So one of the comments in the recent thread about new dice got me thinking on an old pet peeve I have with this game, there’s no such thing as accuracy. X wing only has power. And more powerful attacks are more accurate attacks. I suppose to some extent, you can consider focus tokens and dice rerolls as the accuracy portion of the attack, but really it’s just part of how powerful the attack really is.

So what if the game separated the two? The easiest example would be to consider an A wing, which is an agile highly accurate ship with low power cannons vs. a B wing, which is a lumbering ship, packing tons of power. In general, this is not a new concept, D+D systems have used a to hit roll and a damage roll for a long time.

So how could this be implemented into X wing? The best way I can think of would be to actually get rid of all defense dice (since everyone seems to hate those anyways) and give each ship an evasion rating. Since I haven’t play tested this at all, let’s go ahead and say that this is equivalent to the ship’s current agility rating. This is a static number that the attacker needs to exceed in order to actually hit the target. And to determine if a target hits, he would roll accuracy dice, the number based off of the stat for each ship (so say 6 for an A wing, 4 for an X wing, 3 for a B wing, etc). This number would have to meet or exceed the evasion statistic. And for that reason, I wouldn’t expect a single ship to have less than 3 accuracy dice. This would mean that every ship would be capable of hitting every ship, assuming the +1 accuracy at R1 stays in play. But it also means that a B wing would need to get into R1 of a Phantom and roll 4/4 in order to get a hit through.

Once an attack is determined to hit, then you roll your power dice to see how much damage you do. An A wing would have 2, while an X might have 3, and a B might have 4. Since there are no more green dice to cancel results, the health of each ship would have to be reexamined, but for the point of this exercise let’s consider the stat lines to be doubled. So an X wing could push 3 damage through to a TIE fighter, and it would take all 3 hull, but it would still have 3 left. If deemed necessary, you could potentially add an absorption stat, that would work like the reinforce token from huge ships, reducing damage by 1 for each attack. Heck, perhaps reinforce becomes an action choice for some of the ships (Decimator and YT-1300 come to mind)

As for actions, I would start by not touching any of them. Focus symbols would be on both accuracy and power dice, and evades would cancel accuracy dice. This could make evades drastically more powerful since it negates an entire attack, but it could also hinder them almost useless against accurate ships. With focus results being used on both attacks, it allows you to make the decision whether to make an accurate shot or a powerful shot… And while you want to ensure that you connect first and foremost (as would likely be the case for the B wing), there would still be a reason to spend that focus on the A wing’s accuracy roll to peg out all 6 hit symbols.

Playing off of the D+D analogy, you can get rid of critical attack symbol completely. Instead, if the accuracy roll is 2 higher than the evasion stat, then the first hull card dealt is face up. If it is 4 or higher, then every hull card dealt is face up. The rationale for this would be that a standard hit is more of a glancing hit anyways. The direct hits are the ones that cause critical damage. Furthermore, it creates a user choice – once the attack is guaranteed, do I save my focus for power, or do I want to gamble on the crits at the risk that I do less overall damage?

So that’s the proposed mechanics of an accuracy/power system instead of an attack system like we currently have. As far as how it would affect the game, I would have to say that the canon idea of the highly evasive ships being highly accurate would have to be disconnected. Otherwise you would come across two types of ships… accurate, low power ships that are low health but hard to hit, and low accuracy high power ships that are high health but easy to hit. Ideally, you would want highly accurate ships that are easy to hit, and low accuracy ships that are hard to hit in order to establish the rocks/paper/scissor/lizard/Spock aspect of the game.

But more importantly, I feel like it would start to establish roles for each ship to fulfill. We have this to some extent with the ‘flanker’ and the ‘tank,’ but it’s a relatively simple thing. If all of a sudden you had interceptors who’s goal it was to chase down those pesky A wings, and a Decimator who was pumping out the firepower into the opponent’s B wings, there would expanded roles for ships to fulfill. Furthermore, it would create a place for ships like the X wing, who are the jack of all trades. You could substitute an A wing for an X wing in the list, knowing that you’ll be weaker at a pure interceptor roll, but he can do it if need be. But if not needed, he’s stronger at being a dog fighter.

