Honestly the game is in a great place right now. The "get good" atitude isn't good for anyone, it in no way helps the person who is struggling or not understanding. I've helped quite a lot of new players (a point of which I very proud of) and all of them have thanked me for the way I've taught them. If I was to just tell them to get good they never would have stayed in the game and they wouldn't be beating me (typical).

No matter how many fixes you release you will all ways have a "worst ship ever". We fix the x wing and something else takes its place. Its just they way the world works.

Rant over/

Come on everyone let's take a step back and chill. Enjoy the game and if you aren't enjoying it anymore then it's best to take a break.

The standard, 100-point competitive game is dead (to me).

The balancing is beyond laughable, as can be seen in the number of viable lists.

There was a time in this game when, if someone asked "What should I buy next?" the answer was "anything, they are all good ships."

No longer is this true, and never again will it be true.

You now need to buy everything, from Jumpmasters (because they're awesome and come with Boba Fett, who is needed to defeat the ubiquitous "Emperor Palpatine" builds).

You need to buy the Raider so you can get Emperor Palpatine, since he's the only list outside Crack-Swarm that can be fielded in an Empire 100 list (meanwhile you buy 3 TIE/x1 titles & Adv. Targ Computers that you will NEVER field).

You need to buy a K-Wing for TLTs.

You need to buy M3-A interceptors for mangler cannons, even though the ship is one of the weakest.

Basically there are about 10 competitive lists at any given time nowadays. Sure, you can field 'different' lists, but the odds are you're still piling one or two "standard loadout" ships, like a stress-hog, or a Soontir Fel, or a TLT-Scum Y-Wing, etc.

I get that there is a cadre of loyal, competitive players who think I'm an idiot whiner.

But I actively discourage people from playing this game now, and I don't even play on Vassal (which is where you can truly see how poor the 'variety' of competitive builds is).

The ONLY thing that can save this game now is composition rules, such as limiting the amount of certain things that can be taken, or requiring ship X to be taken before ship Y can be taken. Similar to how 40K has Heavy/Fast Attack/Troop.

Playing against the same 10 lists is dumb, and when I go... back when I went to open X-Wing events, ALL that showed up were competitive builds.

There's no fun in that for me.

And so I quit buying, and encourage others to do so as well.

If you absolutely NEED your X-Wing fix, play on Vassal for free, and remind yourself why this game is no longer fun without the regret of having bought ships.

At least I never got hooked into Armada, because that's going to end up in the same place.

Talk about a BuzzKill! I really don't understand where attitudes like this originate. I'm probably a sub .500 player and have yet to develop this kind of attitude. I've been fortunate that the people I've met during play are pretty decent individuals and interesting. If X-Wing, for you, is all about winning you're missing out on several great aspects of game play.

Do not diss Black Sun Enforcer.

Diss Knave Squadron Pilot as much as you like.

Knaves are one of a few places where you can stack sensor jammer and regen droids. R5-p9 is also better at low P.S

(Extremely unlikely to be blocked, knows perfectly if it can spend focus on defense, then attack or save for regen.) barrel makes it a nice blocking ship.

Helio, dude, just leave. No one will miss you, but that's not why you should leave. You should leave because hanging around a forum for a game you hate and occasionally venting your spleen is the worst possible use of your time. Do anything else, you'll be happier for it

The standard, 100-point competitive game is dead (to me).

The balancing is beyond laughable, as can be seen in the number of viable lists.

There was a time in this game when, if someone asked "What should I buy next?" the answer was "anything, they are all good ships."

No longer is this true, and never again will it be true.

You now need to buy everything, from Jumpmasters (because they're awesome and come with Boba Fett, who is needed to defeat the ubiquitous "Emperor Palpatine" builds).

You need to buy the Raider so you can get Emperor Palpatine, since he's the only list outside Crack-Swarm that can be fielded in an Empire 100 list (meanwhile you buy 3 TIE/x1 titles & Adv. Targ Computers that you will NEVER field).

