X-wing doesn't need a 2.0 due to reasons above "the games never been so balanced..."

The OP shouldn't have been given that much grief, after all anyone can typo or misspell "chimps".

X-wing doesn't need a 2.0 due to reasons above "the games never been so balanced..."

The OP shouldn't have been given that much grief, after all anyone can typo or misspell "chimps".

I like this answer the best "the game's never been so balanced" I soooooo hope it's true and we can stop fixing things soon. Defenders and bombers next. I'm sure there are a few others but......... I've crossed my fingers.

X-wing doesn't need a 2.0 due to reasons above "the games never been so balanced..."

The OP shouldn't have been given that much grief, after all anyone can typo or misspell "chimps".

I like this answer the best "the game's never been so balanced" I soooooo hope it's true and we can stop fixing things soon. Defenders and bombers next. I'm sure there are a few others but......... I've crossed my fingers.

Unfortunately, I do think they've gotten into a pattern of coming in conservatively with new ships, especially small base ships post Wave 4 (the K-Wing has done well as a TLT platform, but that's about it) The exception of recent releases may be the TIE/fo pack which comes with good pilots and good upgrades for the generics. Anyway, the point is that I think might see the pattern continue to some extent. At the same time, it's possible that at with ships with similar characteristics (TAP vs. A-Wing), they'll be better out of the gate in those cases.

OP, don't go away mad.

OP, just go away.

Was there any need for this?

It seemed like a well thought out reasoned argument, he sounds like he has played the game for a while and has brought up a point that I believe has started to raise its head in recent releases, instead of reasoned discussion and debate he was confronted with this. I see his posts descend into frustration from countless negative replies and I think the reaction from some members of this site who have massive post counts who should know better, pretty **** shameful.

As I side note, we recently had a second edition of X wing( was it??) I think the better route would be to fix the ordanance problem at source rather then countless upgrade cards in various expansions, there may be something to take from GW model, new edition and the former one is obsolete, this would avoid the damage deck debacle we experienced over last two months.

I love this game but it's not perfect about time some people around here recognised the fact and let others air their issues.

...Take a note from GW?

Are you totally batshit insane?!

Wow.

No. Just no. I'm not even going to tell you how bad it would be for ANY company to take ANYTHING from GW. You should just know, as a wargamer and as a nerd. Shame on you.

Joking, by the way. Just in case... That was a fun post. Its supposed to make you laugh.

NOW LAUGH!

Oh,I could do with a 2.0, with revised dials and templates for A-Wings and Interceptors, giving them 4 & 5 speed maneuvers. Give them the speed they need.

And long range ordnance, 4-5.

Yeah but then it's X-Wing 2.5, then 3.0

... then we gotta do a reset because all the old guard got all neckbeardy, so 4.0 is actually more like 2.5 (that's when the really good nerd we like joined the team) but then after that I mean hell, it's become a cash cow so now we get X-Wing 4.5, X-Wing Spelljammer, X-Wing Undivided, X-Wing Civil War, X-Wing vs Captain Crunch....

I could go on but...

X-Wing v Tie Fighter: The Reboot!

okay, that's the last one I swear...

OP, don't go away mad.

OP, just go away.

Was there any need for this?

It seemed like a well thought out reasoned argument, he sounds like he has played the game for a while and has brought up a point that I believe has started to raise its head in recent releases, instead of reasoned discussion and debate he was confronted with this. I see his posts descend into frustration from countless negative replies and I think the reaction from some members of this site who have massive post counts who should know better, pretty **** shameful.

As I side note, we recently had a second edition of X wing( was it??) I think the better route would be to fix the ordanance problem at source rather then countless upgrade cards in various expansions, there may be something to take from GW model, new edition and the former one is obsolete, this would avoid the damage deck debacle we experienced over last two months.

I love this game but it's not perfect about time some people around here recognised the fact and let others air their issues.

...Take a note from GW?

Are you totally batshit insane?!

Wow.

