Anyone else feel like vector thrusters is the t-65 fix we have been looking for? the x-wing already has some really solid pilots and now with the option of barrel roll or IA I feel like we are in a good place.

Wes, Biggs, Wedge, and even Hobbie all are pretty solid options. Sorry, the Rebel Alliance only consists of elite pilots. The rest of them died at Yavin.

Its too bad you need to chose between the two. IA is so good that I am hesitant to try another modification.

It's priced fairly, while x-wing hulls cost too much.

It clashes with integrated astromech.

Sorry kid, it ain't the fix... Just an actually useful modification. Given we've needed a few of those, I'm not sad it exists - but let's not get ahead of ourselves in what it is and is not.

No the T-65 is overcosted as it is - adding two points for a barrel roll is certainly not the fix we are looking for.

God no, unfortunately. I kind of rate it on Wedge, if you're not taking bb8, but then the x-wing is just too wafty without IA to justify the points... so.. you always take bb8 instead of VT! bb8 also gives you a little bit of action economy and activates before maneuver, so he's the clear winner for me, if you want a br t-65.

I'm in the 'could use a bit more but don't overdo it' camp of t-65 fixes.

I feel that the T-65 will need to have 2 Illicit slots, an extra Torpedo slot, a System slot and a Boost icon before people can even say it is close to fixed.

A vectored thrustered rookie at 23 pts. Oh yeah, here we go, fixed.

..... This game is ƒael.

We need a unique t-65 x-wing title

"One in a million" 0pt

When attacking with a proton torpedo you may change all attack dice to crits.

Powerful and thematic - fixed!

Its too bad you need to chose between the two. IA is so good that I am hesitant to try another modification.

Its almost like LRS and GC for Tie Bombers. You'd need both mods to make them effective alpha strikers.

I'd agree that you would need to have VT and IA on X-Wings to make them formidable fighters.

If VT would be 0 points, you could argue to take that over IA...

Its too bad you need to chose between the two. IA is so good that I am hesitant to try another modification.

Its almost like LRS and GC for Tie Bombers. You'd need both mods to make them effective alpha strikers.

Nah, you don't. LRS allows for Crackshot. GC allows for Deadeye. Both builds are very nice, if you use Homing Missiles. I have had excellent results with a list incorporating both, a Crackshot TIE and the inquisitor in the Vassal league.

Its too bad you need to chose between the two. IA is so good that I am hesitant to try another modification.

Its almost like LRS and GC for Tie Bombers. You'd need both mods to make them effective alpha strikers.

Nah, you don't. LRS allows for Crackshot. GC allows for Deadeye. Both builds are very nice, if you use Homing Missiles. I have had excellent results with a list incorporating both, a Crackshot TIE and the inquisitor in the Vassal league.

I use my trusty Scimitar Squadron with Concussion Missiles. Everything else is too expensive.

T-65 is in despite need of a title. I suggest allowing 2 mods or 2 ept AND some sort of point reduction. Maybe a free Astromech with more green on the dial or a talon roll.

Both A-wing and Intercept were hardly used until they got their titles. Same, recently, with Defender.

Its too bad you need to chose between the two. IA is so good that I am hesitant to try another modification.

Its almost like LRS and GC for Tie Bombers. You'd need both mods to make them effective alpha strikers.

I'd agree that you would need to have VT and IA on X-Wings to make them formidable fighters.

If VT would be 0 points, you could argue to take that over IA...

One shot dodged from VT is often better than one damage soaked to IA

Its too bad you need to chose between the two. IA is so good that I am hesitant to try another modification.

Its almost like LRS and GC for Tie Bombers. You'd need both mods to make them effective alpha strikers.

Nah, you don't. LRS allows for Crackshot. GC allows for Deadeye. Both builds are very nice, if you use Homing Missiles. I have had excellent results with a list incorporating both, a Crackshot TIE and the inquisitor in the Vassal league.

I use my trusty Scimitar Squadron with Concussion Missiles. Everything else is too expensive.

Not if you punish your opponent for going for the Bombers. I prefer PS greater than U-Boats and damage that is equivalent or greater than theirs. But 5 Scimitars sounds pretty awesome, too!

​I'm really glad some of you are not the designers of this game.

​I'm really glad some of you are not the designers of this game.

Statements like this are not necessary.

I think that something along the lines of the /x7 Defender title for the X-wing would be ideal. Like the pre-fix Defender, the X-wing is a jouster that is hampered by low points-efficiency and poor action economy.

I would prefer a Title to a modification so as not to conflict with IA. Also I would like it to be balanced but not overpowered, particularly on the (numerous) named pilots. Any fix would need to be useful while avoiding any inadvertent overpowering of existing pilots.

You know, I'm not very keen on Vectored Thrusters. Flavourwise, I mean, not performance wise.

Do we really want a game where X-Wings barrel roll? Doesn't that kinda spoil the flavour - TIEs are all nimble and barrel rolly, X-Wings aren't. There'll be a modification that increases a 2-attack dice ship's primary attack by 1 next!

Not that I'm going to stop putting them on my ARCs, of course.

Edit: I think people realised, given their replies, but there was supposed to be a "not" in there, before "very keen"!

VTs basically put X-wings in the exact same place they've always occupied: worse than B-wings

VTs are way too expensive to just slap on a jouster as it ruins their efficiency, you want them on ships that can exploit the hell out of em (mainly ARCs and TLTs)

even if VTs were 0 points, we'd still be where we were pre-IA (worse than B-wings)

You know, I'm very keen on Vectored Thrusters. Flavourwise, I mean, not performance wise.

Do we really want a game where X-Wings barrel roll? Doesn't that kinda spoil the flavour - TIEs are all nimble and barrel rolly, X-Wings aren't. There'll be a modification that increases a 2-attack dice ship's primary attack by 1 next!

Not that I'm going to stop putting them on my ARCs, of course.

Expert Handling should reflect that skill to barrel with X-Wings, back then when X-Wing was released. So why shouldn't it be 'flavorful' to have them performing barrels?

VTs basically put X-wings in the exact same place they've always occupied: worse than B-wings

VTs are way too expensive to just slap on a jouster as it ruins their efficiency, you want them on ships that can exploit the hell out of em (mainly ARCs and TLTs)

even if VTs were 0 points, we'd still be where we were pre-IA (worse than B-wings)

Heh! -2 Points X-Wing only would be a 'real fix' then I assume? ^^

VTs basically put X-wings in the exact same place they've always occupied: worse than B-wings

VTs are way too expensive to just slap on a jouster as it ruins their efficiency, you want them on ships that can exploit the hell out of em (mainly ARCs and TLTs)

even if VTs were 0 points, we'd still be where we were pre-IA (worse than B-wings)

Heh! -2 Points X-Wing only would be a 'real fix' then I assume? ^^

you got it

or just another card altogether

Paying 2pts for VT is fair but given the over costed nature of the x-wing it's not good enough to replace IA.

X-wing needs a point reduction.

​I'm really glad some of you are not the designers of this game.

Statements like this are not necessary.

I am disappoint.

This was the perfect opportunity for a whole series of recursive quoted posts about how each statement above is not necessary or helpful.