2 hours ago, LordBlades said:

I'm in the 'not really excited boat, not because the new wave raises the power level, but because it fails to match it. I usually play competitive squads and play to win. I see little in this wave (especially for Scum which is my favorite faction) which, when put on the table, would not be a small step back from what I'm currently playing.

I think it's more of a "sidestep and take a look from an alternate angle" wave. Made for Johnnies and not Spikes, rather unlike wave 8 for example (for the most part anyway) - which in turn had me unexcited because everything looked so bland and "just powerful". I'm looking forward to what the community gets the Quadjumper to do.

I have played this game less than a year, and it's my first real table top gaming experiance. I have played many online games, that all have pronounced metas and buff/nerf rinse repeat cycles.

i have always been a reject the meta guy and I play x wing for fun cinematic value. It's doubtful I'll ever try to serious try to be a top competitor.

Not starting at the begging I have not seen the evolution of the meta so there's a lot I don't know. My question would be how has the meta changed, were ships like the Slave one ever over powered?

the reason I ask, is becuase I bought a core set, then a tie x wing expansion then a slave one. I'm the begging it didn't take me long to realize the slave one wasn't that great. The ties were just more effective, imo.

I have amassed a huge collection now, (I'm a addict) and I notice I have have tons of cardboard and tons of upgrades that never sees play. Some of it is new stuff and some of it is older, so is it a function of power creep, evolution of the game or is it possible many pilots upgrades etc are just not good or overcosted?

the old ties still seem competive, the y wings are competive with upgrades, even the z95 has held up ok it seems.

The x wing itself does seem to need love.

I don't know if powercreep is even neccesarly bad, but it would be nice if the main characters of the movies or even the main ships were a bit more viable.

I also entered the game this year. I got the impression that much of the material from the earlier waves is no longer viable for standard play, or even available, with a few notable exceptions. That said, HotAC concentrates on exactly those early waves and (v0.7) ignores anything more recent. In effect, right now almost everything has its place, just not in the same game.

Good news for FFG: The newcomer that wants to play both standard games and coop, and does like the lastest additions, has no choice but buy everything ...

The imperial slave one ... I guess it never was op, some folks keep telling me of the triple bounty hunter lists, but whatever. Now scum firespray, they have been always able to build decent lists with and they are in the meta currently.

As ive said numerous times before, Scum Firesprays are actually good. The only reason Imperial ones suck balls are those abilities are laughably useless for the same price and the Scum ones arent seen much purely because the JM5K and Lancer exist, which are superior in (almost) every way.

Give me those scum abilities in imperial lists and i'll fly firesprays again.

2 hours ago, Stew00m said:

My question would be how has the meta changed, were ships like the Slave one ever over powered?

Basically the meta evolved like this;

Swarms are OP

Phantoms are OP

Fat Han is OP

Super Dash is OP

Brobots are OP

TLT & Rebel regen are OP

Palp is OP

Jumps/deadeye are OP

Defenders/mindlink are OP

Any build that suddenly starts winning a lot is ostracised as "OP" by chunks of the internet dwelling players. It's ironic because so many people laughed at mindlink and said it was "another scum dud" when it came out...

Don't forget that "everyone" said as well that Manaroo is crap before Dangeroo was a thing °_^

That happens alot in the local meta too.

TIE/SF was hated in my area, im not joking when i say im the only one that bought ANY upon release. Two weeks of Backdraft completely decimating people, suddenly i started getting a TON of flak for running "such an OP ship" and i started seeing other people fly him lol.

And now im doing the same thing with Sabaac. Wasnt the only striker buyer but i was the only one to try them more than twice. Sabaac's ability negates the need for range1, so i can elude people way easier at a distance. Again, i get gripes when i field him now rofl.

People dont like a challenge. That is all the "THIS SHIP IS OP" is...its a challenge to take it out....well 90% of the time anyway (fu torp boats...)

5 minutes ago, SEApocalypse said:

Don't forget that "everyone" said as well that Manaroo is crap before Dangeroo was a thing °_^

Also Palp IIRC. Many people were saying 8 points and 2 crew slots is way too much for a single die.

