This isn't a right or wrong situation. Just different philosophies in game design.

Acewing games are often won solely by boosting last.

I suppose you are correct that it is "power creep" if you define that as an increase in average power level.

I define power creep as anything that is more powerful than the previous best ships/combos, not relative to the average power level. For example, nothing in wave 1 could have been power creep, because there no prior baseline existed. Instead, the best ships / pilots in wave 1 became the baseline by which to judge if future ships were balanced.

Equivalently, power creep may also be observed anytime a new ship/upgrade renders an old ship/upgrade completely obsolete.

The 24 point TLT Y-wing has rendered the previous best vanilla ships obsolete. This was mathematically predicted and has been empirically observed starting at Worlds. Therefore it is power creep. This is not to say that it is necessarily the best ship in the game, nor that you would want to take 100 points of pure TLT Y-wings, but it is still power creep, and the impact on the meta game is significant.

The vanilla, pure stats generic ship was destined to go "extinct" the moment they decided to make Uniques worth taking.

Not true. In a better balanced game, the uniques would be good in some situations but worse in others. They would have tradeoffs compared to their cheaper generic brethren. The main benefit of a vanilla generic ship should be that it is very cost effective compared to the unique pilots. Instead, there are several named pilots that are around equal or even higher cost efficiency relative to the best generics in the game. (Z-95, TIE Fighter, B-wing). Since the aces also have additional capabilities that aren't yet even baked into those numbers, that makes them universally better than generics. The number of qualifying uniques has steadily increased. What results is "AceWing" where it almost never makes sense to take vanilla generics. TLT Y-wings are still OK because they themselves are also power creep so they can keep up with the power creep aces. Meanwhile standard X-wings and TIEs are left in the dust.

Except.... Pure generics were not the best combos so replacing them is not "power creep" as I (and you) define it. It is true that the game has crept upward, but the top end is entirely dominated by named Aces with the notable exception of the Stresshog. TLT did not exceed the "best ships/combos", it doesn't even exceed pure generics in a faceoff between the two (TLT vs. Pure Generic). It only plays better against the top end, allowing otherwise inadequate generics an opportunity to fare adequately against the best.

In other words, TLT allows the mediocre to have better game against the best, but is not itself pushing the top end upwards. By your own definition TLTs would need to be replacing Soontir, Whisper, Fat Han, Poe, Corran Horn and their like. They are not. The most they can do is reduce the dominance of those ships.

This isn't a right or wrong situation. Just different philosophies in game design.

Acewing games are often won solely by boosting last.

Which has nothing to do with what I said.

However that does not change the fact that TLT is still power creep at 6 points. Alex essentially acknowledged this in his most recent interview, where he said that TLT has turned out to be stronger than they anticipated. It is another example of power creep (albeit not as drastic as Whisper) that was clearly predicted by the mathematics. Unfortunately FFG doesn't have that expertise or capability, but that's really an entirely different discussion about upper management's general hiring philosophy.

Why would FFG need to hire someone to mathematically predict the cost of new cards, when they would still need play-testing groups to determine how well those cards function in real games?

TLT is definitely top dog so far in SC season, both before and after the cut.

Here's the Feb Top 10, all upgrades, before and after the cut (Feb set a record in terms of total # of lists submitted to LJ, btw):

TLT 15.5% | 17.7%

HLC 6% | 5%

Engine 5.9% | 5.7%

Autothrusters 5.7% | 5.7%

Palp 5.2% | 8.1%

PTL 4.9% | 4.7%

R2-D2 3.9% | 3.3%

ATC 3.5% | 5%

VI 2.6% | 2.4%

FCS comes in at number 10 before the cut at 2.4%, and Stealth Devices creeps into top 10 after the cut at 3.3%.

My personal opinion on this matter is that TLT is strong, but the meta is diverse enough to handle it. Player skill matters a lot too. But appeals to skill aren't exactly compelling for me, as for the average tournament player TLT is pretty scary.

