Hey Ken, I'm probably not going to answer the way you want, but I'll give it a try. My apologies for the incoming wall of text.

I was attracted to this game initially because I love Star Wars and the rules were simple and elegant. I happened across the TableTop episode and was hooked. I got involved at Wave 3, and since then I have been disappointed with the overall direction the designers have taken the game. That isn't to say the game isn't balanced, or that there haven't been some good decisions (Raider + Tie Adv fix comes to mind). It is to say that the way it is going, simply isn't my cup of tea.

The current reliance on action economy, synergies, upgrades that are built to negate both red and green dice results, and the slow but steady creep away from the iconic ships of the initial movies doesn't interest me. If the TableTop episode in question showed Brobots vs RAC + Fel, I doubt I would have looked into the game further. It's one of the reasons I don't have any interest in Armada, though I can appreciate the strategy and tactics, it simply doesn't "do it" for me.

Having said that... I LOVE THIS FREAKING GAME! But, I play a very streamlined version. For example I usually only play with OT ships and the less "time intensive" upgrades that go along with them.

I also have "standard" builds for my ships. Not without upgrades, mind you, but standard (X-Wings are house ruled because they need it, ordnance purchases include free munitions failsafe)

For Example, there are 2 X-Wing builds

"The Sidewinder" (R2 Astromech Purchase triggers a free Expert Handling) 22 points for a Rookie, 24 for Red Squadron

"Next Gen Booster" (R7 Astromech Purchase triggers a free Engine Upgrade) 23 points for a Rookie, 25 for Red

So whenever my X-Wings hit the table they are either Sidewinders or NG Boosters, and I do not mix in the same list. Yes they are upgraded, but really easy to track, doesn't slow the game down, and are IMHO extremely thematic.

My Y-Wings have 2 builds as well

"The Warthog" BTL-A4 with Autoblaster with R2 Astromech

"The Ionic Breeze" R5 Astromech with Ion Cannon turret

B-Wings are as follows:

"B is for Bare Nekkid" Yep naked.

"The Heavyweight" Advanced Sensors + HLC

A-Wings

"The Gnat" Chaardan refit

"The Velociraptor" Proton Rocket (don't forget the free failsafe!) + PTL

So you can see they are all thematic, they perform very different functions and they use really simple upgrades. Occasionally I will add an Ace with their own load out, but usually I fly generics. Large ships and Epic ships are a little different, but that's my basic rebel blue print.

For Imps, I go a little more simplistic

Tie Fighters are always nekkid

Tie Advanced

"The Fix" always comes with the Title and Accuracy corrector. (Note, old houserule was 3 attack dice)

Tie Bombers:

"The Noisy Cricket" Cluster Missiles + Concussion Missiles (free munitions failsafe!)

Tie Interceptor

Nekkid (how I usually run them)

"The Sneaky Bastard" with Stealth Device

"The OYS (On your six!)" Stealth Device + PTL for RGs and Sabers

So same thing with the Imps. Easy upgrades to track.

I'd recommend doing something similar if you want streamlined play. I don't even pull out the upgrade cards anymore (except for Ordnance and Stealth Devices). These pre-built ships are also great for Epic play.

HTH

First: This isn't a troll post. Some may think so but I'm curious to actual opinions.

I'm just curious if you can put together squads and play for fun or will it be too one sided? X-Wings against TIE fighters for example.

Mathjugglers list of ships is often recommended for new players; but many squads have house rules. Are they really need just to play casually? Many posts about the X-Wing T-65 being unplayable; TIE Defender not worth taking; A-Wing being completely broken; etc. Is it that bad? People ask for a nudge for the X-Wing; they get a nudge and then people say what we need is something that screams fix. I'm so confused. I've been collecting since about wave 2 and yes I have multiples of everything except a few large and huge ships. But I don't play often and now I wonder. How bad is it?

Coming from a war gaming back ground we always had units that filled specific roles. When comparing point for point in a head on firing squad no one ever expected that, for example, jeeps should be able to beat tanks regardless of points. Jeeps were either recon or cic. No one cried that 100 points of jeeps couldn't beat 100 points of tanks if you line them up and fired. That wasn't their job. The same was true for artillery, calvary, etc.

