but no ship is good enough that it is seen "99%" of the time.

Corran Horn begs your pardon.

But to be fair he's the only example I can think of. Dash is close, but there are Leebo builds out there; Vader is close, but AC generics take mention; Soontir is close, but Carnor is also common; as an inverse example Gold Squadron Y's are close, but sometimes you see a Grey for PS and ever so rarely you'll see Horton; probably 99% of Aggressor lists use 88B, but they also often have another IG-88 in there, so his usage is closer to 50%.

Corran Horn is hardly seen 99% of the time. Hell, I see more Poe than Corran these days.

Edit: Soontir also sees more play than Corran.

Mary sue inside a Mary sue with 4 more onboard

Rebels in a nutshell

You mean the writers of Rebels see themselves as freighters/shuttles?

Nah I mean all the characters are complete and utter failure of writers, filled with Special Snowflake cream.

All the character set is just a bluntest example of quotas on aliens and females...ahem...

And then these mary sues are put into "OMG MARVEL OF SCIENCE" shuttle inside of "OMG MARVEL OF SCIENCE!" ship

and given complete losers for adversaries.

p.s. still better than re-telling New Hope TFA though, with their "Like T-67 but better! Like TIE\Ln but better! Like Deathstar BUT BETTER!" bantacrap

*stops rambling*

what was the thread about?

Firepower?

I think you are indeed pretty alone with this view of things! Especially TFA is widely regarded as a really good movie, and then the ships being developments from the older ones makes a lot of sense too!

Also the Ghost and Phantom will very likely not be seen even close to the top of the meta! And the Characters being clichés in an animated series... Well i can pretty easily forgive that!

I know, right? So unoriginal! Like, imagine if the US Navy was all like "let's build a new fighter to replace the F/A-18 Hornet but it will be the same Hornet but Superer!!! I know, we'll call it the... Super Hornet!!! Hur hur hur

O wait that actually happened

There has been slight power creep in the form of red dice in this game but it's extremely mild. The fact that TIE swarms from wave 1 are still good goes to show how well balanced the game still is.

Also there was an A-wing and a bandit on the top table at World's. Two-dice ships have options.

There has been slight power creep in the form of red dice in this game but it's extremely mild. The fact that TIE swarms from wave 1 are still good goes to show how well balanced the game still is.

Also there was an A-wing and a bandit on the top table at World's. Two-dice ships have options.

One doesn't shoot at all

and the other is a filler

yeah >_>

There has been slight power creep in the form of red dice in this game but it's extremely mild. The fact that TIE swarms from wave 1 are still good goes to show how well balanced the game still is.

Also there was an A-wing and a bandit on the top table at World's. Two-dice ships have options.

One doesn't shoot at all

and the other is a filler

yeah >_>

Btw, who killed Corran on that table?

And whisper on the same table a year earlier?

Their dice killed them.

Their dice killed them.

I have never lost a ship any other way. Like I said, based on your complaints in this thread alone I think maybe positive play/viewing experiences just aren't really your forte.

This thread is a negative itself.

Unless there was something negative it wouldn't be brought up at all.

You can be gradually reduced to 0 hp.

or you can blank out below mathematical average. that's called "dice killed the ship"

and telling the truth I can't really say what's worse: having to rely on some Soontir's 4 dice and tokenstack blank out

or repeatedly deal no damage to poe because his damage mitigation is over the top and he keeps regening.

*keeps hoping for the return of Joustwing

People keep making arguments, how FFGs trend of "fixing" old ships is a sign of power-creep in the game, but the truth is that almost all the ships that have been or going to be fixed (Tie Adv.,

...A-Wing, Defender, Y-Wing...) where never considered good to begin with. the only case I can think of where an old ship was marginalized because a new one came out and did the same thing but better was when the B-Wing replaced the X-Wing and that was all the way back in wave 3.

Some days ago there was a debate about whether or not some ships were kept deliberately underpowered to sell new expansions with upgrades that amount to nothing more than errata for which we are all happily paying money. Note the word 'deliberately' - there is nothing to suggest this is an evil masterplan, but do we really care when the effect is the same, regardless of malice or simple good ol' stupidity.

