X-wing only. Non-Resistence only.

Per the rules that doesn't actually work. Upgrades are assigned to the Rebel, Imperial or Scum and Villainy primary factions. There is per the rules no such thing as a Rebel Alliance or First Order upgrade.

This of course could be changed, but it's fair to ask if they would just so they can keep the S-Foil card off of T-70's.

Thing is, if the point cost is low enough, say 0-1 point, and goes in the modification slot, you could make something that is useful, yet balanced for all ships with s-foils. Because it has to compete with other good modifications. It would have to be fairly decent even at 0 points to push Integrated Astromech out of that slot.

But I don't think the X-Wing is in need of a major fix like a lot of you.

I don't think there's a single person here who thinks the X-Wing needs a major fix. What it needs to be point for point as good if not a bit better than the B-Wing.

Lore however is the worse possible way to balance something, and the mear fact that you think it is speaks volumes about how poorly you understand what balance is or how it works.

So, again, you're saying the X-Wing needs to be better than the B-Wing... Yet then proceed to lecture me about balancing.

Hey, I'll be the first to admit I'm no "MathWinger." And I'm certainly no master at this game. So I might indeed be missing something in terms of these point values.

But, once again, it seems you are trying to ignore the 'game balance vs. lore balance' issue (which is something FFG obviously must struggle with) by having your precious X-Wings be much more desirable to play than the B-Wings. No matter what.

PS - It's "mere," not "mear." Sorry to nitpick.

Title Card:

*T-65 Only*

Gains boost and -2pts.

To me, it'd make sense with the lore given that the T-65 would be a tad "outdated" so of course it'd be cheaper. And well, like all things retro, people are going to hotrod old sleds with big ass engines. Hence, the boost.

PPS - I do attempt an understanding at game balance. I played A LOT of Battletech back in the day... But that game worked on tonnages so it was quite easy to strip down a 'mech, max it out, and go to town. That, however, did not mean that the general sourcebooks didn't have many of us scratching our heads and thinking (out loud), "Hey, why is this 'mech outfitted with such crappy weapons? This other 'mech at equal tonnage is clearly better!" But again, as Battletech was a multimedia franchise with novels and video games alongside the tabletop wargame, this was another example of 'game balance vs. lore balance.' Some things - in their "generic" shape - are just not as good as others.

So, again, you're saying the X-Wing needs to be better than the B-Wing... Yet then proceed to lecture me about balancing.

The X-Wing needs to be point for point as good if not slightly better than the B-Wing at jousting , because the X-Wing is a pure jouster and the B-Wing isn't.

Edit: That had been stated a number of times in this and other threads and I honestly didn't think it needed to be said again.

*T-65 Only*

There is no such thing as a T-65 in this game. There are X-Wings and X-Wing T-70

I don't think Xwing only needs a fix. I think the Bwing, Xwing, and Starviper all could benefit from the ability to cut and run in certain engagements. All seem like ships that enjoy "attack runs". I'm actually now very supportive of the camp that says no attacks on closed S-foils.



You could add the Token, the action, then have different cards that interact with the token differently and the base ability isn't that helpful for T-70s. (The plus 1 agility is pretty nice for Vipers, getting 4 defence is nothing to laugh at.)

*T-65 Only*

There is no such thing as a T-65 in this game. There are X-Wings and X-Wing T-70

"x wing only. may not be equipped by a t-70 x wing."

But I don't think the X-Wing is in need of a major fix like a lot of you.

I don't think there's a single person here who thinks the X-Wing needs a major fix. What it needs to be point for point as good if not a bit better than the B-Wing.

Lore however is the worse possible way to balance something, and the mear fact that you think it is speaks volumes about how poorly you understand what balance is or how it works.

So, again, you're saying the X-Wing needs to be better than the B-Wing... Yet then proceed to lecture me about balancing.

Hey, I'll be the first to admit I'm no "MathWinger." And I'm certainly no master at this game. So I might indeed be missing something in terms of these point values.

But, once again, it seems you are trying to ignore the 'game balance vs. lore balance' issue (which is something FFG obviously must struggle with) by having your precious X-Wings be much more desirable to play than the B-Wings. No matter what.

PS - It's "mere," not "mear." Sorry to nitpick.

b wing gets a whole new niche with chimps. its more maneuverable than an x wing by a lot, and now its gonna have double super torps on top of a barrel roll, systems, and all its other options. you even get pseudo turret torps with nera whose suddenly looking good.

the x wing flies at the enemy and shoots. thats all it does. so it should be better than the b wing at flying at the enemy and shooting, especially given the fact that they cost pretty much the same amount of points.

"S-Foils" Variable Configuration Action

When you play this card, assign yourself a weapons disabled token, one evade, and boost at the end of this unit's movement. (T-65 may equip this card for 0 points) 3 Points

There.

The X-Wing gets it free, but all other Variable Configuration craft may benefit

How exactly? There is no T-65 in this game.

Also, you don't play cards.

You know what I mean. Don't be pedantic about it.

It's easy to state that the old one is a T-65 on the same card.

It's easy to state that the old one is a T-65 on the same card.

How exactly? The card doesn't say T-65 on it anywhere in the title. So in order to separate them you either have to get very wordy, or make upgrades based on subfaction.