No. Just no. I'm not even going to tell you how bad it would be for ANY company to take ANYTHING from GW. You should just know, as a wargamer and as a nerd. Shame on you.

Joking, by the way. Just in case... That was a fun post. Its supposed to make you laugh.

NOW LAUGH!

Yes totally Batshit insane did make me laugh.

Looking back at what I said, I was suggesting they make an X wing set like the force awakens but it completely replaces the original set, but does not make all the expansions obsolete.

Yeah I think GW could learn a lot from FFG as a matter of fact( see only mildy Batshit Insane)

We have a simple rule for casual play;

As we bought the plastic, we are allowed to use any upgrades we see fit as long as it is possible to add to the ship.

Sure, we love the artwork, but buying multiple €15,- expansions just to get enough of one card is not possible for everyone.

We see the cards more as additional or advanced rules, made available with each expansion.

We see the cards more as additional or advanced rules, made available with each expansion.

There's only one issue with that. I mean I agree for the most part that when playing casual you can do this... But there are times the cards are also counters.

Such as torpedoes/missiles/bombs/ect... These aren't just rules but also a way to track how many you have. So while you don't need to have the card persay, you should have something that allows people to know how many of what secondary someone has.

Yeah but that's no different from 40K single/limited use items (such as the hunter killer).For casual games, I rarely get EVERY card out, except those that are really relevant.

Admittedly for discards I do use the ordnance cards however, but that's more because I can. If say I wanted to field 16 conc missiles but only had 4 cards, i'd just use poker chips.

Yeah but that's no different from 40K single/limited use items

Well it is and it isn't...

40k doesn't come with anything to keep track of those things, so you have use a token or dice or something else to keep track... Unless you don't, which I suppose is fine if you have a better memory than I.

Most games have something that you use various tokens to keep track of something with. In FoW there's dug in and pinned down tokens, in Warmachine there's on fire or Focus tokens. in X-Wing our tokens are also cards with the rules/stats on them.

So while I wouldn't have an issue with someone using a poker chip or something to track torpedoes or bombs... I'd rather they use something, and getting out the cards is likely as easy as getting out a die.

True enough, I'm more playing devils advocate here (I use cards for ordnance, but to be honest things like the X1 or Royal guard titles I might not bother to drag out in a casual game).

but to be honest things like the X1 or Royal guard titles

Oh yeah, completely agree about those. Even the Chardaan refit I wouldn't bother with for most casual games.

I figure that if the only point of a card is to let you take another card, there's often little point having them out.

We see the cards more as additional or advanced rules, made available with each expansion.

There's only one issue with that. I mean I agree for the most part that when playing casual you can do this... But there are times the cards are also counters.

Such as torpedoes/missiles/bombs/ect... These aren't just rules but also a way to track how many you have. So while you don't need to have the card persay, you should have something that allows people to know how many of what secondary someone has.

Good point, I should have explained we print our squads from a squad builder: http://xwing-builder.co.uk/build

When firing ordnance we scratch the missile/torpedo/bomb used. In case of extra munitions or duplicates we note how many are left. We do the same with Hull and Shield points. No tokens are used.

If there are multiple ships of the same type, each pilot gets a number written next to his name and the corresponding number is placed on the base of the miniature.

Makes for a faster set up too

The game is in an interesting place right now. On one hand, the upgrade system allows them to fix subpar releases in a way that either requires complicated errata (cards lose a lot of value the more they stop being the source of truth and the longer an errata document gets, the harder it is to enforce en mass) or a whole new edition. It's a great system that's done fantastic things for the game.

On the other hand, the game has grown to the point where the "board game plus expansions" nature of its early release makes it less practical to own everything for every faction; particularly if you haven't been collecting since the start. It's easy enough to own enough ships for 6 or more squads from a single faction at this point. It's large enough that there's value in lowering the barrier to entry and in isolating the factions a bit to let players focus on their favorite subset.

At the very least, I'd like to see "fix" cards spread out a bit more. I actually thought Extra Munitions was a great example, available in a ship for both Rebels and Empire, with only Scum left out, which is the faction with the least access to torpedoes. I'm a little sad Guidance Chips aren't in the Ghost box, as that would be a fantastic parallel release overall.