However that does not change the fact that TLT is still power creep at 6 points. Alex essentially acknowledged this in his most recent interview, where he said that TLT has turned out to be stronger than they anticipated. It is another example of power creep (albeit not as drastic as Whisper) that was clearly predicted by the mathematics. Unfortunately FFG doesn't have that expertise or capability, but that's really an entirely different discussion about upper management's general hiring philosophy.

Why would FFG need to hire someone to mathematically predict the cost of new cards, when they would still need play-testing groups to determine how well those cards function in real games?

For me, it isn't either or. It's both. If you look back at the original design of the game, Eric Lang and crew did an excellent job getting the dice and token combos just right. Even a hardcore playtesting effort is going to have a hard time precisely pinning down the true cost of something; conversely, the pure mathematical model is probably also going to miss some of the subtleties of actual play.

Give me a hard core researcher, a couple of back end guys, and 3-6 months, and I could build you a deep learning simulator that scratches both of these itches simultaneously. Another 3-6 months with a uex team and we'd replace Vassal with a HTML5 in-browser pseudo-3d X-wing game, with all the fixins.

But frankly I don't think the business model is there. Hey, Disney, if you're interested, I know most of the top venture capitalists; I wouldn't even need any money from ya, just the license :-)

Even a hardcore playtesting effort is going to have a hard time precisely pinning down the true cost of something; conversely, the pure mathematical model is probably also going to miss some of the subtleties of actual play.

A Card has a fixed printed cost that exists in a vacuum. But the worth of that printed cost can vary depending upon the card's use inside a 100 point squadron.

This is a TLT thread.

TLT has a fixed printed cost of 6 points.

Is TLT worth 6 points on a single BTL Y-Wing?

Is TLT worth 6 points on a single Y-Wing?

Is TLT worth 6 points each, when put on four Y-Wings?

Is TLT worth 6 points on a single BTL Y-Wing with R3-A2?

Is TLT worth 6 points on a naked HWK?

Is TLT worth 6 points on single Y-Wing using the old damage deck?

etc...

I don't see why FFG would need to pay $50K to have Mathguy on a retainer, so he can tell them that the printed cost of a TLT should be 6.4 points +- 0.5 points ?

I agree with you that the TLT is a strong upgrade and that the sky is certainly not falling.

My personal opinion on this matter is that TLT is strong, but the meta is diverse enough to handle it. Player skill matters a lot too.

I think this is what everyone is forgetting.

The thing I don't get is why some think if it was costed at 7 points there would be a differences. the only differences would be I now cant put droids on my 4 Y wings. If it was 7 points then everyone will be complaining why isn't it 8 points so you cant take 4 in a list.

there have been many times I have taken TLT's and played against TLT's. Many times the dice roll blank, many times the dice rolled 3 crits only to do 1 damage and many times Autothrusters just laughed at me.

to help prove my point that the sky in not falling at the store champs I was at on Sunday top 4 had 6 Y wing 1 HWK equipped with 4 Ion Turret, 2 Blaster Turret and only 1 TLT

TLT is in no way broken, over costed or over powered its just over talked about.

My personal opinion on this matter is that TLT is strong, but the meta is diverse enough to handle it. Player skill matters a lot too.

I think this is what everyone is forgetting.

The thing I don't get is why some think if it was costed at 7 points there would be a differences. the only differences would be I now cant put droids on my 4 Y wings. If it was 7 points then everyone will be complaining why isn't it 8 points so you cant take 4 in a list.

there have been many times I have taken TLT's and played against TLT's. Many times the dice roll blank, many times the dice rolled 3 crits only to do 1 damage and many times Autothrusters just laughed at me.

to help prove my point that the sky in not falling at the store champs I was at on Sunday top 4 had 6 Y wing 1 HWK equipped with 4 Ion Turret, 2 Blaster Turret and only 1 TLT

TLT is in no way broken, over costed or over powered its just over talked about.

No if you couldn't afford droids it'd force you to reconsider if another turret wouldn't be better, at 6 points it's a no brainer.

Not taking unhinged loses you five green moves, the combination of unhinged and tlt makes it much harder to pin down the scum y-wing.

My personal opinion on this matter is that TLT is strong, but the meta is diverse enough to handle it. Player skill matters a lot too.

I think this is what everyone is forgetting.

