33 minutes ago, cnemmick said:
Haven’t tried it, but I was thinking about house ruling Fenn to lose Assault and gain + 1 DMG and multi fire, and then give multi fire to friendly troopers, because I find I rarely want to set up my troopers to use assault, they die too quickly. Thoughts on if that would work?
1 hour ago, player1155101 said:Haven’t tried it, but I was thinking about house ruling Fenn to lose Assault and gain + 1 DMG and multi fire, and then give multi fire to friendly troopers, because I find I rarely want to set up my troopers to use assault, they die too quickly. Thoughts on if that would work?
Are you wanting to give Multi-fire to more than one friendly Trooper within X spaces? Because depending on how many friendly troopers get Multi-fire, that will be very overpowered. Let me show you my back-of-the-envelope math.
From 5 spaces away (so they can use Sniper to reroll for surges), Alliance Rangers have a 63% chance vs. one black die and a 54% chance vs. one white die to do at least 3 DMG. Barring any extra stuff -- command card usage, Beneficial conditions or other buffs -- you could reasonably expect all 3 Rangers to do 8 DMG (3+3+2) in a round to the same target in one round. With extra stuff, it would be unlikely to defeat 2 different figures that both have 7 or 8 Health, but it could be done. (A green die from Focus would likely give an extra 2 damage; a red die from Tools from the Job or Concentrated Fire would almost definitely give an extra 2 damage; an extra SURGE from Hidden or Hera would likely give an extra DMG.)
With Multifire, Alliance Rangers would have a 63% chance vs. one black die and a 54% chance vs. one white die to do at least 2 DMG to each target. Making the same assumptions as above about not having extra stuff, you could reasonably expect the full card of Rangers to do 5 (2+2+1) DMG to two targets EACH per round. With the extra stuff? EASILY do 7 or 8 DMG to both figures.
Alliance Rangers at the start of Round 2 are dangerous already. Multi-fire Rangers, who will also have one activation free to move or clear a Stun given by Concentrated Fire? [ive_got_a_bad_feeling_about_this.gif]
And the more friendly Rangers that get Multi-fire the more unfair it gets.
--
As far as Multi-Fire for Fenn, I think it's a good way to address the Assault problem. In my solution, Fenn's getting 2 attacks (can target same target) at full power and 2 movement points; in your solution, Fenn's getting 2 attacks (must target different targets) with -1 DMG each and an additional action (for up to 4 movement points, or Grenadier, Ready Weapons, Inspiring Speech, Planning, etc.) I think there's positives and negatives to both. I prefer keeping Assault on Fenn because it makes him a cost-effective counter to other higher-cost, single-die defending figures like Palp, IG-88, etc.
Lol, I guess in my eagerness to fix Fenn I made him way too OP. Just giving it to one friendly trooper would work much better, keeping him more in line with what he was originally intended to do. Thanks for doing to the quick math!
I get what your saying about keeping assault, I just wanted something a little different from the IG-88 fix.
I really like the rest of your fixes by the way, I definitely be trying out a couple!
Soo... how horrible would this be?
QuoteElite Rebel Saboteur (Cost: 7)
FAQ Errata: Add one yellow die to your attack pool. You cannot target figures 4 or more spaces away from you.
This lets a Sab have a 55% chance vs. black & 46% vs. white to do 4 DMG at Accuracy 3. (Note: calculations here don't take in effect using a SURGE for Stun or Blast 1 DMG.) Plenty of surges: 55% chance vs. black die & 33% vs. a white die of getting 2 surges from the roll. Adding Targeting Computer doesn't really increase the damage output. But when Focused, the output does get ridiculous: 38% vs. black and 32% vs. white of doing at least 6 DMG. Those are better odds than a Focused eWeequay of doing at least 6 DMG.
Edited by cnemmickFenn could have something like suppressive fire in skirmish.
On 2017. 12. 10. at 11:18 PM, ricope said:Like this?
Removed all abilities' names (Assault, Shield...) because of room constraints
You could keep the name and remove the description of abilities instead. Would be shorter and I think things like Assault and arsenal don't have to be on every card with them. Most people will know what the name means.
Stabilize your rear deflectors: Version 0.9 of my skirmish fixes document is available for public review . All comments and suggestions are welcome on the document.
So for a while now, I've really struggled with trying to improve Lando. I made some significant improvements to Saska Teft, which makes Lando get a bit behind the curve. I've experimented with adding an additional attack die and static damage bonuses. Nothing really felt great because it swung either not enough or too much with the Smuggler cards. My current solution doubles down on Resourceful and Gambit:
QuoteUnique Skirmish Attachment Card: General's Arsenal (Lando Calrissian only)
Cost: 0
When using Resourceful while attacking, you may reroll up to 2 of your dice. If you do, apply -2 Accuracy to your attack results.
