16 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

Based on what??????? No one flies lists based on B-wings, X-wings, Kihraxz, HWKs et. al.

There is not a single extant thread that talks about early wave ships as part of the tournament meta except for the occasional super-pilot (e.g., Biggs) or left-over filler.

There was a guy who took 15th at Yavin with a blue squad, 2x bandits, rebel op with TLT and Braylen. The chap who made day 2 with the 4 HWK list made the cut again this year. Player skill is still a thing; it's just harder to use to your benefit these days. Last year a friend of mine made the cut in 4 store champs with Luke, Wedge and Wes. Kihraghdgfouisdxxx's are the one I really agree with. You very rarely see them being played or doing well. Still, my point really is just because a ship isn't "meta" doesn't mean it can't be played well. Look for the strengths and weaknesses and account for them. Also; know your enemy! It doesn't stop the power curve being a thing but it does show that player skill is a thing.

I think when analysing tournament data a lot of people forget that tournaments can be a long day so people go with an easy list to play. It doesn't mean harder ships to utilise are "unplayable" but it does mean you will see less of them as people want to win without having to think all day. It's the classic lazy mans list building like running 4 blues with Acc. Corrector. Easy to fly and punches things in the face. Parrattani (or whatever) is a fairly simple list to fly compared to the Braylen, HWK, B-wing, 2x Z-95 list I mentioned above and it may have fantastic action economy but it does not mean it's auto-win.

5 hours ago, Panzeh said:

IMO, if you're going to have missions be a thing, you have to re-work X-wing a lot to have upgrade cards/pilot abilities that interact with them ala Armada/IA. Just plonking them in the existing game ends up either narrowing the field or being pointless.

I think this is a cool idea. It creates a new design space for upgrades, as well as creating a new format for play.

2 hours ago, Chumbalaya said:

In the casual setting you're describing, he can be. The "power gap" between ships is really only relevant in tourney play.

Because casual players don't know what their doing?? The game is the game.

53 minutes ago, Luke C said:

Thats literally the point though. Sure, if you want to create an environment where the B wing is good again, great, whatever. There still will be ships that are left in the cold (Rebel Smuggler [HWK-290] I'm looking at you). In a competitive environment, you cannot get away from the idea that there are more optimal choices. People figure out the optimal choices and then Boom, you have a meta.

So yes, you can definitely have a situation in which some ships become better based on outside restraints, but it will never make every ship competitive at the same time.

No one has ever claimed there would no be a new meta. All anyone has attempted to do is inject some new ideas into X-Wing. But, as is typical for a lot of subjects, no one is willing to try something new without a guarantee it fixes EVERYTHING.

Just now, Darth Meanie said:

No one has ever claimed there would no be a new meta. All anyone has attempted to do is inject some new ideas into X-Wing. But, as is typical for a lot of subjects, no one is willing to try something new without a guarantee it fixes EVERYTHING.

I think you should do exactly what you want to do.

Go design something, play it in a league at your LGS, set something up on vassal. If it works, people will adopt it. Stop waiting for FFG to do something. Go do it yourself if you are that passionate.

Source: Heroes of the Aturi Cluster

9 minutes ago, LordBlades said:

My point is that missions in themselves wouldn't necessarily guarantee a wider meta. There are plenty of games out there that have both missions and a meta just as well defined as x-wing.

This is true, I think. Missions are primarily a tool, and there is no guarantee that the tool will do everything one might want. The biggest gains, I think, can be made in the "cycle/churn" department and the thematic issues. I don't see how it could help with complexity creep. Nor is a wider meta guaranteed (but it is possible).

39 minutes ago, Luke C said:

Talonbane and Fenn Rau are relatively the same without upgrades.

They're really not, while they have similar levels of offense their defense is drastically different. Ignoring Concord Dawn Protector, which for all intents and purposes can largely be considered just part of the ship. Fenn still has an extra base green die, a better dial, repositioning through boost/barrel roll, and yet another green die at range one. Talonbane's bonus green at range 3 only brings him up to Fenn's baseline so not really an advantage. Really the only thing he's got going for him is that single shield.

