The bottom of my foot is by no means in danger!

I would only support this if the special squadron rules etc.were online and you did NOT need to have any cards to use them (think rule ref cards) and the squadrons did NOT come with any special goodies.

If it ended up being something that would compel me to REbuy ships rather than new ones, it would do nothing more that piss me off and spur a maelstrom of "FFG is the new GW" trollishness on the Interwebs.

It's funny how people become so concerned about xwing spontaneously exploding into Warhammer 40k.

It reminds me of the stereotypical parents not wanting their kids to hang out with "that kid".

Others have referenced it but having shared abilities is something that could bring alot to this game for some of the underwhelming ships. After all, this really is just an expansion upon IG 2000's ability as well as youngsters.

Some folks just won't get off their GW/40k high horse of doom.

this mentality works in 40k because 40k individual unit balance is just bad...plain bad...so people would spam the hell out of the "best unit" their race has. Formations force them to bring units they probably dont normally want, so it works for 40k (for the most part, RAW the Tau formations are just...wow lol and yeah i play tau)

Xwing's balance is the insane amount of customization each ship can get. Adding formations would limit that more than benefit.

Surely this would be done with shared titles? I've seen a number of 'Rogue Squadron: if in range 1-2 of another Rogue Squadron...etc' type ideas around so it seems kinda odd to single this one out as being too much.

Y'know, what cracks me up about this is that it's not even originally a 40k thing. Warmachine was doing it for years before GW ever added it to 40k, and someone was probably doing similar "select a certain force, gain a bonus!" stuff before Warmachine was.

Warmachine/ Hordes was the first game to do it properly. Hell, warmachine kinda of had it in MKI

Battletech had a loose fluff based formation thing due V the field manual era.

This topic was brought up ages ago and it was shot down then by all the people who couldn't get "I hate 40k" out of their head.

The farthest I would want this to go is maybe a title similar to brobots, where they gain limited abilites for being the same ship. Attani Mindlick sorta does that to.

Adding in under-represented ships in a way that restricts their list diversity is not a route I would choose as a player.

Imagine if they had done this with the Advanced title. Ugh.

I would like a squadron mechanic that rewards the same PS. My thought:

Squad Formation:

Title - 0pts

When an friendly ship in range 1 with the same Pilot Skill as you defends, if you have not attacked, you may choose preform an attack on the enemy ship attacking if they are in your firing arc. If they are not in your firing arc, you may rotate your base until they are in your firing arc, then receive a stress token. You may not preform additional attacks this round.

If saves lower PS squads from being arc dodged to death, and it's still not an instant "Do it everytime" button because you might have to rotate to a bad position to get the shot, messing up your formation completely.

This is bad game design. It dramatically increases the complexity of list building, and unless you meticulously balance these, it will lead to a reduction in list variety.

This could have a place in a campaign setting, but not in competitive or pick-up games.

This is bad game design. It dramatically increases the complexity of list building, and unless you meticulously balance these, it will lead to a reduction in list variety.

This could have a place in a campaign setting, but not in competitive or pick-up games.

Ok i got to say it, you mean like EVERY new pilot/ship/slot/card dramatically increases the complexity of list building and balancing the game?

this mentality works in 40k because 40k individual unit balance is just bad...plain bad...so people would spam the hell out of the "best unit" their race has. Formations force them to bring units they probably dont normally want, so it works for 40k (for the most part, RAW the Tau formations are just...wow lol and yeah i play tau)

Xwing's balance is the insane amount of customization each ship can get. Adding formations would limit that more than benefit.

Just a heads up sir but it impossible for EbongHawk to have a 40k mentality. We started playing the game the same time and the same place and he had never played a miniatures game before.

I suggest people consider before they continue on the 40k doom and gloom. NOBODY here is talking about 40k. We are discussing creative new aspects to play X-WING, and that is all. I can understand wanting to defend your game from unwanted intrusion but you are not reading the intent as intended.

The general idea of selling multiple ships in a pack is good, but the formation rules idea is not. Just continue the current trend of releasing Aces/Veteran packs in between Waves, maybe stepping up the schedule some.

The mission format is perfect for including rarely/never used ships and builds. There's a bazillion fan made missions out there as well as enough from official expansions to model your own missions. Don't rely on FFG to hold your hand.

That said, a mission tournament would be awesome.

good thing that some have already answered that xwing is not Games horseshit shop. the sole reason why i sold my 10.000 point strong and painted Dark Angels army is because i hated those formations. Formations kinda DIRECT u or even FORCE u to play them. thats what i hated alot. after 7 years of being a Games Workshop costumer i quitted at 40k Edition 7 and Age of Sigmar. Lucky for me tough i could sell my minis for a decent prize. But that doesnt mean that i dont like thier computer games i will conteniue that but my Tabletop time with GW is over i dont want to play a rock papper shot gun with formations vs formations.

thats why i play Bolt Action and X Wing cause it lets me build my own lists it doenst force me to do something or chose something.

The OP is either:

A) A GW Financomancer who is poisoning us with wyrdstone gas vapours to induce zombie-like servitude or,

B) A T-65 Fixer

Well, don't you think X-wings need 4 dice primaries?

Well I guess if 3 reds and a foci is only aaaaaverage....

Why screw with what is working?

No.

The OP is either:

A) A GW Financomancer who is poisoning us with wyrdstone gas vapours to induce zombie-like servitude or,

B) A T-65 Fixer

I appreciate your sense of humor

The OP is either:

A) A GW Financomancer who is poisoning us with wyrdstone gas vapours to induce zombie-like servitude or,

B) A T-65 Fixer

I appreciate your sense of humor

My greatest dream is to be immortalized forever in a Star Wars X-Wing Miniatures Game forum signature.

Some people have made the argument, tersely, that because GW does something similar, it is automatically a bad idea. That is pretty weak sauce reasoning.

Actually Warmachine introduced something very similar, and I think before it became common in 40K. If implemented correctly, the idea has a lot of merit.

Warmachine has thematic forces that make sense in their universe. They also extensively playtest them and most are not a mess of overpowered garbage. In general, out of four levels of theme lists, most players will only get the second level, as going beyond that will not usually result in a competitive list.

I don't think X-wing needs theme lists that give out bonuses. If you want a theme, feel free to fly it but don't expect any bonuses because of it.

Maybe in the future once X Wing has ballooned out with a much larger range of selections for ships this type of mechanic might be useful for epic play format games.

If the only "viable" X-wing build forces you to run 3x X-wings then it drastically limits diversity. As it is now you rarely see a single IG-88 because they are so much stronger together (you do see them on occasion).

Why on earth would anyone want to limit diversity? it just makes no sense.

I will explain this further. The squadrons would have to be balanced evenly against other things in the game if not then they will be the only thing played thus limiting diversity. Now if they are balanced to the rest of the game then the ships involved in the squadron would be weaker when not in the squadron so therefore only played as part of the squadron thus limiting diversity.

Long story short its a bad idea that has not been thought out well. Forcing inclusions of units is just bad.