At the end of your activation, if there are no friendly figures within 2 spaces of you, you gain 1 EVADE TOKEN.
And I ended up going in a different direction for the Elite Rebel Sabs:
QuoteUnique Skirmish Upgrade Card: Ambush Training
Cost: 0
Your Elite Rebel Sabs gain the following:
Pierce 1. After you resolve an attack during your activation, you gain 1 movement point.
The static Pierce 1 ability increases their damage throughput versus evade results and Zillo Technique. Sabs with this Pierce 1 have a 93% chance vs. one black die and a 83% chance vs. one white die to do at least 1 damage from 3 spaces away WITHOUT using any surges -- leaving a surge to Stun. While Focused and with access to the surge for Pierce 2, these Sabs have a 74% chance vs. one black and a 63% chance vs. one white to do at least 4 damage from 4 spaces away.
Edited by cnemmickIf Lando had something like this:
At the end of your activation, gain one power token of your choice, i think he'd be fine. He's a tiny bit overpriced right now, but a power token cures a lot of ills. Sabs are sabs.
Honestly you guys have put a ton of good work into this but i don't think they'll give an upgrade card to everyone and i don't want them to. It's annoying enough that every 1st wave unique has a card now. I'd rather pay for a new rendition of the figure like Luke to Jedi Luke, at least we'd still be getting new figures
1 hour ago, buckero0 said:Honestly you guys have put a ton of good work into this but i don't think they'll give an upgrade card to everyone and i don't want them to. It's annoying enough that every 1st wave unique has a card now. I'd rather pay for a new rendition of the figure like Luke to Jedi Luke, at least we'd still be getting new figures
Though almost all of the fixes I have are in skirmish upgrade form, I'm not tied to the format. If FFG released a new Bossk/Dengar/Leia figures with new deployment cards, I'd be down with that. If FFG released a bunch of new deployment cards and/or skirmish upgrades in a kit, leaving us to buy older figures & expansion boxes that is newly reprinted (& slightly cheaper to manufacture), I'm down with that too.
Honestly the goal of my changes stopped being "FFG Should Do This" about a day after I initially shared this document; I finally sat down and realized that if FFG is going to make skirmish changes, it'll do so with new material tied into campaign material that they can make a profit on. Nothing wrong with that at all... and I'm happy to contribute towards a growing demand for competitive IA.
I have a lot of fun working on these fixes, listening to feedback & playtesting. What motivates me further is imagining how much more fun skirmish would be with older figures brought up to being usable in the current meta.
For example, a player at my casual tournament on Sunday owns a lot of IA but is finally getting around to trying skirmish. He ran an army with Vader, Vader's skirmish fix and several sets of regular & elite Stormtroopers. He didn't know Stormtroopers aren't good enough to be played vs. Smuggler Han & IG-88 Hunter lists the rest of us were playing.
But why can't Stormtroopers get some sort of fix that lets them have a fighting chance vs. opponents running the new stuff? What kind of buffs do they need? Do they need a reduction in cost, or would they benefit more from a free Reinforcements-like ability? And with all those changes, would they be fun to play and to play against?
Oooh, now that's the stuff!
I agree whole heartedly. I often feel they gave up on IA when the Haabro thing came down and that's why we've had a skeleton crew of designers working on it for the past several years. That's probably why Legion was created.
It's a shame the best game I've played has all these inherent problems built into it and holding ot down
Honestly, I think what's keeping skirmish from busting out big like X-Wing/Destiny is that it'll always be the second IA game. IA is Descent v3.0. IA's main focus is always going to be about the player team vs. overlord campaign. (There's nothing wrong with that: it's a fun game to play!)
Pulling skirmish out to stand equally with campaign is a chicken and the egg kind of problem: To get more skirmish players, there needs to be a way to build skirmish lists without needing to buy current big boxes (core set, expansions). To justify getting skirmish-only starter sets and expansions, there needs to be more players interested in playing skirmish. Even when I was doing that Core + 1 Expansion + 4 A/V Packs list building exercise, people wanting to buy into the game were going to have to spend around $250 to get a list that was going to be competitive but not top tier. That's a big ask for new players!
Instead of expecting FFG to build skirmish, I think its growth needs to be community driven. If I can get 8 guys in my city playing skirmish regularly -- enough to have a weekly or once-every-two-weeks pick-up game and to support a once-or-twice-a-month tournament -- then that's going to make skirmish really worth the money I've invested in it. If in my multi-state region there's 30+ players that all talk to each other and who'll make sure Store Championships and Regionals are competitive, I'll be thrilled. To do that, I'm trying to build the communication between folks who already have IA components and folks who are interested but don't have anything. Then the next goal is getting new IA players to start buying A/V packs in my area because they've bought a used Core & expansions off another player who's leaving IA for Legion or another game. If my LFGSs start seeing A/V packs selling at a higher rate, FFG will find out.
