1 hour ago, GrogEgrog said:

Don't get me wrong. Its not the concept that bugs me it's the term. Probably because it's a bad thing to do/habit people have in RPGs. But now it's used everywhere in gaming.

Ah, gothca. Between the web and pseudo news shows there are a lot of words that are over used. It's like everyone forgot what a thesaurus is.

5 hours ago, KryatDragon said:

- Ordinance: It should have worked far differently. Largely, how do you dodge a missile that just exploded on you? You don't.
But I really don't wanna go into detail.

People who say 'ordinance' when they should be using 'ordnance'.

My pet peeve is that big guns are required for agile ships: to hit something with lots of green dice, you need lots of red dice. As a system that's okay, but I don't think it fits Star Wars very well.

"It's only the plastic that's off, that's not really part of the base."

Just play to the accursed rules. Please.

When I land a critical hit on my opponent and all he says is oh just a Damaged cockpit or loose stabilizer. Sorry but telling me the title of a card doesn't help. I'd like to know what the critical effect did to you.

9 hours ago, Scarloochie said:

Love the game, shame for the licensing restricting sales and OP support in whole regions once covered.

Licensing restrictions? What kind of l icensing restrictions?

A pet peeve of mine is when people take the game to seriously. I only play about once a month, and enjoy playing what I like, even if the ships aren't "good" ships in the meta.

I also get get annoyed of everyone who dooms and gloom the next big list and then talks about how X-Wing 2.0 will fix everything.

2 hours ago, Ebak said:

Licensing restrictions? What kind of l icensing restrictions?

I think they are referring to what a lot of people have said, in which FFG are not allowed to sell ships and/or cards separately due to their licensing deal with Lucasfilm/Disney.

There are people (not myself) who want to buy card/update packs for this game, but alas due to the terms of the license, FFG cannot do this.

When my brother is supposed to have crashed into an obstacle, and he nudges the ship and template until it doesn't.

7 hours ago, Verlaine said:

My pet peeve is that big guns are required for agile ships: to hit something with lots of green dice, you need lots of red dice. As a system that's okay, but I don't think it fits Star Wars very well.

Ironically in the movies the bigger the gun the more it sucked at hitting small fast ships. I get sick of the gameplay>fluff arguement. How bout small bases>than large bases? Should have always been the motto in a tactical star fighter game.

My annoying points:

1. Player repeatedly throw dice in a way that the fall off the table. Next turn, same thing

2. Player who make (unfunny) jokes when they win but are uber whiny when the have problems in game

3. Players coming too late to tournaments (or return too late from lunch break)

4. Players who stall the time to win

And, my personal favourite:

5. Player who are ill but still coming to a tournament and infect others with coughing and sneezing

I can never seem to win

3 hours ago, AwesomeJedi said:

When my brother is supposed to have crashed into an obstacle, and he nudges the ship and template until it doesn't.

NUDGE him in the ass with a bull whip...no more probs.

3 hours ago, AwesomeJedi said:

When my brother is supposed to have crashed into an obstacle, and he nudges the ship and template until it doesn't.

That annoys me in games too. When it looks like my opponent may hit a rock during his move, I automatically go in and pin a finger on the obstacle to keep it from moving. And if it's my turn, I ask them to do the same for me.

Never had anyone complain about me doing it; usually it's the exact opposite: a word of thanks. If someone was to complain, I'd immediately be suspect of their motives.

On 2017-02-03 at 11:26 PM, gabe69velasquez said:

People who complain about the Quadjumper because it got barely any screen time and promptly blown up are using an "idiot's argument," because there was a second Quadjumper clearly in the movie that they completely missed... there's only one YT-1300 in the movie, but 2 Quadjumpers in the movie, so that's pretty dumb logic.

Precisely:

7 hours ago, InterceptorMad said:

I think they are referring to what a lot of people have said, in which FFG are not allowed to sell ships and/or cards separately due to their licensing deal with Lucasfilm/Disney.

There are people (not myself) who want to buy card/update packs for this game, but alas due to the terms of the license, FFG cannot do this.

Actually, it's that in all of Asia, Japan included, and Russia from what I recall, FFG cannot distribute any Star Wars related products. That means no customer support, before the embargo FFG support helped me replace some missing bases. No OP support, no game night kits or championship series events. That covers all Star Wars related FFG stuff, from Assault, Destiny and Armada.

Would be nice if they brought it back even just for the OP support

X-wing Pet Peeves?

1.) 100/6; its not very thematic, and encourages min/maxed lists and WAAC mentality. Seriously, how often is Palp cruising around in a shuttle with no escort besides 2 aces??? If it happened, I'd expect the full support of a Star Destroyer near enough that there should be turbolaser shots resolved all over the table to simulate the off-map ship... Still, it bugs me that many seem to think that 100/6 is the only way to think about this awesome game.

