The New X-Wing actually looks to have a poorer baseline efficiency as a pure jouster than the T-65.*

*yes: the t-70 has a statline that would cost the T-65 8 points to buy. But those upgrades are only worth about 2 points when out on a T-65.

Can you explain - I didn't understand that last line at all.

MJ did some number crunching about expected survivability given dice and HP. What he found (as I recall) is that the shield upgrade on a T-65 isn't worth the 4 points you pay for it.

That extra shield will simply melt off before it can give you enough extra time on the board to do some damage.

The Engine Upgrade is a similar case: taking it adds points to add an action that doesn't directly add to your offence or defense. The X-Wing dial isn't great for arc dodging, and Boost is mostly useful for that.

I could be misremembering the math.

Aaah, I get you. It would cost 8 points, but that doesn't mean it's worth 8 points.

We've already had power creep. Super Phantom in wave 4 (which even post nerf is still obnoxious), wave 5 as a whole, dual IG's. Certain pilot abilities and certain card combos like gunner/corran + FCS, RAC and predator, "I didn't take an action this turn but here is a hit hit hit crit for the 3rd turn in a row."

The fact that the neo-xwing is going to be actually playable (and still probably get nuked by 2 ship power lists anyways) and that the imperial's get a semi-prototype pilot isn't power creep.

AT and six hit points go a long way against large PWT ships.

Honestly forgot about AT on them.

2 TLT ships, 2 neo-X-Wings and Autothrusters. Maybe finagle generic R7's on the X-Wings.

Also Tarn Mison remains the sole viable X-Wing. I'd run him with 3 new X-Wings still.

I think the first power creep happened with the B-wing. interviews already have FFG saying that they costed the B-wing a little too cheap when compared to the X-wing. That's part of the reason why no one takes X-wings now, because the B-wing is the better buy.

It's debatable on that point as the Falcon could've been the first power creep. The whole turret and lots of points in one ship that made tournament gaming skewed. That happened sooner and might be considered the first power creep. I think overall the Falcon isn't broken, but the way the tournament points run now that it skewed towards them being better options.

Is it a concern? No. I think they have just recently brought two of the worst Wave 1 ships back into the limelight and being highly effective. So, I don't think it's an issue.

We've already had power creep. Super Phantom in wave 4 (which even post nerf is still obnoxious), wave 5 as a whole, dual IG's. Certain pilot abilities and certain card combos like gunner/corran + FCS, RAC and predator, "I didn't take an action this turn but here is a hit hit hit crit for the 3rd turn in a row."

The fact that the neo-xwing is going to be actually playable (and still probably get nuked by 2 ship power lists anyways) and that the imperial's get a semi-prototype pilot isn't power creep.

AT and six hit points go a long way against large PWT ships.

I was thinking this as well. While AT won't nearly be as good on 2 green dice as it is on 3 greens, these new ships have the potential to be a major pain to any turrets whether they be Fat PWT or TWT.

I think there is a power creep but not to the point that it's becoming unmanageable. You won't see a ship or squad build that makes older ships obsolete. What you will see are new squad builds using older ships with new cards being used to fill out squads with the new ships. FFG, I think, has a good grasp on the need to balance new ships and abilities with the existing ships and cards. That's not to say someone won't put together the next Fat Han. It means in general new releases won't break the game.

I think there is a power creep but not to the point that it's becoming unmanageable. You won't see a ship or squad build that makes older ships obsolete.

Well, except what the B-wing did for the X-wing.

This comes up every time they release something that people want to fly.

Good ≠ Unbalanced

Hey, I know a lot of you came over from GW where your wallets were routinely pillaged, and new codexes generally meant a skipped car payment. THIS isn't THAT. Let it go.

FFG may not always get it perfect, but they actually do pretty well.

I think there is a power creep but not to the point that it's becoming unmanageable. You won't see a ship or squad build that makes older ships obsolete.

Well, except what the B-wing did for the X-wing.

I think there is a power creep but not to the point that it's becoming unmanageable. You won't see a ship or squad build that makes older ships obsolete.

Well, except what the B-wing did for the X-wing.

Please explain. I haven't been in the game that long to understand the implication.

The generic B-wing is one more point than the generic x-wing but it's got 3 more shields the same firepower and can barrel roll it's just plain better basically.

If every ship more points-efficient than the T-65 X-wing were a symbol of Power-Creep, we should all be buying HWKs in boycott.

The B-wing did not make the X-wing obsolete. The X-wing was costed poorly from day 1 and the B-wing simply allowed players a viable alternative. I get the point but the B-wing was not the problem, the X-wing was and still is.

And, hypothetically, if ships are improved by having a more varied and interesting dial, I'm on board with that. Putting some more focus back on pilot skill and anticipating the opponent is A-OK with me.

If every ship more points-efficient than the T-65 X-wing were a symbol of Power-Creep, we should all be buying HWKs in boycott.

To be fair, I do need two more HWKs at the moment.

