I don't exactly like scenarios for tournaments.

The more I play 100 pt deathmatch, the more I want something more. I've been playing since Wave 1 and after a while, it gets old. Also, the tournament meta tends to make it even more stale. I'm tired of seeing only 4 builds of whatever the flavor of the month is. I would love some sort of scenarios or missions or anything to spice up the game. Warhammer Fantasty Battle did this. Everyone declared that it was going to ruin tournaments. It didn't. It made them better. Scenarios are a good way of forcing people out of the meta. There has to be some missions where a 2 ship build would usually lose. There are mission where swarms would probably lose. Force people into playing balanced lists.

I've been playing since release. I don't find it boring. Then again I also don't complain about meta builds or anything like that. I tend to build offshoot stuff and make it work. Maybe you should try to lessen your focus on meta and more on trying to find a list you enjoy? Before you say "X BEAT Y SO I CAN'T", you really haven't tried enough. Also, lots of missions would favor different builds more then others, then what happens is you get these generic lists that people will complain about cause no one deviates from them. Its a vicious cycle, I assure you. So regardless of what happens, people will still complain that the meta is stale after the 3rd week of each release. If you wanna go home brew or get a local tournament to support a mission style, do it, more power to you. But sometimes I wonder if people look at the big picture and realize all these fixes they want just cause more problems.

I think it is fair to say that 100 point could be too small for a really good mission. Epic play (and it's sister, cinematic) are where it's at in that regard.

I maintain that a good meta campaign can reconcilliate both modes beautifully.

FWIW, I'm not at all sold on the idea of retrofitting missions into X-Wing. That said:

True, but a 100 point dogfight is a much too small an engagement for strategic objectives like in Armada.

That's really not the case. Armada's missions include things like:

-Deploy a minefield before the start of the match

-The first time every ship attacks, it rolls an extra die

-Set aside one ship. Deploy it in the middle of the map, at one of three markers, at the start of any turn after the first

And so on. You wouldn't want to import them without modification, sure, but I see no reason that style of objective wouldn't fit in X-Wing. You know, after Alex Davy spent months figuring out how to implement missions without creating a class of hilariously OP ships and so on.

The more I play 100 pt deathmatch, the more I want something more. I've been playing since Wave 1 and after a while, it gets old. Also, the tournament meta tends to make it even more stale. I'm tired of seeing only 4 builds of whatever the flavor of the month is. I would love some sort of scenarios or missions or anything to spice up the game. Warhammer Fantasty Battle did this. Everyone declared that it was going to ruin tournaments. It didn't. It made them better. Scenarios are a good way of forcing people out of the meta. There has to be some missions where a 2 ship build would usually lose. There are mission where swarms would probably lose. Force people into playing balanced lists.

I've been playing since release. I don't find it boring. Then again I also don't complain about meta builds or anything like that. I tend to build offshoot stuff and make it work. Maybe you should try to lessen your focus on meta and more on trying to find a list you enjoy? Before you say "X BEAT Y SO I CAN'T", you really haven't tried enough. Also, lots of missions would favor different builds more then others, then what happens is you get these generic lists that people will complain about cause no one deviates from them. Its a vicious cycle, I assure you. So regardless of what happens, people will still complain that the meta is stale after the 3rd week of each release. If you wanna go home brew or get a local tournament to support a mission style, do it, more power to you. But sometimes I wonder if people look at the big picture and realize all these fixes they want just cause more problems.

I find this really funny as the only way I can stay interested in the game is to try out all the crazy lists with things that are broken. I've done very well with my Tie Bomber list. I've made another one of the locals really fear Tie Bombers! I had one game of rotten luck and just missed out on the cut for Regionals with my Xizor list. I love to take things that are oddball and make them work.

I also don't say that "X BEAT Y SO I CAN'T". I usually say "I'm sick of playing against the same **** thing constantly". For example, at my Regionals, I played 2 of the exact same Brobots list twice in a row. Exactly the same. I beat them both, but it still doesn't mean I wish there was more variety. Tournaments tend to be really stale with the types of lists that I face against. To me, slight variations as to exactly which upgrade cards don't make that much of a difference when you are facing a YT-1300 and YT-2400 list. It's just boring to play against the same old, same old.

I'm lucky in that my local shop has a lot of casual players and I get a lot of fun games in. We try Epic, or multi person games, scenarios, or even just 100 pt death matches. I love my weekly game nights. I am coming to the conclusion that I'm tired of going to tournaments. I usually place in the Top 4 when I go. It just becomes less fun to go when I'm facing the same types of lists over and over again. I can't even listen to all the tournament report podcasts anymore. It's just so boring to listen to their tournament reports. It's the same crap over and over again.