Not to mention, ordnance could finally be used to shore up your weaknesses. An A wing swarm could grab some Prockets in case you come up against a double-deci list. While a B wing could load up with some Torpedoes to chase down those agile mother f*(&ers (but not protons… those pack a punch!). So instead of its pre-W8 usage where it’s never used, or its post-W8, where you pretty much take Conc/Protons (or plasma if you can’t fit the protons), you could design ordnance to be highly accurate or highly powerful to supplement the specific craft’s weaknesses.

Either way, I don’t expect this to happen, even in an X wing 2.0. But it does intrigue me enough that I might play around with it some on a lazy afternoon to see how the game feels. Anyone else care to comment?

I think it would make more sense to be different based on pilots than ships as I think on it. You could still have things like Prockets be inaccurate but more powerful by giving secondary weapons an accuracy modifier stat.

I think the idea of "absorption", or armor, is important, because that's what really induces you to take heavy weapons to damage tough things. The risk of all of this, though, is that ships become too specialized. Specialization is great in games that have 8-10 units or more, but at X-wings typical 3-5 unit level, you stand a very high chance of overspecialization even if only one ship is specialized to take a particular target out. You could easily have a fast, zippy A-wing that could dog fight and find itself with nothing to dogfight. I think this type of thing could easily be too much like Rock-Paper-Scissors. In the current system, everything is a threat to everything, and that's important in a small scale battle.

Edit: I know you mentioned munitions as an equalizer, and I think that's a good idea, but I still think the current points structure would need to be worked on. I think if you could get 4 broadly capable ships it could work, just in case one went down early to bad luck, you'd still have 3 to do work with.

So here's the list of things I'd want to see out of X-wing 2.0:

Pilot skill gone, in favor of simply choosing a ship to activate, starting with the player who has initiative. This eliminates a number of problems with accurately pricing PS-sensitive upgrades.

• Attack stat replaced by a pictorial indication of the number and color of dice to roll (as in Armada and Imperial Assault).
• Agility stat replaced by a set of tokens (as in Armada) and/or a static "armor" value. This removes a huge amount of variance from the game and makes ships' "death clocks" more reliable and transparent for both players.
• Repositioning (i.e., barrel roll and boost) either removed from the game entirely or moved to a separate phase available to all ships. (That is, ships are activated until all ships have executed a maneuver, then all ships have the opportunity to reposition. Read on for more about this.)
• Standardized keywords for timing and for a number of common effects. This simplifies rules interactions.
• Standardized templating for paying ability costs--a simple and Magic-like "cost: effect" would simplify a number of things.
• Clearly establish the concept of a dice pool
• Clearly establish timing windows and the language used to refer to those windows, including a standard timing for "interrupt"-style effects.
• Ordnance simply replaces your standard attack with a different set of dice, and has a standard keyword allowing you to pay a cost to re-equip or re-arm (like, and I know what I'm saying here, Attack Wing).

Now, I'm not sure any of those things are likely to happen short of X-wing 2.0, and I'm not sure X-wing 2.0 will ever happen. Yanking this back on topic, though, I think the first two items are the most important. Both of them would put the X-wing on a more solid footing as a tournament game, by both diversifying the design space and by replacing random variation with player decisions.

It's not quite the same as decoupling to-hit rolls from damage rolls, and I'm not really sure you'd want to--one of the advantages of X-wing is that it typically accomplishes a lot in relatively few rolls. But it would still let you distinguish between hit points and damage mitigation as sources of durability, as well as between brutal, "swingy" weapons and light, reliable weapons.

