15 minutes ago, CosmicCastawayA90 said:

FFG would need to come up with its own officially promoted and sponsored game modes if X-Wing is going to have a chance at branching out for other types of content and victory conditions for competitive play.

Well....technically, there already are several "official" rule sets out there for something other than 100/6. There is Epic and Escalation Leagues. They have official rule formats, but I wouldn't necessarily say they are supported very much. You have the FFG prize pack that just gets thrown into 100/6 support. What I think could happen is that FFG came out with some missions that were rigorously play tested and designed. Then, they would have to make a push to support that specific format. You could have different prize packages for each format. You can even host them at different times of the year if that helped. Or...have them at the same time. When you go to Worlds, are you going to play in the Deathmatch or the Mission format? Personally, I think this would be the best way to make everyone happy. I think the only way it could be bad is if you have a small store and most of the players only like one way and the one or two other guys don't get to play the format they want. Those are probably extreme examples as most people have another store or enough people the could coax into a tournament to support both. I think it would help the longevity of X-wing overall. FFG could even track number of players at the different events to see which was more popular in the long run.

I'm actually going to speak to the guy at my local store and see if we can play a store kit with very slightly modified "mission-based" rules. These would be advertised ahead of time, so people can build for the mission if they choose to.

Namely this:

(1) Each player has a 2"x2" token representing the Maguffin.

(2) After ship placement, in init order, each player places his or her token in the starting area of his opponent.

(3) The token is not an obstacles, doesn't obstruct, and has zero effect on the game except the below.

(4) After the Cleanup Phase, each player checks each of his ships to see if it has that player's Maguffin in-arc. If it does, total the base number of attack dice and score that many points. (So if I have my token in-arc of two Z-95s and a VCX-100, I collect 8 points.)

(5) If any player scores 100 points in this fashion, that player wins. If both score at least 100 at the end of the same turn, the higher total wins the game.

(6) Killing ships count as points normally.

(7) MoV calculations include points scored for the Maguffin. (So it is possible to have a higher than normal MoV.)

I think this is a good experiment, because players can literally ignore the "mission rules," if they want to. It might put them at something of a disadvantage, but it's an option.

Anybody see any glaring problems with this? ("It's different than normal X-Wing scoring" doesn't count as a glaring problem.)

The discussion here is enlightening and healthy; props to the weavers. You guys are, by far, a very intelligent bunch.

I'm no game designer and I'm more of an idiot on most topics than anything close to an expert, but I was thinking....and that could be good or bad. I know that power creep in games is quite a standard thing, and probably cannot be designed out of a growing game once it begins. In addition, retro-fitting older, beloved ships (the ones that are old-school Star Wars and the heart of the game) to meet the new curve might not be a reasonable business process and would probably upset the apple cart and harming the game further. But the maddening increase in complexity might be something that can be curtailed or buffeted in regards to our beloved Star Wars ships and pilots. Yes, the following thoughts are my record of lucidity (or madness, depending on your definition): What if we defined those "powers" that have created the complexity and resulting power curve that has pushed the game away from its true core and calling and then set a blanket counter? What if, a new "simplifying mechanic" was created? I'm speaking of a new mechanic that allowed squads of highly trained and prepared fighters, when working in tandem, to disrupt, defeat or outright ignore these complex effects of the powerful crew members, ship abilities or crazy combinations, rendering them useless against these valiant fighter pilots and their stalwart wing-mates?

Yeah, yeah, I know....I'll go get another tea and get back to work.

'These are not the words you were looking for. You can go about your business. Move along.'

24 minutes ago, heychadwick said:

You have the FFG prize pack that just gets thrown into 100/6 support.

EDIT: I may have misunderstood the quoted sentence.

Technically, the standard prize pack can be dispersed through any sort of event. There's nothing special about them that makes them more important to 100/6 play. I had one such pack reserved for my own objective based event which Babaganoosh put a very big hole in... (technically, he just illuminated a problem I hadn't yet discovered and I've put things on hold until I find a finger large enough to push into the gap...) I'm still game for doing an objective based event or mission scenarios, I just need to rethink things to make it easier on the players.

