No, CCGs have bad cards to make you waste money. That entire line from the magic designers is a load of crock.

A tabletop game has no place for useless cards. Better everything be good and better players rise from a vast pool of somewhat situational choices.

Yup random forumite definitely knows better than someone making their living off of years and years of experience designing for the most successful tcg that exists...

Enhanced Scopes + Intel Agent + ACD on any Phantom. If you get within range 2 of an enemy ship you turn into pre-nerf Whisper. Not even Fel can outrun these guys.

It's spectacular on a Phantom, but you need to be an ace pilot in planning your moves.

Want to really screw with your opponent's brain? Have a bunch of ships with Swarm Tactics and chain off of it. You can take over the entire field and action deny every one of your opponents ships all at once.

One of those is combat phase, and the other activation phase, so you can't combo them.

I have considered the following list:

IG-88C (probably) with Enhanced Scopes, Intimidation and Inertial Dampeners

5 x Z

The Aggressor gets in the way and blocks while the Z's take out the gimped target who ran into the Aggressor. Of course you could do mostly the same thing with Advanced Sensors, but it is more expensive, and cuts down the number of Z's to 4.

I also run a fun list with IG-88C, I used Anti-Pursuit Lasers as well but otherwise it is very similar.

May on enhanced scope would be nightmarish, as it gives you a 50/50 mixup, a lot like in a fighting game, is he gonna move first or second. Block sometimes, reposition sometimes, with very high value on pre-nerf phantoms and high p.s. Ships. Probably worth more than 1 point

No, CCGs have bad cards to make you waste money. That entire line from the magic designers is a load of crock.

A tabletop game has no place for useless cards. Better everything be good and better players rise from a vast pool of somewhat situational choices.

Clearly it's a line of crock that the designers of the X-Wing CCG (and yes it is a CCG that uses minis) agree with. Otherwise cards like Intimidation, Countermeasures and Dash Rendar crew wouldn't exist. Somebody who knows those cards are bad gets to feel like a genius when they beat someone that's using them, the new player gets to feel like a genius when they figure out those cards are bad, and the crazy player gets to feel like a genius when they figure out how to make a card everyone else thought was bad into something good. All the people who are actually playing the game get to have feel-good moments because of bad cards.

Games where all the cards are equally good are boring, because #1 everything has to be weak to prevent the game from becoming broken by every card being powerful and #2 there's no feeling of accomplishment for newer players discovering which cards are good or bad, because they can just pick random cards and have a deck/list that's just as good as anyone else's, and #3 it becomes easy for a card that's slightly too powerful to take over the game, because all the other cards are too weak to beat it.

I've played asymmetric games with flat power levels and they're boring.

phantoms for the new decloak rules

No, CCGs have bad cards to make you waste money. That entire line from the magic designers is a load of crock.

A tabletop game has no place for useless cards. Better everything be good and better players rise from a vast pool of somewhat situational choices.

Yup random forumite definitely knows better than someone making their living off of years and years of experience designing for the most successful tcg that exists...

Yeah, did you know that a company's interests aren't your own? Like that say, a CCG that relies on you buying hundreds of dollars of cards for 4 copies of exact cards need to fill their packs with garbage to make that commercially viable?

It's almost as if people can be sheep! FFG should randomize what ships come in their packs, so that you have a chance at getting a Rare C3PO instead of that 9th Common Enhanced Scopes or your 7th Common Fel's Wrath!

No, CCGs have bad cards to make you waste money. That entire line from the magic designers is a load of crock.

A tabletop game has no place for useless cards. Better everything be good and better players rise from a vast pool of somewhat situational choices.

Clearly it's a line of crock that the designers of the X-Wing CCG (and yes it is a CCG that uses minis) agree with. Otherwise cards like Intimidation, Countermeasures and Dash Rendar crew wouldn't exist. Somebody who knows those cards are bad gets to feel like a genius when they beat someone that's using them, the new player gets to feel like a genius when they figure out those cards are bad, and the crazy player gets to feel like a genius when they figure out how to make a card everyone else thought was bad into something good. All the people who are actually playing the game get to have feel-good moments because of bad cards.

