If you really can't figure out how to play the game without reacting to your opponent and retroactively adjusting your position, then maybe it's time to do yourself a favour and reacquaint yourself with the core set and the basic rules.

AND WHILE WE'RE AT IT.

Being able to perform one action per turn does not mean that your "action economy sux", it is the STANDARD. Every single ship in the game starts in this position, and (one or two notable exceptions aside) you have to pay a premium and/or suffer a penalty to improve that position. If you really can't figure out how to play the game without being able to perform two to three actions per turn, then maybe it's time to do yourself a favour and reacquaint yourself with the core set and the basic rules.

Public service announcement over. We now return you to your regularly scheduled unnecessary bleating for "fixes".

*rolls on the floor laughing*

This is one thing that has bugged me for awhile. If a ships can only do 1 action, and it can't take boost/EU and VI, then it's considered not good enough. I firmly wish that EU and VI had never been made as they IMO seen like a crutch.

My two cents: I completely agree. Being able to just move and Focus is fine enough in most cases, and doing much more than that without penalty is why you pay a premium on different ships/pilots (Fel takes up a third of a list with just PtL and ATs, never mind that second Mod slot; x7 Deltas are still a whopping 28 points to start for situational double-actions, etc etc). Pulling the right move at the right time is still vastly more important than most other aspects of playing the game.

That said, add-ons that make your ship relatively action-independent are rightly powerful because of the freedom they grant you when planning manoeuvres. My absolute favourite combo is still FCS/Autothrusters, even though the only two ships able to equip both are the Virago and the Aggressor. I'm really hoping the StarViper gets a boost somehow because VI Xizor with FCS/ATs ±Inertial Dampeners is a mid- to late-game monster, but that's neither here nor there.

So far I've been running a lot of K-Wing lately, and while they have the BEST post-manoeuvre adjustment, it's at the sacrifice of not attacking that round. Otherwise, you're just setting your move and taking a Focus or TL, then waiting for the Combat phase. It makes it feel all the sweeter when you've successfully blocked a ship or zipped past a firing arc.

I don't have anything against Fel et al that rely on reactionary movement and/or token-stacking, it just doesn't fit my play style.

Engine Upgrade (IMHO) was a mistake. The four point cost sounds like enough of a penalty. It is on cheap ships but on a 42 point Corran or a 60 point large based ship, EU is just too good. Hindsight being 20/20, it would have made more sense to be either small ship only or come with a built-in penalty.

I don't think every fix involves a reposition. But there are certainly some ships whose pilots suffer greatly due to a lack of reposition.

gamblertuba, on 15 Apr 2016 - 10:00 AM, said:

Engine Upgrade (IMHO) was a mistake. The four point cost sounds like enough of a penalty. It is on cheap ships but on a 42 point Corran or a 60 point large based ship, EU is just too good. Hindsight being 20/20, it would have made more sense to be either small ship only or come with a built-in penalty.

Something like: You gain the boost action but the restriction from boosting onto rocks, and off the board is removed. (no ships as that would allow for nasty APL shenanigans)

So far I've been running a lot of K-Wing lately, and while they have the BEST post-manoeuvre adjustment, it's at the sacrifice of not attacking that round. Otherwise, you're just setting your move and taking a Focus or TL, then waiting for the Combat phase. It makes it feel all the sweeter when you've successfully blocked a ship or zipped past a firing arc.

So much this. I love planning a turn or two ahead to trap ships in my firing arcs and/or block them. The past few waves the real problem has been that jousters had trouble making their damage stick even when they set up their shots properly, regeneration and heavy green dice modification made it easy for a lot of elite ships to soak a bad maneuver and go about their business. This is less true now, thanks to some pretty dangerous ordnance options.

I think we're getting to the point where Engine Upgrade isn't the end-all anymore. Boost is certainly powerful, I won't argue that, but we are seeing more and more interesting Mod options start to filter into the game. I have nothing against Boost as a mechanic nor the EU as a universal option, because it doesn't always work and doesn't always save someone. Corran Horn at PS10 costing 42+ points? Yes, I feel it's warranted that his five HP better be able to stay alive for a while, or he'd never be able to make his points back. He's relatively balanced, without getting into a discussion of Regeneration anyway.