You need to buy a K-Wing for TLTs.

You need to buy M3-A interceptors for mangler cannons, even though the ship is one of the weakest.

Basically there are about 10 competitive lists at any given time nowadays. Sure, you can field 'different' lists, but the odds are you're still piling one or two "standard loadout" ships, like a stress-hog, or a Soontir Fel, or a TLT-Scum Y-Wing, etc.

I get that there is a cadre of loyal, competitive players who think I'm an idiot whiner.

But I actively discourage people from playing this game now, and I don't even play on Vassal (which is where you can truly see how poor the 'variety' of competitive builds is).

The ONLY thing that can save this game now is composition rules, such as limiting the amount of certain things that can be taken, or requiring ship X to be taken before ship Y can be taken. Similar to how 40K has Heavy/Fast Attack/Troop.

Playing against the same 10 lists is dumb, and when I go... back when I went to open X-Wing events, ALL that showed up were competitive builds.

There's no fun in that for me.

And so I quit buying, and encourage others to do so as well.

If you absolutely NEED your X-Wing fix, play on Vassal for free, and remind yourself why this game is no longer fun without the regret of having bought ships.

At least I never got hooked into Armada, because that's going to end up in the same place.

I stopped reading part way through because it's pure nonsense, you are putting artificial restrictions on your self based on perceived power.

You are the problem here.

For example I no longer run a shuttle and palpatine in my imperial aces build, because I find it stronger without the emperor. And I defeat palp aces build with it, I just have more aces.

I bet if the people winning about balance actually were good at list building then they would realize the game is more balanced. However if you can only defeat a palp aces list with a palp aces list then maybe you just suck at list building and therefore require a net list to compete against a strong list?

But of course that's not the case, it's definitely the games fault.

(I don't run Vader, soontir, or palp shuttle in my imp aces list... Wtf wrong with me? Oh right I try new things and combinations. My first imp aces build that I tried competitively was soontir, Vader, palp. But after months of tweaking it has none of those ships in it.)

I flamed you hard, but you needed to be. Some new player is going to read this **** and form ideas based on your interpretation and create another you. ""X" sucks because I said so and "y" is the only thing viableto fly." Is a sentence that is bad for the game.

Personlly I am hard pressed to find a shipi won't fly, and this thread has forced me to change my fleet for tomorrows spring tournament to have a m3a in it because I love that little ship even if no one else does.

Quoted myself, as promised i took an m3a to my stores spring kit today. 17 people attended and i won the tournament running an m3a. If that is indeed the weakest ship as stated be people in this thread you can still win a 17 person tournament running it in your list then the game has to be somewhat balanced.

Here was my list:

100 points

Anyways, long story short. The game is allot closer balanced then you think. Step back, and actually try stuff that you think is not good in a competitively built list. I wish people like major juggler never made there lists and posted there opinions because yes some things are slightly stronger or weaker, but in reality the balance is extremely good and things that are worse are only marginally worse and in the right builds are not worse at all.

I hate these threads and i feel they are poison to the community because new players read them and get the wrong ideas in there head about what is good and what is not when in reality almost everything (if not everything) is good in the right circumstance.

+1 to FFG for designing an extremely balanced game.

TL;DR: figuring out the prerequisite math to balance this game is hard and FFG hasn't gotten it right yet. There are other games that are worse, but that doesn't change the fact that X-wing is an imperfectly imbalanced game.

First, the game is imperfectly balanced, and that is a good thing because it adds variety in strategies (as stated in the video).

As a subtle note, I made the distinction that X-wing is IMperfectly imbalanced according to the definition and criteria of the "Perfect Imbalance" video. That's not a good thing.

The video's first point about useless units being good for the game is wrong. Anybody can make a bunch of units that aren't good. Justifying it is just making excuses for poor game design. The FFG designers have repeatedly and explicitly strongly disagreed with that design philosophy, so I don't know why it keeps getting brought up in their defense. Other than that, most of the video is pretty solid.