6 minutes ago, LordBlades said:

Also Palp IIRC. Many people were saying 8 points and 2 crew slots is way too much for a single die.

Very true on both counts. I personally thought Manaroo and Mindlink had some serious potential as soon as I saw them and spent a fair bit of time placing well in local tournies with lists built around her. Now it's trendy and "OP" so I've stepped away from mindlink and I'm looking for my next crusade. My local group told me Paul Heavers "Imperial A-Holes" list (that I came up with months before he made it famous) was rubbish as it needed Vader and Soontir; until Heaver flew it. The G-1A was widely regarded as a "scum b-wing in a meta where b-wings are dead" on arrival so I took 3rd at a store championship with a 4-LOM based control list.

For me; doing good with something unorthodox or unexpected is much more fun than gaming the meta. Whilst there are some very intelligent and experienced players on the forums; there's also a lot of "group think" and sheep mentality. Always be prepared to question things and think for yourself, PEW-PEW everything and fly casual

Pretty sure Imperial A-holes was sozin.

1 hour ago, Smutpedler said:

Very true on both counts. I personally thought Manaroo and Mindlink had some serious potential as soon as I saw them and spent a fair bit of time placing well in local tournies with lists built around her. Now it's trendy and "OP" so I've stepped away from mindlink and I'm looking for my next crusade. My local group told me Paul Heavers "Imperial A-Holes" list (that I came up with months before he made it famous) was rubbish as it needed Vader and Soontir; until Heaver flew it. The G-1A was widely regarded as a "scum b-wing in a meta where b-wings are dead" on arrival so I took 3rd at a store championship with a 4-LOM based control list.

For me; doing good with something unorthodox or unexpected is much more fun than gaming the meta. Whilst there are some very intelligent and experienced players on the forums; there's also a lot of "group think" and sheep mentality. Always be prepared to question things and think for yourself, PEW-PEW everything and fly casual

There's also a 3rd category of people: people who think for themselves but aren't that great at list building. Myself for example I'd rather take a list (or a ship) that I know is good and tweak it a bit to my liking rather than go 100% into uncharted waters. When Wave 8 appeared, I liked Dengar a lot, so I tried hard to make it work. Went with PtL, K4, Unhinged, EU Dengar, but didn't do so well because I just couldn't find a competent wingman in the 40-44 point range. Then I turned to the Internet, and asked around. Most replies mirrored my own experiences (there really wasn't a good Scum option in that point range). Therefore I concluded that maybe Dengar isn't as great as I thought, and maybe triple scouts are really where it's at. Some time later Dengaroo appeared.

@Darth Meanie. I wanted to get back to you on the tractors and ion comment. Am I understanding that you feel I implied that there was a progression to each new mechanic displacing specifically the last one or another previous? If so I must clarify my position. You read my post, but I do not think you know what those words mean ;P Each mechanic released that was wholly new displaced something in the game but never really a specific mechanic at whole. Cloak displaced jouster style ships(was fixed later), tractor did it again. SLAM put a hurt on low maneuverability. Tractor smacks around high agility survivability. Etcetera so on and so forth. In the end they are still Accretion. Where Accretion is defined as new mechanics that are added that are built to work with existing core mechanics and bring new energy to the game while increasing design space. Often leaving other game components behind as no to little effort is ever given to bring them up to par (see FFG errata philosophy)

The thing that bugs at many of the X-wing fan base when it comes to some ships being viable or not is that Fantasy Flight has always pushed the living game format. Any product off the shelf is supposed to be an eternal product, and always a usable and economical purchase. Yes you will have strong and weak components, as in perfect imbalance if you prefer that definition, but so many of any given component in the living design marketing is "supposed" to be just as good. The game is "supposed" to be balanced at 100/6, and with the TIE Swarm as the point of comparison. Obviously it could never pull that off in the long run, but that didn't remove that expectation from the consumers mind.