Boost is a way to get return on investment. You're investing a third of your list or more into a single ship, and part of that investment includes increased survivability due to manoeuvre timing and being able to adjust position after the fact.

That said, it is true that certain pilots or ships don't really have access to repositioning in the same manner as others. I feel certain recent upgrades have been trying to balance this without forcing the pendulum to swing too violently (BB-8 comes to mind).

Great post, Gecko.

I completely agree.

We are in a better place now but Engine Upgrade just about ruined the meta for a while with every list having a YT or Decimator boosting around. Now nearly everyone thinks a ship needs boost, barrel roll or both in order to be competitive.

I wonder if there is a way to introduce a mechanic whereby a ship that avoids X amount of damage takes an extra stress...

Gosh I love PSA's, so informative. You're doing a great service to the public with your announcement Gecko.

There's nothing wrong with post maneuver positioning because any ship that can do it well you have to pay out to have. There's also nothing wrong with suggesting that a ship in need of a fix could benefit from it as well. Until FFG stops providing those options then this topic is about as useful or relevant as the bleating you disparage.

I think we're getting to the point where Engine Upgrade isn't the end-all anymore. Boost is certainly powerful, I won't argue that, but we are seeing more and more interesting Mod options start to filter into the game. I have nothing against Boost as a mechanic nor the EU as a universal option, because it doesn't always work and doesn't always save someone. Corran Horn at PS10 costing 42+ points? Yes, I feel it's warranted that his five HP better be able to stay alive for a while, or he'd never be able to make his points back. He's relatively balanced, without getting into a discussion of Regeneration anyway.

It's been absolutely ages since I last used Engine Upgrade myself (I think I used it once on TBC when he first came out, and that's probably the last occasion). It's a card which gives you a lot of flexibility but also inevitably ties you into an expensive build (you're going to want an extra action to really take advantage of it). Which is why it finds a natural home on Vader.

I've been spending more and more time playing low PS generic fighters recently (since I like fielding 4+ ship lists), and I honestly don't miss the extra actions or repositioning shenanigans; quantity can be just as effective as quality, so long as you use the ships in their intended role.

5/5 Excellent PSA.

Maneuver Better.

Eh. I think you're beating the wrong horse. The game ship the core has been "roll dice to do damage". Yet sadly, dice fail. The way to be better at the game and competitive is to remove the dice's ability to fail. How do you do that? You can focus. You can target lock, or you can have Palp change it for you. All amazing pieces that save you from bad dice.

On the defensive, best way to save from bad dice? Focus. Evade token. Palp and yes, boost and barrel roll. You can't get screwed by dice if you don't roll them.

If your list 100% relies on the luck of the dice, you will wing half the time and blow up spectacularly half the time, because you're playing a game of pure chance. If that's your style, fly on. However, don't be angry if players too the scale of chance with thier lists.

Gosh I love PSA's, so informative. You're doing a great service to the public with your announcement Gecko.

There's nothing wrong with post maneuver positioning because any ship that can do it well you have to pay out to have. There's also nothing wrong with suggesting that a ship in need of a fix could benefit from it as well. Until FFG stops providing those options then this topic is about as useful or relevant as the bleating you disparage.

Sarcasm, that always works.

It's been absolutely ages since I last used Engine Upgrade myself (I think I used it once on TBC when he first came out, and that's probably the last occasion). It's a card which gives you a lot of flexibility but also inevitably ties you into an expensive build (you're going to want an extra action to really take advantage of it). Which is why it finds a natural home on Vader.

I've been spending more and more time playing low PS generic fighters recently (since I like fielding 4+ ship lists), and I honestly don't miss the extra actions or repositioning shenanigans; quantity can be just as effective as quality, so long as you use the ships in their intended role.