The thing I don't get is why some think if it was costed at 7 points there would be a differences. the only differences would be I now cant put droids on my 4 Y wings. If it was 7 points then everyone will be complaining why isn't it 8 points so you cant take 4 in a list.

there have been many times I have taken TLT's and played against TLT's. Many times the dice roll blank, many times the dice rolled 3 crits only to do 1 damage and many times Autothrusters just laughed at me.

to help prove my point that the sky in not falling at the store champs I was at on Sunday top 4 had 6 Y wing 1 HWK equipped with 4 Ion Turret, 2 Blaster Turret and only 1 TLT

TLT is in no way broken, over costed or over powered its just over talked about.

No if you couldn't afford droids it'd force you to reconsider if another turret wouldn't be better, at 6 points it's a no brainer.

Not taking unhinged loses you five green moves, the combination of unhinged and tlt makes it much harder to pin down the scum y-wing.

You wouldn't, really. Y-Wings weren't used before, because Ion controll for the most part doesn't work in a tournament setting and BTL-A4s have proven too stiff and easily outmanouvered to be reliable. TLT, even if it cost 8 points, would be the only worthwhile turret slot upgrade, because it can attack at range 3 and does good damage.

My personal opinion on this matter is that TLT is strong, but the meta is diverse enough to handle it. Player skill matters a lot too.

I think this is what everyone is forgetting.

The thing I don't get is why some think if it was costed at 7 points there would be a differences. the only differences would be I now cant put droids on my 4 Y wings. If it was 7 points then everyone will be complaining why isn't it 8 points so you cant take 4 in a list.

there have been many times I have taken TLT's and played against TLT's. Many times the dice roll blank, many times the dice rolled 3 crits only to do 1 damage and many times Autothrusters just laughed at me.

to help prove my point that the sky in not falling at the store champs I was at on Sunday top 4 had 6 Y wing 1 HWK equipped with 4 Ion Turret, 2 Blaster Turret and only 1 TLT

TLT is in no way broken, over costed or over powered its just over talked about.

No if you couldn't afford droids it'd force you to reconsider if another turret wouldn't be better, at 6 points it's a no brainer.

Not taking unhinged loses you five green moves, the combination of unhinged and tlt makes it much harder to pin down the scum y-wing.

You wouldn't, really. Y-Wings weren't used before, because Ion controll for the most part doesn't work in a tournament setting and BTL-A4s have proven too stiff and easily outmanouvered to be reliable. TLT, even if it cost 8 points, would be the only worthwhile turret slot upgrade, because it can attack at range 3 and does good damage.

I'm going to have to disagree with you there, the original thug life was 4 btl ys with ion, that won a few regionals, and I took a pair to the top cut at gen con. There's a reason scum tlt is seen more than rebel even with the mighty stressbot being a rebel option. The mobility that the unhinged gives is why b wings among other ships hit the endangered species list, if you guess wrong against quad tlt, they get at least two turns of shooting with thier entire list before you can bring your list back on target.

I'm not advocating a tlt nerf, but then again I didn't advocate a phantom nerf either.

It is true that Warthogs are pretty strong, but they are at a clear disadvantage against highly mobile ships which are insanely popular ever since wave 4, even with Unhinged.

Actually, for BTL-A4s I would still ususaly take ICTs, because TLT loses too much are and range 1-2 works a lot better with UA. I prefer the 25 point R4 Agromech, ICT, BTL-A4 Thugs anyways.

I suppose you are correct that it is "power creep" if you define that as an increase in average power level.

I define power creep as anything that is more powerful than the previous best ships/combos, not relative to the average power level. For example, nothing in wave 1 could have been power creep, because there no prior baseline existed. Instead, the best ships / pilots in wave 1 became the baseline by which to judge if future ships were balanced.

Equivalently, power creep may also be observed anytime a new ship/upgrade renders an old ship/upgrade completely obsolete.

The 24 point TLT Y-wing has rendered the previous best vanilla ships obsolete. This was mathematically predicted and has been empirically observed starting at Worlds. Therefore it is power creep. This is not to say that it is necessarily the best ship in the game, nor that you would want to take 100 points of pure TLT Y-wings, but it is still power creep, and the impact on the meta game is significant.