Maybe if there was no agility stat, and instead ships had defensive abilities they could trigger to reduce damage in different ways. Tanky ships could just reduce the damage by half, fast or maneuverable ships could make the attacker reroll dice (or even cancel them if they are far enough away - representing more distance to dodge). And then you could have different classes of dice equate to different weapons. Some would have a lot of damage faces, others would have a special die face (like a focus/target lock) that allows the attacker to choose a defense ability (let's call them...tokens) that can't be used on that attack!

Ok, sorry for my snark. In all seriousness, this is one of the abstractions in X-Wing that annoyed me from time to time, but I realized that I prefer the current system for that simple abstraction. When I want what is quite frankly a better (but more complicated) system, I play armada. Good ideas, though, just not my cup of tea for what I play X-wing for.

2.0 is the only way this would happen, obviously, so it's not going to happen anytime soon.

But it would be a delicate balance between simplicity and whatever mechanic separated power from accuracy.

The combat phase would take twice as long...

I think that in the more recent waves they have started de-coupling accuracy from power for certain attacks. A good example is TLT. Three dice of accuracy but low damage power.

Another example is how the single Turbolaser works for epic ships. High damage dealing capabilities but inaccurate against small nimble targets.

I think that the designers will continue to use things like that to expand the design space.

It would diversify the game quite a bit in a good way, but I agree with Vorpal that if they were to do this, Armada's dice are the way to go. e.g. An A-wing rolls 2 blue dice, blue dice have no blank sides, but they also don't have any critical hits on them. Meanwhile, a B-wing rolls yellow dice which have double hits, and crits on them, but more blank spaces than usual, etc. etc.

Or just give us Defensive reroll abilities outside of Lone Wolf and specific pilots.

So some people would like defense dice.

Maybe if there was no agility stat, and instead ships had defensive abilities they could trigger to reduce damage in different ways. Tanky ships could just reduce the damage by half, fast or maneuverable ships could make the attacker reroll dice (or even cancel them if they are far enough away - representing more distance to dodge). And then you could have different classes of dice equate to different weapons. Some would have a lot of damage faces, others would have a special die face (like a focus/target lock) that allows the attacker to choose a defense ability (let's call them...tokens) that can't be used on that attack!

Ok, sorry for my snark. In all seriousness, this is one of the abstractions in X-Wing that annoyed me from time to time, but I realized that I prefer the current system for that simple abstraction. When I want what is quite frankly a better (but more complicated) system, I play armada. Good ideas, though, just not my cup of tea for what I play X-wing for.

I totally agree with you. Vorpal wants some kind of Armada system, which i really would not like to copy for X-Wing. Don't get me wrong i like the armada system, but i think it represents what is going on in starfighter combat very poorly.

On the other hand i do like the OP's idea very much. You would be able to ping your enemy to death slowly but with nearly guaranteed precise hits with ships like an A-Wing, or risk to miss your shots with large "caliber" weapons on stuff like the B-Wing. There could also be ships that are both precise and have powerful weapons. That's what high point costs are for after all. If you pay a lot for a Tie Dfender, you deserve to have a both powerful shot with a good aim. Because the ship is much less sluggish than a B-Wing it should be easier to get your guns on target!

This is an absolutely great idea if you ask me. It would require the total reedition of Pilot and upgrade cards, the revision of point costs and abilities. You cannot half-bake something like this. The movement system of the game is totallyfine, but there is at the moment just not enough space for differentiation between some ships because they have only those 4 stats plus Pilot skill. And some ships are totally useless because of them. Non spammable 2 attack ships like the Advanced was before fix are an example of that. 1 attack ships like the HWK are forced to take a turret... This could all be remedied by such a nw system. So i cause only one damage with the HWK? Maybe, but its not so bad if i get it through 90% of the time while, let's say a 3 damage ship or weapon would be able to get its 3 damage through only 40% of time...

I hope this idea can be considered if they ever should make an X-Wng 2.0!

It would be good. The best example is missile and torpedoes. Normally a single missile should be able to kill if hits a tie or a-wing in one shot, I repeat, IF HITS.

Heavy Laser Cannons should be almost useless against fighter size targets, but very powerful against capital ships (Inaccurate, but powerful).

