I'm (very) new to Skirmish, and I've been doing some reading here and on Reddit. There's a pattern I'm seeing that has me a little bothered. It can be summarized by four basic points:

1) The more activations the better. Going below five activations is a real hindrance, and you'd better know what you're doing and why if you do.

2) Movement of 5 or higher--particularly but not exclusively for melee types--is crucial. If your figure has speed four, consider that a disability that its other abilities had better compensate for. If it has speed three, then don't even bother unless you have a good workaround.

3) You need Stun and/or Blast. If you don't have access to one, and preferably both, then think long and hard why not. And probably change your list to include them. But, only Stun and Blast. Focus, Weaken, Bleed, etc? They're handy, but yeah whatever, Stun and Blast.

4) Over half the activation cards currently available to choose from are severely underpowered, and most of the underpowered ones are also uniques. (This is possibly a side effect of points 1 to 3, rather than a new issue all its own.)

Is this summary more or less accurate? And please don't respond with "I once won a game six months ago using only Han Solo, Chewbacca, and Luke, and therefore your points are invalid!!!" I'm thinking more in trends here, and these trends seem to lead to a short list of, say, about half a dozen or so competitive builds (with minor variations). --Further, they're competitive in the sense of "you have an almost unfair advantage if you fight someone who is not running one of these lists", not in the "this gives me a 10% increased chance of rolling one more damage, therefore it's more competitive" sense.

Now, sky-is-falling writeup aside here: I do come from extensive experience with X-Wing, and that has led me to become quite the fanboi of FFG. Even if I'm correct about this game's current state, I'm more than willing to believe FFG is working hard (and competently!) to rebalance things. A little over a year ago, X-Wing was locked into a similar state, where (with very few exceptions) the best lists were "big ship (usually PWT), with an escort of other big ship, ace, or miniswarm". Game after monotonous game. It was horrible. Less than a year later, the meta has exploded, and now it's common for me to fight ten or even twenty games without seeing a similar list twice. I -love- it. ; )

What I'm mostly curious about is that I also get a sense of...acceptance. The points I listed above seem to be channeling players into a handful of limited competitive options, but no one seems bothered by it. Am I missing something?

I think your summary above is overall pretty accurate, if a bit over-stated at some points. I think the 4 things you list are true in a general sense, but not exclusively true all the time.

For example, having just 4 deployment cards isn't a problem if you still have plenty of figures on the board for objectives and they work together well...but generally, yes, it's best to have 5 or more. However, the Pass Rule has made it completely viable to run a lower number of activations...it used to be that you needed a base of 7 to even compete.

Myself, I'm not real worried about Stun and Blast so much. A squad I've been enjoying is Luke, Leia, Elite EBTs x2, Gideon (on a Dipl Mission) and C3P0. Lots of damage output and fairly durable.

And yes, most of the uniques are not competitive. Some real stand-outs: Gideon, C3P0, R2 (some debate his value), Luke, Leia, RGC, Boba (some disagree here too). Obviously there are ways to make any piece function well, but the question is whether or not the resulting squad will be competitive.

I think the reason that nobody seems bothered right now is that we've just recovered from a severely constricted meta--similar to the one you described with X-Wing. A few months ago, you could either play 4x4 (Royal Guards and Officers) or Rebel Blast (Rebel Saboteur spam) or lose. But after errata to the key pieces there, the meta is much more wide open now than ever before. If anything, Trooper squads seem to be rising to the top, but there are plenty of variations to those squads, which still makes for a very open meta. The Wonder Twins (Luke & Leia) are also doing very well in some areas. People are also anticipating that Mercenary squads will finally stand a chance once the new Bantha arrives in stores. So I think you're seeing more optimism here because we're still enjoying the fresh air of a non-constricted meta and we're optimistic about developments coming down the pipeline.

I think it's kind of hard to say right now. How many games do you play? How competitive is your area?

In my local area, there isn't much competition so it is hard to tell what is good and what is not.

I try to play a lot of games on Vassal to compensate, but even there I still have a hard time losing a match even when playing some experimental lists. Making a judgement call on the meta without actually having an intensely competitive meta is silly.

Here are my general thoughts on the things you said and the meta:

* 6 activations is the standard. If you have 7, you can sometimes get a slight advantage.

* Having initiative first is generally awful and can easily force you to make subpar moves to contest objectives and thus lose the game. You kind of want 3 units you can move without putting anyone in harms way.

