additional attack--meaning the B-wing can still attack when an X-wing would be dead. That's a small advantage, but not a trivial one. (The action bar and upgrade bar are also showing their age a little bit and could do with a bit of a touch-up, but they don't need fixing.)

(2) The X-wing's durability is what's off, not the B-wing's. This is true whether you look at MajorJuggler's work or simply consider the fact that FFG can make the X-wing better but can't make the B-wing worse.

(3) The gap between where the X-wing is and where it should be is small--about 1.5 points (meaning more than one point, but less than two). If you're flying one or two X-wings in conjunction with other ships, and particularly if you're flying the best named pilots, you won't see that 1-2 point difference in every game. I think that's where a lot of the differences in opinion are coming from: the X-wing can be flown successfully, and has been.

Vorpal I agree with everything you said there, except I think that the discussion of 'durability' is masking another question. What is the X Wing supposed to be in the game?

The B loses 1 green dice to gain 3 HP plus BR over the X. The design of the B in game is IMO thematic: its a tough, slow heavy hitter with some BR tricks due to wonky design. If we simply make the X stand up to one more attack we arent differentiating the two fighters. Simply adding HP to the X wont make it any more attractive over the B which sits in the same price bracket and offers more HP and BR. To add the same amount of HP as the B is outside the cost scope of what the X wing needs.

So what SHOULD the X Wing be?

To go back to the thematic argument for a second; the B survives due to HP, its hard to kill, just not particularly manouverable. Even if the B survives repeated attacks, it is by virtue of its HP. The X to be thematic of a front line superiority fighter needs to gain survivability through other means.

If we take your argument that the X needs 1-2 points of improvement then we have to consider what we can fit in that space to improve the X Wing's survivability.

HP would seem to give the X an undeserving advantage as a Hull Upgrade is 3 pts, which would appear to be outside the scope of your 1-2 point bracket. I think an extra Green dice could fit in the 1-2 point bracket (Mathwing might say otherwise), but I dont think it is thematic of the X Wing design.

So what else do we have?

Could you add 1 red dice for the 1-2 point upgrade? I think 4 red dice would give the X a unique role in the game and I think its thematic of the design and has been mentioned before. It would improve survivability by making the X more deadly to its attackers. However I suspect that it is worth more than 1-2 points. Mathwing would probably settle that.

You could also add actions: Is adding the evade action worth 1-2 points? I think its thematic of the X as a superiority fighter. It wouldnt be the only ship in the game with less than 3 green dice and evade. Or you could add BR, which has also been suggested. I'm still not sure this is totally thematic, but I could go with it.

Or you can add an X-Wing only title, astromech etc which does something worth 1-2 points. Maybe something similar to autothrusters, improving the survivability because of some special ability. Not so thematic and probably more situational and hard to balance. But this is what FFG designers are paid for.

As has been rightly pointed out, the X is still used and has some excellent pilots, its certainly not a horrible choice, but nor is it a particularly stand out ship with a role of its own (i.e. front line superiority fighter). I think someone else described the X WIng as having a crisis of identity which has been caused by everything that has happened since wave 1. Thats probably the most accurate description I have heard.

Agreed, but the X can also regenerate hull and shields. Though these are unique (R5-P9 etc), coupled with a defensive pilot, Luke being the best example, an X Wing can be annoying to kill and demand far more attention than they would deserve. Though maybe less so than the points you spent to achieve this would suggest.

Your last sentence is ultimately the point. If the X-wing is point-for-point not as durable as it should be, that's a problem. When you can spend a point more for a more durable B-Wing or a couple more points for 2Zs, there's no real reason to take the ship except in very specific roles. It does fill a couple of those roles very well, but as the iconic star wars ship and the ship in the game's title, I think most people would like to see it as the backbone of rebel lists and not as a specialist role.