I mean sure we may all know the difference between the T-65 and T-70 but rules can't assume that. The closest you could get easily would be 'Non X-Wing T-70'.

It's easy to state that the old one is a T-65 on the same card.

How exactly? The card doesn't say T-65 on it anywhere in the title. So in order to separate them you either have to get very wordy, or make upgrades based on subfaction.

I mean sure we may all know the difference between the T-65 and T-70 but rules can't assume that. The closest you could get easily would be 'Non X-Wing T-70'.

"Treat X-Wing as T-65"

It's easy to state that the old one is a T-65 on the same card.

How exactly? The card doesn't say T-65 on it anywhere in the title. So in order to separate them you either have to get very wordy, or make upgrades based on subfaction.

I mean sure we may all know the difference between the T-65 and T-70 but rules can't assume that. The closest you could get easily would be 'Non X-Wing T-70'.

"Treat X-Wing as T-65"

Great, then we can see poe flying his T65 T70.

It' semantic, but in a rule based game semantics have their place.

This whole thing seems needlessly complicated. Why not divide cards by sub faction? So "Rebel Only" cards can be used by "The Rebel Alliance™" and "The Resistance™", but "Rebel Alliance Only" cards may only be used by "The Rebel Alliance™".

This whole thing seems needlessly complicated. Why not divide cards by sub faction?

Because that's not how the rules currently work. Which doesn't mean it can't be changed of course. But per the rules as written, as far as upgrades go only the Primary faction counts. That means Rebels, Imps or S&V.

They'd have to change the rules for upgrades to count only for a subfaction. Which again is something they could do, but that doesn't mean they will.

Because that's not how the rules currently work. Which doesn't mean it can't be changed of course. But per the rules as written, as far as upgrades go only the Primary faction counts. That means Rebels, Imps or S&V.

They'd have to change the rules for upgrades to count only for a subfaction. Which again is something they could do, but that doesn't mean they will.

Ahh yes, I just reread that section and it does say

Each squad is aligned to one of these primary factions and may contain an ships and upgrades belonging to its subfactions.

Still, it seems easier to errata this than trying to make the "X-wing" a "T-65 X-wing".

That is, if they even want to do this in the first place.

It's easy to state that the old one is a T-65 on the same card.

How exactly? The card doesn't say T-65 on it anywhere in the title. So in order to separate them you either have to get very wordy, or make upgrades based on subfaction.

I mean sure we may all know the difference between the T-65 and T-70 but rules can't assume that. The closest you could get easily would be 'Non X-Wing T-70'.

"Treat X-Wing as T-65"

It'd be much easier then to ship it with a title

T-65

X-Wing only. Rebel Alliance only.

If you equip [s-Foil modification] reduce its squad points cost by 3.

This whole thing seems needlessly complicated. Why not divide cards by sub faction?

Because that's not how the rules currently work. Which doesn't mean it can't be changed of course. But per the rules as written, as far as upgrades go only the Primary faction counts. That means Rebels, Imps or S&V.They'd have to change the rules for upgrades to count only for a subfaction. Which again is something they could do, but that doesn't mean they will.

But isn't that just because we've not seen any subfaction only upgrades? We've only seen upgrades limiting something to a primary faction but I'm at a loss why rules would need to be changed? It's just another limitation after all, functionally no different than Rebel only or A-Wing only?

We could discuss the mechanics of the fix I proposed too, rather than the wording. :/

We could discuss the mechanics of the fix I proposed too, rather than the wording. :/

Where's the fun in that?

But an evade and a boost (you didn't specify a free boost action, did you mean to or were you planning to PtL into a second boost?) in exchange for no shot.

Hmz.

Biggs springs to mind of course.

It's a mini-SLAM.

Why yes. Yes it is a mini SLAM. On the point of Rogue Squadron, if you slapped that trigger down to close the S-Foils you seriously rocketed forward. I think giving the X-Wing a mini-slam would give it that nice hit-and-run capability it needs to drop in and out of a fight.

And yes. It was a free boost action.

Interesting point brought up in this thread is how difficult it will be for FFG to ever introduce an over-arcing "boost" card to the original Xwing's power due to the fact that it is plainly "Xwing" and we know that T-70s count also as xwings. You'd need to make a card that can't go on a ship with at tech slot or other such nonsense to make it a boost to only the 1 ship... That just seems like a headache,

We don't know how dual Upgrades work yet though. So until we know it might actually not make sense mechanically.

I also support the S-foils closing as being a cut and run, or speed into battle mechanic where-in:

You gain 1 agility,

Can't attack

After performing a straight maneuver over 3 you may preform a free boost

At first I thought it would be a good idea for it as an action but dual upgrade modification is now starting to sound better.

Still I would say primary weapon is reduced to 0. Agility is increased to 1 and at the end phase must perform a speed 1 maneuver.

Assuming dual cards work by flipping at activation, why does the "open side" have to provide a bonus? We see the main stats of the model as (x-wing - t-65 and T-70) as the open side. The closed side could be this:

Assign a weapons disabled token.

Before revealing a manoeuvre, you may move 1 forward.

Your action bar gains the evade action.

This provides a bonus, but comes at a cost of not firing. The t-70 can spend points on a comm relay. If this is an action to switch the card, or if done upon activation, the dual card can be balanced point wise and accordingly.