Just so I understand this.

Everyone said the X-Wing didn't need a fix only a nudge or a bit of love. We get a nudge that math says brings the X-Wing up to par. But before this is even released or properly played in tournaments people are now saying regardless the X-Wing now needs something that screams fix.

Honestly I don't think people will be satisfied until the X-Wing has the maneuverability of the TIE Interceptor and totally dominates the meta.

Dealing with the TIE Interceptor religion is like dealing with the F-16 religion.If you value your sanity, you don't.

Just so I understand this.

Everyone said the X-Wing didn't need a fix only a nudge or a bit of love. We get a nudge that math says brings the X-Wing up to par. But before this is even released or properly played in tournaments people are now saying regardless the X-Wing now needs something that screams fix.

Honestly I don't think people will be satisfied until the X-Wing has the maneuverability of the TIE Interceptor and totally dominates the meta.

Dealing with the TIE Interceptor religion is like dealing with the F-16 religion.If you value your sanity, you don't.

Beware the Light Fighter Mafia.

But I already beware the Amish mafia.

I think, and this is only my two cents; If the X-Wing is overcosted, the obvious choice is to make its points more worth it. I DON'T like the idea of giving it a boost since that suddenly makes it a T-70, yes you have a different dial and all that, but if the X-Wing gets a boost suddenly everyone will be saying every ship needs a boost. The X-Wing is the standard multipurpose starfighter, people rarely take torps on it, but nearly always have an EPT if it has one, or an astromech....so:

Rogue/Red Squadron Veteran - Title - Cost: 0

If you do not have an EPT slot, your upgrade bar gains an EPT slot. Any EPT assigned to your ship has its cost reduced by 3 to a minimum of 0.

This DOES make R2-D6 obsolete for the X-Wing, but he does have some use on Y-Wings I guess. Alternatively, you can drop the benefit of granting an EPT slot from the title and just have the cost reduction. This allows X-Wing pilots to take most EPTs for 0 points while the more expensive ones cost 1.

Counterpart Level Integration - Title - Cost: 0

Any astromech upgrade assigned to your ship has its cost reduced by 3 to a minimum of -1.

So you have to chose where you get the reduction, do you take a cheaper astromech, or a cheaper EPT, you can't get the benefit of both. Furthermore as you can see the reduction can go into negative squad points. This would allow a Rookie pilot to take R2 astromech and other cheap 1 and 2 point astromechs...and get reduced down to 20 points, allowing you to take 5 Rookies in one list while having the benefits of the astromech.

and just to give that torp slot some use

Dual Torpedo Launchers - Title - Cost: 0

Add a torpedo slot to your upgrade bar. You may equip 'Extra Munitions' for free in one torpedo slot.

After performing a torpedo attack you may immediately perform an additional torpedo attack against the same target at -1 attack die. You do not need to have or spend a target lock to make this attack.

I'd also like to see some new EPTs and astromechs to take advantage of this.

Formation Flying - EPT - Cost: 5 - X-Wing only.

If at least 2 friendly ships are in range 1 of you, your agility and attack value are +1.

Right approach, too strong. 1 point rebates at most, after Intigrated astromech

Supposedly IA catches up with the B-wing, giving an extra pseudo shield. I don't know about math wing but that's what I've been told. I suppose to surpass the B it would need something like BR and maybe access to another upgrade, like system. I dunno. That sounds like it would pretty much be copying the B and become a slightly more fragile B with a somewhat faster dial but lacking 1 turns.

I guess we need to figure out if he rookies and reds need the help or if the uniques need the help. A 'rogue' title could help with adding repositioning actions to aces and a 'torpedo' slot that gives a system slot could help the generics. Depending on cost it could make these ships even more expensive or end up making them inch towards OP if cheap or free.

I say we need a PS 5 Rogue Squadron Pilot with EPT and maybe we will have mid PS ships that actually get into lists. Well other than tarn and maybe hobbie.

But maybe we should just wait and see what all the new goodies do for our favorite snub fighter.

Random thought for a fix, astromech that gives you -1 points.

Random thought for a fix, astromech that gives you -1 points.

Definitely not. That gets rid of one of The X-Wing's biggest selling points- having Astromechs in the first place.

Random thought for a fix, astromech that gives you -1 points.

Definitely not. That gets rid of one of The X-Wing's biggest selling points- having Astromechs in the first place.