Anyway, that's way off-topic for this thread. HEY LOOK AT THIS TUSKEN RAIDER FIX INSTEAD!
QuoteUnique Scum Skirmish Upgrade Card: Hiding Their Numbers
Cost: 0
Each Elite Tusken Raider in your army gains the following: Health +1, "SURGE: Pierce 1".
At the end of your activation, if you are adjacent to another friendly Elite Tusken Raider that is not Hidden, you become Hidden.
When you perform a Tusken Cycler attack while Hidden, that attack gains +2 Accuracy, +1 DMG and you may reroll one attack die.
Rather than clogging this thread, I've added a bunch of comments to 0.9.1 Google doc with my thoughts and questions.
Edited by ThatJakeGuyOn 5/29/2018 at 11:36 AM, cnemmick said:Honestly, I think what's keeping skirmish from busting out big like X-Wing/Destiny is that it'll always be the second IA game. IA is Descent v3.0. IA's main focus is always going to be about the player team vs. overlord campaign. (There's nothing wrong with that: it's a fun game to play!)
Pulling skirmish out to stand equally with campaign is a chicken and the egg kind of problem: To get more skirmish players, there needs to be a way to build skirmish lists without needing to buy current big boxes (core set, expansions). To justify getting skirmish-only starter sets and expansions, there needs to be more players interested in playing skirmish. Even when I was doing that Core + 1 Expansion + 4 A/V Packs list building exercise, people wanting to buy into the game were going to have to spend around $250 to get a list that was going to be competitive but not top tier. That's a big ask for new players!
Instead of expecting FFG to build skirmish, I think its growth needs to be community driven. If I can get 8 guys in my city playing skirmish regularly -- enough to have a weekly or once-every-two-weeks pick-up game and to support a once-or-twice-a-month tournament -- then that's going to make skirmish really worth the money I've invested in it. If in my multi-state region there's 30+ players that all talk to each other and who'll make sure Store Championships and Regionals are competitive, I'll be thrilled. To do that, I'm trying to build the communication between folks who already have IA components and folks who are interested but don't have anything. Then the next goal is getting new IA players to start buying A/V packs in my area because they've bought a used Core & expansions off another player who's leaving IA for Legion or another game. If my LFGSs start seeing A/V packs selling at a higher rate, FFG will find out.
Anyway, that's way off-topic for this thread. HEY LOOK AT THIS TUSKEN RAIDER FIX INSTEAD!
I never understood why the tusken cycler couldn't use his surge abilities. None of them are that overpowered. I think it was just another early campaign oversite.
I still think the skirmish problem could be fixed if there was an economical board solution. Gideon is amzing but not required to play skirmish and outside of officers and new vader (who they could release in a pack) that's all you would really want from the core. There should be enough core sets of command cards floating around that you dont need the core
Long time, no post. The Zion's Finest #customskirmish channel has provided a bunch of great feedback, which I've used with the current version.
I'm hoping to move this into a version 1.0 and a public beta test soon. Please take a look at the changes and let me know what you think (either here in this topic or directly on the google doc itself).
Nice. One change/errata I thought about, was to make Indentured Jester a -1 Upgrade instead of a 1 point upgrade, but only useable by Jabba. Would essentially make Jabba a 5 point figure instead and add Salacious Crumb (I think this should go hand-in-hand with a change to Gideon to be Rebel only).
Bumping this post back up to the top for another round of comments.
Am hoping to run an online tournament with folks using these changes. If you're interested, let me know.
Hi! I know that everybody is into getting ready to worlds, but I did my most recent update of the Skirmish Fixes. We're up to v2.2 now!
If you want to take a break from figuring out how to beat Spectre Cell, check out the following:
Skirmish Fixes Google Doc
-- Comments and suggestions welcome!
Skirmish Fixes Card Images -- Print them out and test them with your buddies!
Skirmish Fixes Playtest Questionnaire -- If you do play with them, please fill out this short survey with your experience!
Here's a preview of what you'll find in the latest version:
Edit: I've already gotten some feedback and applied changes to some of the sample cards listed here (including Boba). Instead of re-posting the cards, be sure to check out the links above for the latest versions.