Major Juggler imo, has it primarily right: There's too much gut feeling in how Xwing is created. They NEED to hire a math major for this game, immediately.

Bad units were once considered a thing for games, but Magic's in-house publishing and research has proven thats a really bad way to create a game. And their reasoning seems to stand.

Xwing has a serious Generic problem. TLT became the best generic damage output for a while. Now its scouts. etc.

Generics need not only to be effective. They need to be different and cause increase in power via synergy. There is little to no synergy now in xwing.

---

[They also need a much longer and more effective playtest criteria. (So far it SUCKS!)

They also need a PR manager

They also need a Logistic whip/whatever they're called. These delays are ridiculous. ]

Major Juggler imo, has it primarily right: There's too much gut feeling in how Xwing is created. They NEED to hire a math major for this game, immediately.

True. Unfortunately it is not that simple.

• Getting a math guy on board is required to balance the game properly, but it's not required to actually sell the game.
• Not just any math major can fix the game, and randomly hiring a B.S. graduate in math with a gaming background is unlikely to help. I'm not aware of anyone in the entire games industry that has the technical proficiency to do what is required to properly balance X-wing, and if they wanted this capability they would have to pay through the nose for it.
• FFG's business model is to pay below market rates for employees. See Glassdoor.com reviews.
• I'm the only one who has demonstrated the capability (so far) to know how to balance their game. I have had brief discussions with them about doing consulting work for them. It didn't go anywhere for multiple reasons.
• I have essentially solved the problem of X-wing balance in my non-public MathWing 3.0, but I'm not giving it away for free.

I don't mean to be pessimistic, just realistically recognize that the developers will be playing whack-a-mole with game balance for years to come. They already have playtesters that get paid nothing, and undoubtedly some of them have tried to apply mathematics to the game. So far they have not been successful, but it is free labor, so I would expect FFG to try and continue pursuing this option. The alternative is to multiply their development costs on the order of 3x to 4x. Remember their standard operating procedure is to pay as little as possible.

The bright side is that FFG does actually care about game balance. Between this and the new Star Wars movies it virtually guarantees a steady stream of expansions for years to come. Enjoy the ride.

There is little to no synergy now in xwing.

Crackshot and alphastrikes, too easy to kill off a key element early?

Extreme arc dodgers or regenerators too cheap in relation to points spent on a synergy combo?

However S&V got some nice new combos now, lets see how that plays out.

There is little to no synergy now in xwing.

Reasons for this?

Major Juggler imo, has it primarily right: There's too much gut feeling in how Xwing is created. They NEED to hire a math major for this game, immediately.

True. Unfortunately it is not that simple.

• Getting a math guy on board is required to balance the game properly, but it's not required to actually sell the game.
• Not just any math major can fix the game, and randomly hiring a B.S. graduate in math with a gaming background is unlikely to help. I'm not aware of anyone in the entire games industry that has the technical proficiency to do what is required to properly balance X-wing, and if they wanted this capability they would have to pay through the nose for it.
• FFG's business model is to pay below market rates for employees. See Glassdoor.com reviews.
• I'm the only one who has demonstrated the capability (so far) to know how to balance their game. I have had brief discussions with them about doing consulting work for them. It didn't go anywhere for multiple reasons.
• I have essentially solved the problem of X-wing balance in my non-public MathWing 3.0, but I'm not giving it away for free.

I don't mean to be pessimistic, just realistically recognize that the developers will be playing whack-a-mole with game balance for years to come. They already have playtesters that get paid nothing, and undoubtedly some of them have tried to apply mathematics to the game. So far they have not been successful, but it is free labor, so I would expect FFG to try and continue pursuing this option. The alternative is to multiply their development costs on the order of 3x to 4x. Remember their standard operating procedure is to pay as little as possible.

The bright side is that FFG does actually care about game balance. Between this and the new Star Wars movies it virtually guarantees a steady stream of expansions for years to come. Enjoy the ride.

