I did not see a thread to discuss this article that was posted yesterday.

http://teamcovenant.com/star-wars-x-wing/the-limits-of-game-mechanics

I want to share because it discusses issues with small base generic ships in X-wing, IN A COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENT. (you can fly anything casually for funzies) The topic is highly relevant and perhaps is the most pressing issue in X-wing affecting balance and fun. Now remember everyone, you will agree to some things and disagree with other things. No person writes a perfect article. No person writes a perfect post. So post casually

Here's a summary from the author:

"Builds have reached that point where ships that can’t consistently roll 3+ hits cannot deal damage to targets, arc-fighting ships without Barrel Roll or Boost cannot even see targets, and action-free dice modifying cards dominate the game due to having extreme efficiency and no highly accessible counters any faction can reach for to adapt their list to these popular cards. In particular Palpatine is extremely low costed given how much he affects the game. Ships like T-65 X-wing, Khiraxz Fighter, HWK-290, and Z-95 could use some help staying relevant to the game."

Usually when people post upgrade card ideas to fix ships, the ideas just aren't that good. Often to niche or to complicated or incorrectly costed. I myself know that I want the Kihraxz to be good, but other than making it cheaper, I don't have any ideas. The upgrade ideas in the articles I find interesting and reasonably costed.

-- Dogfighter --

1pt title or mod, small ship only (any ship)
“While attacking or defending against a ship in your primary arc, enemy ships may not modify dice except by spending tokens.”

-- Stunt Fighter --

1pt title, small ship only (any ship)
“If your action bar does not have [barrel Roll] or [boost],
after you perform a maneuver discard 1 Stress token.”

-- Decoy Fighter --

1pt, title, small ship only (any ship)
“If your action bar does not have [barrel Roll] or [boost],
after defending remove up to 2 Focus token from the
attacker and assign 1 Focus token to your ship.”

Decoy Fighter would potentially be a bit overboard, but it's not off by much and just requires a little reworking. TLT Y-wings don't need too much help

The list of generic pilots that requires 'fixing' at this point is extensive. I am now sold on the idea to fix most with cards that work for multiple ships. Limiting some to those without barrel roll or boost helps target the fix. Limiting upgrades to generic ships only is another way to target a fix. 'Aces packs' won't come fast enough to fix everything. I'm utterly convinced the Fang fighter generic pilots are useless competitively, so a broad fix would get them in the game sooner rather than later.

4 and 5 ship builds should have competitive options. Perhaps there should be the most variety at that # of ships. As it stands, the most variety in X-wing is with 2-ship builds. Would chess be any good at all if you only started with 2 pieces on the board? This means more individual ship builds in the 17-27 point range. This mostly means they have to be generic pilots. I do believe Alex Davy has indicated that named pilots are often a priority. Luke, Vader, Poe, Inquisitor, Boba Fett, Dengar... they should be competitive of course, but please, give us 4 & 5 ship builds!

As people like to say, this game ain't called Ace-wing, it's called X-wing

Eh, it is generally best to not take that source as gospel.

And as someone who has been here from the beginning, I remember what it was like when the uniques were not worth taking, outside of a very, very select few.

Eh, it is generally best to not take that source as gospel.

And as someone who has been here from the beginning, I remember what it was like when the uniques were not worth taking, outside of a very, very select few.

I in no way 'take that source as gospel.' It's just an article by some dude. Uniques were bad, now most generics are bad. Balance still has not been brought to the force.

I'm going to repeat this ad nauseum until someone on the Xwing side sees my posts as much as they do on the Armada side. (They made 200 points tourneys a thing - my posts.)

STOP MAKING LARGE SHIPS SO GOOD AND WITHOUT CARDS THAT ARE MEANT WORK WELL AGAINST THEM.

Aces and small ships have tons of counters. There literally aren't any cards at all that are better vs large ships than they are vs small ships. None. Zero. Conner net doesn't count, it works just as well if not better vs aces.

You've now printed ALL of these against aces: Feedback Array, Conner Net, Flechette Torp, R5-P8!!, APL.

Go ahead. Go think up one card that's better vs large ships than it is vs small ships to an effective degree.

STOP STOP STOP.

The days of 2 Falcon, Fat Han, Decimator, Dash rage were not good. That was the worst meta diversity in the history of the game. When you go overboard giving new ships, especially large ships, too many new toys, its easy to find a "within-the-ship" synergy that is extremely hard to beat. Hence, 3scout and Dengaroo.