In which case we're needing the title to knock the price down a notch.

I'm not convinced that adding boosts is a good idea for the X wings. It would start to blend ships in to a grey area where they start to act the same

There are several ships that are still more cost efficient than the I.A X-wing, in Epic or otherwise, as listed in my earlier post....

And there are several more other faction ships less efficient than the I.A. X-Wing. Shouldn't they be of more concern?

Are you being deliberately obtuse? Do you not understand what 'jousting values' mean?

No I am not being 'deliberately obtuse. I'm sorry you think this.

Random thought for a fix, astromech that gives you -1 points.

Definitely not. That gets rid of one of The X-Wing's biggest selling points- having Astromechs in the first place.

also, ships besides Xwings can get them.

No I am not being 'deliberately obtuse. I'm sorry you think this.

Well if you're not, you must genuinely think Soontir Fel needs a buff because he has a lower jousting value than an X-wing. Which shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what Jousting value is used for and what it means.

Random thought for a fix, astromech that gives you -1 points.

Definitely not. That gets rid of one of The X-Wing's biggest selling points- having Astromechs in the first place.

also, shisp besides Xwings can get them.

You just limit it to X wings only

A title that reduces the X-Wings points cost by one point if you have an astromech equipped would still make it impossible to put five in a single list, while effectively reducing the ship's cost.

I think it is fun to fly the X-Wing without repositioning or movement-as-action. However, this is a big disadvantage in the game and the ship should have some strong point to compensate for that. This is not really the case. In other words, the X-Wing should be the kind of craft that gives a huge reward if you are able to position it well, without needing to react to what your opponent does.

This could be perhaps be achieved by some kind of new offensive action, maybe granted by a new non-unique astromech, and benefitting from higher attack values.

Random thought for a fix, astromech that gives you -1 points.

Definitely not. That gets rid of one of The X-Wing's biggest selling points- having Astromechs in the first place.

I disagree. -1 point astro + Integrated Astro would make the generic pilots much better and would mean more opportunity cost to the Named Astros like R2-D2 and BB-8. In fact, it would probably make them too good.

Would you say that cost efficiency is more important than just good flying; cost efficiency is more important than predicting your opponents next move; cost efficiency is more important than knowing how to play the game; cost efficiency is more important than knowing the capabilities of your squad as a whole and individually? Isn't there any point where the numbers are simply close enough? I would think that if something has 50% the efficiency of most other ships it could use a fix. But we are at a point where plus or minus a few percentage points has gotten many up in arms screaming from roof tops (metaphorically speaking) and demanding that FFG fix the obvious fractional percent difference and perceived error.

I think you are missing the point. At some point you have to assume that the 2 players playing are of equal skill/competency. If you balance under that assumption, then efficiency is easily more important. And 1.2% is enough to cause one player to win more often, making his list less viable. While you could say "well, close enough" and be fine for a majority of players/groups, if you want it to be balanced, you need a ways to reduce the disparity as much as possible.

Obviously, if you assume that one player is simply better than the other, then it is pretty easy to assume that the better player will win by a huge percentage no matter what he plays.

anyone who uses Charden Refit knows the value of negating a few points.

for all intensive purposes

Sorry to be that guy.

The word "intensive" means "concentrated on a single area or subject or into a short time; very thorough or vigorous."

So an example would be "The ship came under intensive fire". A related phrase:

Admiral Piett: Intensify the forward batteries, I don't want anything to get through.

[A-Wing careenes towards Super Star Destroyer Bridge]

Admiral Piett: Intensify forward fire power!

Imperial Officer: Too late!

The phrase you're looking for is "all intents and purposes". It means "For every functional purpose".

However! If you wish you use the word "literally" for all intensive purposes, you may be my guest.

Obviously, if you assume that one player is simply better than the other, then it is pretty easy to assume that the better player will win by a huge percentage no matter what he plays.

Obviously in a perfect world with perfect players this would make a difference. But even between perfect players it amounts to 12 times out of 1,000 plays or 1.2 times out of 100 plays.

Question, are you saying that 1.2 times out of a 100 would not be obscured by mistakes of the players themselves and that players are so consistent that the 1.2% is observable and measurable in practical play and tournaments? 1.2% maybe measurable in math but on the table perhaps it's not.

At some point aren't we just chasing numbers and bemoaning those rather than actual play?