Games where all the cards are equally good are boring, because #1 everything has to be weak to prevent the game from becoming broken by every card being powerful and #2 there's no feeling of accomplishment for newer players discovering which cards are good or bad, because they can just pick random cards and have a deck/list that's just as good as anyone else's, and #3 it becomes easy for a card that's slightly too powerful to take over the game, because all the other cards are too weak to beat it.

I've played asymmetric games with flat power levels and they're boring.

You apparently don't know what a CCG even is, considering that X-Wing is not a card game, nor is it collectable in the context of 'blind pack' like all CCG models are. Therefore, it is zero percent CCG.

There's also a dramatic difference between 'objectively bad card' and 'situational card'. For example, Fel's Wrath is an Objectively Bad Card. Intimidation is a situational card.

There's no such thing as 'equally good', and strawmanning it that way is pointless. But there's a world of difference between 'I could situationally use this! (ie, Outmaneuver, Flechette Torpedoes) even if they're not amazing, and 'This card is rubbish and should never be used'. If Enhanced Scopes for example was slightly better, it would not suddenly turn the game boring. It'd make it more diverse, as you encounter someone who has a real choice on why they're using optional Enhanced Scopes instead of other choices.

May on enhanced scope would be nightmarish, as it gives you a 50/50 mixup, a lot like in a fighting game, is he gonna move first or second. Block sometimes, reposition sometimes, with very high value on pre-nerf phantoms and high p.s. Ships. Probably worth more than 1 point

Agreed. Enhanced Scopes having a "may" in it makes the card more powerful than a 1 point card should be.

I think Enhanced Scopes suffers in meta filled with high PS and would be more useful if lists with lower PS ships become dominant. Being able block with an Aggressor instead of being susceptible to blocking is could easily be worth a point and the opportunity cost of the sensor slot. Putting a Shuttle with Mara Jade right where the enemy wants to be this round can deny actions this round and prevent your opponent from K-Turning the next. When more than half the matches you play have high PS ships you kind of get the benefit of Enhanced Scopes for free and it's not worth the opportunity cost to take them for the one match you have against low PS ships.

No, CCGs have bad cards to make you waste money. That entire line from the magic designers is a load of crock.

A tabletop game has no place for useless cards. Better everything be good and better players rise from a vast pool of somewhat situational choices.

Yup random forumite definitely knows better than someone making their living off of years and years of experience designing for the most successful tcg that exists...

Yeah, did you know that a company's interests aren't your own? Like that say, a CCG that relies on you buying hundreds of dollars of cards for 4 copies of exact cards need to fill their packs with garbage to make that commercially viable?

It's almost as if people can be sheep! FFG should randomize what ships come in their packs, so that you have a chance at getting a Rare C3PO instead of that 9th Common Enhanced Scopes or your 7th Common Fel's Wrath!

I love that you use the wonderful 'companies wanting to make money is bull, wake up sheeple' line in this response then the classic 'that's a straw man argument' line in your next response, it's like they made a textbook on how to be an argumentative internet dweller and those are the first two pages...

I don't really think either business model is relevant to the discussion here because a) it's true that some cards have to be worse than others to make a gradient power curve and b) enhanced scopes is by no means objectively bad, there have been several reasonable uses with legitimate meta lists given as ways to use it.

No, CCGs have bad cards to make you waste money. That entire line from the magic designers is a load of crock.

A tabletop game has no place for useless cards. Better everything be good and better players rise from a vast pool of somewhat situational choices.

Yup random forumite definitely knows better than someone making their living off of years and years of experience designing for the most successful tcg that exists...

Yeah, did you know that a company's interests aren't your own? Like that say, a CCG that relies on you buying hundreds of dollars of cards for 4 copies of exact cards need to fill their packs with garbage to make that commercially viable?

It's almost as if people can be sheep! FFG should randomize what ships come in their packs, so that you have a chance at getting a Rare C3PO instead of that 9th Common Enhanced Scopes or your 7th Common Fel's Wrath!