The vanilla, pure stats generic ship was destined to go "extinct" the moment they decided to make Uniques worth taking.

Not true. In a better balanced game, the uniques would be good in some situations but worse in others. They would have tradeoffs compared to their cheaper generic brethren. The main benefit of a vanilla generic ship should be that it is very cost effective compared to the unique pilots. Instead, there are several named pilots that are around equal or even higher cost efficiency relative to the best generics in the game. (Z-95, TIE Fighter, B-wing). Since the aces also have additional capabilities that aren't yet even baked into those numbers, that makes them universally better than generics. The number of qualifying uniques has steadily increased. What results is "AceWing" where it almost never makes sense to take vanilla generics. TLT Y-wings are still OK because they themselves are also power creep so they can keep up with the power creep aces. Meanwhile standard X-wings and TIEs are left in the dust.

Except.... Pure generics were not the best combos so replacing them is not "power creep" as I (and you) define it. It is true that the game has crept upward, but the top end is entirely dominated by named Aces with the notable exception of the Stresshog. TLT did not exceed the "best ships/combos", it doesn't even exceed pure generics in a faceoff between the two (TLT vs. Pure Generic). It only plays better against the top end, allowing otherwise inadequate generics an opportunity to fare adequately against the best.

In other words, TLT allows the mediocre to have better game against the best, but is not itself pushing the top end upwards. By your own definition TLTs would need to be replacing Soontir, Whisper, Fat Han, Poe, Corran Horn and their like. They are not. The most they can do is reduce the dominance of those ships.

yeah, I gotta agree

defining "power creep" as rendering old options obsolete, then every miniatures game in existence has powercreep in some form or another. They gotta get you to buy the new stuff if they want to be successful, after all.

power creep really should be reserved for when it raises the ceiling, not when it comes in viable

if aces have already power crept vanilla generics, then vanilla generics are no longer a relevant standard. Designing around them would just result in underpowered crap. To make new models worth it, you have to design around the aces instead

See signature.

Good riddance

See signature.

See signature.

Good riddance

And here i thought maneuvering died with 360 turrets!

Pure generics were not the best combos so replacing them is not "power creep" as I (and you) define it. It is true that the game has crept upward, but the top end is entirely dominated by named Aces with the notable exception of the Stresshog. TLT did not exceed the "best ships/combos", it doesn't even exceed pure generics in a faceoff between the two (TLT vs. Pure Generic). It only plays better against the top end, allowing otherwise inadequate generics an opportunity to fare adequately against the best.

In other words, TLT allows the mediocre to have better game against the best, but is not itself pushing the top end upwards. By your own definition TLTs would need to be replacing Soontir, Whisper, Fat Han, Poe, Corran Horn and their like. They are not. The most they can do is reduce the dominance of those ships.

There are different categories of best kinds of ships. To name a few:

• cost effective filler
• arc dodgers
• turrets
• control
• alpha strike

You're right that some of the aces are both arc dodgers and cost effective, and that is a problem that has been pushing generics out. However it is also true that TLT is universally better than the previous best cost effective filler in the game, and essentially completely invalidated basic Z-95s, TIEs, and B-wings from the meta overnight. That's also power creep.

To reiterate:

24 points of that 36 point cost effective was previously Z-95s, and was replaced by TLT Y. The only reason that the 12 points of bandit is still in there, is the quantization problem where you you can't get 36 points of cost effective TLT. That will change in wave 8 with Ezra + TLT/PtL/Chewie, which Paul is 5-0 in the vassal league.

TLT is definitely top dog so far in SC season, both before and after the cut.

Here's the Feb Top 10, all upgrades, before and after the cut (Feb set a record in terms of total # of lists submitted to LJ, btw):

Here's the list again, but tweaked so the 2nd column is the conditional effectiveness of each upgrade advancing to the cut.

Related, consider this a feature request for a new set of plots.

