You're taking issue with things like Auothrusters not being included in TIE Interceptor packs? The upgrade/fix was released around a year after Imperial Aces came out. The *** Advanced title will be out in the next week or two, but the TIE Advanced came out 3 years ago. What's FFG suppose to do, use a time machine to fix their design mistakes?

@Ken: this will have to be quick, as I'm waiting to board a flight in Dallas. The problem with your position--with your whole soapbox, really--is that I doubt anyone would disagree that it would be better to live in a universe where every X-wing ship had been released perfectly balanced and without flaws.

But we don't live in that universe. And given that there are ships out there with huge issues, you're the only one I know of who's saying the game would be better off with those ships left in their broken/unbalanced state.

@Ken: this will have to be quick, as I'm waiting to board a flight in Dallas. The problem with your position--with your whole soapbox, really--is that I doubt anyone would disagree that it would be better to live in a universe where every X-wing ship had been released perfectly balanced and without flaws.

But we don't live in that universe. And given that there are ships out there with huge issues, you're the only one I know of who's saying the game would be better off with those ships left in their broken/unbalanced state.

So my 'whole soapbox' is I 'want my cake and eat it too'. Ouch but partially true I guess. FFG is doing a great job keeping older ships relevant, balanced, rebalanced, etc. and doing so does require new upgrade cards, FAQ, etc. I'm guess I the one that doesn't think that everything has to be balanced quite so tightly. Some things/ships could be situational for special missions/scenarios; not everything has to be balanced against an attack fighter IMHO. It takes away from the simplicity of clean builds but Sigh... Nevertheless your point is completely valid so I guess I'll hang this one up (and the crowd goes wild ).

As much as I love the Raider and already have my pre-order in, and even though I have a least one of every ship and hopefully will continue to do so... it would be nice if FFG could publish the upgrades another way. I know it does bother several here to buy a Star Viper or even a Raider for the cards only.

Thank you for your reasoned response and insights to the game. It is appreciated.

I'll use the wood from the soapbox in the firepit on the next moonless night ahhhhhh

________________________________________

Can I P.S. after I said I'd let it go?

Some have said that things like X-Wings and torpedoes shine in Epic games. If they fix/buff these things will that, could that make them over powered in Epic? I do like situational (mission selected) ships, etc.

Sorry now I'll let it go.

it would be nice if FFG could publish the upgrades another way. I know it does bother several here to buy a Star Viper or even a Raider for the cards only.

I think that you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who really disagrees with that as well.

I'd love to be able to have four autothrusters without having to buy two Star Vipers. As it is I only have one myself, so only two copies of autothruster. But the thing is, I don't think that FFG put the autothruster in the Star Viper solely for the sake of selling them to people who want to fly Interceptors. The upgrade works quite well on the ship it comes with. Plus it does come with two copies more then you can use in that expansion.

That's true of most upgrades, sure they make work great on other ships, but they also work just as well on the ship that they came with. I don't think anyone can reasonably claim that PtL is a bad upgrade on A-Wings...

So while yes some sort of print on demand, or card only expansion would be nice for us, I don't think anyone can reasonably say they aren't getting a good deal when they buy X-Wing packs. Nor can they say that FFG is gouging people by putting PtL in A-Wings or Autothrusters in Star Vipers.

The thing about key (non-unique) cards, is patience. They will likely get reprinted in another ship.

Just wondering... Is/was there any ship that didn't need a fix/buff?

(...)

TIE bomber - Really? I thought everyone agreed that ordnance which is the bombers primary purpose was junk; otherwise how good is a naked squad of bombers?

(...)

Yes it is my favorite soapbox so I'll drop it there

People have flown 6 Bombers in casuals (However, it would not work in competition).

How much of the Bomber-"problem" is really a Bomber problem or a general problem of ordnance?

Just wondering... Is/was there any ship that didn't need a fix/buff?

(...)

TIE bomber - Really? I thought everyone agreed that ordnance which is the bombers primary purpose was junk; otherwise how good is a naked squad of bombers?

(...)

Yes it is my favorite soapbox so I'll drop it there

People have flown 6 Bombers in casuals (However, it would not work in competition).

How much of the Bomber-"problem" is really a Bomber problem or a general problem of ordnance?

The TIE Bomber is one of the most points efficiant jousters in the game, next to TIE Fighters (and maybe Z95s). I'd take a swarm of Scimitars over Academies any day, but that's not what they were designed for. The problem has been ordnance, although a generic with an EPT or a Systems slot could have helped it.

P.S. added