The amount of salt over PWTs this long after Autothrusters and while Rebels are basically shut out of the meta is silly.

This is not a balance issue, but a play style one. There are some of us that would LOVE to play such an iconic ship as the Falcon, but are put off by the (in our opinion) boring PWT mechanic.

Why some people keep trying to make this sound like "PWT are OP, please nerf!!!" is beyond me.

I don't get it either

yeah, we're not seeing many pwts in the competitive meta and this is a good thing. You really want a repeat of wave 5?

but if all you do is sweep all the crap under the rug, you've just moved the crap somewhere else. It's still stinking up the place, and you never know when someone's going to wonder what all the stench is coming from

it's a lazy, poorly designed mechanic and the ships that use it deserve much better, especially considering how iconic the falcon is

At this point the meta is just as uninteresting as wave 5 (where PWTs were plentiful simply as a response to Phantoms)

nonsense

arcs mattering already makes a massive difference

Also lol if you have some sort of complex about PWTs and think this pilot controlled turret is the Final Solution why not simply place that requirement on yourself? Fly the Falcon, and waste an action every time the enemy isn't in your firing arc.

It's insane to me that people cry about not being able to fly an iconic ship which behaves exactly like it does iconically in the films in the game.

Mobile arcs make complete sense to me. Autothrusters was a fix so that arc dodging ships wouldn't be completely useless against 360 arcs. But a mobile arc doesn't trigger autothrusters, so you just have to dodge two arcs now, but shifting your arc costs your action. I think that's a completely balanced mechanic.

And it will make pilot skill REALLY important for these ships, otherwise you're going to have to guess which arc an enemy ship is going to end up in. So I predict you'll see VI used a LOT on these ships.

The argument against turrets can be more obviously observed if we look at mirror matches.

Say we face off with identical Palp+Aces list in a series of 5 games, who wins? In all likelihood the player that can better read his opponent will come out on top. We still have a luck factor with the die, but skill and decision making still remain supreme.

Now let's do the same with identical double YT1300 list, who wins? It's likely that beyond the initial engagement both players ships will have a shot 90% of the time, and the times they don't the enemy also will not have a shot. In such a situation it comes down purely to the dice to decide the victor.

The game basically becomes monopoly with space ships. Now some people like monopoly, obviously as it has been around for decades and will likely outlive us all(Sadly). I on the other hand F#%@ing hate monopoly. It's a game where human input is so minimal you can just as easily play it with your self rolling for each separate piece as you can with other people. It's more luck based than many forms of gambling. That's the basis of why people hate PWT ships so much, it replaces skill with luck.

The fact that they had to design a card that quickly became mandatory on arc dodgers specifically to counter turrets is a good indicator of poor design, mandatory upgrades are generally bad, unless we're talking the titles they're now using to give ships special abilities outside unique pilots.

As for the possibility of 2.0, I don't see why not, beyond FFG's stated desire not to make cardboard only expansions. Revamping the rules after a point almost becomes a necessity. With a constant string of expansions the problems of rule bloat, power creep, and shelf only units will continue to increase. Just about every long term wargame I can think of goes through this eventually, it seems to be the natural progression. As for the cost to consumers, I don't see it being that bad unless they stick to their guns on the cardboard thing. Realistically they could release card packs like Netrunner boxes that contain the updated ship cards and bases, then just switch back to their previous business model for 2.0. I honestly wish they did this anyway just so we could get new pilots for our favorite ships every now and then.

Ok, so say they issue 2.0 and they issue cardboard only updates. What are stores supposed to do with all outstanding inventory? Does FFG wait until every ship is sold out to swap versions? If they do how to they continue to make money during the transition? If they don't what do the stores do with the inventory? What happens to players with huge investments in ship which would require huge reinvestment in cardboard? You do understand what punch and print costs and what shipping costs right?

It would be simpler to just close down X-wing and launch a new game with the similar mechanics but redesigned completely from every angle. Simpler, fairer to stores and players and FFG.

Also lol if you have some sort of complex about PWTs and think this pilot controlled turret is the Final Solution why not simply place that requirement on yourself? Fly the Falcon, and waste an action every time the enemy isn't in your firing arc.

It's insane to me that people cry about not being able to fly an iconic ship which behaves exactly like it does iconically in the films in the game.

I think you're missing an important point here.

Game balance >>>>>>>>>>> Movie correctness.

If it acted EXACTLY like it did in the movies, then you'd get two shots both of which were in 360 deg arcs. And it would also kill a TIE fighter in a single hit....

Also lol if you have some sort of complex about PWTs and think this pilot controlled turret is the Final Solution why not simply place that requirement on yourself? Fly the Falcon, and waste an action every time the enemy isn't in your firing arc.

It's insane to me that people cry about not being able to fly an iconic ship which behaves exactly like it does iconically in the films in the game.

I think you're missing an important point here.

Game balance >>>>>>>>>>> Movie correctness.

If it acted EXACTLY like it did in the movies, then you'd get two shots both of which were in 360 deg arcs. And it would also kill a TIE fighter in a single hit....

I was just told it isn't about game balance! Which is it?