Which is it? Let me put it this way: I'm sure they mean well. FFG is probably as dedicated to 'not being evil' as Google.

*keeps hoping for the return of Joustwing

You keep hoping for something you just said is bad? Jousting is were only dice matter, mathwinging is the only source of knowledge, and who ever has the hottest dice win. No, no thank you. You didn't play back when 7 TIE swarms won every table because you couldn't reposition. No, this game is in the best state is has been. Jousting take no skill, and for someone that complains about PWT as much as a few other vocal blow hards, it seems odd to want something that is essentially the same dice-fest.

Counterpoint: the original designer(s), play testers, etc didn't understand the full ramifications of 2 red dice vs 3 red dice, green dice vs red dice, how ordnance would (or wouldn't) work. The original design was not perfect. That's not a complaint though as I truly love this game and think it's fantastic. However that scenario did leave this game with a great many ships that were weaker than what was intended. So instead of turning their backs on Darth Vader, Interceptors, A-Wings and Y-Wings that all came out of the first two waves they started working carefully towards fixes. This was the right thing to do. There is tremendous demand for these iconic ships snd was a benefit to everyone.

Along the way more ship designs were found to be too conservative initially. Alex said he regrets that the HWK only has a 1 red dice primary (I'm paraphrasing). The Defender with a white K was found to not be the terror they thought it would be and it ended up over costed along with some other warts. The only thing they ever truly made overpowered, or at least too negative of a play experience, was the Phantom which they effectively reigned in a bit. It's still a lethal ship in the hands of a surgeon but is less forgiving and still fragile enough to not be too powerful.

This game is filled with ships that people complain about to this day as being overpowered yet in many (most? all?) cases those ships have weaknesses that are routinely exploited by others. As is the case with almost any game you will have a group of people that would rather complain about perceived overpowered elements of a game rather than figure out how to improve their own abilities and how to beat certain things.

This game has tremendous balance right now. We don't know what some new mechanics and ships will do but so far I haven't seen anything to indicate that there will be a problem. New things come out, people adjust, and nothing is borken.

And the TL;DR is: quit complaining and learn to play better. Sorry if that is too harsh.

I've posted my idea's for E-wings fixes before.

Who knows FFG has used 3 of my other suggestions, so well see

*keeps hoping for the return of Joustwing

You keep hoping for something you just said is bad? Jousting is were only dice matter, mathwinging is the only source of knowledge, and who ever has the hottest dice win. No, no thank you. You didn't play back when 7 TIE swarms won every table because you couldn't reposition. No, this game is in the best state is has been. Jousting take no skill, and for someone that complains about PWT as much as a few other vocal blow hards, it seems odd to want something that is essentially the same dice-fest.

When two B-wings exchange shots they gradually die

when two aces exchange shots it's just a matter of complete blankouts

(and that's the best case. in other cases the result of the battle is decided simply after Initiative is rolled for)

Yep, I only came in wave 3, saw the struggle between the Bs, Biggses, Ties and occasional tries to use Han or Triple Firesprays. (But lambdas were cool!)

And then the era of bull began. Whisper, PWTs, Aces.

No fire exchange, no maneuver predictions, nothing. Whisper didn't even NEED to take any maneuver except for 1 hard turn.

Then the PWTs with their OMNIPRESENT ENGINE UPGRADE came. Sure thing, soooooo entertaaaaining.... boosting all the day.

Boostwing takes no skill. Why predict maneuvers when you can alter the course with precise knowledge?

The last remnant of joustwing is blocking, and THAT takes skill.

A different point.

This game was somewhat handicapped from the start by a mechanic that, in its most basic form, goes against how Star Wars battles would intuitively work.

It seems obvious that big guns are difficult to bring to bear but do a lot of damage, while small guns are easy to aim but don't do a lot of damage. Not so in X-Wing. The basic mechanism is that the bigger the weapon, the more difficult it is to avoid. This means that agile ships have a harder time avoiding larger weapons. On the other hand, small weapons only stand a chance against sluggish targets.