I see a few different types of play in X-Wing: 100 point tournament death match (points); missions; epic. Of course you will always have thematic and house campaigns, etc. The 100 point tournament seems to have pushed everything else to the side and made them almost irrelevant to future releases.

So I guess I'm asking:

A) Is it really that bad and without fixes the game would never work?

A1) Seriously can you sit down and play with X-Wings, Y-Wings, A-Wing, B-Wings, TIE Fighters, Interceptors , Defenders and Advanced and have a balanced game?

B) The game isn't that bad and a few or factional points difference matters more math than is does in play.

B1) If that's the case are these fixes over blown and the ships are not that bad??

C) Something else?

Followup questions:

A) Can we have specific role craft that may not ever compare to a fighter. Can a bomber be a bomber and a freighter be a freighter or must a freighter be on par with even the most capable fighter? Or will tournaments and math be the only thing that decides ship viability?

B) Is is even possible that all types of play can be accommodated or is the 100 razor's edge balance the only driving force?

Okay I re-read this before posting any maybe it comes off like a rant. But I still say these are serious questions and I'm curious what the community has to say.

Thanks,

Defenders are completly viable ships in delta patrol, any one who says otherwise can go die in a hole.

Delta patrol: 2 Deltas and a Patrol leader.

and while Defenders are overpriced, the fact that no other ship does quite the same thing allows them to still win if you know exactly what you're doing.

Yea

Yeah I used that it wiped the floor with my friends fleet.

Delta patrol, funny I've not heard it called but I like it.

Yeah I used that it wiped the floor with my friends fleet.

Delta patrol, funny I've not heard it called but I like it.

I came up with it.

I think you'd have to play without named pilots as well as no upgrades. Because named pilot abilities are basically the same thing as upgrades.

If there were no upgrades, 8 TIE Swarm and 8 Z-95 Swarm would dominate. So would BBBBZ.

Most other things in the game would still be viable, it's just that you'd end up with lists like 5 Academies and a Patrol Leader, or 6 Z's and an Outer Rim Smuggler or triple Bounty Hunter or quad Phantom or 5x Avenger instead of super Fels with Fat RAC's and Fat Falcons. Naked Aggressor's don't seem too bad next to a wad of Z's and naked M3-A's, and ships with good pilot abilities independent of upgrades would be good. I daresay even the generic K Wing would have a place, as 2 attack dice can still hit things when there are no C-3PO's or autothrusters around. We have enough ships in enough different point totals that it shouldn't be too hard.

Seems pretty fun.

IMO If you want to play with no upgrades, you should still allow missiles and torps and a handful of other cards like Leia and Moff and bombs and munitions failsafe and the 1 point EPTs. And on HWK's and Y-Wings, turret upgrades (albeit not TLT). This would make ordnance usable.

I kind of want to do a come as you are tournament, with all upgrades banned. That would be hilarious!

I just wanted to say thanks to everyone for the help. Lost of great answers and ideas. I appreciate the input.

These two thoughts do seem at odds with each other.

I don't think that this game has that finite interesting element or purpose for scouts and utility ships. Basically, every ship really does need to hold its own and contribute to the damage out put, or they're a wasted ship... Or, they need to have such a critical and amazing rule change they bring to the table that they are worth the points. Where as with Warhammer, it wasn't really about how much damage your troops were bringing to the table, and a lot more about how effectively they fill a needed roll in that army list.

And this thought

Coming from a war gaming back ground we always had units that filled specific roles. When comparing point for point in a head on firing squad no one ever expected that, for example, jeeps should be able to beat tanks regardless of points. Jeeps were either recon or cic. No one cried that 100 points of jeeps couldn't beat 100 points of tanks if you line them up and fired. That wasn't their job. The same was true for artillery, calvary, etc.

This is a different question, I think. X-wing does have some of that: a HWK is not going to play as a front-line combatant. The HWK's price is related to its effect on the rest of the list, but isn't a good reflection of how it would fare in a toe-to-toe matchup. It's an upgrade card, but Emperor Palpatine is sort of the same way: he has an outsized effect on the fight as a whole, but if you're looking at pure efficiency for points he's (sometimes) not a great card.

