Also, I agree with the TIE / TIE F/O debate, even if my opponent explained it to me that they numbers 10 and 20 are black sqd with crackshot and the unmarked is actually Omega Leader but they all looked like F/O, later on, I may forget, go for the sloop block and kick myself when reminded that they can't do a sloop due to being normal TIES. Its the same when I see Carnor Jax in a blood stripe Interceptor and Soontir Fel in the Red one, at some point, I AM going to get the two confused.

Which is fair to at least consider, but the game was designed with a solution to your potential problem. It is a one inch square of cardboard with a hole in the center that sits directly below each ship and is never removed. It lists the type of the ship and the pilot's name.

If you mistake two ships with different base tokens for each other, then it is no different than you forgetting that the YT-1300 has a turret and trying to dodge its arc by flying behind it. In both cases, all of the information that you need is, as the designers intended, right on the table in front of you - you just failed to utilize it.

Speaking as a sometimes TO.

The only reasons I'd DQ a model is because it wasn't recognizable any longer, such as trying to convert a X-Wing so look like a Z-95. If was modified to make it confusing, like a Y-Wing so heavily modified you can't tell what it is. Or if it was offensive in some way, like say a X-Wing modified to look like a male member... and people were complaining about it.

I decided to go for it.

Is anyone unclear that these are brobots? The pincers and wing/arms are moved.

I decided to go for it.

Is anyone unclear that these are brobots? The pincers and wing/arms are moved.

OH! there BROBOTS! I thought they were Firesprays!

I decided to go for it.

I'd dare say no one should have an issue with them. If I were a TO and you brought those in, and someone complained I'd be more likely to give them a warning for poor sportsmanship then make you change models.

This conversation has been had many times. How is playing a TIE/FO and a TIE painted like a TIE/FO any more confusing that flying Tetran with Mk II engine next to Fel with a shield upgrade? It is not. You just are not thinking - which is perfect if you really are a TO.

It's different because Tetran and Fel are still both interceptors. Sure, Fel m ight have an extra shield (in your example), and tetran might have a couple extra green banks, but they both have the same interceptor dial and are going to fly mostly the same. The TIE Fighter and TIE/FO don't have the same dial, and the addition of green hard turns and sloops can make a far more significant difference to how the two different ships will fly than extra green banks will for an interceptor.

So now you are picking which differences on a dial are meaningful? You just explained the problem away and the recreated it in the next sentence. 'Sure, but it doesn't matter than one in that example has a few extra greens on the dial - but, in this example, one has several additional green maneuvers, and that can have a large impact on the game.'

Regardless, the question is why one situation would be more confusing than the other, not what the consequence of that confusion would be. The reason that you did not answer is because there is no more potential for confusion in either situation. Both simply require that the opposing player look 1 inch below the ship at its base token to determine which is which - just as players are already required to do anyway.

Also, did you forget that Tetran can do a 1-k turn? But if you don't like that example, How about Fel and an Alpha Squadron Pilot? Suggesting that those two would fly the same is ridiculous.

Adding green turns and sloops on the TIE/FO is vastly different from giving Tetran 2 extra green banks. And Fel vs an Alpha squadron, the alpha is STILL an interceptor, so it still has an interceptor dial. You aren't flying Fel with a Tempest squadron advanced but using an Interceptor ship to represent said Tempest.

This conversation has been had many times. How is playing a TIE/FO and a TIE painted like a TIE/FO any more confusing that flying Tetran with Mk II engine next to Fel with a shield upgrade? It is not. You just are not thinking - which is perfect if you really are a TO.

It's different because Tetran and Fel are still both interceptors. Sure, Fel m ight have an extra shield (in your example), and tetran might have a couple extra green banks, but they both have the same interceptor dial and are going to fly mostly the same. The TIE Fighter and TIE/FO don't have the same dial, and the addition of green hard turns and sloops can make a far more significant difference to how the two different ships will fly than extra green banks will for an interceptor.

So now you are picking which differences on a dial are meaningful? You just explained the problem away and the recreated it in the next sentence. 'Sure, but it doesn't matter than one in that example has a few extra greens on the dial - but, in this example, one has several additional green maneuvers, and that can have a large impact on the game.'

Regardless, the question is why one situation would be more confusing than the other, not what the consequence of that confusion would be. The reason that you did not answer is because there is no more potential for confusion in either situation. Both simply require that the opposing player look 1 inch below the ship at its base token to determine which is which - just as players are already required to do anyway.