In the meantime, I'm brushing the dust off the Death Star trench for the end of the month. I'm betting turnout is going to be higher that night...

4 minutes ago, LagJanson said:

EDIT: I may have misunderstood the quoted sentence.

Technically, the standard prize pack can be dispersed through any sort of event. There's nothing special about them that makes them more important to 100/6 play. I had one such pack reserved for my own objective based event which Babaganoosh put a very big hole in... (technically, he just illuminated a problem I hadn't yet discovered and I've put things on hold until I find a finger large enough to push into the gap...) I'm still game for doing an objective based event or mission scenarios, I just need to rethink things to make it easier on the players.

In the meantime, I'm brushing the dust off the Death Star trench for the end of the month. I'm betting turnout is going to be higher that night...

Ah, sorry for confusion. I think I'm coming down with something. Also, I wasn't sure about how the prize support was dished out.

I think when you have one prize box, it will always get put towards the 100/6 format. I think if you came out with a specific prize box for the mission oriented ones, then I think it would actually get played that way. You can also give out alt art cards that the mission crowd would love but the 100/6 people would hate. Some cards are better than others in different formats. This way you don't have to worry about which crowd got the alt art card.

1 hour ago, gamblertuba said:

Isn't this basically what Theorist does with the TC Open? Have not participated so I could be wrong.

If enough players get fed up with the current state of the game, I think the online community is going to see some level of adoption of either a ban-list or price adjustment.

Ya and this is where the fickleness of a "house rules" tournament comes in. I disliked a lot of Theorist's new rules (and it is especially irksome when he changes things once it gets to elimination rounds. I performed especially poorly anyways and didn't make the cut, so not like I should care anyways. lol), and I'm certain if I were to create a house rules tournament of my own, a strong number of players would roll their eyes at some of my decisions as well, even though I'm certain it would be perfect.

12 minutes ago, heychadwick said:

Ah, sorry for confusion. I think I'm coming down with something. Also, I wasn't sure about how the prize support was dished out.

I think when you have one prize box, it will always get put towards the 100/6 format. I think if you came out with a specific prize box for the mission oriented ones, then I think it would actually get played that way. You can also give out alt art cards that the mission crowd would love but the 100/6 people would hate. Some cards are better than others in different formats. This way you don't have to worry about which crowd got the alt art card.

Really depends on your store. My local stores do a lot of non-100/6 tournaments for store kits (outside of leadup to regionals, etc. Our last couple have been 100/6). We've done escalation a number of times. Hunger games, three amigos (1 ship from each faction, no large ships), various others. We do 100/6 as well, but usually change up the format every month from what we did the month before.

39 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

A speaking of a new mechanic that allowed squads of highly trained and prepared fighters, when working in tandem, to disrupt, defeat or outright ignore these complex effects of these powerful crew, ship abilities or combinations, rendering them useless against these valiant fighter pilots and their stalwart wing-mates?

Wow, it's like free advertising for my "Squadrons for X-Wing" thread!

56 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

Wow, it's like free advertising for my "Squadrons for X-Wing" thread!

Post the link, I'd love to read another twisted mind's ramblings...?

13 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

Post the link, I'd love to read another twisted mind's ramblings...?

Enjoy!

I love the mynock podcast. I wish the first 10 minutes of every episode was Dee, Dallas and Ryan rambling.... I mean waxing eloquently about off topics subjects. It is laugh out loud funny. Now as for burnout, I think the lack of store championships this winter is a big contributor. Going from worlds to regions with open series mixed in is/was brutal. Store champ season coming in the summer is going to be tough with kids, family, life. It sounds like Dee might be feeling a little fatigue. Therefore, all mynocks and fans of the show must help Dee remain strong and accomplish his life's mission. Make sure Ryan Farmer never wins a store championship! That's right if your at a store championship and you find yourself up against Ryan treat that game like the most important game of your life.?

Thanks for the show guys, keep up the good work.