The B-wing did not make the X-wing obsolete. The X-wing was costed poorly from day 1 and the B-wing simply allowed players a viable alternative. I get the point but the B-wing was not the problem, the X-wing was and still is.

And, hypothetically, if ships are improved by having a more varied and interesting dial, I'm on board with that. Putting some more focus back on pilot skill and anticipating the opponent is A-OK with me.

If you didn't have the B-wing....or had the B-wing cost more points, then the X-wing would not have dropped off as badly as it did. If anything put the X-wing under, it was the B-wing. Why bother with an X-wing when you can get the B-wing for 1 more point? FFG admitted that they priced the B-wing cheaper than they should've.

You can complain about the issues with the X-wing all day long, but if there isn't an alternative to take, what will you buy to have a 20-something ship with 3 attack dice? Take the number of points people like to say the X-wing is over-costed by and add that to the cost of every B-wing. Would it be worth taking at that point? I bet we would see more X-wings on the table.

It's at this point in game design generally accepted as a law. I think of it as a law that states:

"For any game that has a start point of finite content, and also has later created additional but also finite content as an expansion to the first, if sales are at stake, than Power Creep will occur inevitably along either or both axes of expressive power, or overall power."

Expressive power is the more obvious: this piece deals more damage, lives longer, goes faster all at the same time. Overall power is when the same units are involved, they just all now have more things to do when you use them, have more synergy outlets, have variant or alternate forms that min-max them one way or another, and now have more interaction or otherwise more intricate play.

X-wing could be seen as having power creeped for the first many waves along just one axis mostly, that being the overall axis. Wave four as already mentioned with phantom, is when we really start to see the game make strides going out the expressive power axis.

For what is to come though? I'll quote Shakespeare: "The play is the thing." We need to see the new stuff in action to really tell.

Power creep is bit like aging. Inevitable and sadly natural and some people always try to deny or make up (something) to hide it.

No pun intended to anyone though.

I believe the reason that some people see power creep in this game has more with their own ability as a player than with the game itself.

There are three fundamental traits that are required for winning in this game: being able to process probability mathematics, being able to see and use relationships between cards and ships (synergy), and having a strong fluid intelligence. Fluid intelligence is defined as, "the ability to perceive relationships independent of previous specific practice or instruction concerning those relationships." A player who can do or understands all three will nearly always succeed over a player who can't. Experience with the game can marginally improve matters for the weaker player; however, with each new expansion, I believe the gulf between the weaker and stronger players will widen. From the perspective of the weaker player, the stronger player "always" seems to be having a edge. As the weaker player struggles with the base game mechanics of the game, the stronger player executes actions that leave the weaker player "in their dust". The weaker player is "always" lagging behind, in other words. I believe some weaker players will continue to struggle, while others will concede the game to the stronger players.

I actually think FFG has done the best game balance of any gaming company I have ever encountered. When they see an imbalance, they work to fix it. I look at the Tie Advanced Fix and the latest editions to the Y-wing as ways I see these ships doing great. I think there are a number of changes coming out in Wave 7 and Raider that will make the 2 ship Fat Turret builds obsolete by next year. Well, maybe not completely obsolete, but probably not greater than 25% of all lists.

Is there power creep? Sure, but it's been a lot less painless than any other gaming company I have ever bought stuff from, especially with the amount of releases. Wave 5 was the worst and Wave 7 is the best at re-balancing.

I see these "Power Creep" threads every time new ships come out. Sure, new ships, new upgrades, and new powerful combos are coming out, but nothing that makes old ships "unplayable" any more than they already were "unplayable." No single list is so powerful as to beat all other lists given equal player skill.

My gut reaction to the idea of power creep is that you can build a TIE swarm with just wave 1 ships and still be competitive

I think we have seen power creep in wave 2 with the falcon and will continue to see it. It definitely isn't as bad as banhammer 40k where codex creep wrecks an entire army. Don't forget we also have power slide, where a ship (e.g. phantom) slides down its mountain

I still think Phantoms are broken. They should've been 3 red dice.

I still think Phantoms are broken. They should've been 3 red dice.

The Defender and Phantom should have swapped red dice.

I still think Phantoms are broken. They should've been 3 red dice.

I agree. I also think the Falcon should have had 2 attck dice primary for all pilots. 3 attack dice has become the baseline, which ups the ante and overshadows the 2 attack dice ships.

IMO 2 attack dice should be standard, 3 for very powerful ships, and 4 or more only reached by specific secondary weapons or upgrade abilities.

But that ship sailed a long time ago.

I still think Phantoms are broken. They should've been 3 red dice.

It has a only a small base firing arc, as many hitpoints as a Z-95 and you still get Range 3 bonus against it. Compare to Dash Rendar with HLC+Outrider.

Also, if you're that worried about a 4 dice primary, what do you think about the Ghost?

We got the biggest powercreep in the game in wave 2 - with the boost action and Falcon turret.

As someone who has just ordered a Core set and has it coming in on Thursday, power creep is something that I have been watching for. I understand that some of the newer ships are a little more powerful than the older ships, but compared to the other games I looked at, this isn't really all that bad.