Surprisingly, less is getting more votes.

Less waves, but most of all...

No more Alphabet Rebels or "TIE" Imperials! I think the K-wing looks cool, but the TIE DoubleDown just looks like Xzibit pimped a Bomber!

"Yo dawg, i heard you like the TIE Bomber..."

I think I'd rather see a Naboo N1 than another Rebel ship shaped like letters that don't even exist in a galaxy far, far away.

No more Alphabet Rebels or "TIE" Imperials!

-1

I'd be okay with less. One major wave, 2 aces, and an epic seems about right to me. But since this is just a secondary game for me, I don't think my "vote" should hold much weight.

I want Wave 1, 2 and 3 in a revised edition of them. Something like "Wave I (bis)".
With the same ships, the same pilots, but revised abilities and costs. This wouldn't invalidate the old ones, though.

Probably I am totally alone in this.

Less... 1 wave and 1 aces pack and 1 last epic for scum.

We need "Uglies", The Chiss Clawcraft, Hapan Nova class Battle Cruisers with Miy'til fighters, and Vong Coral Skippers.

And absolutely none of this...

Next year I think 1 new rebel and imp ship, 2 new scum ships... Then maybe an aces pack for each in a separate wave? Don't want too many more next year. I still need to start collecting scum!

I also vote less waves as they currently are.

However i think new stuff to be released could be interesting:

- more mission focussed releases; neutral ships that can be used in several scenarios or packs without ships

- card packs possibly updating older releases with titles or other fixes

- campaign rule upgrade (weve seen many fan made, but an oddicial one would be also cool)

- official additional game modes pack; interesting 3 player rules, objective based missions/win conditions; official 150p limitations, furball rules...

I can't let this slide....I can't.....I'm too much of a pedant....

I believe you mean "More waves or fewer".

They'll do what the market requires, not what we want to. And that's fine to me, because the more cash the game carry the better it will be supported...

For the pedants:

Although Garner’s Modern American Usage says that 10 items or fewer is the correct choice, other reference books such as Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage and The Cambridge Guide to English Usage note that the admonition that writers should not use less for countable items is relatively new, beginning as the personal opinion of one usage writer from the 1700s, and the Oxford English Dictionary has examples of less being used with countable items going back to nearly the dawn of printed English and continuing to this day. I find it impressive that the first citation of less being used with a countable noun in the OED comes from King Alfred the Great himself. He was the great promoter of English over Latin, and in the year 888, wrote about less words.

Language researchers tend to believe that using less with some countable nouns is natural and that the restriction against doing so is constructed and forced.