After having played several tournaments, I feel the initiative rule is the only one that I really dislike. A mere 1-2 points (or even worse, a dice roll) decide who has the initiative, something that can have an enormous impact in the game.

To me, it's like calling heads or tails to see who will play with a team of 10 instead of 11 players in a football game... Deciding field side (or asteroid placement) on a coin toss feels OK; deciding who'll move first seems poor design. Maybe it was not so important when the Core box came out, but now it is.

Now, why not just use alternative initiative? Basically an initiative token that would switch sides at the end of every turn. Has anyone tried such a thing?

Has anyone tried such a thing?

They do that in IA, but not in X-Wing and not in Armada as far as I know.

You can't simply change it at this point either. If it would've been better or not, is debatable, but as it stands now, rules, tactics, lists, ect... are all built around the idea of one person having initiative the whole game.

It's not like you have no control over it either, you can always bid for init if you feel that having it or not having it provides too much of an advantage to one player.

It'd be a pain in X-wing I think, but Imperial Assault uses it.

Could work, but it'd take some getting used to.

I like the idea, but X-Wing is already too well established to change rules at the core. I guess for casual house games, it is cool.

But basically what VanorDM said, if you are playing a list where initiative matters, then you need to bid for it. My buddy took a 96 point bid for initiative to Worlds this past year because he NEEDED the choice to have it or give it to the opponent.

For a lot of matchups, it does not matter for the game except to choose who gets the 'Big One'. If you have arc dodgers, it will matter most. Each point in the game is specifically calculated to where it affects your whole squad and the way you build. So when you bid for initiative, you are hindering your squad in most cases for that advantage, or the chance at that advantage. If it is really important to you, put in that bid and keep that in mind when building squads. Also remember that same PS ships get to shoot back even if they are attacked first and destroyed.

Imperial Assault also doesn't have pilot skills to determine who acts when. It's just Rebel figure/Imperial group/Rebel figure/Imperial group etc, etc. There's zero chance of anyone ever acting simultaneous like you would if two PS 5 pilots were up.

One thing that bugs me:

In case of a tie, initiative serves as a tie breaker. (That's fine)

Sometimes you want to shoot first, and sometimes you want to move last. "Having initiative" only describes one of these conditions, even if you sacrifice points in your list to get there.

My sense is that "having initiative" should describe the choice, rather than which choice you make.

eh. I like it just the way it is. It gives some meaningful choice during list building and sometimes at the start of the game (when both sides have pilots of equal skill). Now at least there is a reason to NOT have 100 point lists. Putting the power to make meaningful choice whether to bid/not bid on initiative is superior and I think it was a smart game design decision.

The reason initiative (or lack thereof more specifically) feels a bit powerful is because of the simultaneous fire rule. Shooting first has no real benefit in this game as the same PS will still get a shot and a lower PS wouldn't have gotten a shot anyway. Therefore the only real benefit to having initiative is first asteroid placement, which I think we can all agree is nowhere near comparable to moving second.

But, eliminating the simultaneous fire rule puts those same arc dodgers (that rely on moving last) at a serious risk of not getting a shot off at all. Can you imagine your joy at having your 35 point Fel one shotted before he fires?

So there's the choices. I think FFG chose well.

D&D Attack Wing does this, but D&D Attack Wing also keeps everyone alive until the end of the turn.

Cogollo: There are many games in which I purposefully give Initiative to my opponent.

See, it only comes up in the following times:

1. Multiple player's events triggering simultaneously
2. The above, concerning the Maneuvering, Placing, or Attacking of ships with identical pilot skill
3. Tie-breaking in elimination brackets
4. Setting the Asteroid Field

Choosing the order in which effects are determined is an advantage for the player with Inititiative

Moving first can be beneficial or detrimental either way.

Placing first is a disadvantage to the player with initiative

Attacking first only matters when you can effect their return volley, due to the simultaneous fire rule.

Getting the win in case of a tie is an advantage for the player with initiative

Setting the Asteroid Field is the only one of the above that effects every game, and the two sides are balanced.

Having the 1, 3, and 5 asteroids determines where the asteroid field will be.

Having the 2, 4, and 6 asteroids determines what shape the asteroid field will take.

I often prefer the latter, as I'm pretty good at determining where the fight will actually happen.

Why are we talking like initiative is universally beneficial?

One thing that bugs me:

In case of a tie, initiative serves as a tie breaker. (That's fine)

Well, in the latest tourney rules, if you tie you tie in the rankings.

Why are we talking like initiative is universally beneficial?

To the uninformed, it looks like it.

Makes it easier to press the advantage of not having initiative on a metagame level

I agree that unless you're trying to block your opponent's movements / prevent your own from being blocked, or make use of actions that trigger off of the attack (Advanced Cloaking Device, Turr Phenir, etc), then initiative is bad to have.

But you do have to keep in mind that a lot of critical hits are applied immediately. So if the player with initiative applies a Blinded Pilot, Injured Pilot, Munitions Failure, Damaged Sensor Array, Thrust Control Fire, or Weapon Malfunction critical, that will affect the quality of that return fire shot or possibly prevent effects that trigger based off of the attack.