Also, did you forget that Tetran can do a 1-k turn? But if you don't like that example, How about Fel and an Alpha Squadron Pilot? Suggesting that those two would fly the same is ridiculous.

Adding green turns and sloops on the TIE/FO is vastly different from giving Tetran 2 extra green banks. And Fel vs an Alpha squadron, the alpha is STILL an interceptor, so it still has an interceptor dial. You aren't flying Fel with a Tempest squadron advanced but using an Interceptor ship to represent said Tempest.

Come on. The potential effect of the potential confusion is in no way relevant to whether or not there really is any potential for confusion. We can keep going if you insist, though.

Fel, obviously carrying push the limit, flies nothing like an Alpha Squadron Pilot. But fine, be that way. Lets use a new one:

Hypothetical 1: Corran Horn, with R2-D2, is flying next to Etahn A'baht, who has an R2 Astromech. Note that the rules do not require that Horn and A'baht have ID tokens. They are two identical plastic models. One has a full set of green speed 1 and 2 maneuvers -including the turns- and the other does not.

Hypothetical 2: The TIE Fighter with FO colors and a TIE/FO. Note that the rules do not requires that the TIE Fighter and TIE/FO have ID tokens. They are two very similar plastic models. One has green 2 turns and s-loops and the other does not. Since you didn't care that Tetran and Fel have different speed k-turns available, I guess that we are ignoring the s-loops and focusing on the green turns?

Also, I agree with the TIE / TIE F/O debate, even if my opponent explained it to me that they numbers 10 and 20 are black sqd with crackshot and the unmarked is actually Omega Leader but they all looked like F/O, later on, I may forget, go for the sloop block and kick myself when reminded that they can't do a sloop due to being normal TIES. Its the same when I see Carnor Jax in a blood stripe Interceptor and Soontir Fel in the Red one, at some point, I AM going to get the two confused.

Which is fair to at least consider, but the game was designed with a solution to your potential problem. It is a one inch square of cardboard with a hole in the center that sits directly below each ship and is never removed. It lists the type of the ship and the pilot's name.

If you mistake two ships with different base tokens for each other, then it is no different than you forgetting that the YT-1300 has a turret and trying to dodge its arc by flying behind it. In both cases, all of the information that you need is, as the designers intended, right on the table in front of you - you just failed to utilize it.

Just out of curiosity, would you mind me using Poe card insert and the X wing T-65 Rebel Transport model?

As for the guy saying the guy should take a loss for proxies, he is a worthless PoS, hope he got smashed.

I don't know, if I've spent money for a tournament, I kinda expect the people I'm playing to have invested in the game and not show up with Micro Machines and photocopies.

Just out of curiosity, would you mind me using Poe card insert and the X wing T-65 Rebel Transport model?

Just out of curiosity, what color is your desk?

My question is as relevant to this discussion as your question, so you can just PM me the answer to my silly question and then I will PM you the answer to your silly question. Then, you can even come back here and tell everyone how I responded. I am sure that everyone is genuinely interested.

This conversation has been had many times. How is playing a TIE/FO and a TIE painted like a TIE/FO any more confusing that flying Tetran with Mk II engine next to Fel with a shield upgrade? It is not. You just are not thinking - which is perfect if you really are a TO.

It's different because Tetran and Fel are still both interceptors. Sure, Fel m ight have an extra shield (in your example), and tetran might have a couple extra green banks, but they both have the same interceptor dial and are going to fly mostly the same. The TIE Fighter and TIE/FO don't have the same dial, and the addition of green hard turns and sloops can make a far more significant difference to how the two different ships will fly than extra green banks will for an interceptor.

So now you are picking which differences on a dial are meaningful? You just explained the problem away and the recreated it in the next sentence. 'Sure, but it doesn't matter than one in that example has a few extra greens on the dial - but, in this example, one has several additional green maneuvers, and that can have a large impact on the game.'

Regardless, the question is why one situation would be more confusing than the other, not what the consequence of that confusion would be. The reason that you did not answer is because there is no more potential for confusion in either situation. Both simply require that the opposing player look 1 inch below the ship at its base token to determine which is which - just as players are already required to do anyway.