Beyond that, it would be nice to lesson the burden on upgrades. An official app could be one solution or they could just start putting more than 5 cards in the small ships to double up on things. I don't hate the current system, but it is starting to become a bit of a burden to entry into competitive play.

I think at its core this is a question of cost vs. convenience. Does an errata/FAQ release mean you have to keep up with stuff? Sure. But it also means that you don't have to pay $60-75 to keep up with their fixes. That's what I'd be looking at - a classic 5x TIE Bomber list would mean 5 Adv. Prototypes. Now multiply that by every fix card FFG has put out. I'm terrified to do the math on how many models I've bought just to have access to cards, but it's a lot.

You may be fine paying that fee rather than keeping up with rules errata, but there's nothing the least bit unreasonable about having the opposite view. The vast majority of wargames have that opposite view. The swarm of abuse and insults thrown at the OP for what is actually the standard view in the industry is just sad, but also sadly the norm around here.

Yes, people can vote with their wallets. I have, honestly - I wasn't paying for an Epic ship I'd never use just to get the TIE Advanced fixed, and after buying multiple K-wings and Punishers - both of which I hate and think are idiotic - just for ordnance. It broke my brain, and I haven't bought anything X-wing since, and won't touch Armada for the same reason. X-wing is a good game, but when I look at my rather massive Battlefoam case, and consider the ships in there that have never seen the table (but their cards have) the value sense for what I get for most of my purchases simply isn't there.

And that's getting worse. I have 5 TIE Bombers, and 3 Defenders - I don't need more, but that's what I'll get for Imperial Veterans. I have 11 TIE Fighters, so if I pick up an Assault Carrier that goes to a never-going-to-see-use 13, and an Epic ship for a format I don't like playing. I'm no OT purist, but I think the Prototype is just ugly, and an uncreative ship to boot. But if I want to fix the TIE Bombers I've already got... But this is what the model pushes me to do.

At a certain point, it seems, you end up doing more bookkeeping with cardboard than playing with plastic toy space ships. For me, the biggest impediment to miniature gaming in general is the setup time, and anything that can be done to mitigate that is gravy. Harkening back to the original point, isn't it worth considering a system that does away with the monotonous task of collecting new cards just to play with old cards? It's a glass-half-empty approach, I guess; some want to praise FFG for making old things viable, and others feel that those old things could have been viable all along, had FFG not been so stubborn about altering the rules. Look at Autothrusters, for example. A good fix to a stale meta, certainly. But couldn't that also have been done by reducing the number of out-of-arc attack dice for PWT ships? That was the obvious fix from the get-go, and yet whole seasons went by without any acknowledgment from FFG that something was wrong.

Look, I will always defend the pay2win business model. You want to win so bad that you need 3PO? Go buy him. I just can't help but feel that there's a better way to expand the game without tacking on more bandaids, whether they cost money or not.

Well really the easiest way to solve the competitive play problem is to fix the way it requires cards. Really you should only need one physical copy of a card in order to use it. Perhaps a better roster sheet that players could use to mark things off the way described above?

I mean, if you brought your 5 Tie FO swarm you probably have enough cards right? But if you wanted to run a Black Crack Swarm I don't think you should need all the crackshot cards present. One card and a counter will work just as well.

They want us to have the cards and not proxy, so this allows us to do that. Maybe if FFG put out a token/card kit that players could make their own re-usable components for tournament play.

I mean, we would still buy the ships, right?

At a certain point, it seems, you end up doing more bookkeeping with cardboard than playing with plastic toy space ships. For me, the biggest impediment to miniature gaming in general is the setup time, and anything that can be done to mitigate that is gravy. Harkening back to the original point, isn't it worth considering a system that does away with the monotonous task of collecting new cards just to play with old cards? It's a glass-half-empty approach, I guess; some want to praise FFG for making old things viable, and others feel that those old things could have been viable all along, had FFG not been so stubborn about altering the rules. Look at Autothrusters, for example. A good fix to a stale meta, certainly. But couldn't that also have been done by reducing the number of out-of-arc attack dice for PWT ships? That was the obvious fix from the get-go, and yet whole seasons went by without any acknowledgment from FFG that something was wrong.