Oh and also they fill their packs with cards designed for draft, a sanctioned, popular, and well balanced format they support. If you want to get the cards you need you buy from the secondary market, but those facts don't particularly help your inflammatory argument.

Indeed, which is exactly why we care so much about bad cards like Sensors and Expose, for X-Wing Draft, is that right?

Secondary markets. Terrible cards used only in game modes where you're not allowed the full range of good cards. These have nothing to do with X-Wing or non-collectable/blind-purchase formats.

Improving bad cards in X-Wing does nothing but increase the variety available to the game and improve the lifespan of the game itself.

I'd pay a point to throw this on Oicunn. Oh wait.

Indeed, which is exactly why we care so much about bad cards like Sensors and Expose, for X-Wing Draft, is that right?

Secondary markets. Terrible cards used only in game modes where you're not allowed the full range of good cards. These have nothing to do with X-Wing or non-collectable/blind-purchase formats.

Improving bad cards in X-Wing does nothing but increase the variety available to the game and improve the lifespan of the game itself.

This is a fair point, if a bit hyperbolic.

No, CCGs have bad cards to make you waste money. That entire line from the magic designers is a load of crock.

A tabletop game has no place for useless cards. Better everything be good and better players rise from a vast pool of somewhat situational choices.

This is not a fair point. Whatever your beef with WotC is, it's biased and unfounded, and I'm not sure you even understand how the different formats work.

I'd pay a point to throw this on Oicunn. Oh wait.

you wouldn't

sensors would beat scopes over the head before burrowing into that non-existent slot, cackling madly all the while at the evil it would be about to unleash

I don't have a beef with Wizards or Magic. I just call the non-logic of 'We need bad cards so players feel smart and happy' is utter nonsense. Maybe if we're talking about a children's game, but seriously suggesting that Fel's Wrath's very existance or how Expose exists and does jack crap mathematically (or that R2 droid that increases Agility), is 'good design since it's fun to realize these are awful', is utter tripe.

The sudden speed in which eager fans leap in to defend such a statement is terribly funny though. Again. X-Wing and similar miniatures games where you have discrete, non-random choices (Ie, I don't have a 'chance' to draw a Push the Limit, I simply pay for one in points), is an entirely different space than any card game relying on probability to give you options. The very kneejerk defense of the CCG model and what is normally a terrible balance decision (some cards are just worse than others in all ways!) makes no sense when applied to a game that has nothing to do with that.

Consider it a firm prodding against intellectual laziness in trying to fit non-applicable models to a different system.

I don't have a beef with Wizards or Magic. I just call the non-logic of 'We need bad cards so players feel smart and happy' is utter nonsense.

That's fine, but you have to understand that the one person you're arguing with is either toying with you, or doesn't know what he/she is talking about. Either way, it's a poor reason to match their misunderstanding of the game with a dose of your own.

The sudden speed in which eager fans leap in to defend such a statement is terribly funny though.

I could say the same thing about Magic's detractors. Some people are all too eager to bash a game and a business model they quite obviously don't understand.

The very kneejerk defense of the CCG model and what is normally a terrible balance decision (some cards are just worse than others in all ways!) makes no sense when applied to a game that has nothing to do with that.

Again, I think you don't understand how "worse" cards are actually a good balance decision. You're right that it has nothing to do with X-Wing, though, so why don't we shelve this line of thought for now?

I'd pay a point to throw this on Oicunn. Oh wait.

you wouldn't

sensors would beat scopes over the head before burrowing into that non-existent slot, cackling madly all the while at the evil it would be about to unleash

I don't have a beef with Wizards or Magic. I just call the non-logic of 'We need bad cards so players feel smart and happy' is utter nonsense. Maybe if we're talking about a children's game, but seriously suggesting that Fel's Wrath's very existance or how Expose exists and does jack crap mathematically (or that R2 droid that increases Agility), is 'good design since it's fun to realize these are awful', is utter tripe.