Also, did you forget that Tetran can do a 1-k turn? But if you don't like that example, How about Fel and an Alpha Squadron Pilot? Suggesting that those two would fly the same is ridiculous.

Adding green turns and sloops on the TIE/FO is vastly different from giving Tetran 2 extra green banks. And Fel vs an Alpha squadron, the alpha is STILL an interceptor, so it still has an interceptor dial. You aren't flying Fel with a Tempest squadron advanced but using an Interceptor ship to represent said Tempest.

Come on. The potential effect of the potential confusion is in no way relevant to whether or not there really is any potential for confusion. We can keep going if you insist, though.

Fel, obviously carrying push the limit, flies nothing like an Alpha Squadron Pilot. But fine, be that way. Lets use a new one:

Hypothetical 1: Corran Horn, with R2-D2, is flying next to Etahn A'baht, who has an R2 Astromech. Note that the rules do not require that Horn and A'baht have ID tokens. They are two identical plastic models. One has a full set of green speed 1 and 2 maneuvers -including the turns- and the other does not.

Hypothetical 2: The TIE Fighter with FO colors and a TIE/FO. Note that the rules do not requires that the TIE Fighter and TIE/FO have ID tokens. They are two very similar plastic models. One has green 2 turns and s-loops and the other does not. Since you didn't care that Tetran and Fel have different speed k-turns available, I guess that we are ignoring the s-loops and focusing on the green turns?

1) How is there more potential for confusion is Hypothetical 1 than there is in Hypothetical 2?

2) How can you say that, assuming that an opponent is dumb enough not to look at the ships' base tokens, an opponent mistaking the two ships in Hypothetical 1 would have a more significant impact than an opponent mistaking the two ships in Hypothetical 2?

The only kind of situation I would look into is brobots, there is no way to tell them apart besides ready the tiny print on the bases. usually people have there ways, so it's good.

As for the guy saying the guy should take a loss for proxies, he is a worthless PoS, hope he got smashed.

I don't know, if I've spent money for a tournament, I kinda expect the people I'm playing to have invested in the game and not show up with Micro Machines and photocopies.

Ahhhh yes, the old Pay to Win scheme where we stick up for retail companies for developing a non-player-friendly business model where desirable upgrade cards are only packaged with undesirable models.

Ahhhh yes, the old "FFG should put all this time and money and effort and resources into producing a game I enjoy, but I'll be arsed if I'm going to be expected to pay for it" attitude.

...

Also, I agree with the TIE / TIE F/O debate, even if my opponent explained it to me that they numbers 10 and 20 are black sqd with crackshot and the unmarked is actually Omega Leader but they all looked like F/O, later on, I may forget, go for the sloop block and kick myself when reminded that they can't do a sloop due to being normal TIES. Its the same when I see Carnor Jax in a blood stripe Interceptor and Soontir Fel in the Red one, at some point, I AM going to get the two confused.

...

The funny thing about having trouble with Soontir Fel in the RED Interceptor is that if you start looking closely I strongly suspect he is flying a Royal Guard ship which IS Red in color. This gives him just as much right to that model as Jax has. Does it help if one plays Fel with the unmarked Interceptor?

As for the guy saying the guy should take a loss for proxies, he is a worthless PoS, hope he got smashed.

I don't know, if I've spent money for a tournament, I kinda expect the people I'm playing to have invested in the game and not show up with Micro Machines and photocopies.

Ahhhh yes, the old Pay to Win scheme where we stick up for retail companies for developing a non-player-friendly business model where desirable upgrade cards are only packaged with undesirable models.

How is that supposed to be read? As sarcastic support or a crushing rebuttal? I think it is pretty clear that FFG DOES have a degree of "Pay to Win" in that if you want to fly with certain key upgrades you're going to need to buy some big ships you may not otherwise want to use or find some other way to get those upgrade cards.

If I play a Fat Han with C-3PO I certainly expect someone else to be playing with the actual card when that's what I'm using. The same thing when using the fix for the Advanced.

I got no problem with people using proxies for upgrades and other cards in friendly/casual games. But if you're going to play at a Store Championship you need to be willing to follow all the rules, not just the ones you want to.

The rules are quite clear about needing to have the official upgrade cards with you. If you can't or won't buy them, then don't make a list with them. Not sure why that's such a hard concept for some people.

As for the guy saying the guy should take a loss for proxies, he is a worthless PoS, hope he got smashed.