2.) Gameplay > fluff- we're playing a STAR WARS game. On that basis, it should first and foremost reflect STAR WARS, and then should create interesting and effective gameplay options within the bounds of that theme. On that note, more Epic support makes some ships which are not viable in tournaments much more useful, because their roles are more suited to Epic style games. (Bombers aren't dogfighters, but can be very bad for a GR-75....)

Those noted, I love the game and continue to play it and collect more ships. And, being the owner of every X-wing component I've bought, I get to play it in a way that I enjoy, so the pet peeves really aren't that big a deal....

When players play arc dodgers and take forever to decide on actions.

People blame dice dice when they have no action economy in their lists.

When people say Palp is OP but they're running Manaroo.

2 hours ago, MarekMandalore said:

X-wing Pet Peeves?

2.) Gameplay > fluff- we're playing a STAR WARS game . On that basis, it should first and foremost reflect STAR WARS, and then should create interesting and effective gameplay options within the bounds of that theme. On that note, more Epic support makes some ships which are not viable in tournaments much more useful, because their roles are more suited to Epic style games. (Bombers aren't dogfighters, but can be very bad for a GR-75....)

I can't like this bolded quote enough.

On 2/3/2017 at 2:21 PM, DeathstarII said:

People complaining about something in a meta and saying "nerf!" Instead of trying ways to fight it (with the exception of deadeye scouts, that erratum was kinda necessary)

My issue with this attitude is that it doesn't address the actual problem of hyper-competitive things. When elements exist that are too efficient for their price (e.g. X7), it means they have an innate advantage over other things. Sure, the problematically efficient elements (e.g. X7) can still be beaten and one can find ways to fight it, but usually at the cost of list creativity and freedom ("Trust me, X7s are not unbeatable, if you want to take on X7s, fly X, Y, or Z..."). Of course that's true, and there are enough Rock, Paper, Scissors sorts of options in this game that any list can practically be hard-countered (but that hard-counter might lose to most everything else).

But that's not a great situation. It means that the list you fly competitively is almost entirely dictated by other stuff in the meta--what you expect to face--and is not based much upon your faction preference, ship preference, or pilot preference. It also means, since your list is highly tuned to what you expect to face and the game has a growing Rock-Paper-Scissors dynamic to it, that the outcome of any game is largely influenced by the actual match-up (what list each person brings), as opposed to player decision playing a larger role.


So, I guess my pet peeve is people who say "nothing is unbeatable" or the like, because it ignores the problematic issues of the X-Wing competitive meta that are at the core of people's complaints that some game element is too efficient and is having a warping effect in defining the entire meta.

On 2/3/2017 at 1:58 PM, Parakitor said:

1) "Back to dials." Hate it. Don't know why, but that phrase irks me. It's called the planning phase. I much prefer "Back to planning." I've gotten a lot better over the years with just smiling and letting it go, but it used to drive me crazy.

2) "Soft turn." You can call it a soft-1, soft-2, whatever. Please don't call it a "soft turn". It's a bank, not a turn (at least in this game's terminology).

3) The matter-of-fact way some people correct others' squads with something not too different from "That pilot is garbage, fly this instead." That's never helpful. By the way, all those people asking for help on squads, please, please report how it went for you after you've tried it! We've helped you build it and refine it, so we're invested in the outcome. I just want to know!

1) I blame a certain podcast.
2) I'm probably guilty of this. I'll do my best to stick to "bank" in the future, thanks.
3) The first part's rude, the second part's disappointing.

On 2/3/2017 at 2:23 PM, Jeff Wilder said:

(1) JM5Ks up in price by 2 across the board.

I know it'll never happen and people will disagree, but I'll always wish for ORS, WSF, and Contracted Scout to simply trade points. ORS for 25, WSF for 27, Contracted Scout for 30. Not only would it solve the Torp Scout meta issue, it would make the ORS and WSF arguably playable as well.

On 2/3/2017 at 2:28 PM, dewbie420 said:

#2. When my opponent bumps a ship and the ship barely moves one half of a millimeter and he/she adjusts it to a totally new position (2-3MM off) WITHOUT mentioning what happened. Sometimes I miss the first bump and all I see is the "re-adjustment correction". If someone bumps, tips or flings it should acknowledged BEFORE re-touching. When I bump, tip or fling- I always point it out and let my opponent do the readjustment.

I'm guilty of this, not out of ill intent, just that I'm trying to correct a wrong and keep the game moving as accurately as possible. Definitely something I want to work on, though, taking a second to pause and make sure my opponent has plenty of opportunity to help reset the ship (ALL bumps should be mutually agreed upon).

On 2/3/2017 at 2:58 PM, DagobahDave said:

Slippery play mats.