* Move speed of 5 is good, but not required. You should at least have 1 group with move speed 5 in your list if possible, but even all troopers builds can be competitive. The important part is moving to the right place the first time.

* Stun and blast are good but not required. Stunning units is actually a mistake a decent amount of the time. Blast is hard to get in massive damage with the recent changes and can be negated by stuff like snowtroopers.

* It is impossible to have every card be decent without them being too similar.

Right now, I think there are really two top tier lists:

1) Imperial - 2x eStorms, 1-2x officers, whatever else you want - guards, heavies, snows, etc.

2) Rebel - Luke, Leia, Gideon, 3p0, whatever else you want - echoes, sabs, etc.

The trick is that it is hard to say exactly what is the best without playing a ton of games, and I don't think anyone has really exhausted the search space for good lists.

Even with the Rebel list, it isn't super clear if maybe subbing out Luke or Leia for more non-unique groups could be better.

There are lists that can be played wildly differently from others and potentially win. For example, what about something like 2x wookies, 2x elite echoes, Gideon/3p0/diplo mission/rebel high command? If played correctly, the opponent will have a ridiculously hard time getting points from kills.

Troopers are amazing right now, with Grenadier and Reinforcements, so I think that gives the edge to the imperials and should be defining the meta. However, the rebel list is pretty competitive too. Rebels can also bring troopers to at least easily get access to Grenadier, though eEchoes can't reinforce.

Those are just some random thoughts on the state of things.

Just want to make sure that you ARE aware of the assorted errata that has been made, yes?

The pass rule that was mentioned, and the big nerfs to royal guard, rebel sabs and imperial officers.

Just want to be sure that the stuff you have been reading is all post errata, because most of the points you mention were A LOT more true before they fixed stuff.

Right now the meta is very fluid.

Each FAQ is a bombshell, pass rules changing and major nerfs have resulted in huge balance charges (for the better).

It's a mission based game, these missions change between tournament seasons and affect what squads are the most competitive.

We are on the verge of moving from 2 competitive factions to 3, with many predicting that the bantha is the final piece (out in the UK next week).

With such a small pool of miniatures every release has a big impact on the meta, and with the last of the known releases out soon we'll find out what's coming next shortly.

New command cards and skirmish upgrades breath New life into older models.

The latest FAQ and releases are still fresh and I don't think we've had enough time to fully evaluate them yet, I'd wait until the end of the store championships before deciding which lists are competitive.

Many of these are core concepts in most tabletop wargames and I think will always be viable and important.

Movement for melee characters is always the most important stat. It doesn't matter if you hit hard, if you can't close the distance on shooters, you'll get taken out before it's relevant.

Stun or any ability that can stop or control an opponent is usually valuable.

Blast or any ability that can hit other characters with one attack is excellent damage economics and distribution. Plus, being able to hit figure you can't necessarily see, is great board control.

I think given its only been one year, the meta will eventually change. It happens with most games, including X-Wing, which you referenced.

You have opposed die checks, which are super random. You have deck draw, which are pretty random. So I'd say there is too much randomness where player quality will too often be defeated by luck.

As for balance... there are certainly a lot more bad choices than good ones. That doesn't make it unbalanced, just limiting.

1) The more activations the better.

This is not 100% true, depending on the point of view.

Pro:

It is good to have at least the same number of activations or better about one more activation than your opponent.

It is good to have the last activation on any given turn, no matter, who had the initiative.

It is good to lower the opponents activation count by wiping out cheap units first.

Contra, e.g.:

4 Officer

2 eOfficer

4 Probe

2 eProbe

40 Points, 12 activations, ok list, but absolutely not in the top 5.

3) You need Stun and/or Blast. If you don't have access to one, and preferably both, then think long and hard why not. And probably change your list to include them. But, only Stun and Blast. Focus, Weaken, Bleed, etc? They're handy, but yeah whatever, Stun and Blast.

Blast 2 on the Sabs was great. A lot of board control. Blast 1 is just good, but no must-have.

Stun is neccessary to stop the expensive figures. Stun is one reason, why expensive uniques are not good. Stun is the tactical measure to stop e.g. the opponent's RGC.

but no one seems bothered by it.