I don't know, if I've spent money for a tournament, I kinda expect the people I'm playing to have invested in the game and not show up with Micro Machines and photocopies.

Ahhhh yes, the old Pay to Win scheme where we stick up for retail companies for developing a non-player-friendly business model where desirable upgrade cards are only packaged with undesirable models.

Ahhhh yes, the old "FFG should put all this time and money and effort and resources into producing a game I enjoy, but I'll be arsed if I'm going to be expected to pay for it" attitude.

Just like a good little consumer.

Who was suggesting that I said people should get things for free? It's buying extra ships you'll never use just to get small pieces of card that it silly. Not even Games Workshop is that greedy, lol. I mean, this isn't complicated. FFG intentionally has not packaged high demand cards in multiple ships, even when the opportunity presents itself to duplicate them. Or making it possible to buy upgrade cards individually or in bulk packs. This isn't about proxying Mico-Machines or papercraft. It's literally complaining about ownership of cheap cardstock rules rectangles. Especially when people are talking about competitive cards that require the purchase of a $90 model, lol. It's absolutely not player-friendly, and it's silly that people stick up for FFG on the issue. But I'd guess it's a fair bias. I mean, you already got suckered into those three extra K-Wings, so should everyone else!

But hey, people like you are why EBay has hundreds of cheap upgradeless Starvipers and K-Wings, lol.

As for the guy saying the guy should take a loss for proxies, he is a worthless PoS, hope he got smashed.

I don't know, if I've spent money for a tournament, I kinda expect the people I'm playing to have invested in the game and not show up with Micro Machines and photocopies.

Ahhhh yes, the old Pay to Win scheme where we stick up for retail companies for developing a non-player-friendly business model where desirable upgrade cards are only packaged with undesirable models.

Ahhhh yes, the old "FFG should put all this time and money and effort and resources into producing a game I enjoy, but I'll be arsed if I'm going to be expected to pay for it" attitude.

Just like a good little consumer.

Who was suggesting that I said people should get things for free? It's buying extra ships you'll never use just to get small pieces of card that it silly.

And there's not a person in the world saying you have to. You can have fun and play X-Wing and never once see a C-3PO card. You can play friendly games buying only the ships you want and printing cards you don't have and more power to you. You don't have to play competitively, and there will never be a need for you to ever so much as sniff at a Raider because you will be happy and content with your TIE Advanced you bought because you like Darth Vader.

But if you do want to play in a tournament, you have to follow the rules, and the rules say you have to have the actual stuff. This isn't some surprise ruling you get sprung on you when you start the first round. You know it going in. If that's a problem, then don't play in tournaments. Nobody's forcing you.

And there's not a person in the world saying you have to. You can have fun and play X-Wing and never once see a C-3PO card. You can play friendly games buying only the ships you want and printing cards you don't have and more power to you. You don't have to play competitively, and there will never be a need for you to ever so much as sniff at a Raider because you will be happy and content with your TIE Advanced you bought because you like Darth Vader.

But if you do want to play in a tournament, you have to follow the rules, and the rules say you have to have the actual stuff. This isn't some surprise ruling you get sprung on you when you start the first round. You know it going in. If that's a problem, then don't play in tournaments. Nobody's forcing you.

Which is generally true and fair, while also totally unrelated to this topic, but lets remember that some people purchased one of more TIE Advanced expansions expecting to play competitively with them - which they certainly should have expected to be able to do - and will now never be on equal footing with opponents unless they shell out for a Raider. Those players had no reason to suspect that FFG would essentially release a purchasable errata that reduces the ship's cost by four points.

The same goes for any new players that unknowingly purchase a TIE Advanced to build a competitive list. They are not purchasing a whole ship.

This isn't some surprise ruling you get sprung on you when you start the first round. You know it going in. If that's a problem, then don't play in tournaments. Nobody's forcing you.

I'd say that easily 60-65% maybe even more of the X-Wing player base has never played at a tournament and may never do so.

So for most people the requirement to own the card doesn't actually apply. It's going to be very, very rare for someone to go into a LGS and find someone else who refuses to play them because they proxied 3PO...

But if you are going to play at a Store Championship or higher level event, or even a casual tournament that won't allow proxies... You know that before you show up, or at least you should, because that's really on you. So you know if you have what you need or not, and can either try to borrow it, or make a list without it.