Range 3: 3 red vs 4 green for both ships

Range 2: 3 red vs 3 green for Fenn and 2 green for Talonbane

Range 1: 5 red vs 4 green for Fenn and 2 green for Talonbane

49 minutes ago, Luke C said:

You missed my point. Talonbane and Fenn Rau are relatively the same without upgrades. It is the unique combination of upgrades that make Fenn better than Talonbane.

But they're not really the same. Fenn Rau has a better ability (+1 defence dice at Range 1) a better statline (a 3rd green dice > 1 shield), a better dial (T-Roll, better greens), and better actions (Boost/Barrel).

One-on-one at 28pts is pretty much a cakewalk for Fenn Rau.

All of you saying that the generic Rebel HWK is crap, play him with a TLT, Chewbacca crew and Moldy Crow. You'll be pleasantly surprised at just how tanky it is.

22 minutes ago, Luke C said:

I think you should do exactly what you want to do.

Go design something, play it in a league at your LGS, set something up on vassal. If it works, people will adopt it. Stop waiting for FFG to do something. Go do it yourself if you are that passionate.

Source: Heroes of the Aturi Cluster

In truth, I have. . .I even posted one on these boards. I love homebrewing. As I pointed out on a different thread, I never played Decipher's SWCCG as designed cuz I thought it sucked.

But, to be honest, it is still a disappointment to have to rework a game all the time. And it is even a bigger disappointment to have a game company recommend alternate ways to play their game, but then only to see half-ass support for it.

53 minutes ago, Smutpedler said:

There was a guy who took 15th at Yavin with a blue squad, 2x bandits, rebel op with TLT and Braylen. The chap who made day 2 with the 4 HWK list made the cut again this year. Player skill is still a thing; it's just harder to use to your benefit these days. Last year a friend of mine made the cut in 4 store champs with Luke, Wedge and Wes. Kihraghdgfouisdxxx's are the one I really agree with. You very rarely see them being played or doing well. Still, my point really is just because a ship isn't "meta" doesn't mean it can't be played well. Look for the strengths and weaknesses and account for them. Also; know your enemy! It doesn't stop the power curve being a thing but it does show that player skill is a thing.

I think when analysing tournament data a lot of people forget that tournaments can be a long day so people go with an easy list to play. It doesn't mean harder ships to utilise are "unplayable" but it does mean you will see less of them as people want to win without having to think all day. It's the classic lazy mans list building like running 4 blues with Acc. Corrector. Easy to fly and punches things in the face. Parrattani (or whatever) is a fairly simple list to fly compared to the Braylen, HWK, B-wing, 2x Z-95 list I mentioned above and it may have fantastic action economy but it does not mean it's auto-win.

Quote

sure they can. both are 28 points, naked, they have nearly the same power curve. Its the PTL/Mindlink/Title/AT that makes fenn a monster, and Talonbane a paper tiger. If you are playing Expert handling Fenn (for fun), its not outlandish to think Talonbane could win the fight.

28 minutes ago, costi said:

All of you saying that the generic Rebel HWK is crap, play him with a TLT, Chewbacca crew and Moldy Crow. You'll be pleasantly surprised at just how tanky it is.

Hmmm. . .it's funny how everyone is clamoring for all these fixes on old ships until the idea comes up that 100/6 needs a tweak. Then, suddenly, they are all fine!! Everybody's flying them!! We're all good here. How are you??

2 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

Hmmm. . .it's funny how everyone is clamoring for all these fixes on old ships until the idea comes up that 100/6 needs a tweak. Then, suddenly, they are all fine!! Everybody's flying them!! We're all good here. How are you??

@Smutpedler and I have been saying that for PAGES now.

2 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

Hmmm. . .it's funny how everyone is clamoring for all these fixes on old ships until the idea comes up that 100/6 needs a tweak. Then, suddenly, they are all fine!! Everybody's flying them!! We're all good here. How are you??