There are a lot of examples more about this

I think adding a few of armardas mechanisms could work I've been saying for ages ordnance should get a separate dice.

Getting rid of PS is an interesting idea, certainly activating units in an order you choose can work well.

I don't think we should add too much extra dice rolling though, one of the things that's a little tedious about 40k is to hit followed by to wound followed by save rolls, x-wings system is quick and unlike 40k not the main focus.

Accuracy could also be based on the pilot rather than just the ship. So Lord Vader might be more accurate than a wet-behind-the-ears academy pilot.

Mechanically speaking, it would be pretty easy to do (many wargames have a "ballistic skill" roll followed by a "wound" roll or "armour" roll or both). Different ships could have different armour classes, etc. You could then tweak this so that a ship might take several glancing hits but a direct hit past shields just blows a small ship up outright and tweak certain weapons as suggested above, torpedoes might not hit easily but do a lot of damage, etc. It wouldn't necessarily take much longer than now especially if there were less modfiers to some of the rolls. Roll to hit, roll for dodge, roll for damage. Not much more complicated than now.

But it would be a huge change to the game, really a total re-write.

FFG already has a system that does this in Imperial Assault, in which accuracy is directly linked to range and damage is totally separate so you can hit something a still do no damage. However this would require a totally new system for X Wing which is highly unlikely particularly considering the tantrum people threw over something as basic a rebalancing the damage deck.

I like the current system.

FFG already has a system that does this in Imperial Assault, in which accuracy is directly linked to range and damage is totally separate so you can hit something a still do no damage. However this would require a totally new system for X Wing which is highly unlikely particularly considering the tantrum people threw over something as basic a rebalancing the damage deck.

Yeah no that was never an issue, it was the fact you had to spend £30 to get the new deck if you didn't want tfa ships.

Or heaven forbid, actually have to pay 15 bucks if you want to fly Soontir Fel! That's outrageous!

How would X-wing be if accuracy and power were seperate? TLT. Or ICT for the Wave One answer.

Good points about the TLT. And as I said, this is purely an academic exercise. Even in a 2.0, this would be such a departure from the current X wing game that it'd be difficult to swing. It would take Paul Heaver getting to the final table again just to get demolished in two rounds because all greens blanked even though he outflew the guy in order for the Devs to discuss something needing to be done with the dice (green ones specifically).

In a WWI or WWII dogfighting (and in X-Wing PC games), being able to put the target inside your crosshairs has nothing to do with the number of weapons you carry, but with your skill as pilot and the maneuverability of your ship.

X-Wing would be more accurate if the hit was determinate by agility vs. agility (and the damage was a separated roll). Sure, the mechanics of attack dice modification needed to be completely different.

How the game was implemented is specially sad when you think about ordinance. Torpedoes should be very hard to hit, but doing a great damage (useful only against larger ships). Missiles should be very easier to hit, but doing much less damage (made for hunting fighters).

I tried to revise the Proton Torpedoes into something based on the lore for my custom system, without changing the game's rules:

See? Hard to hit, but powerful.

PS: I also liked the idea of different attack dice: that's another solution and would really add to the game. Unfortunately, it's only possible in a X-Wing 2.0 (that hopefully will take a very very long time to come).

I think adding a few of armardas mechanisms could work I've been saying for ages ordnance should get a separate dice.

Getting rid of PS is an interesting idea, certainly activating units in an order you choose can work well.

I don't think we should add too much extra dice rolling though, one of the things that's a little tedious about 40k is to hit followed by to wound followed by save rolls, x-wings system is quick and unlike 40k not the main focus.

It would be one more roll actually and as long as we don't have units that add up to 40 attack dice that don't even fit in your hand, i think we're totally fine.

I am against removing PS as a deciding factor, it just would need to be revisited for some pilots for X-Wing 2.0

Different dice for ordnance would be okay, but they would not change enough, while it would be totally logical if a Proton Torpedo was dangerous to a large ship because it can easily hit and then do its enormous damage, while an interceptor could laugh at such an unprecise attack because it could just dodge it.