Look, I will always defend the pay2win business model. You want to win so bad that you need 3PO? Go buy him. I just can't help but feel that there's a better way to expand the game without tacking on more bandaids, whether they cost money or not.

Good method to reduce setup time is to organize all upgrades by type into bags, leaving out excess copies. I also have all my pilots in a binder, loosely organized in a system that makes perfect sense to me (a chain of this is like this one, which was replaced by this eventually, and then we get into bombers...). Doesn't address most of your post but it's done wonders for me so I thought I'd share.

I mean, we would still buy the ships, right?

No we wouldn't. If I didn't need to buy a Starviiper for the sake of Autothruster I wouldn't of ever bought one. I know back in the day a number of people bought 4 Shuttles for the sake of AdvSen.

So doing something that let you get by with less ships would in fact eat into FFG's bottom line.

The game is in an interesting place right now. On one hand, the upgrade system allows them to fix subpar releases in a way that either requires complicated errata (cards lose a lot of value the more they stop being the source of truth and the longer an errata document gets, the harder it is to enforce en mass) or a whole new edition. It's a great system that's done fantastic things for the game.

On the other hand, the game has grown to the point where the "board game plus expansions" nature of its early release makes it less practical to own everything for every faction; particularly if you haven't been collecting since the start. It's easy enough to own enough ships for 6 or more squads from a single faction at this point. It's large enough that there's value in lowering the barrier to entry and in isolating the factions a bit to let players focus on their favorite subset.

I think at its core this is a question of cost vs. convenience. Does an errata/FAQ release mean you have to keep up with stuff? Sure. But it also means that you don't have to pay $60-75 to keep up with their fixes. That's what I'd be looking at - a classic 5x TIE Bomber list would mean 5 Adv. Prototypes. Now multiply that by every fix card FFG has put out. I'm terrified to do the math on how many models I've bought just to have access to cards, but it's a lot.

You may be fine paying that fee rather than keeping up with rules errata, but there's nothing the least bit unreasonable about having the opposite view. The vast majority of wargames have that opposite view. The swarm of abuse and insults thrown at the OP for what is actually the standard view in the industry is just sad, but also sadly the norm around here.

Yes, people can vote with their wallets. I have, honestly - I wasn't paying for an Epic ship I'd never use just to get the TIE Advanced fixed, and after buying multiple K-wings and Punishers - both of which I hate and think are idiotic - just for ordnance. It broke my brain, and I haven't bought anything X-wing since, and won't touch Armada for the same reason. X-wing is a good game, but when I look at my rather massive Battlefoam case, and consider the ships in there that have never seen the table (but their cards have) the value sense for what I get for most of my purchases simply isn't there.

And that's getting worse. I have 5 TIE Bombers, and 3 Defenders - I don't need more, but that's what I'll get for Imperial Veterans. I have 11 TIE Fighters, so if I pick up an Assault Carrier that goes to a never-going-to-see-use 13, and an Epic ship for a format I don't like playing. I'm no OT purist, but I think the Prototype is just ugly, and an uncreative ship to boot. But if I want to fix the TIE Bombers I've already got... But this is what the model pushes me to do.

At a certain point, it seems, you end up doing more bookkeeping with cardboard than playing with plastic toy space ships. For me, the biggest impediment to miniature gaming in general is the setup time, and anything that can be done to mitigate that is gravy. Harkening back to the original point, isn't it worth considering a system that does away with the monotonous task of collecting new cards just to play with old cards?

Look, I will always defend the pay2win business model. You want to win so bad that you need 3PO? Go buy him. I just can't help but feel that there's a better way to expand the game without tacking on more bandaids, whether they cost money or not.