Comparably, how paltry and useless do the cards in the Khiraxz, Scyk, and even the TAP expansion look? This is pretty outrageous. (Though TAP has a bunch of nice options. Good design).

In terms of his article, I think he sums up why Dengaroo is actually a dangerous precedent, which we found out the hard way. However, I vehemently disagree with the card ideas he espouses as I think it removes the difficulty from the game. What should have been done is not make new stuff quite as bombtastically good as they did and focus more on fixing what they made already.

Instead of giving even more power creep and buff to small ships to combat the giant power creep of large ships and their ridiculous upgrades, simply create more cards that are good vs large ships.

Plasma torps was kind of the right track. But I want to see something even more blatant.

I can know for certain that the 4 other matchups I face will be large ships usually with turrets and still be impossibly able to counter build then. That's bad game state.

Let's go back to the era where players had to actually plan everything and create their own move plans. See the Lambda shuttle dial? That ship, is one of the greatest designs in prohibitive play ever.

Palpatine is 29 points. Not sure how that's undercost.

Hell for that price I should get to use him 3 times per turn.

Palpatine is 29 points. Not sure how that's undercost.

Hell for that price I should get to use him 3 times per turn.

Even if he isn't undercosted, what you are proposing is insane.

He either doesn't know better or is joking. The rest of us can understand that Palp is a strong card. While pretending that that old hoary crusty old space wizerd is actually the one piloting the albino space cow.

Eh, it is generally best to not take that source as gospel.

And as someone who has been here from the beginning, I remember what it was like when the uniques were not worth taking, outside of a very, very select few.

I in no way 'take that source as gospel.' It's just an article by some dude. Uniques were bad, now most generics are bad. Balance still has not been brought to the force.

I'm going to repeat this ad nauseum until someone on the Xwing side sees my posts as much as they do on the Armada side. (They made 200 points tourneys a thing - my posts.)

STOP MAKING LARGE SHIPS SO GOOD AND WITHOUT CARDS THAT ARE MEANT WORK WELL AGAINST THEM.

Aces and small ships have tons of counters. There literally aren't any cards at all that are better vs large ships than they are vs small ships. None. Zero. Conner net doesn't count, it works just as well if not better vs aces.

STOP STOP STOP.

The days of 2 Falcon, Fat Han, Decimator, Dash rage were not good. That was the worst meta diversity in the history of the game. When you go overboard giving new ships, especially large ships, too many new toys, its easy to find a "within-the-ship" synergy that is extremely hard to beat. Hence, 3scout and Dengaroo.

Comparably, how paltry and useless do the cards in the Khiraxz, Scyk, and even the TAP expansion look? This is pretty outrageous. (Though TAP has a bunch of nice options. Good design).

Palp Aces ruins the game more than triple scouts, and I'd argue Palp Aces ruins the game more than Dengaroo too.

I had a friend fly my double Advanced Proton Torpedo Dengaroo variant. He scored 5 hits, and my Palp backed Vessery with Stealth Device, an x7 evade, and focus ended up taking a SINGLE damage after the Zuckuss rerolls, it was ******* stupid. Palp Aces ruin the game and actually do not have easy counters. It's difficult to cram Feedback Arrays and Autoblaster weapons into every list and have it do more things than just spam feedback or autoblaster, and they're sh*tty against most other things.

Non-intelligent people just joust U-Boats and feed them range 2-3 shots all game and then come here and complain about it. There, I said it.

They complain about how U-Boats are dumb point and shoot ships when that's exactly what they're doing when they predictably lose half their list to a range 2-3 volley they fed their opponent. U-Boats can be beaten with a wider variety of lists and just general play strategies such as realizing where the battle is going to take place and placing the biggest obstacles there because it's actually somewhat difficult to fly 3 arc dependant large bases in a tight formation through an asteroid field , bidding to pilot skill 4, using x7 Defenders (even PS 1 Deltas), knowing about the rule of eleven, and blocking, either with lower pilot skills, or with higher pilot skills since they'll have to move first into your ships. U-Boats end up blocking themselves almost as often as they're blocked by enemy ships.

I feel like I have a chance against U-Boats with Brobots, (crackshot) swarms (and I mean actual 6-7-8 ship counts, 5 ship lists are not swarms you knucklehead mcspaz-a-trons), 5 TAPs with 5 Prockets, Chips, and TIE/V1's, Defenders, Quad PS 4 Gamma Squadrons with Homing Missiles, Chips, and Extra Munitions.