I'd love to see mission cards come out for X-wing. Force people to play different missions in tournament play. Some of them will be standard death match games, but not all of them. You want to see X-wings do well? Introduce different missions where speed is more valuable than the shields on a B-wing. Introduce missions where 2 ship builds will have a hard time. Force the players to build lists that are varied and have different requirements than just "be efficient killers in 100 pt death match".

As stated above, I've seen it happen in WHFB. The tournament scene was quite strong in that game system. They introduced scenarios that were officially in the tournaments. Lots of people complained about them and said it was going to kill tournaments. It didn't. More people enjoyed them. The types of lists you saw weren't always the most OP armies and lists. You had to get smarter to win. The tournaments got bigger. It made the game better.

At this point, I am not sure if I want to attend another tournament.

Torpedoes useless against huges? High damage is the only thing that spikes past Reinforce and the crits Proton Torpedoes deal really, really hurt.

heychadwick, I tried to send you a message and it bounced?

Inbox is now empty!

Tournament play is getting boring.

Do you guys fly the same stuff every time you play? And how often do you play? I just don't see the 100pnt matches getting old. They're so much fun. Short and sweet. It might have to do with the fact that I rarely play the same list more than twice and I only get to play a few matches a week.

It's more boring due to what you fly against. Everyone seems to take the same crap all the time. Hey, look, another double YT list. Oh, Han and 3 Z's. There' is Soontir and a Decimator followed by a Decimator and Soontir. Brobots followed by matching brobots with another brobot thrown in at the end.

One way I could see mission cards being added is as something you can buy as part of your fleet. This would mean that you have less points to spend on the fleet itself, but would effectively allow you to effectively nudge the rules of that battle in your favour. Whilst I don't think X-Wing strictly needs such missions, they could certainly add an extra dimension towards increasing variety, which is certainly a good thing.

For examples of the above, you might have mission cards such as the following:

- Most Wanted (10 pts) - Each player's most expensive ship is worth double if destroyed.In the case of a tie for most expensive ship, the player's opponent may choose which of those ships is their objective.

(This is the classic idea of a mission in that it alters the victory conditions. Note that the cost for altering the victory conditions to something you can build your fleet around is that you have less fleet to then fight for those conditions.)

- Asteroid Belt (10pts) - You may choose to place an extra 3 obstacles during the battle setup.

- Room to Maneuver (10pts) - You may choose to place 3 less obstacles during the battle setup.

(For the cost of having a smaller force, you could choose to alter the battle environment to one more suitable for your play style.)

- Magnetic Dust Cloud (5pts) - When a target lock would be removed, roll a red die. On a <hit>, the target lock is left in place.

(My thinking on the "fluff" for this specific example is that whilst the dust is thin enough not to cause any direct problems, its build up on the ships makes them easier for sensors to track and maintain a lock on. Either way, it's an example of altering the rules of the battlefield for both players, but at the cost of reducing your own squad size.)

In all the above cases, the points and specific effects are just placeholders to demonstrate the ideas. If it ever was introduced, FFG would no doubt do a much better job of balancing them than I ever could when throwing them together in 5 minutes.

Tournament play is getting boring.

Do you guys fly the same stuff every time you play? And how often do you play? I just don't see the 100pnt matches getting old. They're so much fun. Short and sweet. It might have to do with the fact that I rarely play the same list more than twice and I only get to play a few matches a week.

I never run the same thing twice; rarely even the same faction twice in a row. I also don't do terribly well at tournaments I'm bummed our store tournament is tomorrow and I won't be able to run any of the Wave 7 stuff a friend sent me from GenCon, so I'll probably run a trio of named TIE Advanceds just to get to fly something I've not flown before and I can use the Raider stuff.

The 'boring' part comes from facing multiple sets of whatever this year's hot lists are. Sometimes it's against people that have run them a lot and are good with them and mop the floor with you, sometimes it's against newbies who just copied a list off the boards because it's done well but they have no clue how to fly it and you mop the floor with them. But it's still your handful of ships against my handful, the same 6 asteroids in more or less the same positions, the same 60 or 75 minute rounds, etc. Admittedly, 'objective cards' wouldn't do anything for the last issue, but it would at least relieve the monotony of 4 or 5 rounds of deathmatches. And objective cards would liven up casual play after you've run through the canned missions, still let you experiment with list building, etc.

We played the Raider v Corvette mission the other night (1 player played the Rider, I flew the escorts, and a third player did all the Rebel stuff). More fun than we've head in straight up 100v100 in a long time. We'd largely replaced X-Wing with Armada since that came out just because the head-to-head play had gotten stale. And also Armada is pretty **** good on its own.

I think that it would be a good idea if it can be incorporated into a multi-game running campaign. I have played the missions so many time that they are starting to get predictable. Don't have too many players where I am at. Sometimes a straight dogfight can get old. Why not have more options? As long as it does not become mandatory what could it hurt?