I also think you can expect that kind of indirect effect to become more prominent as FFG opens up new areas of design space to explore in the game.

I an hoping that Fantasy Fight considers upgrades or synergies when determining point. The HWK may be a good example and if so then it does fill a roll of a 'freighter' and with upgrades becomes something else. But here the question is how balanced is 100 points of HWK to 100 points of main line fighers. What I have play/seen it does seem that the main line fighers would win fairly easily. Again if so, then woopie!!! No because of any perceived imbalance but rather that changing it's points and then adding upgrades would under value or over power the ship. Even if I'm way off base it does seem to be a good example.

Thank you,

First: This isn't a troll post.

Speaking for myself, it doesn't come across that way.

Thanks

I'm just curious if you can put together squads and play for fun or will it be too one sided? X-Wings against TIE fighters for example.

Mathjugglers list of ships is often recommended for new players; but many squads have house rules. Are they really need just to play casually? Many posts about the X-Wing T-65 being unplayable; TIE Defender not worth taking; A-Wing being completely broken; etc. Is it that bad? People ask for a nudge for the X-Wing; they get a nudge and then people say what we need is something that screams fix. I'm so confused. I've been collecting since about wave 2 and yes I have multiples of everything except a few large and huge ships. But I don't play often and now I wonder. How bad is it?

So my answer here is that the kind of effects you're talking about are relatively small. That is, they'll show up if you look at a year's worth of tournament results (e.g., X-wings don't show up very often, and when they do, it's usually one of a small group of named pilots). In an individual game, though, dice and player decisions are going to have a much bigger effect than a 1.5-point mismatch between the X-wing's value and its cost.

Some things probably are big enough to notice. The TIE Advanced is a good example: a squad that takes a TIE Advanced other than Vader, without implementing FFG's fix, has taken on a minor but noticeable handicap. But those are the exception, not the rule.

If these are the exceptions then awesome. I agree that there is a difference between fixes and upgrades. I've played other games without upgrades and I do like the ability to modify my ships. It addes variety and can give games with the same ships a different feel. Sometimes however the simplicity is just jumping in a taking some ships is nice. From what I've been reading, and great help from everyone by the way, maybe the answer is somewhere in the middle. The TIE Advanced definitely needed help and a few others could use a nudge or some help.

If all this is true then it should be easy to make a short list of standard mods/upgrades for quick games or with newer players.

Yes some of these may sound like the auto-include list but that's sort of what I'm putting together.

• TIE Advanced: TIE/X1. Higher PS also takes Adv. Targeting Computer; Lower PS takes Accuracy Corrector
• A-Wing: A-Wing Test Pilot (when able) with ???; Chardaan Refit if not taking Proton Rockets
• X-Wing: Integrated Astromech and R2. Of course you can always change the mech but an X-Wing really deserves a mech. Always.
• TIE Interceptors: Auto-Thrusters, Push the Limit
• TIE Interceptors: Auto-Thrusters, Royal Guard and ???
• TIE Defenders: Twin Ion Engine Mk. II
• B-Wing: Advance Sensors
• Scyk: with Heavy Scyk and anything that sounds fun or just mix it up.
• Star Viper: Auto-Thruster

Did I miss any?

Tie Defenders do not need tie mk II. if anything, it makes them less efficient for no gain

B-wings do not need sensors. They're stupidly potent without them, they come packaged with FCS, and they're very controlling with tactician. Along with the Tie Fighter, they're the perfect example of a ship that comes out of the box perfectly ready to play competitively. Just slap on a blue squadron and have at it.

so you can knock those two off the list without even looking twice

everything else is pretty spot on, though you could add PTL to the intercept characters (although imp aces do come with a couple, so at least that's something)

I'd only bother with the advanced sensors if you are carrying HLCs as well on the B-Wing. Otherwise fly them Naked. In this regard you'll have a ship with two distinct roles. The meatshield jouster, and the crafty slugger.

I also steer clear of autothrusters in the squints, using Stealth Device instead. This is for simplicity's sake only. (Less measuring for new players). If you find that PWTs are killing them too easily, switch to autothrusters, I don't think it's necessary outside fat turret meta stuff, but your call.