As for regeneration, both methods of regeneration come at a points cost and opportunity cost. For R5-P9, the X-wing might need to choose to sacrifice offense or choose to spend the focus on defense. R2-D2 requires a green move which can often put the ship in a spot that it doesn't want to be and I see players make the mistake where they end up putting the ship in position where they'll end up worse the turn after rather than just skipping the green and getting to safety. I think they're both good droids, but the fact that they don't see much play either should speak for itself.

Alex: Absolutely agree. Those options come with an drawbacks, but they do give the X a flexibility which is more than just its raw stats, which was what I was trying to show. However opportunity cost and pricing of upgrades will affect that and using those to improve the X Wing is not the best answer as you said.

I am not sure that simply making the X more 'durable' is the answer. I absolutely agree that it doesnt perform to its cost at the moment. For the same price the B is much more durable. But maybe for its cost the X needs to be something else, not simply durable. It shouldnt be as durable as the B either by design or by role IMO. It should offer something equally useful for the cost however and as you say it doesnt do that at the moment, which you rightly pointed out is a shame given what the X Wing represents.

Durability is an issue on the X-Wing but not as much as needing some kind of post movement relocation. Durability means nothing if you can't even fire at your opponent. A cheap astromech would fix that right up - and solve problems the Rebel Y-Wing and E-Wing have. We've seen how good droids can be with R3-A2 and the scum astromechs - there's no excuse why Rebels have to suffer with 95% unplayable astromechs.

IMO, there are three important things to understand in this discussion:

(1) The X-wing's durability is what's off, not its action bar or upgrade bar. The B-wing survives, on average, one additional attack--meaning the B-wing can still attack when an X-wing would be dead. That's a small advantage, but not a trivial one. (The action bar and upgrade bar are also showing their age a little bit and could do with a bit of a touch-up, but they don't need fixing.)

(2) The X-wing's durability is what's off, not the B-wing's. This is true whether you look at MajorJuggler's work or simply consider the fact that FFG can make the X-wing better but can't make the B-wing worse.

(3) The gap between where the X-wing is and where it should be is small--about 1.5 points (meaning more than one point, but less than two). If you're flying one or two X-wings in conjunction with other ships, and particularly if you're flying the best named pilots, you won't see that 1-2 point difference in every game. I think that's where a lot of the differences in opinion are coming from: the X-wing can be flown successfully, and has been.

Concerning point 1 and 2, I don't think durability is really the problem here. The B-Wing is and should be more durable than a X-Wing. I also don't want FFG to start nerfing ships, imagine what it would do and all those ''Nerf the Phantom!'' ''Nerf Fat Han!'' threads... the forum is not ready for a negativity of this magnitude...

What the X-Wing lack is a purpose. Some named pilot and some astromech bring it, but I think that's the reason the generic B-Wing is taken over the generic X-Wing: they serve the same purpose but the Blue is more durable. If you bring more droids in line with what R3-A2 do, I believe you will start to see more X-Wing, because the astromech slot is what set the X-Wing appart from the B-Wing.

-You want more durability, make an astromech that let you reroll one defense die, or one that give you the evade action.

-You want your X-Wing to be a missile carrier, make an astromech that doesn't make you spend your TL when you shoot a Torpedo.

-You want to be able to arc dodge a little, make one that give you Barrel Roll.

-Offensive power? A droid that allow you turn a blank into a hit.

There is a lot of opportunities right there. Just cost them accordingly, and give a little discount (1-2 points) to the X-Wing for taking an astromech.

If all you do is raise the durability, there still won't be a reason enough to take an X-Wing over a B-Wing except for flavor. Give it one more hull and it come somewhat on par with the B-Wing durability, only it's still a little bit more reliant on dice than the B, so I believe people would still take the B over the X.

Back to my overexageration from yesterday:

-Want the X-Wing to be as resiliant as a B-Wing. Check. One more hit point makes it in line with the B-Wing.

