Most of the current mechanics in the game are quite balanced and it is only the price point that keeps ships at the top tier or out of play entirely. Why not have a seasonal handicap to balance the price point rather than waiting for a card fix which is either soon redundant or doesn't solve the price point when the next ship comes out?

How would this work?

1. Every 3 months a committee of top players and game designers come together.

2. They look at the current meta at the decide which of the cards are at the peak of the game and those that are utterly unplayed due to obsolescence or being overpriced.

3. The committee decides on 5 cards to receive a 1 point price penalty and 5 cards to have a 1 point price reduction. This could be individual pilots, upgrades or a complete class of upgrade cards or ships type.

4. This list of cards is published in the Tournament rules or FAQ.

5. A Pilot, or Upgrade can't receive more than one point adjustment in any season but the penalty or buff can build up over time.

What does this do to benefit the game long term?

- It will lessen the gap between the best and the worst choices in the game and hopefully upset the clone wars where 90% of the tier 1 environment is one of 2 lists.

- Design will be able to see what is lacking or broken because the handicap has become huge and then look at the need if any to mechanically adjust.

I'd love to see everything fair and playable and the environment to be full of wonderful varied lists where the skill of the player matters most not just whether they brought a Rock, a pair of Scissors or a newspaper to the game.

• 3. The committee decides on 5 cards to receive a 1 point price penalty and 5 cards to have a 1 point price reduction. This could be individual pilots, upgrades or a complete class of upgrade cards or ships type.
• - It will lessen the gap between the best and the worst choices in the game and hopefully upset the clone wars where 90% of the tier 1 environment is one of 2 lists.

I don't think this should happen because it stops creativity in list building, and ceases to show who the best players in the world are. By increasing a certain card's cost to prohibit or change an effect on 1 list, you also change it on all lists. For example, altering autothrusters would change too many builds - not just imperial aces. At the top level of tournaments, all lists should be viable because there we see who is best at every single aspect of the game. If the top players all play 3 Jumps, then the best will win - and whoever didn't win lost because they couldn't beat the 3 Jump list. This is a requirement of being the top player in the world/country/region/store, surely? The winner of the top tournament should be able to:

• Beat other players
• Design a list to do so
• Be able to deal with all types of list, consistently (obviously dice will have an effect here).

Paul Heaver designed his list to beat other lists and won because he could use all cards to do so.

The altering costs idea is good for casual tournaments (earlier this year I played in a 40pt small ship tournament where Vader was banned, since he had too much of an effect with VI) but for the top tier of tournaments, this should not happen. If a ship, card or combo is really broken (i.e. Phantoms pre-nerf) then FFG can nerf it. But this should not be permanent, it should not happen every 3 months, and it should not be 10 cards at a time - that's 40 in a year, way too much.

And then we're a step away from a banned list and being Magic...

• 3. The committee decides on 5 cards to receive a 1 point price penalty and 5 cards to have a 1 point price reduction. This could be individual pilots, upgrades or a complete class of upgrade cards or ships type.
• - It will lessen the gap between the best and the worst choices in the game and hopefully upset the clone wars where 90% of the tier 1 environment is one of 2 lists.

I don't think this should happen because it stops creativity in list building, and ceases to show who the best players in the world are. By increasing a certain card's cost to prohibit or change an effect on 1 list, you also change it on all lists. For example, altering autothrusters would change too many builds - not just imperial aces. At the top level of tournaments, all lists should be viable because there we see who is best at every single aspect of the game. If the top players all play 3 Jumps, then the best will win - and whoever didn't win lost because they couldn't beat the 3 Jump list. This is a requirement of being the top player in the world/country/region/store, surely? The winner of the top tournament should be able to:

• Beat other players
• Design a list to do so
• Be able to deal with all types of list, consistently (obviously dice will have an effect here).

Paul Heaver designed his list to beat other lists and won because he could use all cards to do so.

The altering costs idea is good for casual tournaments (earlier this year I played in a 40pt small ship tournament where Vader was banned, since he had too much of an effect with VI) but for the top tier of tournaments, this should not happen. If a ship, card or combo is really broken (i.e. Phantoms pre-nerf) then FFG can nerf it. But this should not be permanent, it should not happen every 3 months, and it should not be 10 cards at a time - that's 40 in a year, way too much.

If the default list is 3 jumps, the game is pretty stagnant and things like Cheap interceptors and X-wings might as well have been thrown in the bin. The Game shouldn't just be SCISSORS, ROCK.

Nothing will ever be perfectly balanced but the gap is lessened. One season the 1 point addition to Soontir and 1 point reduction to Scyks might make the Scyks tournament viable and the better players will see that and take it to the top. The next season A wings might be the thing. If the cards have a fixed price forever then once they are obsolete they have zero value tournament wise until a mechanic alters the environment. The problem is that Mechanics are either redundant or Tier altering and have no fair point in between.

Dead cards in a fixed stock game are bad for the environment and sales.

Magic actually balances on the 2nd hand Price point and the Limited Cycle.

Netrunner does not and has required influence balancing ala the Most Wanted List.

Cthulhu LCG used the Limited rule where no limited card could be in a deck with any other, thus breaking the combo directly.

X-wing needs price point balancing.

And then we're a step away from a banned list and being Magic...

Never a banned list, there is no need. If in Magic you could alter the Mana cost of a card it would never have a banned list Either.