Fixes aside the game was never meant to be balanced around ships without upgrades. Without upgrades a lot of ships are junk because they are meant to stack upgrades. Imperial Shuttle for example.

I kind of want to do a come as you are tournament, with all upgrades banned. That would be hilarious!

It'd be TIE Swarms versus BBBBZ.

There are a huge number of competitively viable no upgrade lists.

There's also a huge number of competitively viable heavy upgrade lists.

It's a huge game, after all.

Personally I tend to favour lists which feature more ships on the table than lists which are low on ships but heavy on upgrades - I've certainly had more competitive success with numbers over quality - but messing around with various combinations of upgrades and ships is a lot of fun.

Followup questions:

A) Can we have specific role craft that may not ever compare to a fighter. Can a bomber be a bomber and a freighter be a freighter or must a freighter be on par with even the most capable fighter? Or will tournaments and math be the only thing that decides ship viability?

B) Is is even possible that all types of play can be accommodated or is the 100 razor's edge balance the only driving force?

Okay I re-read this before posting any maybe it comes off like a rant. But I still say these are serious questions and I'm curious what the community has to say.

Thanks,

A) There is no real world equivalent to Falcons, Decimators etc. The closest analogy is a flying tank. You certainly did not use B-17s to hunt fighters, and even YB-40s (dedicated anti-fighter conversions of B-17s) were not much use. Despite this, a lot of real world tactics do work in X-Wing (such as the Thach weave).

B) The game works differently at 100+ points. Cards that were irrelevant like Leia suddenly become more valuable. Torps become a LOT more useful.

Fixes aside the game was never meant to be balanced around ships without upgrades. Without upgrades a lot of ships are junk because they are meant to stack upgrades. Imperial Shuttle for example.

Perhaps you're right but we do put a lot of stock into the efficiency of craft in a head on shooting match and many have gone on to say that you should not have to consider upgrades when determining the points cost vrs efficiency.

Followup questions:

A) Can we have specific role craft that may not ever compare to a fighter. Can a bomber be a bomber and a freighter be a freighter or must a freighter be on par with even the most capable fighter? Or will tournaments and math be the only thing that decides ship viability?

B) Is is even possible that all types of play can be accommodated or is the 100 razor's edge balance the only driving force?

Okay I re-read this before posting any maybe it comes off like a rant. But I still say these are serious questions and I'm curious what the community has to say.

Thanks,

A) There is no real world equivalent to Falcons, Decimators etc. The closest analogy is a flying tank. You certainly did not use B-17s to hunt fighters, and even YB-40s (dedicated anti-fighter conversions of B-17s) were not much use. Despite this, a lot of real world tactics do work in X-Wing (such as the Thach weave).

B) The game works differently at 100+ points. Cards that were irrelevant like Leia suddenly become more valuable. Torps become a LOT more useful.

I would like to see more comments on the 100+ games and how the meta changes with the increased scope. Anybody want to go there??

Fixes aside the game was never meant to be balanced around ships without upgrades. Without upgrades a lot of ships are junk because they are meant to stack upgrades. Imperial Shuttle for example.

21 points for that statline is a good deal. They don't /need/ a gunner and FCS to be viable.

I kind of want to do a come as you are tournament, with all upgrades banned. That would be hilarious!

It'd be TIE Swarms versus BBBBZ.

You act as if that would be a bad thing.

The best list would be a Howlrunner Academy swarm with the super Wingman TIE/FO guy, I agree. If this was to be a serious event I'd limit the amount of ships to 6.

HWK's get non-TLT turret upgrades. Perhaps Y-Wings too.

Ordnance is allowed, and related cards like Munitions Failsafe and EM.

1 cost EPT's are allowed.

Disposable crew are allowed, like Leia and Moff and Crewbacca.

Allow generic Astromechs?

Without a Biggs howlrunner will die fast to tlt and without her re roll you have to take focus because using the TL leaves you wide open.

If you have to spend the focus on defence then you can only bank on five hits out of ten hitting so you'll lose ships faster than the y-wing's.

Your much better off with tie ln as once howlrunner is dead you might get seven or more hits and maybe kill a y.

if you let Howlie die to TLTs before killing at least one of them, you deserve to lose that game