Up until wave five if someone came into the FLGS and and hey what should I buy? I took great joy in saying dude, get whatever you want to play with to start, we can make it work from there. Now to get them in I'm answering well how competitive, what faction, okay what play style, okay start with these three ships at least, then expand from there into like this and this and maybe these things you said you really like, unless you don't mind losing alot in which case you do you fam. And then they ask me why can't I just play whatever and I'm sitting there like well, start with this flow chart, then there's this equation and... Yeah. Power creep, Accretion, imbalance, doesn't matter. There's a whole shelf of product that should not be a first purchase for a player who seeks anything more than cinematic play. And even then they are iffy. And that's geuss what, Accretion, makes the game good and exciting for existing players and keeps it moving, makes it difficult to get into for new ones.

On 1/24/2017 at 6:50 PM, Sir Orrin said:

Yea, I agree, the Red dice is the only power creep I really see. Then again, I still rule my local store with my TIE swarm. I'm just curious about new players, and what having to deal with such a built-up meta right off the bat is like. I joined at like wave 7, which was before things really started to pick up.

Here are things we have.

• Easier to move around with new maneuvers and new upgrade granting repositioning abilities both before and after.
• Easier to get multiple tokens and more abilities to change dice results.
• Easier to get more red dice, combine that with more abilities to modify dice.

So what hasn't been easier? Well the rules sure haven't. Neither has the point limit.

11 hours ago, ForceSensitive said:

@Darth Meanie. I wanted to get back to you on the tractors and ion comment. Am I understanding that you feel I implied that there was a progression to each new mechanic displacing specifically the last one or another previous? If so I must clarify my position. You read my post, but I do not think you know what those words mean ;P Each mechanic released that was wholly new displaced something in the game but never really a specific mechanic at whole. Cloak displaced jouster style ships(was fixed later), tractor did it again. SLAM put a hurt on low maneuverability. Tractor smacks around high agility survivability. Etcetera so on and so forth. In the end they are still Accretion. Where Accretion is defined as new mechanics that are added that are built to work with existing core mechanics and bring new energy to the game while increasing design space. Often leaving other game components behind as no to little effort is ever given to bring them up to par (see FFG errata philosophy)

The thing that bugs at many of the X-wing fan base when it comes to some ships being viable or not is that Fantasy Flight has always pushed the living game format. Any product off the shelf is supposed to be an eternal product, and always a usable and economical purchase. Yes you will have strong and weak components, as in perfect imbalance if you prefer that definition, but so many of any given component in the living design marketing is "supposed" to be just as good. The game is "supposed" to be balanced at 100/6, and with the TIE Swarm as the point of comparison. Obviously it could never pull that off in the long run, but that didn't remove that expectation from the consumers mind.

Up until wave five if someone came into the FLGS and and hey what should I buy? I took great joy in saying dude, get whatever you want to play with to start, we can make it work from there. Now to get them in I'm answering well how competitive, what faction, okay what play style, okay start with these three ships at least, then expand from there into like this and this and maybe these things you said you really like, unless you don't mind losing alot in which case you do you fam. And then they ask me why can't I just play whatever and I'm sitting there like well, start with this flow chart, then there's this equation and... Yeah. Power creep, Accretion, imbalance, doesn't matter. There's a whole shelf of product that should not be a first purchase for a player who seeks anything more than cinematic play. And even then they are iffy. And that's geuss what, Accretion, makes the game good and exciting for existing players and keeps it moving, makes it difficult to get into for new ones.

You just introduced an alternative definition about accretion design, one that is contrary to the one from the extra credits video ;-)

Furthermore you mix up poor knowledge with balance. I am sure extra credits has something to say about that too in their series about game balance. If you started at wave 1, what you should have said was not "buy whatever", but instead, buy 8 TIE-Fighters, they own everything. You create a picture of less diversity, while the amount of valid builds and ships constantly rises and you base this fact that the number of invalid pilots and builds rises as well, but the irony is that the invalid rise is closer to linear, while the growth of valid builds is closer to exponential. Which is a rather good track record, considering the amount of content introduced into the game. Defenders and a Lambda shuttle are the current gatekeeper list, that is pretty old stuff, sprinkled with a few new upgrade cards.

34 minutes ago, SEApocalypse said:

(...)Defenders and a Lambda shuttle are the current gatekeeper list, that is pretty old stuff, sprinkled with a few new upgrade cards.