Intuition (and, it has to be said, the X-Wing types of computer games) would suggest that a small fighter should be most capable of bringing down another small fighter. It doesn't need to do a lot of damage anyway, and several shots from its tiny gun should be enough.

Again: not so in X-Wing. An A-Wing might be good at keeping things in arc, its weapons are mostly good against targets with low agility, particularly those unable to evade.

This has some strange effects in different parts of the game. For example, cluster missiles and assault missiles have credible game effects - what the cards do seems a good representation of what the missiles' effects. But while lore suggests that clusters are better against fighter swarms and assault missiles better against capital ships, the complete opposite is true in the miniatures game.

And two attack dice are very hard to justify, because they have a disadvantage on two fronts. They don't do a lot of damage, and are less likely to hit any given target. Chance to hit and damage inflicted are so much the same thing, that using less attack power does not, in itself, come with any benefit.

Maybe the game needs a cannon with one red die and an effect that says: 'if this attack hits, the defender suffers 4 damage. Then cancel all dice results.' or similar. But the problem begins with how the game was designed in the first place, and any upgrades can only mitigate the effects.

Good point

Different dice.

Simple and workable solution

red for blasters, blue for ions, black for ordnance.

The colour of Attack value indicates the type of dice used.

*stops rambling*

what was the thread about?

Firepower?

On the surface, yes. Firepower Creep.

A thin layer beneath the surface? Cost to remain competitive Creep.

Some gamers will only ever see "Expansions" as "Paying for Game-Balance." And the X1/ATC situation really pushed some gamers over the edge of the playmat -- months before Tractor Beam. I know a kid that quit XWING over X1/ATC costing him too much time/money. (a) Time in trading/ebaying. (b) Money either way.

...two attack dice are very hard to justify, because they have a disadvantage on two fronts. They don't do a lot of damage, and are less likely to hit any given target. Chance to hit and damage inflicted are so much the same thing, that using less attack power does not, in itself, come with any benefit.

There are two really worthwhile posts in this thread, and yours is one of them. The problem with 2 Attack is that there's a firm cap on its effectiveness--you have to bring a bunch of them in order to get reasonable performance. That means once they get up above a certain base cost (which is less than 17 points, and possibly as low as 15) it needs help to remain a viable threat in a game that includes ships at 2+ Agility.

That's been true since the game's release; it's not a new development by any means.

Too much Red?

I find our lack of Green disturbing.

*stops rambling*

what was the thread about?

Firepower?

On the surface, yes. Firepower Creep.

A thin layer beneath the surface? Cost to remain competitive Creep.

Some gamers will only ever see "Expansions" as "Paying for Game-Balance." And the X1/ATC situation really pushed some gamers over the edge of the playmat -- months before Tractor Beam. I know a kid that quit XWING over X1/ATC costing him too much time/money. (a) Time in trading/ebaying. (b) Money either way.

And now we have Guidance Chips. I mean, I like the TAP and since I want my ordnance to work, I might end up buying some Inquisitor's TIE expansions. But at the same time, I get the impression that I am being manipulated in an unfair manner, which actually makes me less likely to buy the product.

It's about perception.

Well if the TIE AP skims through by merit of being able to get into R1, then I guess all 8 of my TIE /ln are doing just fine because I tend to throw more than just the two reds per ship.

I think you pay for your arms race.

TLT, range hole, cost prohibitive.

HLC, range hole, cost prohibitive, no crits.

Mangler, middling performance for cost.

Adv. Targeting Computer, action hungry, easy to TL the wrong ship and have no extra crit.

Fat PWTs, um, well it's very very costly.

Even with Ordnance you pay for your bangs.

I think it's just another meta phase we're seeing here. The ability to do lots of damage will soon be mitigated by something. That's how it seems to go, the designers release a new mechanic or idea and then let it percolate in the community. If all is well they move on, and if not, then we see fixes. I think this a more organic and fluid way of stewardship and it does let FFG learn from past mistakes.

FFG is fine. It's okay, I'm almost certainly sure of it being a possibility.

Boostwing takes no skill. Why predict maneuvers when you can alter the course with precise knowledge?

The last remnant of joustwing is blocking, and THAT takes skill.