Maybe if the negative point upgrade was Xwing only Torpedo slot, it would be better, no one uses that slot.

for all intensive purposes

Sorry to be that guy.

The word "intensive" means "concentrated on a single area or subject or into a short time; very thorough or vigorous."

So an example would be "The ship came under intensive fire". A related phrase:

Admiral Piett: Intensify the forward batteries, I don't want anything to get through.

[A-Wing careenes towards Super Star Destroyer Bridge]

Admiral Piett: Intensify forward fire power!

Imperial Officer: Too late!

The phrase you're looking for is "all intents and purposes". It means "For every functional purpose".

However! If you wish you use the word "literally" for all intensive purposes, you may be my guest.

Jesus Christ thank you. It's like when people say "Would of" instead of "Would've".

Maybe a title that makes it cheaper to take torpedoes. Like -4 to the cost of your torpedo to a minimum of 0 (possibly add a clause that lets you keep your TL for rerolls). Now all X-wings are packing some extra heat at no cost. I for one don't want to see them get action maneuvers but I like the idea of them being one of the hardest hitting ships in the game; they've got 4 lasers and two torpedo tubes for crying out loud.

Random thought for a fix, astromech that gives you -1 points.

By itself I would say no to a straight up negative card, but if you want to go that route something like this might do it:

R3

Astromech

X-Wing only, -1 points

Your upgrade bar gains the system icon.

You must equip a system upgrade costing at least 1 point to equip this card.

I personally would rather see something else though as this would just make it too much like the B and even like the Advanced.

Maybe a title that makes it cheaper to take torpedoes. Like -4 to the cost of your torpedo to a minimum of 0 (possibly add a clause that lets you keep your TL for rerolls). Now all X-wings are packing some extra heat at no cost. I for one don't want to see them get action maneuvers but I like the idea of them being one of the hardest hitting ships in the game; they've got 4 lasers and two torpedo tubes for crying out loud.

Problem is, that's the B-Wing and Y-Wing's job. If the X-Wing is better at hauling torpedoes than torpedo-built ships, we got a thematic clash here.

Jesus Christ thank you. It's like when people say "Would of" instead of "Would've".

When I took Latin and we would find these weird spelling changes in the middle of a declension, something that totally broke the pattern of any other words in that declension, my Latin prof would say "ok, say that word as you think it should be spelled. Out loud. 10 times fast." And _every time_ we did this, by the 4th or 5th repetition the spelling and pronunciation we wanted to be using would turn into the spelling and pronunciation we actually used.

This is basically the only reason I'm willing to accept "would of" when spoken aloud. Even though it makes me want to cry a tiny bit inside.

Maybe a title that makes it cheaper to take torpedoes. Like -4 to the cost of your torpedo to a minimum of 0 (possibly add a clause that lets you keep your TL for rerolls). Now all X-wings are packing some extra heat at no cost. I for one don't want to see them get action maneuvers but I like the idea of them being one of the hardest hitting ships in the game; they've got 4 lasers and two torpedo tubes for crying out loud.

Problem is, that's the B-Wing and Y-Wing's job. If the X-Wing is better at hauling torpedoes than torpedo-built ships, we got a thematic clash here.

Bs and Ys get Extra munitions. And bombs. I think they will be fine.

Jesus Christ thank you. It's like when people say "Would of" instead of "Would've".

When I took Latin and we would find these weird spelling changes in the middle of a declension, something that totally broke the pattern of any other words in that declension, my Latin prof would say "ok, say that word as you think it should be spelled. Out loud. 10 times fast." And _every time_ we did this, by the 4th or 5th repetition the spelling and pronunciation we wanted to be using would turn into the spelling and pronunciation we actually used.This is basically the only reason I'm willing to accept "would of" when spoken aloud. Even though it makes me want to cry a tiny bit inside.

But 'would of' isn't a misspelling of 'would have' it's just wrong! (Yes I'm crying more than a little now)

Random thought for a fix, astromech that gives you -1 points.

By itself I would say no to a straight up negative card, but if you want to go that route something like this might do it:

R3

Astromech

X-Wing only, -1 points

Your upgrade bar gains the system icon.

You must equip a system upgrade costing at least 1 point to equip this card.

I personally would rather see something else though as this would just make it too much like the B and even like the Advanced.

Yer you can't give it system. That pushs it too close to the grey mush of every ship does everything I said earlier. Astro is gunna have to be where a fix comes I think.