X-axis: ship/pilot/upgrade overall usage. (column 1)

Y-axis: ship/pilot/upgrade cut rate (column 2)

TLT is by far the most used upgrade (by points), and yet still has a positive cut rate coefficient. That tells me that the meta still has not fully reached steady state yet. Likewise, Palpatine crew and ATC (on just Vader, presumably) are even more effective, leading to the conclusion that Palp Aces is easily one of the strongest archetype builds right now.

Even a hardcore playtesting effort is going to have a hard time precisely pinning down the true cost of something; conversely, the pure mathematical model is probably also going to miss some of the subtleties of actual play.

A Card has a fixed printed cost that exists in a vacuum. But the worth of that printed cost can vary depending upon the card's use inside a 100 point squadron.

Yes, and each use case has to be analyzed separately. It's their system not mine, I can only work within their constraints.

Add these together and it should be clear that this will never happen at FFG.

defining "power creep" as rendering old options obsolete, then every miniatures game in existence has powercreep in some form or another. They gotta get you to buy the new stuff if they want to be successful, after all.

That's a fair assessment. If so, then every minis game has had power creep, and X-wing is fundamentally no different in that regard. Lets call it like it is.

There are a few solutions to the problem of generics being useless now. I have one in particular that I know would work quite well, but given that I'm not getting paid to do FFG's design work for them I'm just being a giant troll and keeping it to myself.

Here's the list again, but tweaked so the 2nd column is the conditional effectiveness of each upgrade advancing to the cut.

TLT 15.5% | 1.15

HLC 6.0% | 0.83

Engine 5.9% | 0.97

Autothrusters 5.7% | 1.0

Palp 5.2% | 1.56

PTL 4.9% | 0.96

R2-D2 3.9% | 0.84

ATC 3.5% | 1.43

VI 2.6% | 0.92

...TLT is by far the most used upgrade (by points), and yet still has a positive cut rate coefficient. That tells me that the meta still has not fully reached steady state yet. Likewise, Palpatine crew and ATC (on just Vader, presumably) are even more effective, leading to the conclusion that Palp Aces is easily one of the strongest archetype builds right now.

I've been flying Palpatine Aces a lot lately, and I haven't come across an archetype it can't handle yet. There are a couple of upgrades it handles very poorly, especially Rebel Captive, but it doesn't seem to be showing up as insurance. Among other anecdotes, that implies to me that you're right about the metagame having failed to find an equilibrium in Wave 7.

I don't see why FFG would need to pay $50K to have Mathguy on a retainer, so he can tell them that the printed cost of a TLT should be 6.4 points +- 0.5 points ?

The product would certainly be better if it was balanced more accurately (more meta diversity = more fun = more sales), but quantifying that and deciding if it is worth the tradeoff of spending more money on development is fundamentally a business decision not a technical problem. Related to this:

• FFG is well known for hiring new employees / designers with relatively little professional experience, and then paying them below industry norms for their position.
• The full-time equivalent pay for a Technical Balance Director, aka "Mathguy", that could reliably provide accurate results would be in excess of $100k / year. (see discussion upthread).

Add these together and it should be clear that this will never happen at FFG.

It would take about $115,000 per year to get me to relocate my family, but I'd do that work for $55,000 if they let me do it remotely (i.e., if my wife could keep her tenure-track position in our low cost-of-living town).

But for some reason, I haven't yet managed to persuade anyone at Fantasy Flight that they ought to essentially change their business model in order to create a position for me.

As to why it might be worth doing so, I think the answers are ordnance, X-wing, TIE Advanced, Firespray, Outer Rim Smuggler, TIE Interceptor, A-wing, HWK-290, TIE Phantom, E-wings other than Corran, TIE Defender, Scyk, StarViper, TIE Punisher, TLT, and K-wings other than Miranda. I really like this game, and I think the developers are actually doing a pretty good job, but there are a lot of game elements that are off just a couple points one way or the other.

And because the game doesn't actually have a lot of resolution in stats or point costs for upgrades, those small errors can be consequential. How much lost business did the Phantom era generate? I still enjoyed the game, enjoyed finding ways around the Phantom, and didn't mind what happened to the metagame as much as other people did--but how many people shrugged and decided the game wasn't for them? How many people saw the late Wave 6 metagame where your choices were basically Dash/Corran, Fat Han, or Soontir/Chiraneau and thought "Maybe I won't continue to buy in"?