Also lol if you have some sort of complex about PWTs and think this pilot controlled turret is the Final Solution why not simply place that requirement on yourself? Fly the Falcon, and waste an action every time the enemy isn't in your firing arc.

It's insane to me that people cry about not being able to fly an iconic ship which behaves exactly like it does iconically in the films in the game.

I think you're missing an important point here.

Game balance >>>>>>>>>>> Movie correctness.

If it acted EXACTLY like it did in the movies, then you'd get two shots both of which were in 360 deg arcs. And it would also kill a TIE fighter in a single hit....

I was just told it isn't about game balance! Which is it?

It's 110% about game balance. Anyone who says otherwise is wrong. If it's not all about game balance, why have a point system at all?

I'll stick with my current carrier.

Thanks.

My opinion is, if a mobile arc was to replace PWT's, that as part of your manoeuvre you could move your arc 90° from its current position (specifically not an action), then spend an action to move it additional 90° if you wish.

(you could have a pilot skill that grants a free 90° after making an attack).

BTW - you wouldn't need to print new base cards just change the "pointer". Rather than the arrow head we've seen in the preview, it could be a quarter-circle wedge made from thin clear plastic. The curved edge would face outwards, with the pointy end towards the peg, but with a donut shaped ring to go around the peg mounting (like the one previewed). The straight edges could be painted with a line for the arc boundry, and since they'd need to align to the corners of the base with each re-pos, it would be a true-90° arc for a change.

Additionally, all ship cards with the PWT attack rating symbol could be errata'd to have the Move Arc icon added to their action bar (small stickers?).

The argument against turrets can be more obviously observed if we look at mirror matches.

Say we face off with identical Palp+Aces list in a series of 5 games, who wins? In all likelihood the player that can better read his opponent will come out on top. We still have a luck factor with the die, but skill and decision making still remain supreme.

Now let's do the same with identical double YT1300 list, who wins? It's likely that beyond the initial engagement both players ships will have a shot 90% of the time, and the times they don't the enemy also will not have a shot. In such a situation it comes down purely to the dice to decide the victor.

The game basically becomes monopoly with space ships. Now some people like monopoly, obviously as it has been around for decades and will likely outlive us all(Sadly). I on the other hand F#%@ing hate monopoly. It's a game where human input is so minimal you can just as easily play it with your self rolling for each separate piece as you can with other people. It's more luck based than many forms of gambling. That's the basis of why people hate PWT ships so much, it replaces skill with luck.

The fact that they had to design a card that quickly became mandatory on arc dodgers specifically to counter turrets is a good indicator of poor design, mandatory upgrades are generally bad, unless we're talking the titles they're now using to give ships special abilities outside unique pilots.

As for the possibility of 2.0, I don't see why not, beyond FFG's stated desire not to make cardboard only expansions. Revamping the rules after a point almost becomes a necessity. With a constant string of expansions the problems of rule bloat, power creep, and shelf only units will continue to increase. Just about every long term wargame I can think of goes through this eventually, it seems to be the natural progression. As for the cost to consumers, I don't see it being that bad unless they stick to their guns on the cardboard thing. Realistically they could release card packs like Netrunner boxes that contain the updated ship cards and bases, then just switch back to their previous business model for 2.0. I honestly wish they did this anyway just so we could get new pilots for our favorite ships every now and then.

Ok, so say they issue 2.0 and they issue cardboard only updates. What are stores supposed to do with all outstanding inventory? Does FFG wait until every ship is sold out to swap versions? If they do how to they continue to make money during the transition? If they don't what do the stores do with the inventory? What happens to players with huge investments in ship which would require huge reinvestment in cardboard? You do understand what punch and print costs and what shipping costs right?

It would be simpler to just close down X-wing and launch a new game with the similar mechanics but redesigned completely from every angle. Simpler, fairer to stores and players and FFG.

They don't need to reissue ships, new ships have new cards, simple as that. Old ships can remain with their old cards for those that wish to play 1.0. If you want to play with the old ships in 2.0 you simply buy the cardboard expansion that could be priced between 20-40 USD. Is popping 40 bucks per faction really a huge investment? That's about the same price as a single ship.

Production wise, check out Netrunner, a card game produced by this very company. If you check the homepage you'll see that it is constantly getting expansions, faster even then this game. Using this as a basis for how much the cardboard would cost to produce, the 15$ packs have 60 cards, the deluxe expansions cost 30$ and have 165 cards, and the core set cost 40$ and has 252 cards along with the cardboard for various tokens. There is absolutely no reason that Xwing cards should cost more to produce, and using these numbers as examples I think we could easily see faction based 2.0 expansions at around 30 USD.

Sorry friend, your argument just don't hold water.

As for the guy defending monopoly, the only meaningful input in that game comes from trading and that's it. Otherwise it's just a case of rolling the die and buying w/e you land on. After the trading is done it's just a case of rolling the die to see who gets cashed out by hotels first. The game was made to make a political point against the unfairness of capitalism (that kinda backfired obviously), not to be a fair and skill based game like chess. I'm not sure what possible difference in skill you could be referencing.