Edited by cnemmickI'm in the camp where I prefer to weaken the powerful figures than trying to boost the weaker figures so my suggestion could be biased
As a starter, I'm highly against making Jedi Luke better, he's already super good at 12pt, we should not try to bring everyone into SC-tier levels. The same goes for Farmboy Luke, his abilities are even better than Zeb
Gideon is badly in need of a nerf so he looks fine
2x eSab for 7pt, each with 7HP with free pierce... I think that's similar/even better than eJet. I would add "Disposable: While defending, apply -1 dodge"
eStorm at 7pt but all other ones get focus? normally yes it's only 1 extra focus but have you considered the Reinforcement command card? I'd make them more durable (ex. more defense buff or +1 HP, or both) rather than reducing their cost
eTusken: I'd add back the "you may not use abilities" for the Tusken Cycler and nerf/change their other 2 abilities, at this point they're even more flexible and their AoE is even more powerful than the 8pt eGamo
the 3 "A powerful Ally" cards: I'd watch out for those passive vs. exhaust and attacker vs. defender bonuses. For example, Rebel's the best and Imperial's the worst imo, because passive +1 block and reactive +1 damage is almost never a bad thing, but a passive +1 damage and a reactive +1 evade could very well might go unused (ex. if it resulted in overkill or the attacker didn't roll any surges at all)
in most games, you get attacked much more than you get to attack
I went through the doc (you may have seen my many comments and suggestions) and I gotta say, these are by far the best thought-out and most developed unofficial changes I’ve ever seen for IA. Really good work. 👏
I personally really like the attachment upgrades that FFG made for Han, IG, and Vader, and I know in earlier versions you had something like that. I enjoy being able to see the original as well.
Oh yeah, you’re not the only one who does this, but I noticed that many people incorrectly “officially” refer to the Mercenary faction as the Scum faction. I don’t mind this much, I just think it doesn’t sound as good as Mercenary.
really good work. I’ll be sure to play test all of it soon!
Edited by GuillotineTE21 hours ago, ricope said:I'm in the camp where I prefer to weaken the powerful figures than trying to boost the weaker figures so my suggestion could be biased
I respect your opinion about this but I disagree. I like the higher damage output skirmish game that has been created with the Jabba's Realm and Heart of the Empire expansions. The newer deployments and skirmish fixes for IG/Han/Chewie/Vader promotes the kind of game where positioning and timing your attacks or movements to contested spaces is move important than before. You and your opponent can be rewarded and/or punished for over-aggressive play. We've come a long way from 4x4.
I understand some players feel that the Hunter/Smugglers card meta has been too strong. I think it is only a problem because it is combined with 1) Mercs having cheap access to Gideon/Threepio and 2) non-Hunters/Smugglers having such poor attack math & damage mitigation that they cannot punish Hunters/Smugglers for being aggressive.
My fixes address both of these points: 1) Gideon can no longer Focus Mercs, which leaves Mercs to have to use Jabba for double-Focus builds; 2) older deployments are adjusted to feel as strong as Hunters/Smugglers. I think, even without playtesting these changes, there'll still need to have some conversation around the power of Hunter/Smuggler cards -- Hi, On The Lam! We're looking at you!
And my goal wasn't to bring these deployments up to Spectre Cell level of strength. I hope they're not! I am in the camp that the SC upgrade card could use a bit of a nerf so that players running SC don't have such an advantage vs. non-SC lists. You can find my thoughts on that
24 minutes ago, cnemmick said:I like the higher damage output skirmish game that has been created with the Jabba's Realm and Heart of the Empire expansions
That's a dark path to follow though, suppose the current power curve is 8 (taking a guess, 8 is meaningless right now). If we take your suggestion and make every figure close to 8 as possible, and a year down the road new figures have been released setting the power curve to 15, then we'd need to revisit all of the fixes to put all those old units as close to 15 as possible
As a result the power curve keeps growing and we're already seeing some of this, if it goes unchecked eventually I wouldn't be surprised for a unit to need at least 25-30HP to not be one-shotted, eStorm is completely out of the meta right now for this reason, even eRangers can one-shot them
I'm in favor of saying "let's establish an acceptable power curve, does 8 looks good? great! we'll stick with 8 and every future figures must be ~8"
this way if a new figure with power curve of 15 got released, we only need to say "nope he's too good, nerf that (one) guy" instead of having to say "welp, guess it's 15 now, let's re-do all of our 50 homemade skirmish fix"
I felt the sweet spot is ~Wave 7, so just before Wave 8 got released
@cnemmick what program do you use to make the custom cards?
35 minutes ago, GuillotineTE said:@cnemmick what program do you use to make the custom cards?
24 minutes ago, a1bert said:
Thank you
Haven't had the chance to read the whole post yet (on a time crunch at work), but my 2 cents is I would love to see Boba Fett fixed. I really want to use him, but for his points I have better options. Looking forward to see what everyone has added to the discussion.