Palpatine is 29 points. Not sure how that's undercost.

Hell for that price I should get to use him 3 times per turn.

Even if he isn't undercosted, what you are proposing is insane.

Imperial players are either non-intelligent or greedy.

There is a certain type of player that plays this game, and plays a certain blatantly broken list archetype, that is completely blind to just how difficult and how much of an NPE his list archetype is.

There is an Imperial player in our area that mained pre-nerf phantoms and still complains about the nerf. I played against him playing a Deci pre-nerf Phantom squad with triple Defender. When I then complained about how broken phantoms were and that I automatically lost the game because it was impossible to get a shot on one without some no-skill turret, I was told that he was sick of me complaining all the time and that phantoms weren't broken, I just needed to fly less predictably. With Defenders.

We had Imperial players complaining during wave 7 about how the stresshog was too easy to utilize , too inexpensive , and an autoinclude .

Palpatine is 29 points. Not sure how that's undercost.

Hell for that price I should get to use him 3 times per turn.

Palpatine is 29 points. Not sure how that's undercost.

Hell for that price I should get to use him 3 times per turn.

Palpatine only costs 29 points if you're not getting any use out of the shuttle. And if you're not getting any use out of the shuttle you're flying the list wrong.

This. I've played games were I've gotten 38 points of value from just the Palpatine card itself, not counting how much damage the shuttle did. Each health saved on Soontir is worth 11 and 2/3rd's points, you save him from damage 3 times you've made 35 points of value. You save Soontir from one damage and you've more than paid for Palpatine. You can just never attack with the shuttle and get more than 29 points of value because Palpatine is /that/ broken, but when you start dropping range one hit hit hit crit shots into things after they've spent all of their tokens and have been softened up by your Acewings you really start ramping up the overall value of the list. The shuttle is rather efficient for 21 points, you're not really wasting anything being 'forced' to take it.

Make Palpatine cost 1 epic point and the game immediately gets much better.

....aaaaand just like that, it's a nerf Palpatine thread!

Back on topic: OP, I get where you're coming from, and I think that the idea of titles that apply to multiple ships has merit; however, I don't think it'll really fix a whole heck of a lot. For one thing, there are jousters out there (like B-Wings, or TIE fighters that don't have EPTs) that have repositioning abilities, but still get wiped off the face of the earth by things that out-joust them and still can't catch aces in arc. And then there are ships that really aren't jousters, but still have no repositioning actions (like the Falcon). So I'm not sure using that as a restriction is the most effective way to make those cards work.

Aside from that, there's the issue that, if you buff everything evenly, bad ships will still be bad. You might get the Y-Wing back in the fight; but why would you take an X-Wing when you could have a more efficient warthog?

So as much as I'd like to have jousters back in the game, I'm not sure generic titles are the way to do it. They're certainly a very cool design element, but in the end, the meta is what's killing off these lists. Kill the meta, and you get them back. How exactly you go about doing that . . . well, that's a tough one.

Its goomba. I dont even bother reading.

I'd like to butt in and point out a strength that is shared by BOTH Palp-Aces AND Dengaroo that no one seems to be talking about... global range on powerful utility . Imagine how much more difficult Palp-Aces would be to fly if the range on Palpatine's ability was even a generous "3." Someone like Soontir would be much more manageable if he had to not only worry about escaping enemy firing arcs but also staying within range of Palpatine. Same for Dengarooo, Manaroo with a range 2 on her ability would no longer be able to boost along the edge of the map running away while Dengar is on your side of the map hindering your progress and killing you. Their fat asses would finally be a real downside as they struggle to stay in range of each other. A real viable tactic would be blocking one of them so as to get them out of range of one another, then unloading on Dengar while he's vulnerable. Why some of the most potent utility abilities in the game have no range restriction is beyond me.

Bottom line, powerful global range abilities like Palpatine and Manaroo need to be closely monitored .

Source not worth discussing. Now that this source wrote it, we almost certainly see Heaver win worlds with Wes ;-)

I COULD NOT DISAGREE MORE WITH THEORIST’S POST

(sorry for the loud attention grab here and I know the follwing might be controversial)

I do not think there is anything wrong or bad with the fact that not all ships are equally good or “top-tier competitive”, and or that there is a (small) power-creep in the game or new powerful mechanics are introduced. I like the fact that there are pilot and upgrade combinations which are (far) superior to others (and or popular) and thus tend to define the socalled “meta” and fill the ranks of the top 8 spots in major tournaments. This is healthy, as it keeps the game “fresh” from wave to wave. Provided, that the resulting meta contains enough diversity i.e. it is VERY bad if there is only 1 specific list that have the possibility to enter top 8. However it would be EQUALLY bad if any combination of any ships regardless of pilot and upgrades to 100pt were equally good or if everything was determined by dicerolls alone. I consider Theorists analysis, comments and suggestions for upgrades as a move towards the latter.