Especially of the official kind...

On 2/3/2017 at 3:40 PM, TitaniumChopstick said:

Even worse, when they repeatedly look at your squad while they are assembling their squad.

This. Is. Not. OK. Either prepare your list with the same amount of information as everyone else, or don't play. If it's OK for you to look at my list before making yours, then it's OK for me to change my list based on whatever you came up with, then it's OK for you to change your list, then it's OK for me to change my list again, etc, etc, and we'll never even play a game.

On 2/3/2017 at 3:56 PM, Sarcon said:

Nah, changing it to a free evade Action should be fine. This makes them vurnerable to stress

This would be a step in the right direction, at least.

On 2/3/2017 at 3:56 PM, WWHSD said:

Pilots that need EPT slots that don't have them (Kir Kanos, Laetin A'shera, etc.)

People that roll into dice trays that are on their side of the table. The walls of the tray make it hard to see their dice.

People that start moving their dice with around for modification before the original results have a chance to register in my brain.

When people bump doing a turn but their ship ends up with almost the same facing that it would have if it completed a turn.

1) I've often wondered how different the game would be if all named pilots had EPTs and all ships had a generic with an EPT. In the end, I think variety is good for the game, but certainly some pilots are left behind (and increasingly higher-PS generics are pointless as well).
2) I generally trust people, but appreciate not making me have to ask to see your results every time.
4) Yeah, that bugs me, too.

On 2/3/2017 at 4:44 PM, ScummyRebel said:

Poor winners and poor losers.

Certainly something I've been guilty of on occasion, and something I hope to continue correcting in myself.

On 2/3/2017 at 5:26 PM, Astech said:

But, like anything requiring interaction with others, problems happen.

Amen to that. I hate people.

On 03/02/2017 at 6:46 PM, Ebak said:

There was also this with the Quadjumper when it was announced; people commenting that it barely got any screen time and it got blown up. I thought that was a bit of 'double standards much' since the B-Wing was on screen for all of 4 seconds and its big moment was to open its wings...big whoop.

But the B-Wing looked majestic as hell as the Quad jumper, well, is a tug boat.

Jokes aside; my pet peeves are as follows...

1. Salty players. It's a game. I play to enjoy myself. Dice and variance are a thing. Loosen up a little and relax.

2. People who listen to the internet too much. Don't write Attani Mindlink off as a dud because the stresshog exists then moan about it being OP when someone shows you how to use it properly. Think for yourself. Experiment, learn and as above; enjoy!

3. The lack of B-Wings I see on the table. I feel like David Attenborough needs to narrate a documentary on this now rare but majestic beast and it's secretive existence. I know T-65's have been hunted nearly into extinction but those filthy animals just don't compare to the B-Wing.

4. The frailty of the front turret guns on k-wings. 3 out of 4 are broken off now

That's about it though really.

1 minute ago, Smutpedler said:

3. The lack of B-Wings I see on the table. I feel like David Attenborough needs to narrate a documentary on this now rare but majestic beast and it's secretive existence. I know T-65's have been hunted nearly into extinction but those filthy animals just don't compare to the B-Wing.

I still use the b-wing, not because i find it competitive, hell, the squad i use it in isn't very competitive, i just find it fun as hell to fly, and it's also an easy ship to keep in an engagement since you dont't have to do a huge flip around

21 minutes ago, Smutpedler said:

People who listen to the internet too much. Don't write Attani Mindlink off as a dud because the stresshog exists then moan about it being OP when someone shows you how to use it properly. Think for yourself. Experiment, learn and as above; enjoy!

This. So much this! I think the problem is that some squads are tough to master, and when somebody tries it and loses, and then hears the collective 'experience' of the online community say it's bad, they assume that they shouldn't waste their time trying to get it to work. It's made tougher by the fact that most of us have more time (make more time?) to write on these forums than we have time to play the game. I'm guilty of that.

8 minutes ago, Parakitor said:

It's made tougher by the fact that most of us have more time (make more time?) to write on these forums than we have time to play the game. I'm guilty of that.

So very sadly true for me recently too. I've had a total of 11 games in the last 3 months. 6 at Regionals 2 weeks ago and 5 at a "Gaming Vs Cancer" tournament in November. Not a single casual or "practice" game in 3 months though. I guess it's easy to let other people's experience overshadow yours when you feel your is lacking. Thing is; I'm sure most of us forum dwellers probably have less time to play than type

35 minutes ago, DeathstarII said:

I still use the b-wing, not because i find it competitive, hell, the squad i use it in isn't very competitive, i just find it fun as hell to fly, and it's also an easy ship to keep in an engagement since you dont't have to do a huge flip around

One of my all time favourite ships to fly. Just never get time for fun these days