Games of this level of intricacy tend to require stronger research to do right. Touch and go worked for a while, but its gotta be more refined than that to be a true piece of art.

I'm of course in awe of your Mathwing but at the same time, I'm assuming that a group of researchers could probably get something similar and close while also doing other mathematical modeling as needed. Magic definitely has come a long way from just what the designers feel.

It depends on how much I guess FFG wants to make their best grossing product refined. They of course make cash. But there's something beautiful about really good systems. And I do believe that even touch and go, if they took more time, there are ways to get this game closer to a balance parity than we have. (Also, what in the world is up with this wave? Like really. What happened? Its like we're back in wave4. Maybe its a curse of 4.)

--

As much as it excites me to know you've got it "solved", it can also lead to really boringness if that is truly the case.

Even then, I'd really like to see you or your guided performance jockeys take the game by storm. Break it for a bit, and maybe FFG will see the need.

Also, it lets us say.... "You were right...."

I got to page 3, so I may have missed it but I'd like to draw attention to the new maneuvers and the fact that the Interceptor/A-wing don't have them... and there are other problems that have already been addressed.

Are 2 of the absolute most maneuverable and agile ships in the Star Wars universe just incapable of these turns that freighters seem capable of? Or should FFG find a means to revisit the earlier wave dials?

Should the current undercosted models keep that inherent advantage? Or should FFG update earlier waves costs in an FAQ?

I have presented some (what I perceive to be) problems, so here is my proposed solution. Much like the new starter box with damage decks, I think a wave update box is in order. It could be wave designated (wave 1 box, wave 2 box etc) faction designated or both (wave 1 rebels, wave 1 Imperials.) A wave update box would contain new dials, 2-5 of each small ship, 1-2 per large ship, as well as updated stand cards and ship cards. Make these updated boxes mandated for tourney play, and suggested for beer and pretzels play.

All this said, love the game, generally pleased with it, I just feel an update is in order.

Major Juggler imo, has it primarily right: There's too much gut feeling in how Xwing is created. They NEED to hire a math major for this game, immediately.

You assume that'd actually help.

Sure, it'd stop you getting comparable generics where one is strictly better than the other but this game has so many unquantifiables that the benefit of pumping it full of equations may be minor at best.

Furthermore, the tournament data itself isn't a perfect representation of balance because it assumes everyone can and will squadbuild, every reasonable looking list will get a decent distribution for each and therefore you'll get a good level of testing for each configuration. That's not how people work: most copy lists either because they lack time, they don't know how to build themselves or they think it's an easy way to win (I have sympathy for all but the last one). As a result you get PalpAces and U-boats winning tournaments that are mostly PalpAces and U-boats. Those lists wouldn't win if they were bad, but they do create a feedback loop. A perfectly balanced game would still get this happening.

That is to say, even if MathWing 3.0 is perfect (and while I believe it's probably an improvement I very much doubt it's perfect either) the human element is still going to screw everything up.

They NEED to hire a math major for this game, immediately.

No, they don't.

If, and that's a big IF, they ever needed over-priced Mathguy, it would have been when the game was initially developed. We're well and truly past that stage. The cards have been printed and the points costs have been fixed.

All that's required now is tweaking new values for new ships to fit them between existing designs.

Enough people, have enough experience with the game, to play test new stuff and compare it to what already exists.

Feels too strong? Add a point, then rinse and repeat.

Feels too weak? Subtract a point, then rinse and repeat.

Sufficient play testing iterations, with varied play testing groups will generally hone in on where a ship seems to fit best. We are not dealing with a perfectly solvable system.

You're a FFG executive and you have this choice:

1 - Months of play testing from various designers and wage-free play testing groups say the new ship should be 28 points.

2 - Hire Mathguy on a $250,000 retainer to say the new ship should be 8Pi + root(2) points.

Which would you choose and do you really think that it's going to affect sales either way?