I'm new to miniatures games like this. When other games undergo a 2.0 revision, what happens to all the 1.0 product? Is it still compatible or do you need to rebuy everything? do they come out with a 2.0 upgrade kit that includes a whole wack of revision tokens and cards to update the stuff prior? Or is it, this is 2.0 and we are starting fresh, no 1.0 stuff allowed. If you wanna go play 1.0, you need to go over there and play with the people who already spent a small fortune on ships.

I can see it now... "why is there suddenly $1000 on the credit card from the local gaming store?" "well you see honey, X-Wing 2.0 came out and now I gotta buy all new stuff." "why can't you use the old stuff" "because its 2.0"

insert mistakes were made comic

This game cannot have a 2.0 revision. It would be financially crippling for the customers, stores or FFG as well as a logistical nightmare beyond anything actively managing the product line has ever been. Just try and do a little business math on it. Unless the big mouse demands it and drops millions of dollars on it there is no chance.

Both flavours of Warhammer, Warmachine/Hordes, Kings of War, Malifaux, etc all seem to release new editions of their games without financially crippling anyone...

As others have said, Making all PWTs mobile arc ships instead would mess up so many things you would have to start from scratch. There are a number of cards, like outmaneuver, among others, that would be unbalanced, messed up, and in need of errata.

I also think, now that we have balances like autothrusters, that totally doing away with PWTs would make arc dodgers too powerful.

The presence of PWTs does not break the game, provided they are costed appropriately. The only one that really seems to be a threat now is super dash, and he is not dominating the meta the way fat han once was. I submit that the PWT issue has already been balanced with costing and fixes like autothrusters.

Is a mobile arc a good idea? time will tell. would it have been a good way to do things from the beginning? perhaps so, but that ship has sailed. I for one am not at all interested in an xwing 2.0

A more interesting question is will the shadowcaster be a viable option when compared with ships like the outrider.

the idea that you need PWTs to somehow counter arc-dodgers is silly

not only does the base game provide you with obstacles and blocking, but bombs and ABTs screw them over far worse than a PWT ever could

not to mention stress control from an arc-locked ship, ala stresshog

or feedback array

Ok, so say they issue 2.0 and they issue cardboard only updates. What are stores supposed to do with all outstanding inventory? Does FFG wait until every ship is sold out to swap versions? If they do how to they continue to make money during the transition? If they don't what do the stores do with the inventory? What happens to players with huge investments in ship which would require huge reinvestment in cardboard? You do understand what punch and print costs and what shipping costs right?

It would be simpler to just close down X-wing and launch a new game with the similar mechanics but redesigned completely from every angle. Simpler, fairer to stores and players and FFG.

Are you unaware that ffg already did the thing you think is impossible? Descent 2.0, read about it

the idea that you need PWTs to somehow counter arc-dodgers is silly

not only does the base game provide you with obstacles and blocking, but bombs and ABTs screw them over far worse than a PWT ever could

not to mention stress control from an arc-locked ship, ala stresshog

or feedback array

Those affect primary turrets too...maybe not as drastically but it shouldn't affect a 35 point ship and a 50 some point ship the same way...

the idea that you need PWTs to somehow counter arc-dodgers is silly

not only does the base game provide you with obstacles and blocking, but bombs and ABTs screw them over far worse than a PWT ever could

not to mention stress control from an arc-locked ship, ala stresshog

or feedback array

Those affect primary turrets too...maybe not as drastically but it shouldn't affect a 35 point ship and a 50 some point ship the same way...

they don't

seismics will take 1/13th off of a yt-1300, but 1/3rd off of soontir

with sabine, that's 2/13ths a yt-1300 but 2/3rds of soontir

not to mention you'll never hit a PWT with a seismic because it doesn't care about its facing and will never have to chase you in a way that it'd ever have to worry about seismics

Obviously if the game is all about skill and people playing arc dodgers are the most skilled, why not just give every faction equal access to arc dodging ships? Remove PWT and make a Soontir Fel for every faction. Because that's the end game people want when they whine and beg FFG to remove PWTs constantly. Soontir Wing.

citation seriously needed

though it's ironic that the pilot mentioned, ie soontir, was the ace to use during the PWT dominated 2-ship meta

the reason? he was the only 9 who could take

Maybe instead of trying to fix PWT's, go back to the source. Remember *spoilers, but if you haven't seen TFA yet you probably don't like Star Wars* when the turret got locked on the Falcon and Rey had to maneuver for a shot? Make a new crit for turret ships (complete with acetate cover) that limits firing arc, or make a rule that limits your arc when you start losing hull points (not shields) to the foward quadrant.

Whaddaya think?

....

Whaddaya think?

No thank you.

I think turrets are a part of the game and have been since wave 1.

That they are doing alternative things now is understandable because they need to open up more design space. maybe we will see a few more mobile arks (i think it's possible to see this on epic ships soon).

With so many ships on the market they need new ways to make the ship's important and interesting and not just an expensive way to get new upgrade cards.

This wave also has a few 0 point title cards that essentially function as extra card space to include a special rule tied to a ship rather than a pilot card.