I'm not clamouring for a fix for these ships. I firmly believe that player skill, practice and having a plan accounts for a lot more than most people give it credit.

Just now, Luke C said:

@Smutpedler and I have been saying that for PAGES now.

Yeah, I know. I fully agree. I'm not saying power creep isn't a thing but it's not insurmountable.

Power Creep is real. It is a problem. It's a reflection of poor game design, coupled with avarice. If earlier ships action gummies could be brought in line with new releases, then we'd see the leveling of power creep and probably a lot of happier players.

Just now, BlodVargarna said:

Power Creep is real. It is a problem. It's a reflection of poor game design, coupled with avarice. If earlier ships action gummies could be brought in line with new releases, then we'd see the leveling of power creep and probably a lot of happier players.

5 minutes ago, Smutpedler said:

I'm not saying power creep isn't a thing but it's not insurmountable.

7 minutes ago, Smutpedler said:

I firmly believe that player skill, practice and having a plan accounts for a lot more than most people give it credit.

2 minutes ago, BlodVargarna said:

Power Creep is real. It is a problem. It's a reflection of poor game design, coupled with avarice. If earlier ships action gummies could be brought in line with new releases, then we'd see the leveling of power creep and probably a lot of happier players.

or wave 11 could be a rerelease of wave I and II. Why Not?

11 minutes ago, Luke C said:

@Smutpedler and I have been saying that for PAGES now.

11 minutes ago, Smutpedler said:

I'm not clamouring for a fix for these ships. I firmly believe that player skill, practice and having a plan accounts for a lot more than most people give it credit.

5 minutes ago, BlodVargarna said:

Power Creep is real. It is a problem. It's a reflection of poor game design, coupled with avarice. If earlier ships action gummies could be brought in line with new releases, then we'd see the leveling of power creep and probably a lot of happier players.

Mostly I agree. . .and for the most part I was being snarky on purpose.

And that's supposed to read "action gimmies" (aka action efficiency) not "action gummies" but it's kind of funny so I'm not editing it as I've been quoted multiple times.

Just now, Smutpedler said:

Yeah, I know. I fully agree. I'm not saying power creep isn't a thing but it's not insurmountable.

All other things being equal it is though. There's little reason to think that when I show up to a tourney that the other players on the upper end of the spectrum won't also have a roughly equivalent amount of skill, practice, and planning. When we have lists of similar power then the match hinges on the roughness in that rough sameness in skill level. But if one of us is running a poor list with older ships then that will absolutely be the determining factor.

5 minutes ago, Luke C said:

or wave 11 could be a rerelease of wave I and II. Why Not?

The Massive Update Wave wouldn't be a bad idea. Add Blue Squadron X-Wings. Add Phoenix Squadron A-Wings. Add Hera in a B-Wing. It could be X-Wing 2.0 Lite with some new things so it isn't a complete rehash wave.

2 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

The Massive Update Wave wouldn't be a bad idea. Add Blue Squadron X-Wings. Add Phoenix Squadron A-Wings. Add Hera in a B-Wing. It could be X-Wing 2.0 Lite with some new things so it isn't a complete rehash wave.

I think perhaps, that might be good, but overkill.

If I'm digesting the waves of quite valid points here, and there are sooooo many over these pages, the summary goes something like this: ships are all somewhat balanced out of the gate when you factor in flying ability outside of a few outliers on the top and bottom. However, ship synergies (large based ones mostly) boost these top outliers into a "top of the Meta" that leave ships in the box, never to see daylight. We all agree that's not good. Plus, these synergies are complicating the game, and many would like a simpler pilot first strategy that was "back in the day" to be competitive again. And, most of the new synergies and meta warping powers lie in the latest ship/mod/crew releases.

Again (I've pandered to this idea prior), I think the corrective step is to release a squadron modification card that allows a squad of fighters (same ship type fighter from any faction) to mitigate or completely ignore said meta bending synergies, thus pushing fighters back up the power curve when they fly in squads. Thoughts?