Disagree. 30 years ago wargames were fully tested before release. Now simply launch the game, and sell the fix. The new Defender Titles are a Joke. Shoot twice, same point value. Buy my new box.

If games are not well playtested, we all loose.

Are you sure about that? I have never heard anyone claim WH40k has been balanced in any of its iterations and that has been the top player for tabletop wargames for a long time. You can also still play Defenders without Veterans, nothing is going to change for HLC Rexler.

I got to page 3, so I may have missed it but I'd like to draw attention to the new maneuvers and the fact that the Interceptor/A-wing don't have them... and there are other problems that have already been addressed.

Are 2 of the absolute most maneuverable and agile ships in the Star Wars universe just incapable of these turns that freighters seem capable of? Or should FFG find a means to revisit the earlier wave dials?

Should the current undercosted models keep that inherent advantage? Or should FFG update earlier waves costs in an FAQ?

I have presented some (what I perceive to be) problems, so here is my proposed solution. Much like the new starter box with damage decks, I think a wave update box is in order. It could be wave designated (wave 1 box, wave 2 box etc) faction designated or both (wave 1 rebels, wave 1 Imperials.) A wave update box would contain new dials, 2-5 of each small ship, 1-2 per large ship, as well as updated stand cards and ship cards. Make these updated boxes mandated for tourney play, and suggested for beer and pretzels play.

All this said, love the game, generally pleased with it, I just feel an update is in order.

Interceptors and A-wings have very good dials and almost never do red maneuvers anyway so they don't need these moves.

FFG actually does OK in this category. Ships generally fundamentally fall into one of four classes:

• cost efficient filler
• turrets
• arc dodgers
• control

What about Support?

Eg: all named HWKs, Manaroo, Shuttles, Cracken, Esege, Dutch, Lando and so on

Are you sure about that? I have never heard anyone claim WH40k has been balanced in any of its iterations and that has been the top player for tabletop wargames for a long time. You can also still play Defenders without Veterans, nothing is going to change for HLC Rexler.

W40k a wargame? No, I was thinking about real wargames. ASL, VG's Vietnam, that.old hex and counter games with 2 or 3 years of playtesting before release. Yes, you can play Defender as it is, or Advanced, if you want.

FFG is one of the best big companies our there, but playtesting is simply deficient. No need to do things well. If we do, OK. If not we will sell you the fix. And many will claim that this is superb !!!

Are you sure about that? I have never heard anyone claim WH40k has been balanced in any of its iterations and that has been the top player for tabletop wargames for a long time. You can also still play Defenders without Veterans, nothing is going to change for HLC Rexler.

W40k a wargame? No, I was thinking about real wargames. ASL, VG's Vietnam, that.old hex and counter games with 2 or 3 years of playtesting before release. Yes, you can play Defender as it is, or Advanced, if you want.

FFG is one of the best big companies our there, but playtesting is simply deficient. No need to do things well. If we do, OK. If not we will sell you the fix. And many will claim that this is superb !!!

I also play some games from that era and a lot of the 80s were really poorly playtested and thought out games.

Also, they tended to test in groups that were quite fine with massively clunky games so everything of that era is super, super clunky. Nothing from that era flows like the CDGs of today. Even more traditional hex and counter games are a lot more clever mechanically today than they ever were in that era.

Are you sure about that? I have never heard anyone claim WH40k has been balanced in any of its iterations and that has been the top player for tabletop wargames for a long time. You can also still play Defenders without Veterans, nothing is going to change for HLC Rexler.

W40k a wargame? No, I was thinking about real wargames. ASL, VG's Vietnam, that.old hex and counter games with 2 or 3 years of playtesting before release. Yes, you can play Defender as it is, or Advanced, if you want.

FFG is one of the best big companies our there, but playtesting is simply deficient. No need to do things well. If we do, OK. If not we will sell you the fix. And many will claim that this is superb !!!

I also play some games from that era and a lot of the 80s were really poorly playtested and thought out games.