If you refuse to buy a Starviper then don't build a list with Autothrusters... It really is that simple, and despite what some people claim, you can in fact build a competitive list with A-Wings or Interceptors without them.

And there's not a person in the world saying you have to. You can have fun and play X-Wing and never once see a C-3PO card. You can play friendly games buying only the ships you want and printing cards you don't have and more power to you. You don't have to play competitively, and there will never be a need for you to ever so much as sniff at a Raider because you will be happy and content with your TIE Advanced you bought because you like Darth Vader.

But if you do want to play in a tournament, you have to follow the rules, and the rules say you have to have the actual stuff. This isn't some surprise ruling you get sprung on you when you start the first round. You know it going in. If that's a problem, then don't play in tournaments. Nobody's forcing you.

Which is generally true and fair, while also totally unrelated to this topic, but lets remember that some people purchased one of more TIE Advanced expansions expecting to play competitively with them - which they certainly should have expected to be able to do - and will now never be on equal footing with opponents unless they shell out for a Raider. Those players had no reason to suspect that FFG would essentially release a purchasable errata that reduces the ship's cost by four points.

The same goes for any new players that unknowingly purchase a TIE Advanced to build a competitive list. They are not purchasing a whole ship.

But that's not a case of FFG deliberately making the Advanced a poor competitive ship and sitting back and cackling as they dream of the extra money they'll make with the fix. They put out a ship they thought would work in the meta, and, as no amount of playtesting will EVER reveal, the meta left it in the dust.

And yes, putting the fix for the Advanced in a higher cost Epic ship was a hit, especially if you didn't plan on playing Epic. But they also included 4 of every pertinent upgrade, so you got your fix with one purchase. Unless you were planning on running a dozen of the things. Which means you're probably playing Epic and would want the Raider anyway.

And there's not a person in the world saying you have to.

then don't play in tournaments.

Nobody's forcing you.

It never surprises me when people who think like you do miss the point entirely.

The correct answer to this question is "Yeah, it kinda sucks that to play competitively you have to buy so much otherwise-worthless stuff, but I guess those are the rules", not "Those are the rules the masters handed down to us, like it or not, peasant!" I mean, this isn't a game like MTG where half of the game (?) is collecting the cards. We're talking about what is supposed to be a tabletop strategy game. Apparently part of the strategy is budgeting to buy items you won't use 90% of the components of. It would be like saying "I want to play these two tanks in my Space Marine army, but I need to buy two copies of this other tank I won't use so I can use the best rules for it".

Of course, this attitude may well be why so many players avoid tournaments like the plague.

We're talking about what is supposed to be a tabletop strategy game. Apparently part of the strategy is budgeting to buy items you won't use 90% of the components of.

While I would be sympathetic if this game was younger, that is how X-Wing works. It is definitely not a subscription model, but FFG has made it clear that new and powerful upgrades will become available to be purchased over time. And that is not something like the TIE Advanced where it sneaks up on unsuspecting players, that is just how the entire game is structured.

And there's not a person in the world saying you have to.

then don't play in tournaments.

Nobody's forcing you.

The correct answer to this question is "Yeah, it kinda sucks that to play competitively you have to buy so much otherwise-worthless stuff, but I guess those are the rules", not "Those are the rules the masters handed down to us, like it or not, peasant!"

Yeah, because that's exactly what I was saying.

Have fun yelling at clouds, I'm done.

Yeah, because that's exactly what I was saying.

I don't know, if I've spent money for a tournament, I kinda expect the people I'm playing to have invested in the game

And having been thoroughly derailed from the original issue regarding mildly modified models.

May I suggest we move on to talking about breakfast foods.

Or go ahead and have the thread fade out into the netherworld.

I punctuate this sentiment with John Cleese dancing in his underwear.

I feel it's important to make a distinction here:

Arguing about whether customised ships should be legal in play is one thing. (I for one am all for it, with some clearer lines of distinction as to what counts as modified. Micromachines-on-a-stick is pushing it, for instance.)

Arguing about whether we should agree to the balance-patches-cost-money approach or not is another - it's a valid complaint, but it's one that they've stated is the only business model they've got at the moment, and if we must choose, I'll take fixes-cost-money over no-fixes-at-all.

Arguing about proxies in tournament play is pointless; it's explicitly in the rules. Like it or lump it, even if many stores will happily let you run proxy cards.