The sudden speed in which eager fans leap in to defend such a statement is terribly funny though. Again. X-Wing and similar miniatures games where you have discrete, non-random choices (Ie, I don't have a 'chance' to draw a Push the Limit, I simply pay for one in points), is an entirely different space than any card game relying on probability to give you options. The very kneejerk defense of the CCG model and what is normally a terrible balance decision (some cards are just worse than others in all ways!) makes no sense when applied to a game that has nothing to do with that.

Consider it a firm prodding against intellectual laziness in trying to fit non-applicable models to a different system.

EDIT: Another thing about this post is that it gets to be smug about replying. "Told you that those people would be mad if I said something dumb about their game."

I'd pay a point to throw this on Oicunn. Oh wait.

you wouldn't

sensors would beat scopes over the head before burrowing into that non-existent slot, cackling madly all the while at the evil it would be about to unleash

I would and save the action economy by using the Dauntless title.

Most people I've seen try this decide that Dauntless isn't worth it and just go with an EPT like predator. Reason being, Dauntless generates stress, and because of the order of the rules, it can prevent actions anyway. IE you bump and get a stress. Then you go a green, bump again. You cannot range your free action because it takes place before the"check pilot stress" step. Same rule as Night Beast.

It can certainly help you out, but it's utility is limited as it can only generate a free action every other turn at best on Oicunn.

I run it on shuttles.

It will be very good on the new tie punisher.

This. Tie punisher + enhanced scopes + proximity mines

I don't have a beef with Wizards or Magic. I just call the non-logic of 'We need bad cards so players feel smart and happy' is utter nonsense. Maybe if we're talking about a children's game, but seriously suggesting that Fel's Wrath's very existance or how Expose exists and does jack crap mathematically (or that R2 droid that increases Agility), is 'good design since it's fun to realize these are awful', is utter tripe.

The sudden speed in which eager fans leap in to defend such a statement is terribly funny though. Again. X-Wing and similar miniatures games where you have discrete, non-random choices (Ie, I don't have a 'chance' to draw a Push the Limit, I simply pay for one in points), is an entirely different space than any card game relying on probability to give you options. The very kneejerk defense of the CCG model and what is normally a terrible balance decision (some cards are just worse than others in all ways!) makes no sense when applied to a game that has nothing to do with that.

Consider it a firm prodding against intellectual laziness in trying to fit non-applicable models to a different system.

I actually don't think that the 'we need bad cards so people have the rewarding feeling' thing applies to xwing either, but it also isn't false for the game it was said about by the designers of said game.

I think the 'we need cards at different power levels and with different situational benefits so that interesting and meaningful build choices exist' is true though, and that's where things like expose and enhanced scopes fall.

I run it on shuttles.

It will be very good on the new tie punisher.

This. Tie punisher + enhanced scopes + proximity mines

For 24 Points I'd run this on a shuttle + APL. This actually could be worth the 2 Tie Fighters. But then, when I got 24 points left I'd rather run Yorr to drain the stress off the others. Stressless k-turns are so good...

I'd pay a point to throw this on Oicunn. Oh wait.

you wouldn't

sensors would beat scopes over the head before burrowing into that non-existent slot, cackling madly all the while at the evil it would be about to unleash

I would and save the action economy by using the Dauntless title.

Most people I've seen try this decide that Dauntless isn't worth it and just go with an EPT like predator. Reason being, Dauntless generates stress, and because of the order of the rules, it can prevent actions anyway. IE you bump and get a stress. Then you go a green, bump again. You cannot range your free action because it takes place before the"check pilot stress" step. Same rule as Night Beast.

It can certainly help you out, but it's utility is limited as it can only generate a free action every other turn at best on Oicunn.

Sorry, I was very tired when I posted the first two times.

The shuttle is the only ship I've used this System with success. (Before the update, I also liked them on Generic Phantoms)

ES is a must (for me) when running Jendon STS-321. Jendon's ability doesn't do you any good if he is constantly being blocked and denied actions. This turns the tables. Now Jendon is the blocker and keeps handing out those TLs!