Even Magic has Standard Tournaments, Double headed Giant, Sealed Deck, Booster Draft, Elder Dragon Hinterland, Commander, Emperor, Multiplayer.

True, but the basic gameplay doesn't change drastically in those formats, at least not as far as I know. You're still trying to get the other guy to zero life points.

The rules don't change but the games play very different. Being limited to only wave 8 and 9 ships and upgrades and playing ships or upgrades from any wave (Standard/Modern) are going to be very different experiences despite the other rules being the same.

Even Magic has Standard Tournaments, Double headed Giant, Sealed Deck, Booster Draft, Elder Dragon Hinterland, Commander, Emperor, Multiplayer.

True, but the basic gameplay doesn't change drastically in those formats, at least not as far as I know. You're still trying to get the other guy to zero life points.

I'm not sure I agree with that. The goal generally remains to get the other guy to zero life but there are other ways to win and certainly are other ways to make your opponent suffer besides just causing damage. Counterspells were previously mentioned but massed land kill, at least in the days before readily available non-land mana sources, is generally seen a not fun experience. While "winning" may still be the objective the deck construction rules change some between the various format and as importantly what goes into a deck changes based on the format even if the building rules remain the same.

One more thing there is that not all of those formats have been around in any kind of "official" format since the start of the game. MtG is what, 23 years old or so giving it time to grow into those various formats but also seeing many people who have played the game stop playing for any number of reasons. Give X-Wing another five years and maybe some other tournament formats will start gaining some traction if the 100 point deathmatches are too much for you.

To touch on the Rock/Paper/Scissors argument the game can work with that but it depends on how many squadrons fill each spot to make mirror matches interesting and it also can make rotation slow. If there is a very dominant Rock deck that 'everyone plays" then you aren't going to see much Scissors played in a tournament because there are too unfavorable matchups. Paper may defeat Rock and should cause R-P-S to roll on but if there isn't enough Paper then rock stays and if Paper ever happens to run into a Scissors it's done for. Adding in Lizard and Spock give more options to shake things up and make complicate the question of playing the dominant squad, the counter squad, or the counter-counter squad which loses to the current dominant squad.

Even Magic has Standard Tournaments, Double headed Giant, Sealed Deck, Booster Draft, Elder Dragon Hinterland, Commander, Emperor, Multiplayer.

True, but the basic gameplay doesn't change drastically in those formats, at least not as far as I know. You're still trying to get the other guy to zero life points.

The rules don't change but the games play very different. Being limited to only wave 8 and 9 ships and upgrades and playing ships or upgrades from any wave (Standard/Modern) are going to be very different experiences despite the other rules being the same.

As a comparison to MtG I'd say you should include at least three waves in "standard" but isn't the way the game is currently played closer to Legacy (I may have my MtG formats mixed up, stopped playing years ago). Of course X-Wing still has everything in print and comes out with far fewer updates so comparisons to MtG do have issues.

Even Magic has Standard Tournaments, Double headed Giant, Sealed Deck, Booster Draft, Elder Dragon Hinterland, Commander, Emperor, Multiplayer.

True, but the basic gameplay doesn't change drastically in those formats, at least not as far as I know. You're still trying to get the other guy to zero life points.

The rules don't change but the games play very different. Being limited to only wave 8 and 9 ships and upgrades and playing ships or upgrades from any wave (Standard/Modern) are going to be very different experiences despite the other rules being the same.

As a comparison to MtG I'd say you should include at least three waves in "standard" but isn't the way the game is currently played closer to Legacy (I may have my MtG formats mixed up, stopped playing years ago). Of course X-Wing still has everything in print and comes out with far fewer updates so comparisons to MtG do have issues.

I'd agree that my analogy might not be the most accurate but the point about the rules remaining the same but the experience of playing being very different remains. Older formats in MtG will be "more powerful" compared to the formats limited to recent things (Standard) than in X-wing but that is more a age of game and changes made to the design to lessen discussions like these.

Land destruction is something that there isn't a lot of because it speaks to the OPs point about participating. You'd just have to sit there as your opponent beat you while you were not playing any cards. It wasn't any fun. There is losing and there is not getting to play. So while there are land destruction cards it isn't really a deck archetype in Standard because it is an NPE especially for newer players that was deliberately eliminated for the "health" of the game.

Do you know what her pilot ability is?

Do you know what her dial looks like?

2 reds which are both turns, and 3 greens, a 1 and 2 straight and a 2 bank. This is not exactly a killer dial for her ability to work with. Plus as was pointed out the lack of the Ghost on top tables anywhere proves Hera is far from being ahead of the power curb.

Left something very important out there:

Look at Nien Nunb, now look at her ability. Now look at Stay on Target.

...waits for it...

It's better, but she stills lacks an EPT to get to that magical 9 PS to make it good. If Hera could get PS 9 She'd be broken. We can debate this back and forth, but honestly, if it was that practical you'd think it'd be played more often.

@Catpeeler - We got your point, you just didn't make a very good one. The game is still about skill, maneuvering, and a smaller degree of luck then before. Your argument is provably false. If a player could simply dictate a specific ship to be dead then Aces would never be played. It's simple as that. No one is gonna load points onto a 3-4 health Ace like Fenn or Soontir if they can be easily killed in the opening volley. The fact that many players better then you or I continue to use these ships in the highest tier of play proves that you are, demonstrably and quite simply, wrong.

As for the tournament format, I honestly prefer bigger games of 125-150 with a sensible cap of 6 on any specific ship. It gives a lot of ships and builds a new lease on life, and old power combos are still good but less dominate. The main argument I've heard against this point level is time, but I find this is only a issue if you don't have any ruling limiting the size of swarms such as the previously mentioned ship cap. Generally the extra firepower tends to burn though the game pretty quickly.