Jousting is still very much a thing. I really enjoy running five Headhunters + tank/Ace/gimmick, since that's two factions and a whole lot of options. There's very few individual ships that want five Zs barrelling towards them, and I also have enough bodies in the field to block, trap, and tackle more or less at my discretion. I don't need Barrel Roll, Boost, or SLAM to make them effective at what they do.

But I also don't want to come across as though people need to git gud; player style can matter a lot. I just believe that foresight and manoeuvre planning are very important tools in the X-Wing tacklebox.

But 1 action a turn isn't the standard anymore, its behind the power curve. We have pilots that can get 3 without much trouble or that much of a penalty. Cards like R4 Agromech, FCS, K4 Security, V1 Title, etc. can give even lowly generics multiple actions a turn. Your move, focus or TL is just not that good anymore. Ships that can only do that are at a disadvantage.

Gosh I love PSA's, so informative. You're doing a great service to the public with your announcement Gecko.

There's nothing wrong with post maneuver positioning because any ship that can do it well you have to pay out to have. There's also nothing wrong with suggesting that a ship in need of a fix could benefit from it as well. Until FFG stops providing those options then this topic is about as useful or relevant as the bleating you disparage.

Sarcasm, that always works.

Sarcasm causes two scenarios:

1. Self doubt (Is something I said worth mocking?)

2. Confusion (Why is a 14 year old talking to me?)

I am fine with either.

not every ship needs repositioning (though considering even tie fighters have it, the core sets are aokay for repositioning)

but then you need to at least be cheap or reliable enough to combat sh*tty rng. If you play harder to use ship only to have worse luck than your opponent, you might as well not play

so far, there are only a few non-repositioning ships with rng retardant failsafes

feedback or missile + chips Z-95s

doom or palp Shuttle

Vadermator

Gunner bossk YV-666

R4 aggro scum Y

the poor t-65 X has nothing, nor does the special-K outside its one-shot stim + TL combo

This PSA is better than CATS... I would watch it again and again.

I love PSA's.

Really, the game-breaker is PTL. Action economies are almost always of primary importance in any game. In a game with a small range of opportunities to act like X-Wing, where in a 3 ship list you might get to act 15 times in a game, additional actions are killer, and the stress penalty isn't enough to offset it in many instances.

not every ship needs repositioning (though considering even tie fighters have it, the core sets are aokay for repositioning)

but then you need to at least be cheap or reliable enough to combat sh*tty rng. If you play harder to use ship only to have worse luck than your opponent, you might as well not play

so far, there are only a few non-repositioning ships with rng retardant failsafes

feedback or missile + chips Z-95s

doom or palp Shuttle

Vadermator

Gunner bossk YV-666

R4 aggro scum Y

the poor t-65 X has nothing, nor does the special-K outside its one-shot stim + TL combo

Also any Scum ship with a crew slot. Praise our savior K$ Security Droid.

Also, not a typo. K-Money.

I don't have anything against Fel et al that rely on reactionary movement and/or token-stacking, it just doesn't fit my play style.

Oh, I don't have a problem with them either - you pay for the upgrades, and they have their disadvantages (in Fel's case, no shields and three hull). What I do have a problem is is people who appear to believe that's the only way to play the game (or even the only way to play the game effectively).

But 1 action a turn isn't the standard anymore, its behind the power curve. We have pilots that can get 3 without much trouble or that much of a penalty. Cards like R4 Agromech, FCS, K4 Security, V1 Title, etc. can give even lowly generics multiple actions a turn. Your move, focus or TL is just not that good anymore. Ships that can only do that are at a disadvantage.

No, one action per turn is still the standard. Yes, there are specific pilots who can get three (or more) without much trouble (and there have been since at least wave 3), but again you have to pay a premium for that ability. Whether you're paying for the pilot skill or an upgrade, it still costs you more to do it (which is the entire point of upgrade cards, they allow you to do things the rules wouldn't normally allow).

The notable exception will be the Defender's TIE/x7 title when it is released.