We are. But we also understand the reality that balancing such a game is impossible without wide field testing. Since the game is just over a year old, these issues are to be expected. The meta is much much better now than 4 months ago. The errata and Return to Hoth really helped and I am certain future packs (have you looked at the Bantha Rider?) expansion will expand the viability of more arcane lists.

All of your points still stand. But I think besides No.4, all are fixed pretty easily with Skirmish Upgrade cards or units in expansions or packs.

2) Movement of 5 or higher--particularly but not exclusively for melee types--is crucial. If your figure has speed four, consider that a disability that its other abilities had better compensate for. If it has speed three, then don't even bother unless you have a good workaround.

I wrote that myself quite often. But since the Royal Guards got FAQed, this is not that true anymore. I've been to a tournament today with an imperial list without Royal Guards. I did good (lost one match to about 4 or 5 X-Men). I had no figure with move 5 and even 2 figures with move 3. No Problem, if you know what you're doing.

most of the underpowered ones are also uniques. (This is possibly a side effect of points 1 to 3, rather than a new issue all its own.)

Stun, low activation count due to expensive figures ... yeah expensive uniques inherently suck. On top of that, many of them have low health and don't deal enough damage.

But: Gideon, Luke, Leia, R2-D2 and C-3PO (and maybe RGC and Boba) are amongst the best figures in the game...

you'd better know what you're doing and why if you do.

That's always good, when playing strategy games, isn't it?

This is a great thread- and much of what I'd want to say has been said above- but it's also worth checking interviews with the developers, OP.

https://teamcovenant.com/blog/video/paul-winchester-todd-michlitsch-interview-ffg-worlds-2015/

For example - this one at Words last year shows that the developers didn't WANT activation count to be an advantage (or at least as much of an advantage as it was) before they added the sit tight rule.

I don't know about you - but I worry about some of the stuff you've mentioned here and there myself - so understanding that the devs DO get it and are looking to improve the game gives me hope.

Also- you heard it here: The Bantha's arrival will put the FEAR into the trooper swarm lists!

It is incredibly easy to stop a Bantha with stun, because he doesn't roll any defense die.

If you don't have stun in your list, an opposing Bantha indeed is fearsome.

I was thinking about this and wondering if R2's value will go up past Rebel High Command and On A Diplomatic Mission once Banthas arrive. He gets a garunteed stun at range(albeit short range) for only 3 points. Obviously this depends on whether Bantha ends up being good or not though.

I personally do not value R2 any higher than I already did because of the bantha. Rebels already have access to an easy stun with eSabs. Maybe not guaranteed, but pretty close to it and from farther away.

Yeah it's not a huge difference but r2 is already pretty close to making the cut in most decks IMO. It's definitely is not like he's bad but he was edged out by the two upgrade cards. Maybe now he may have a little extra utility for when you're dealing with rampaging banthas

Yeah it's not a huge difference but r2 is already pretty close to making the cut in most decks IMO. It's definitely is not like he's bad but he was edged out by the two upgrade cards. Maybe now he may have a little extra utility for when you're dealing with rampaging banthas

R2's stun range always fails me I'm sorry to say

I think if you DO end up using R2 to stun a Bantha, there's too good a chance of it de-stunning and trampling to kill you.

R2 is really interesting in lists because of how vitally important command cards are and how often that dodge can theoretically come up in a game.

Are people really effectively stunning with him? Am almost always scompin' it up.

I haven't used R2 much, to be honest. Maybe I should use him more, but I'm leery of putting too many of my points into tech. I already almost always have 6pts taken up by Gideon (and Dip Mission) and 3P0, and after that I'm usually wanting to add more attackers. But if it comes to a choice between R2 and Mak, then it's R2 every time.

Hmm, all right. The consensus I think I'm getting here (counting DerBaer's umpteen responses as one...; ) is that I'm more or less correct, but the actual extent and effect of the imbalance is debatable.

There are enough options available after culling the weak that the game remains fun to play, and things are much better than they used to be. IA is still young, and FFG is heading in the right direction at least, so the community is generally willing to wait and give the benefit of the doubt. (Those that aren't willing to wait, admittedly, have probably already left...)

That just about sum things up? : )

That just about sum things up? : )

I'd say so yes.

The fact that they are doing a full blown errata of some cards shows just how serious they take balance and fixing things wrong with the game.

It seems that FFG is against errata of a card other then in fairly extreme cases, so that gives me a great deal of hope for IA.