Well really the easiest way to solve the competitive play problem is to fix the way it requires cards. Really you should only need one physical copy of a card in order to use it. Perhaps a better roster sheet that players could use to mark things off the way described above?

I mean, if you brought your 5 Tie FO swarm you probably have enough cards right? But if you wanted to run a Black Crack Swarm I don't think you should need all the crackshot cards present. One card and a counter will work just as well.

They want us to have the cards and not proxy, so this allows us to do that. Maybe if FFG put out a token/card kit that players could make their own re-usable components for tournament play.

Gentlemen, you basically sum it up. Situation, problem, finer points, and possible solution. My thanks!

I know my solution in earlier posts above is not working for competitive play on higher levels (Nationals, Worlds; in store championships here most people don´t seem to have many of everything), but for casual play it reduces set-up time and using cards we don´t have or don´t have in necessary quantities.

FFG is the one that shall choose whether or not to create the possibillity to play tournaments without having to own every necessary card. However, for casual play the squadbuilders have created the possibillity (adding the gravy, to freely quote WonderWAAAGH) to do what we were planning to do.

Playing a game of X-wing; after all, it is the setting and the models we are playing this game for.

I mean, we would still buy the ships, right?

No we wouldn't. If I didn't need to buy a Starviiper for the sake of Autothruster I wouldn't of ever bought one. I know back in the day a number of people bought 4 Shuttles for the sake of AdvSen.

So doing something that let you get by with less ships would in fact eat into FFG's bottom line.

I don't think there's any doubt about this. FFG abandoned the randomized model, and replaced it wholesale with a bundling model. They're the cable company of gaming, which is a pretty damning statement IMHO.

Consumers have every right to expect better treatment from the companies they buy from. FFG's bundling model is, in many ways, very unfriendly to consumers. A lot of people around here either don't believe that because they love FFG, don't think it matters because the overall cost is lower than some other games (although that's ending), or because the model can be circumvented (as long as you limit how you play). But that doesn't change the inherent unfriendliness of bundling.

The problem many people are starting to have is that a model which was minimally unfriendly early has gotten worse and worse. I was OK buying a third A-wing for Push the Limit, I could see myself using those. I rolled my eyes when they only put Advanced Sensors in the Lambda. Imperial Aces didn't bother me personally because I loved the uniquely distinctive paint jobs for the matching pilots, but it catapulted me way past anything I'd ever reasonably use on the table at once. And it just kept getting worse from there - people who didn't care for Scum still needed Autothrusters, then ugly ships for ordnance, now uglier ships for YET ANOTHER ordnance fix. It just keeps getting worse

And as it gets worse and worse, "FFG is doing it to make more money" becomes a less and less acceptable answer for many consumers.

I mean, we would still buy the ships, right?

No we wouldn't. If I didn't need to buy a Starviiper for the sake of Autothruster I wouldn't of ever bought one. I know back in the day a number of people bought 4 Shuttles for the sake of AdvSen.

So doing something that let you get by with less ships would in fact eat into FFG's bottom line.

True but I would have had more money to spend on the ships and games that I did want. My only example is me; I deliberately stopped at Wave 1 with Imperial Assault and Wave 2 with Armada and have no intention of going further. That decision was solely due to my experience with X-Wing. This is due to both over buying when things like aces come out and buying unwanted ships just for the cards. So because of their business model I am limiting my financial exposure and actually reducing my buy in.

I guess it goes both ways.

As a casual gamer, I'd hate to be the guy trying to explain to my opponents that there are unwritten rules, such as: "since I haven't equipped any modifications to this B-wing, I get to add a critical to each attack with my torpedoes. It says so on the Internet."

Having the card gives a stronger impression of "no, really, I'm not just making this up". I think the card as a 0 cost mod is a good way to handle it, and it will save a lot of arguments that errata could start. Not all players get online and look up the latest FAQ and errata for gaming, but everyone at the table has easy access to professionally produced, and therefore obviously authorized, rules in the form of books, sheets and cards when setting up a game.