Does that mean the state of x-wing is heaven? And that no ships need buffs or nerfs? No, and I wholeheartedly enjoy participating in or just reading a lot of fix and that posts. And ofcourse the T-65 X-wing, one of the two flag-ships of this game, should get a boost to see more top 8 spots. But Palpatine should not be nerfed and IMHO none of the upgrades Theorist suggests should enter the game. I fact I really like the route FFG has been taking and is taking by introducing new game mechanics to "shake" things up. In wave 9, I am looking very much forward to the "in action-fase (before Soontir, Dengar etc. have tokens) shooting". Will it be enough to open the meta? Do we still need a hard counter to the Uboats?

this is what happens when people go tournament power-list crazy

Palpatine is 29 points. Not sure how that's undercost.

Hell for that price I should get to use him 3 times per turn.

Even if he isn't undercosted, what you are proposing is insane.

Which was the point of the post. Making an exaggeration to poke fun about something nearly as stupid. ;-)

And as usually some takes it at face value while calling people stupid. ^-^

Go think up one card that's better vs large ships than it is vs small ships to an effective degree.

Fire-Control System.

The way I see it, there's several smaller structural problems affecting the game atm that when combined have resulted in the "ace-wing" problem people are always going on about.

-As the article says; too many action-free dice mods that can be stacked on a small number of ships (Palp, ATs, Predator, Dengaroo, etc.).

-Too big a focus on high PS and post manoeuvre re-positioning (Your Soontirs and Whispers).

-High PS Ace's often having incredibly good pilot abilities compared to their generic/mid PS brethren. Or to put it another way; generics being just generally less efficient that their equivalent in high PS aces (A la Inquisitor).

Combine two or three of these problems and you get a meta made up of things like Dengaroo and Palp-Aces. As far as I can see Crack-swarms and U-boats are the last bastions of the efficient joust lists left.

Palpatine is 29 points. Not sure how that's undercost.

Hell for that price I should get to use him 3 times per turn.

Even if he isn't undercosted, what you are proposing is insane.

Which was the point of the post. Making an exaggeration to poke fun about something nearly as stupid. ;-)

And as usually some takes it at face value while calling people stupid. ^-^

To be fair, it's a little hard to tell on the internet.

Palpatine is 29 points. Not sure how that's undercost.

Hell for that price I should get to use him 3 times per turn.

Even if he isn't undercosted, what you are proposing is insane.

Which was the point of the post. Making an exaggeration to poke fun about something nearly as stupid. ;-)

And as usually some takes it at face value while calling people stupid. ^-^

To be fair, it's a little hard to tell on the internet.

It's only hard on the internet, because people have little to no respect for their discussion partners on the internet. If you are not assuming that you are talking to a moron, it becomes surprisingly easy to tell when someone is using a hyperbole. And there is no harm to assume a hyperbole, when someone is actually serious either.

Regardless of Theorist's reputation, it is obvious that something is lacking with jousters. But that is nothing new.

Without commenting on his proposals, I do think that the term "jouster" doesn't totally match reality for a good number of ships that are usually labeled as so.

I think we have "arc-dodgers" and "turrets" correctly representing the abilities of those ships.

However, it seems that a "jouster" isn't currently a ship that is specially good at jousting, that is, get someone in arc, and then make that attack opportunity make a difference.

All the opposite, it seems that what we call currently jousters are simply all those ships that aren't either arc-dodgers, or turrets (or support, or minelayers, or swarmers...), so they have nothing better to do than just try and face the enemy and hope for the best.

That is not a role! That is actually the lack of a role. Can we really call the U-Boat jousters, when they can barrel roll (large base) and have a primary turret? I don't think so.

If the X-Wing, the Kihraxz, the B-Wing, etc are supposed to be jousters, then jousting needs to become a role as effective as arc-dodging or turreting are.

Currently it isn't, because defensive abilities and token stacking have become so effective against jousting that even when jousters do as they are supposed to do, they cannot get thru all the defenses.