At high level of play, which you probably haven't experienced judged purely on the amount of constant belligerence of peoples ability to plan, taking into account all the movement options for both you and your opponents ships is the standard. This includes after movement positioning. If you feel like you can just boost/barrel roll all the time and win automatically, I suggest playing more advanced players, instead of wishing for the dumbing down of the game.

So really the things you say, contradict, which coming from you, isn't surprising. PWT and aces do indeed need to predict due to the strategies of blocking. Funny enough, action denial and blocking didn't really become the norm till after the time periods you stated, due to the massive action economy changes. Now if you dont predict, you fail, regardless of ship flown. The reason repositioning is needed is due to the amount of dice able to be tossed in a straight line, is incredible. Attack dice have always been a measuring factor in ship cost, but so has the maneuverability of a ship. That's why I don't think FFG has lost control, if anything they have learned a great deal, hence why we aren't seeing native 5+ dice attackers with the manuevers of an A wing or the durability of a B-Wing.

So no I don't think they have lost their way in the slightest.

but no ship is good enough that it is seen "99%" of the time.

Corran Horn begs your pardon.

But to be fair he's the only example I can think of. Dash is close, but there are Leebo builds out there; Vader is close, but AC generics take mention; Soontir is close, but Carnor is also common; as an inverse example Gold Squadron Y's are close, but sometimes you see a Grey for PS and ever so rarely you'll see Horton; probably 99% of Aggressor lists use 88B, but they also often have another IG-88 in there, so his usage is closer to 50%.

Corran Horn is hardly seen 99% of the time. Hell, I see more Poe than Corran these days.

Edit: Soontir also sees more play than Corran.

Chief Hugh was saying his bit in response to The Inquisitor projected to represent 99% of all TAP appearances on the table.

Corran is without a doubt the one you see for more than 99% of all E-Wing appearances. That's all.

And anyways OP was saying that since The Inquisitor's ability is so good, he's basically the only TAP you're going to see (I personally disagree with this, because the Sienar Test Pilot with title and AT lands in a points sweet spot that the Imperials were severely lacking anything durable in before) so it's an example of (fire)power creep because it's another 3 dice ship. Not that The Inquisitor was going to be in 99% of all lists.

...two attack dice are very hard to justify, because they have a disadvantage on two fronts. They don't do a lot of damage, and are less likely to hit any given target. Chance to hit and damage inflicted are so much the same thing, that using less attack power does not, in itself, come with any benefit.

There are two really worthwhile posts in this thread, and yours is one of them. The problem with 2 Attack is that there's a firm cap on its effectiveness--you have to bring a bunch of them in order to get reasonable performance. That means once they get up above a certain base cost (which is less than 17 points, and possibly as low as 15) it needs help to remain a viable threat in a game that includes ships at 2+ Agility.That's been true since the game's release; it's not a new development by any means.

If xwing 2.0 becomes a reality, it may be time to transfer over to a war machine style system

Separate defensive values for evasiveness and armor, separate offensive values for accuracy and weapon damage

...two attack dice are very hard to justify, because they have a disadvantage on two fronts. They don't do a lot of damage, and are less likely to hit any given target. Chance to hit and damage inflicted are so much the same thing, that using less attack power does not, in itself, come with any benefit.

There are two really worthwhile posts in this thread, and yours is one of them. The problem with 2 Attack is that there's a firm cap on its effectiveness--you have to bring a bunch of them in order to get reasonable performance. That means once they get up above a certain base cost (which is less than 17 points, and possibly as low as 15) it needs help to remain a viable threat in a game that includes ships at 2+ Agility.That's been true since the game's release; it's not a new development by any means.

If xwing 2.0 becomes a reality, it may be time to transfer over to a war machine style system

Separate defensive values for evasiveness and armor, separate offensive values for accuracy and weapon damage

Yes, that would be efficient, but at the cost of something that is really good in this game : really simple base mechanics.

Oh no! Instead of two dice rolls (red und green) we have to make 2 dice rolls (evasiveness, armor)

The complex stuff in warmachine is in the abilities (holy **** so many abilities) + jack/beast rules. Their dice system is as simple as can be