5 minutes ago, Makaze said:

All other things being equal it is though. There's little reason to think that when I show up to a tourney that the other players on the upper end of the spectrum won't also have a roughly equivalent amount of skill, practice, and planning. When we have lists of similar power then the match hinges on the roughness in that rough sameness in skill level. But if one of us is running a poor list with older ships then that will absolutely be the determining factor.

Thats just not true though, go through a list of the top players in the game: Duncan Howard, Paul Heaver, Marcel Manzano, Phil Horny, Phillip Booth, etc... They are always seeming to be in the cut and be winning. Skill matters more than the list.

Just now, Makaze said:

All other things being equal it is though. There's little reason to think that when I show up to a tourney that the other players on the upper end of the spectrum won't also have a roughly equivalent amount of skill, practice, and planning. When we have lists of similar power then the match hinges on the roughness in that rough sameness in skill level. But if one of us is running a poor list with older ships then that will absolutely be the determining factor.

You could equally say; if you have a "bad" list with some of the bogey man ships your opponent will probably be on the back foot having had no practise against it in that situation. Whilst I'm not disputing some matches will be an uphill battle; it's not auto loss because they have a "good" list.

I honestly believe a lot of people need to chill. In a game with 2 players there will be winner and a looser. Chances are you'll be in both spots at times. Not everything will win all the time.

Lots of interesting builds doing well in this country. Put what you want on the table and learn how to maximise it. Most of all; enjoy the learning process.

My loses at Regionals last month were against the "meta" and "good" lists but they were close. I had no practise and flew a list I'd never used with 2 ships I've never used. Jank can do well if you know how to utilise it and it often surprises the "meta" players.

16 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

I think perhaps, that might be good, but overkill.

If I'm digesting the waves of quite valid points here, and there are sooooo many over these pages, the summary goes something like this: ships are all somewhat balanced out of the gate when you factor in flying ability outside of a few outliers on the top and bottom. However, ship synergies (large based ones mostly) boost these top outliers into a "top of the Meta" that leave ships in the box, never to see daylight. We all agree that's not good. Plus, these synergies are complicating the game, and many would like a simpler pilot first strategy that was "back in the day" to be competitive again. And, most of the new synergies and meta warping powers lie in the latest ship/mod/crew releases.

Again (I've pandered to this idea prior), I think the corrective step is to release a squadron modification card that allows a squad of fighters (same ship type fighter from any faction) to mitigate or completely ignore said meta bending synergies, thus pushing fighters back up the power curve when they fly in squads. Thoughts?

Hey, I'm the dude that started the Squadrons for X-Wing thread, so you know I'm all in.

20 minutes ago, Luke C said:

Thats just not true though, go through a list of the top players in the game: Duncan Howard, Paul Heaver, Marcel Manzano, Phil Horny, Phillip Booth, etc... They are always seeming to be in the cut and be winning. Skill matters more than the list.

Last I checked they all fly meta lists. Sometimes to the point that they are the innovators of said list and and so are defining the meta. Their skill is what sets them apart from all of the people netlisting stuff and it's absolutely why they make the cut time and time again. But (when flying seriously) none of them are putting anything on the table that they don't consider the best of the best at that point in the game.

2 minutes ago, Makaze said:

Last I checked they all fly meta lists. Sometimes to the point that they are the innovators of said list and and so are defining the meta. Their skill is what sets them apart from all of the people netlisting stuff and it's absolutely why they make the cut time and time again. But (when flying seriously) none of them are putting anything on the table that they don't consider the best of the best at that point in the game.

sooo.. when you show up to a tournament, you might not be the same skill level as the guy across from you? You might have more or less practice? That's my point. Meta list or not, skill matters most.

Also Manzano got 2nd in Chicago with 3xJM and the cut at worlds. ALSO Booth won a regional with brobots. Not so much meta lists....