I don't know the answers, and likely even FFG doesn't. But there's a business case to be made that preventing a slowdown in growth due to detectable errors is worth something.

defining "power creep" as rendering old options obsolete, then every miniatures game in existence has powercreep in some form or another. They gotta get you to buy the new stuff if they want to be successful, after all.

That's a fair assessment. If so, then every minis game has had power creep, and X-wing is fundamentally no different in that regard. Lets call it like it is.

There are a few solutions to the problem of generics being useless now. I have one in particular that I know would work quite well, but given that I'm not getting paid to do FFG's design work for them I'm just being a giant troll and keeping it to myself.

the solution is elementary, my dear major

simply make Boba's ability a permanent, base rule. Bam! TLTs don't deal faceups without the high risk Greedo (or the dumb saboteur), generics don't have enough upgrades to care about (apart from TLTs), ordnance is resistant thanks to extra munitions and it makes fat ships sweat

And, bonus, E'athn suddenly does something that Corran can't

One of the problems with the meta is that one could easily fly a Genericwing squadron that dealt with quad TLT well, but it would struggle to do anything to a Super Poe or Palp Aces squad because it would be 7 Obsidians or 4-5 Green squadrons or whatever.

Even lists that have equal PS with it could do well against it, like quad FCS Blue Squadron, or quad T-70 with quad R2 and IA's.

If Acewing was addressed somehow in the meta (crossing my fingers that ordnance spam will do it) quad TLT would be less obnoxious. Maybe quad Gammas, quad Homing Missiles, Quad LRS or Chips, Quad EM would be able to deal with both quad TLT and Acewing well. If we had a generic squadron that dealt with both quad TLT and Acewing well, that would then be a top list and would hopefully reset the game to generics dominating.

Also, I think quad FCS Blue Squadron would be a decent counter to both quad TLT and Acewing, just haven't felt like playing it because a 59 point Boba with Proton Bombs and a Vader with Prockets is too much fun. You should be able to just out damage the TLT's and past a few turns you'll have TL's up and hopefully also focuses to bust through Poes and and Vaders and Soontirs.

One of the problems with the meta is that one could easily fly a Genericwing squadron that dealt with quad TLT well, but it would struggle to do anything to a Super Poe or Palp Aces squad because it would be 7 Obsidians or 4-5 Green squadrons or whatever.

That's an example of Rock, Paper, Scissors evolving from cherry-picked upgrades to suit each squadron's play style.

According to you:

Aces > Obsidian (Generic) Swarm > Quad TLT > Aces

It's inevitable that every squadron will have good match-ups and also hard counters. That's why it's not super-critical if some cards are a point 'off' from their hypothetical and theoretical 'true value' that $50K-retainer-Mathguy says must be so. The meta will self regulate, provided that nothing is too over-powered. (I was against the idea of the Phantom being nerfed, but now I acknowledge that it was a good change for the game)

I don't believe that X-Wing can be balanced so that any two 100 point squadrons will always have an equal chance against each other. The nature of the ships and cards will create un/favourable pairings. You could fly slightly under-powered squadrons knowing that you will have a great match-up against some 'meta squadrons', while you fold to others.

Its not quite Rock Paper Scissors...

Aces can beat quad TLTs, ive done it, others too.

The problem is that not enough people actually play quad TLT, it always seems to be one or two players per event, yet you have to build against Acewing because it's the majority of lists.

This means when you face the quad TLT player you're just f'ed.

Rock Paper Scissors is the epitome of a balanced game, but it's not a very good one. When you expand the amount of options like Pokemon it gets much better, but there are still situations where you have no choice but to throw your hands up in the air when matchups are posted.

When you expand the amount of options like Pokemon it gets much better, ...

I never thought I would read where Pokemon is situationally better than X-Wing!

Thanks for the daily chuckle!

When you expand the amount of options like Pokemon it gets much better, ...

I never thought I would read where Pokemon is situationally better than X-Wing!

Thanks for the daily chuckle!

I'm just comparing our current meta to the Pokemon video games. There are a bunch of viable archetypes