Question is, is an X7-Defender (esp. with a new pilot Ryad), costing whole 2 points less, and suddenly at certain conditions getting guaranted evade tokens (evade they even had no access to in their original form) really comparable to the defender of old? It' s more like a new ship.

2 minutes ago, Managarmr said:

Question is, is an X7-Defender (esp. with a new pilot Ryad), costing whole 2 points less, and suddenly at certain conditions getting guaranted evade tokens (evade they even had no access to in their original form) really comparable to the defender of old? It' s more like a new ship.

Are you still yourself after college or are you a new, better person? ;-)

1 minute ago, SEApocalypse said:

Are you still yourself after college or are you a new, better person? ;-)

Now we are getting philosophically. Some university/college courses might actually lead to personality changes (for the better or worse....), but unless you go elite sports they probably do not change your physical self that much. But you are not suddenly a lot cheaper to field, like X7, aren't you?

Just now, Managarmr said:

Now we are getting philosophically. Some university/college courses might actually lead to personality changes (for the better or worse....), but unless you go elite sports they probably do not change your physical self that much. But you are not suddenly a lot cheaper to field, like X7, aren't you?

Well, if you become a veggy while on college, you actually might become a lot cheaper

The thing is, your question is inherent philosophical and it is hard to draw a line on top of it. Is R3-A2 Wes still the same good Wes just VI Wes? R2-D2 and Engine Upgrade the same cards when you apply them to. To answer your (loaded) question: Yes, the X7s are the same ship, the defenders were always meant to be that way, the strong efficient but expensive jousters, FFG just screwed up on the original release and the game had a slight power creep over the years, so X7 adjusts them back to what the were and should have been at release. Now you might argue that x7 overshoot the target a little, but the character and essence of the ship is still the same, even when it might be 2 points off.
(I don't like fix suggestions, because they are pointless, but imo x7 would have been fine at zero or minus one points, while d would have worked better at minus two points)

Besides that, yeah Ryad clearly is a new pilot, a new element to the defenders, her ability is rather unique and changes the options of the ships, she is clearly new. The rest is just balancing applied to old ships, adjusting for the changed meta and releases. Defenders are still defenders.

11 hours ago, Marinealver said:

Here are things we have.

• Easier to move around with new maneuvers and new upgrade granting repositioning abilities both before and after.
• Easier to get multiple tokens and more abilities to change dice results.
• Easier to get more red dice, combine that with more abilities to modify dice.

So what hasn't been easier? Well the rules sure haven't. Neither has the point limit.

I agree. The thing that's supposed to balance out these things is the higher point cost you pay for having a squadron that has access to them. I'm well aware that this doesn't always work out, but that's the theory anyway.

Defenders are not 'old' they're new - to most intents and purposes Defenders didn't get released until Q3 2016. You certainly didn't see them getting played!

You go right ahead and play 'old Defenders' and see how well you do.

I've seen a friend of mine win a tournament with triple old Defenders. The capability of your list is as much your familiarity with the ships as their overall firepower - and luck plays a factor. Not just with dice but with matchups. Triple fenders, meet fat juicy Decimators. Most players play twitch monkey arc dodging or sheer dice advantage. Very few players play to shaft their opponents not one turn hence, but in three turns. That is how Pheaver plays.

Back when Phantoms were tearing up the scene, especially Buzzsaw Whisper, I went into our nationals knowing I'd probably be up against that list. Took VI + PTL Tycho specifically to hunt down and kill Whisper. The rest of the list was Bs and Zs and had to carry the bulk of the fighting. And it worked.

The problem i see with X-Wing is that it only has ONE objective, kill or be killed... If they were to add a Mission system that would have different objectives, then most of the problems discussed previously could be solved. Also unused ships/upgrades/combinations would see play again!

1 hour ago, Stay On The Leader said:

Defenders are not 'old' they're new - to most intents and purposes Defenders didn't get released until Q3 2016. You certainly didn't see them getting played!

You go right ahead and play 'old Defenders' and see how well you do.

Challenge accepted. I play old defenders and you play E-Wings. No upgrade cards.

Why would I play E-Wings? They didn't get played either.

If we're going retro how about you use blunt rocks and I use flint tools, **** knows what that's supposed to prove about anything though.