The transport was a step in the right direction and gave some interesting options but still doesn't help that the x wing is over costed by 2-3 points. Now if there was a title like tie advanced x1 which discounted modification slots by 3 points which basically means free hull, stealth, or 1 point shield and engine upgrades then now you are able to customize your x wings and give them more durability for free or 1 point and they start becoming worth there points!

-Want the X-Wing to be as maneuvrable as a Tie Interceptor. Check. A Barrel Roll in the action bar combined with the R2 astromech and Engine Upgrade would make the X-Wing as good as the Interceptor, if not better, to arc dodge.

Overall its stats and dial and upgrades are a decent reflection of what it was intended to be. Its actions, on the other hand, I think really let it down. TL and Focus by themselves dont reflect a hard hitting, tough but agile brawler which was designed to mix it up in a dogfight. Evade and/or Barrel Roll would give the X a measure of survivability by avoiding or outmanouevering damage/attacks.

-Want the X-Wing to hit as hard as a Phantom. Check.

Could you add 1 red dice for the 1-2 point upgrade? I think 4 red dice would give the X a unique role in the game and I think its thematic of the design and has been mentioned before. It would improve survivability by making the X more deadly to its attackers. However I suspect that it is worth more than 1-2 points. Mathwing would probably settle that.

And I thought I was overexagerating things.

Let's look at the roles in the game.

Swarm/filler. The x is too expensive to be a swarmy or filler ship. An argument could me made to run xxxxz but I feel like bbbbz does it better.

Arc dodger/knife fighter. This has always been the rebels weakness since they lack a ship with a native boost and barrel roll. For 2 points you give it expert handling and 4 points for boost. It just makes it more expensive. Honestly I don't think this should be it's role in the game as this is A wing and E wing territory and even B's do this better.

Turret ships. X wings with turrets lol

Control. Cheap ships that tell expensive ones where they get to go. Now this is something the x wing with a stress bot can do well. For 23 points you get a stress machine which is the same price as an ion y wing so I think this is a good value. Also the x wing handles the stress bot better due to its additional greens. I think the y-wing is more attractive now due to double tapping and b-wings can take tactician and or ion cannons.

Support-garven

Tanky/hard to kill ship. See all the other posts.

Anchor/closer This where the x wing should be really well since it has so many great pilot abilities. You should be able to really build around a great x wing that has staying power to make it the late game. Look at the best closers like whisper, han, fel, dash, corran. They can usually survive to the late game. ***more on this in a sec.

Ordnance/bomber. Nah

Phantom&Fel hunter. This right here is where I have found the best use of an x wing. Put Luke up to ps 10. With an engine and stress bot. Luke moves last, shoots first, double stresses fel, stops whisper from recloaking. Luke is the most durable x wing so he can last and usually let's you bring down there big guys. This is where I've found the best use for an x wing and at 35 points I don't mind it too much. Ten numb, and corran can do this job but not as well or as cheap as luke. Jake and tycho with prockets can as well for a few points less but can't stress. This is imo the only place the x wing clearly shines.

***Anchors*** OK going back to anchors and closers think of your dashes,corrans,hans,fels,jax's,vaders,whispers,echo's. How easy it for generics to kill those ships? Not very!! Why? Because when fel moves somewhere unless you are moving afterwards and he wasn't blocked (x wings shouldn't be by our main blockers) then he is going to boost/barrel roll to safety and still have an action plus many green dice and your screwed if he has auto thrusters at range 3. Whisper sees where you move and then can decloak reactionary. Han can boost extremely far and again take a bunch of shots. So on and so on. An x wing just moves and then doesn't do anything. Generics can kill x wings very easy. Now 4 points for a boost is imo still a lot of points unless it's luke because he has survivability.

Again I think x wings should be high tier rebel closers. Too give them a chance they need something to help them get to end game. Again I think a discounted mod slot by 3 points to give them a 1 point engine upgrade would be a fair fix. Now wedge can boost at 30 points. At 31 points he's boosting at ps 11.