I do wish FFG would give some more official support for alternate formats and start experimenting a little to see if a higher point cap might lead to more interesting play. After all, rock, paper, scissors ain't so bad when you can take all three.

What I dislike is when someone doesn't like the current meta 100/6, they think they need to walk away from the game.

That does seem to be the common thought around here. I'd say that these boards are decidedly biased to the 100/6/dm game, but that's because I'd guess a majority of us regulars are tournament players. Which kind of makes sense, most truly casual players aren't going to bother posting on a message board.

Casual players may buy as much, in fact I'd say the majority of ships sold are sold to casual players. But I don't think it's a huge majority any longer. Given how many people play in tournaments now I think the idea that only 10-15% or even 25% of X-Wing players are also tournament players isn't true.

Well, I for one am a casual-only player. Even in the '90s I loves M:TG, but never had an interest in tournaments. I'm out here because I am interested in seeing what people think about the game, and for the more "spiritual" threads about what people would like to see out of the game or how they would liek to see the game grow.. JBR7 and Heychadwick are notable and vocal supporters of the fun/casual game. Sadly, in truth, its hard to think at this current time that FFG designs for anything but 100/6 DM tournament play, which is not a feeling I ever got from M:TG.

I'm a little late to this thread but it really grabbed my attention. I'm one of those "meta got me down' kinda players. I prefer a more narrative style of play, i'd much prefer to see scenarios or campaign type play come to X-wing. Imperial Assault and now Armada are heading down this road, whilst X-wing remains mostly the 100 pt deathmatch. Sure you can play epic or Heroes of the Atturi cluster, but its shifting the players in larger groups to do this. The part about the meta that was really getting me down was seeing tournament meta lists show up in casual play. I used to attend a casual weekly X-wing night and started to get irritating to see people bring Dengaroo and Palp Shuttle lists to a group that mostly plays 'basement lists'. Naturally, they stomp everyone else. I could understand if there was an upcoming tournament that they wanted to practice for, but there were separate events/nights for that. It seemed to be players that didnt want to put time into making a new list and/or players that don't play very often. I'm guessing their logic was "I dont play X-wing very often, i'm sure not going to waste my opportunity and play a loser list". Congrats, your Dengaroo list beat down a Rebel list with Etahn A'baht and Tarn Mison. Before their match, i'd walked over and commented "Dengaroo seems pretty strong against E-wings and X-wings", he gave looked up smiled and said proudly "YUP!" He was relishing the beat-down he was about to deliver....and he did. Obviously finding the right style of group is going to affect your perception of the game.

All that being said, I still hope that FFG starts to look at either:

a. a campaign like Corellian Conflict for Armada.

b. adding missions or scenarios to standard play. (similar to what Star Trek Attack Wing has)

I know for each of those, there will be a chorus of voices saying "that will never work" or "that would kill X-wing" and so on. Take it for what its worth.

I actually agree with you, I think a Scenario pack would only improve things. Hell even a set of Scenarios where TOs select 3 scenarios for the day and you have to design lists to complete those scenarios (they would probably have to be mirrored scenarios)... The problem with most tournaments being 100/6 is that that is the only way the majority of people will play.. I love Escalation Tournaments for this reason.....

Hell doubles could be hilarious, where every round you get paired up with another player.

I mean, they could at least try something new for 1 season. . .if it falls flat, go back to 100/6.

The problem with most tournaments being 100/6 is that that is the only way the majority of people will play.

I think the only reason most people prefer the 100/6 game is because that's what most tournaments use, so it's seen as the default method. Don't get me wrong, I like the 100/6 game because it's quick and easy, and I can often get more than one game in a night. But if tournaments were played with some other scenario I'd likely play that instead.

If you look at pretty much every other miniature game out there round limits and scenarios are part of the default game. I think if FFG were to come up with a system with a scenario pack, you'd see most people starting to play those instead.

There is no reason scenarios have to be complicated or take more than the allotted tourney session time. But at least they would drive new and different list building ideas.

Most of the killer ships are very mobile and could probably accomplish any conceivable objective in this game. I don't think scenarios really fix a whole lot of ships unless you do silly things like "only t-65 x-wings not named biggs can accomplish this".

As a side note, I'm developing a narrative event for GenCon 2017 with the rest of my podcast and I'm quite excited about it. We are working on our catalog short description to draw people in. It will be the day after most are cut from the FFG event, so we should get the 40 players required.

Scenarios will make you rethink lists without having to as dictatorial as "only x-wings can play."

And now I have a greater incentive to make it to GenCon 17

In the Old Days, Player A could reduce Player B's ability to defend (by way of Wedge, or Outmaneuver, with stress, etc).

These Days, Player B can remove Player B's ability to defend (double Auto-corrected Autoblaster, auto-TB, etc).

There is a fundamental difference between reducing defense and removing it entirely. Whether you think this is a problem or not is an entirely different discussion.

Oh, I get it. I started a thread called "Green Dice Need More Love" which is more or less based around the same notions.

Dont let the door hit you on you way out.

Attitudes and comments like this are are honestly the only truly NPE I have with this game. The game itself is fun (if sometimes flaky and vague), but there are some players who make me question why I play in the first place.

then don't play this game.

Tyllon, you have 6 posts on account, and in 2 of them you are rude. Be nice or sign off.

If you don't like it then you can sign off not me. I don't have to be nice to anyone. This is post someone being a baby and crying about a game that is does not work in their favor. If you can't handle the heat, get out of the kitchen.