As it is now you need tons of red dice in order to hit evasive ships, but if you separate precision from damage of the weapon this quite "unrealistic" feat of X-Wing would disappear!

It's the same thing as 2 Knights in armor fighting. One has a Sword (A-Wing) and one a massive 2-Handed Warhammer (B-Wing). It is easier to hit with the more agile sword, but i imagine a blow with the clumsy Warhammer is way more devastating IF it is not evaded!

Same thing for WWII fighter combat. I play Warthunder, and the german fighters often hve the Mk108 30mm cannon, which can take of the wing of a bomber in a single hit with it's High explosive filled Minengeschosse. But the weapon has terrible ballistics compared to the 50cals and 20mm cannons of the time, and a poor rate of fire too when compared. So in fighter combat it's not a good weapon when you face agile maneuvering targets and need to take deflection shots. Also some of the planes are just too clumsy to get any weapon on target! But anything they do hit just goes poof!

Coming from a Warhammer background, I can easily say i'm glad this game doesn't have a "to hit" and "to wound" roll. For the right environment such mechanics can add very interesting dimensions.

That said, I think the abstractions of the dice in X Wing reflect all of the things you guys are talking about. The variances of the green dice accurately reflect the slim chances of a pilot managing to escape the attack of an enemy on his/her tail, just reduced to their bare essence. I think it's cool there are people out there who crave a more granular experience, but the abstracted simplicity of X Wing's dice really help keep the games a manageable length.

The dice also keep the game accessible to new players. I could never get my wife or even some of my less adventurous friends to play Warhammer. The love of Star Wars brings em in, and the simplicity of the mechanics hooks em. Of course, the customization the cards brings is a whole other level of depth...

It's not quite the same as decoupling to-hit rolls from damage rolls, and I'm not really sure you'd want to--one of the advantages of X-wing is that it typically accomplishes a lot in relatively few rolls. But it would still let you distinguish between hit points and damage mitigation as sources of durability, as well as between brutal, "swingy" weapons and light, reliable weapons.

Yes, imo it does. It assigns a fix damage value and use a dice how well the target got hit, basically how much of that damage could have been applied to the target. If you know use tokens for defense, you can aswell adjust those tokens to evade/absorb certain types of dice, while not able to do anything against others types, etc which allows you to represent different grades of weapon effectiveness against different targets.

But I would say that is kind of irrelevant for X-Wing which should deal with fighter weapons and fighter weapons alone. Star Destroyers, Turbolasers, Anti-Capital-Torpedos and Point-Defense Lasers are a subject for armada and not X-Wing.

TurboLasers

3 attack

Range 2-5

Small ships gain extra defense dice equal to the range number, large ships gain an extra defense did at range 3+.

If this attack hits ship receives 3 damage (and 1 critical damage if a small ship), then cancel all dice results.

Too much?

Coming from a Warhammer background, I can easily say i'm glad this game doesn't have a "to hit" and "to wound" roll. For the right environment such mechanics can add very interesting dimensions.

That said, I think the abstractions of the dice in X Wing reflect all of the things you guys are talking about. The variances of the green dice accurately reflect the slim chances of a pilot managing to escape the attack of an enemy on his/her tail, just reduced to their bare essence. I think it's cool there are people out there who crave a more granular experience, but the abstracted simplicity of X Wing's dice really help keep the games a manageable length.

The dice also keep the game accessible to new players. I could never get my wife or even some of my less adventurous friends to play Warhammer. The love of Star Wars brings em in, and the simplicity of the mechanics hooks em. Of course, the customization the cards brings is a whole other level of depth...

This.

I used to play Warhammer and 40k, I play warmahordes now, I like that Xwing is, in its bare bones, simple. (Ironically I walked away from GW, partly because they were dumbing everything down(but mostly because they started channeling the spirit of scrooge)).

You move, you action, you shoot, you dodge.

That's the essence of it, long may it continue.