Ok after reading this thread and some of the comments and stuff. I think a new thread should be started on where B-wings need at least 1 more green dice since it too dies way to easy to focus fire.

Also the Decimater since you have to have a crew slot hide behind a rock to simply add a green dice.

Ok after reading this thread and some of the comments and stuff. I think a new thread should be started on where B-wings need at least 1 more green dice since it too dies way to easy to focus fire.

Where is anyone asking for that???

No where but with a little time and some of the comments posted here it has a decent chance of happening.

No where but with a little time and some of the comments posted here it has a decent chance of happening.

Definitely feel free to start the thread, that would be a better place for b wing and decimator discussions.

i do agree but was kind of being snarky this morning. But any ways back to the Op topic here, Maybe just maybe the X-wing might need something but lets not forget what the guy who won worlds the last 2 years had in his lists. In 2013 it was what Biggs and a rookie and last year was 2 talas? with Han. Which had a similar dial and slightly worse stat line. I think it is equal part ship and pilot as to how good or bad a ship is.

i do agree but was kind of being snarky this morning. But any ways back to the Op topic here, Maybe just maybe the X-wing might need something but lets not forget what the guy who won worlds the last 2 years had in his lists. In 2013 it was what Biggs and a rookie and last year was 2 talas? with Han. Which had a similar dial and slightly worse stat line. I think it is equal part ship and pilot as to how good or bad a ship is.

Yeah no doubt good players make a difference. Let's be honest though Han was the heavy lifter in his list not the talas. Talas are 13 points and have a very similar Stat line and dial like you said but x wings cost 21.

No, it's really not. You don't win by being durable, you win by doing more damage than the opponent. Durability only has value in so far as it allows you to maximize your own offensive firepower. The named X-Wing pilots can still do this. They don't need to live to the end of the match, they just need to earn their points back. They can't always do this, I agree. But we need to be clear about how we value ships. It is not for longevity, but for efficiency.

If durability was the only consideration, the TIE Advanced and Lambda would be the best ships in the game. Obviously there are other things going on.

The problem is that the B-wing has the same Attack value as the X-wing (as well as access to an inexpensive upgrade that substantially improves their action efficiency on offense), and moderately better durability. A ship with no appreciable downside on offense and better defense for the same price is just better.

...I think that the discussion of 'durability' is masking another question. What is the X Wing supposed to be in the game?

It's a good question, although obviously I think the point about durability is important too. Ultimately I think the X-wing should be a multi-role fighter in a way the B-wing isn't: whatever you're doing with the B-wing, you probably want to maneuver your opponent into a joust and then tear them up. (You can set up for control these days, too, although it's somewhat expensive.) The X-wing should have the flexibility to set up as a jouster or a flanker or a controller or even an arc-dodger, if you want to spend the points.

Its design, though, makes it a jouster--the Headhunter's big brother, which isn't a bad thing to be. But it's a slightly understrength jouster (again, by about 1.5 points), which is a bad thing to be if you also can't do anything else.

What the X-Wing lack is a purpose. Some named pilot and some astromech bring it, but I think that's the reason the generic B-Wing is taken over the generic X-Wing: they serve the same purpose but the Blue is more durable. If you bring more droids in line with what R3-A2 do, I believe you will start to see more X-Wing, because the astromech slot is what set the X-Wing appart from the B-Wing.

I agree. The Interceptor remains attractive because it's brutally efficient on offense, which offsets its astonishing lack of efficiency on defense.

You can "fix" the X-wing by just adding a hit point, and I'd like the option to do that if what my list needs is a jouster. But more generally I want to see a suite of fixes, not just one, so the X-wing maintains that multi-role stance. And I would absolutely like to see that set of fixes come through the astromech slot: thematically it always bothers me to see X-wings flying without astromechs, and mechanically it feels elegant to me.

i do agree but was kind of being snarky this morning. But any ways back to the Op topic here, Maybe just maybe the X-wing might need something but lets not forget what the guy who won worlds the last 2 years had in his lists. In 2013 it was what Biggs and a rookie and last year was 2 talas? with Han. Which had a similar dial and slightly worse stat line. I think it is equal part ship and pilot as to how good or bad a ship is.