And no, having 1-3 extra HP doesn't help jousters win. That only help them lose more slowly.

However, unlike Paragoomba, I don't think defensive abilities should be removed or nerfed. They aren't the problem here. Arc-dodgers need them against turrets, swarms and other archtypes. Without them, they will go back to the time before autothrusters, where arc-dodgers couldn't survive turrets without the grace of the dice, no matter what the player did.

Let them keep those defenses. But instead, make arc-dodgers have to dodge arcs again! If a jouster gets an arc-dodger in arc, then the arc-dodger has failed to perform its role and should face the consequences. It is not okay that it comes out untouched from such a failure.

The jousting role needs to be redesigned to be effective, and not to be just the lack of a role.

If a jouster has got a target in its arc, then the jouster has done its job and it should be rewarded with damage being dealt. That is why Omega Leader works, but other jousters don't.

Theorist's proposed upgrades are too much, though. You cannot simply disable a lot of defensive upgrades with a 1 point title or mod, and let all small base ships equip it. That is nuts!

Also, the defensive part of his proposals is excessive and can make ships with lots of health be a slog to kill, also rendering Predator, Advanced Targeting Computer, Guidance Chips, Proton Torpedoes, Concussion Missiles, and many other cards useless against them.

My proposal would be something that directly counters defenses in arc for jousters, without totally rendering them useless.

Something like:

Precision Shooting Specialist

Title

When attacking with a (cannon) or primary weapon inside your firing arc, you may add to your roll as many (precision) results as the absolute difference between your primary attack score and your agility score.

You may equip another title in addition to this one.

You cannot equip this card if either your primary attack or agility scores are lower than 1 or higher than 3.

Then a rules card:

Precision Result Rules

One or more (precision) results can be added to a dice roll and is represented by a Precision tokens. These results cannot be rerolled or changed.

During the Compare Results step, (precision) results are cancelled by (evade) results before (hit) and (crit) results are.

If there are uncancelled (precision) results left at the end of this step, the attack is considered to hit.

During the Deal Damage step, (precision) results deal no damage.

This title does nothing for turrets, bombers, minelayers, etc.

It does nothing for TIE Interceptors, Fang fighters, Starvipers, Agressors, Defenders, TIE/SF, ARC-170 and any other ship whose primary attack matches their agility.

However, it autocancels one evade from the defender for X-Wings, Y-Wings using the primary arc, TIE Fighters, Scyk, Kihraxz...

For B-Wings, G-1A and other heavy armed slowpokes, it autocancels two evade results, making their attack much more likely to deal actual damage, and being great at burning tokens and defensive abilities out of their targets in the worst case.

Even A-Wings get a bonus to their disappointing primary weapon.

At the same time, this upgrade doesn't increase the damage output of any ship, since precision results deal no damage. It just helps overcome the defenses.

PS: It would even give a use to Expose!

At the base of both the key concerns (dice modification and maneuvering effectiveness) lies the same root - action economy imbalance.

Action economy imbalance is, in most cases, how you push your dice modification into the red zone. It's also how, in most cases, you push your maneuvering into the red zone. It's definitely how you manage to do both at once.

I would be interested in what happens to the game if you flat out ban Push The Limit. PTL certainly isn't the only source of action economy imbalance but it seems a key point of difference that occurs in many of the most frustrating builds (Dash, Soontir, Inquisitor, now Manaroo). This is especially as it sits in an EPT slot so available to all elite pilots and no generics, whereas a lot of other action economy cards are both available to generic pilots AND limited to particular ships.

I might attack this problem from a different direction...

By introducing a list building restriction:

The Wingman rule - a list may not include more named pilots than generic pilots.

I think it sits quite well from a thematic point of view: You wouldn't see an ace all out on his own; he would almost always have other pilots around to have his back - usually less experienced pilots who can learn from him and who aren't such a big loss if they are Kia.

From a mechanical point of view it doesn't hit all that many lists, but I feel that the lists it does hit are those that a lot of people seem to have issues with.

And of course the big plus is that it's completely reversible: If it makes the game worse it can be quickly and easily undone with no permanent after-effects.

What about an ordnance card called 'shields double front', or 'all power to front deflectors'? 3Three pts. cost with the text, "discard this card and all shields absorb double damage from an enemy in your primary firing arc this turn". This might put Ys and Bs back in the first round jouster category. I'm a casual at home player so I don't know all the cards and synergies, it was just a thought, so fire at will.