Since I have taken to X-wing, I have to say I am more competitive. Two of my closest friends though, who got me into the game, are VERY theme based. So needless to say we don't actually get to play many games as I always *always* get called out for being too cheesy... Sigh. I don't mean to be cheesy, I just see good combinations of cards and pilot abilities and want to try them out together.

Either or, I am happy because in my area there is usually a tournament every other month to help me get my competitive on.

Since I have taken to X-wing, I have to say I am more competitive. Two of my closest friends though, who got me into the game, are VERY theme based. So needless to say we don't actually get to play many games as I always *always* get called out for being too cheesy... Sigh. I don't mean to be cheesy, I just see good combinations of cards and pilot abilities and want to try them out together.

Either or, I am happy because in my area there is usually a tournament every other month to help me get my competitive on.

I've found that there are some friends that I can play competitive with and others that I just can't. They just don't want to go that way.

For me, Theme > Competitiveness. However, I try to make my thematic lists solid. They may not win tournaments, but they will win games.

I like the TIE/fo Omega Squadron; I came up with the same list. Thematic and hits hard.

Thanks to Integrated Astromech, I may bring out the Trench Run list (i.e. Biggs, Wedge, Luke) again.

I am glad that ordnance has gotten a boost; X-wing (the game) without torpedoes does not feel right to me.

I think it's a matter of competitive in their preferred arena. A Torpedo full Y-wing needs to be competitive in a game where torpedo runs is a thing. If it's not, then it's not worth it. It doesn't need to be worth it in all types of games.

I 100% agree!

I just wish that FFG did more to encourage and support Cinematic and Epic play as opposed to the 100 point tournament snoozefest.

My competitive thematic is flying ships that I love.

If they're not competitive I'll make them competitive.

Just recently I flew Vessery, the Inquisitor and Palpmobile to a tournament and got 2nd. Until Vets comes out Defenders are still "meh", but I love the ship.

What's the point? A fun game that's worth your time

The label just moves units, theres gotta be something actually substantial to keep us invested

Gameplay is always the highest priority

No, I meant "what's the point in slapping a Star Wars logo on it if things don't behave like they do in Star Wars". And then answered my rhetorical question in the next paragraph.

In the case of game which advertises itself as "come and do the stuff you saw onscreen", then gameplay and verisimilitude to the thing it's simulating are equally important, IMO.

Theme and aesthetics have always been ancillary for me. It's nice that the ships look really cool and I enjoy Star Wars but really, I just want to play a really fun competitive game. So, not only does theme not matter so much to me, I don't harbor any particular loyalty to ships, pilots, or factions.

I'm the same way with board and video games. I don't care what my avatar or character looks like. I don't really care so much what the board looks like or whatever is the backstory as to why we're all pushing chits around a board. Theme can make for some fun moments of imagination but really, I just want to go in to a game to see who the better player is.

Actually, I think not caring so much plays a bit in to my favor. It means I get to see new things. I can look at and play with new ships. I can play video games where I'm a female rhino warrior clown. I can play board games about World War II just as easily as I can play games about basket weaving. Since theme and aesthetics aren't prohibitive to my enjoyment, I get a wider set of games, options, and strategies to explore.

Played Omega Squadron tonight, was a blast, looked great on the table and was effective, although my opponents x-wing list could have been built a little better.

I actually think it's a real problem that we have ships from two different eras in the same game. There should be some kind of timeline system where new ships only play against new ships, and old ships only play against old ships. It's like seeing WWII aircraft in active service today.

...says the guy with the Millennium Falcon as his icon...

And given the 20-30 year gap between Ep6 and Ep7, a better analogy would be using Vietnam aircraft...which are still regularly used today. The C-130, Prowler, C-9 and A-10 are all 30+ year old A/C that still see use.

I dunno if this has a place here, but thematically, I can't bring myself to fly ships that have no hyperdrive with ships I can imagine operating without a carrier.

For example: I know it makes sense to fly my Decimator with a few ties as back up, but if I've got ties, why isn't my Star Destroyer their backup? A ship's fluff capabilities sorta dictate what I fly them with.

Oh, quite often in the video games a Star Destroyer would drop out of hyperspace, launch a patrol and move to the next system. Or they were planet based. There's ways to keep it thematically sound. You don't waste an entire Star destroyer on a small patrol.

why not both?

IG-2000 with mangler+tractor, feedback arrays adv.sensors and mindlink

I also like a mix of both....my favourite list of Wes/Wedge/Hobbie came together after trying a few things out, worked out very competitive.

It was only afterwards that I was reading about the pilots that I found out that the three of them formed a threesome protecting one of the rebel transports during the evacuation of Hoth...Made it feel more thematic!

why not both?

IG-2000 with mangler+tractor, feedback arrays adv.sensors and mindlink

Mindlink on IG88s is a pretty cool idea. Not exactly what this mindlink are in the books or wherever they come from, but the linkedness makes a ton of sense.