The 2013 list was Biggs/Rookie/2x Dagger, and the 2014 list was Han/3x Tala. The former features the most broken pilot in the game as well as two B-wings for heft, and the latter features no X-wings at all.

Back to my overexageration from yesterday:

-Want the X-Wing to be as resiliant as a B-Wing. Check. One more hit point makes it in line with the B-Wing.

The transport was a step in the right direction and gave some interesting options but still doesn't help that the x wing is over costed by 2-3 points. Now if there was a title like tie advanced x1 which discounted modification slots by 3 points which basically means free hull, stealth, or 1 point shield and engine upgrades then now you are able to customize your x wings and give them more durability for free or 1 point and they start becoming worth there points!

-Want the X-Wing to be as maneuvrable as a Tie Interceptor. Check. A Barrel Roll in the action bar combined with the R2 astromech and Engine Upgrade would make the X-Wing as good as the Interceptor, if not better, to arc dodge.

Overall its stats and dial and upgrades are a decent reflection of what it was intended to be. Its actions, on the other hand, I think really let it down. TL and Focus by themselves dont reflect a hard hitting, tough but agile brawler which was designed to mix it up in a dogfight. Evade and/or Barrel Roll would give the X a measure of survivability by avoiding or outmanouevering damage/attacks.

-Want the X-Wing to hit as hard as a Phantom. Check.

Could you add 1 red dice for the 1-2 point upgrade? I think 4 red dice would give the X a unique role in the game and I think its thematic of the design and has been mentioned before. It would improve survivability by making the X more deadly to its attackers. However I suspect that it is worth more than 1-2 points. Mathwing would probably settle that.

And I thought I was overexagerating things.

You are either trolling or deliberately trying to sideline the productive discussion with this post: But OK, lets look at your points.

One more HP wouldnt make the X in line with the B, which has 2 more. You wouldnt get the same HP as the B for the same cost bracket as the X's dial is different enough to be worth more points. The B is still better with 2 more HP and BR and all for pretty much the same price. As you yourself said, extra durability wouldnt make the X any more attractive than the B.

Yes, BR combined with EU and R2 would be similar to the Interceptor, but for lots more points. A basic Rookie X would be 26 points at least with this setup and would still not be as good. No Boost, no hard 1 turns, less flexible dial and no EPT, which a PS 4 Saber Int with PTL can have all for 2 points less or an Avenger interceptor which moves after it and could arc dodge it easily for 6 points less. So the X isnt muscling in onto the Ints territory particularly hard, despite your over exaggeration.

I have already said that I didnt think 4 red dice was the best solution. But it was a suggestion which would give people a reason to take the X over the B which you have identified as part of the problem. It would be more of a glass cannon, durability being part of that. I still dont understand why the Phantom got 4 red dice with 5 guns, when the X and the Interceptor and the Defender, which all have 4 guns only get 3 red dice along with other ships with 3 guns which also get 3 red dice. Maybe the Phantom was a bit of a mistake by FFG. OK I can live with that reasoning and maybe we shouldnt be comparing stuff to the Phantom too much in that case.

And nowhere has any thread actually suggested that the X Wing do all of these things at once, which is a crucial part of this discussion which seems to have passed you by. The X Wing was a good all rounder which managed by excellent design to combine the best of firepower agility and protection into a single package. It could do a lot of different things well, but not as well as the more specialised ships (interceptor, B Wing etc). At the moment it doesnt represent that. Any one of the different improvements which have been suggested would improve the X closer to where it needs to be. Noone is suggesting that all of this be applied together.

Maybe you should stick to constructive discussion, which you had been doing previously.