Also, they tended to test in groups that were quite fine with massively clunky games so everything of that era is super, super clunky. Nothing from that era flows like the CDGs of today. Even more traditional hex and counter games are a lot more clever mechanically today than they ever were in that era.

I consider Twilight Struggle to be better than 1830 but both are excellent games.

Well i have always had the highest respect for MJ and his Mathwing, and in a various states of the meta he was probably right about the cost of upgrades and ships in order for the game to be balanced better.

But then again i doubt that there can be a universal formula to quantify everything in the game because the constant influx of new ships and upgrades would make it necessary to reevaluate every other ship and upgrade in existence together with each new and old combo card in the new state of the meta after each release. Can this even be done? If that is what Mathwing 3.0 is, then he might have solved a part of the problem, which is knowing how to cost and balance new stuff to be released.

The problem of everything else that is not well balanced and already exists remains. And another problem occurs. If there are no new unbalanced good cards. The meta would probably stall in its current state as everyone would go on and play the old stuff since the new options would then fail to beat the old ones.

Then we have the issue that a system revolving mainly around 100 points games and where no option can not be costed at 0.5 or even 0.1 steps will and must always fail to be perfectly balanced. You simply lack the precision to say for example this cannon should cost 4.5 points and this bomb onky 1.3! So we would probably need to move to at least a 1000 point system for that or allow 0.1 point steps in costing.

The Stat system in X-Wing is also too crude to really differentiate ships. I mean the A-Wing and the TAP have the same statline and similar dials with marginally different actions. Should this be the case? I think not! They should be entirely different ships which is just impossible due to the simple stat line ships have. Now i am not in favor of overly complicating the game but this fact makes balancing more problematic and differentiating ships a real pain...

At this point we will probably need X-Wing 2.0 for all these problems to be solved, and then would be the right time to hire MJ or someone similar to really make sure to not repeat the same mistakes. I don't know if even Mathwing 3.0, as good as it might be could solve the problems they are facing at the moment!

They NEED to hire a math major for this game, immediately.

No, they don't.

If, and that's a big IF, they ever needed over-priced Mathguy, it would have been when the game was initially developed. We're well and truly past that stage. The cards have been printed and the points costs have been fixed.

All that's required now is tweaking new values for new ships to fit them between existing designs.

Enough people, have enough experience with the game, to play test new stuff and compare it to what already exists.

Feels too strong? Add a point, then rinse and repeat.

Feels too weak? Subtract a point, then rinse and repeat.

Sufficient play testing iterations, with varied play testing groups will generally hone in on where a ship seems to fit best. We are not dealing with a perfectly solvable system.

You're a FFG executive and you have this choice:

1 - Months of play testing from various designers and wage-free play testing groups say the new ship should be 28 points.

2 - Hire Mathguy on a $250,000 retainer to say the new ship should be 8Pi + root(2) points.

Which would you choose and do you really think that it's going to affect sales either way?

At this point we will probably need X-Wing 2.0 for all these problems to be solved, and then would be the right time to hire MJ or someone similar to really make sure to not repeat the same mistakes.

What fundamental mistakes have been made from the start? A couple of points here or there isn't that terrible. Most ships have had their time in winning squadrons over the life of the game. How can that be such a mistake?

In my opinion, the only terrible design mistake was the Outer Rim Smuggler / Millennium Falcon Title situation.

I don't know if even Mathwing 3.0, as good as it might be could solve the problems they are facing at the moment!

What problems is the game facing, at the moment, that is preventing most people from enjoying it?

Older ships almost always need "fixes" or "re-balancing" as new waves come out because new waves often make older releases useless for competitive play in one way or another. The devs are aware of that and we already have fixes come for several ships you mentioned.

The only thing that needs to be "fixed" on the Tie Punisher is a free title card that adds an EPT slot to any Tie Punisher above the cheapest generic. If the Tie Punishers had access to EPTs then they would instantly become more competitive and worth the cost.