Hi guys,

I posted a comment on the Mynock Squadron website, but thought I'd add my thoughts here as well, though it may cause a bit of a stir... I've been listening to you guys since the beginning, and while I'm still listening to this particular 'cast (State of X-Wing Address), I wanted to mention something that might help crystallize some of what you are feeling particularly in relation to castling/fortressing and the effect that has on the game.

I'll take a page from Dee's book and start on a tangent, then work back around to the point. I work in accounting, payroll in particular, so I've learned a thing or two about compensation. The purpose of it is to motivate desirable behaviours in employees, but sometimes this falls apart in the execution. An example of this was an anecdote from a South American country (can't remember where exactly) where the national bus/transit company was having issues with the way their drivers were doing their jobs. To motivate what they thought would be good behaviours, they completely revamped their compensation structure such that they were paid based on how many passengers they picked up and that they were able to get through their routes in good time. It sounds good on the surface, but the behaviour it motivated was for drivers to ignore less populous routes in favour of those that generally had more fares, to speed through their routes and drive aggressively to the point of competing with other drivers to get to the more heavily used stops, and in the interests of reaching those stops, not stopping at stops that only had a few fares waiting. The result was that some stops were over-worked while others rarely had a bus come by as well as an exceptionally high rate of traffic accidents. Before long the compensation structure was adjusted again to address these behaviours, but the moral of the story is people will do what you pay them to do, not necessarily what you want them to do.

Coming back to X-Wing, there are a number of behaviours that I don't care for in the game now, which you addressed in this episode, and I also have very fond memories of the wave 3 meta. However, at the end of the day, I can't blame players for playing in any manner that is within the rules as written by FFG. It isn't their fault if castling is their best option in a particular match, it is (and I say this with the utmost respect for FFG and the work they are doing to keep this game growing - as you said in this podcast, I'm only bitter because of how much I love the game) entirely due to the behaviours FFG is encouraging through the combination of ships, upgrades and rules. As I see it, the only ways to address the problems (to revise the compensation structure, as it were) are those you had mentioned: official tournaments with special rulesets that only allow certain waves or ban certain cards, further updates to the rules/FAQ/errata, and eventually X-Wing 2.0.

Thanks for making a great podcast.

I'll go grab my flame-retardant coat now...

On 2/13/2017 at 0:58 PM, heychadwick said:

You can even host them at different times of the year if that helped. Or...have them at the same time. When you go to Worlds, are you going to play in the Deathmatch or the Mission format? Personally, I think this would be the best way to make everyone happy. I think the only way it could be bad is if you have a small store and most of the players only like one way and the one or two other guys don't get to play the format they want. Those are probably extreme examples as most people have another store or enough people the could coax into a tournament to support both. I think it would help the longevity of X-wing overall. FFG could even track number of players at the different events to see which was more popular in the long run.

1

You're not wrong, splitting the community is always a risk with any game that has multiple modes. But I really agree with your view that in the end, it'd bring more people to play the game. Heck, why not have a game mode that is strictly Tie Fighters vs. X-Wings? I think that'd be a pretty awesome way to get newcomers like myself more involved in the game outside of playing with friends and family. A "vanilla" mode such as that would tick off a lot of the checkmarks regarding the issues people have with the game the way it is now:

*The ships are easily recognizable.

*Ties vs. X-Wings can be fairly balanced (depending on the numbers of Ties and X-Wings) and would give an easy way for players to learn the core concepts of the game.

*Fans of how the game was played in the past would have an avenue to officially play the two classic ships from Star Wars.

*Flight skill now has it's meaning restored.

*Those same fans of the earlier waves could now have a direct means of more easily teaching new players themselves, and potentially strengthen the community as a result.

*And finally, the game mode would put "X-Wing" back into X-Wing Miniatures.

This would essentially be X-Wing's version of Dust II. A game-mode that every knows, that a large audience is drawn to, that could stick around for decades.

On 2/13/2017 at 1:14 PM, clanofwolves said:

What if we defined those "powers" that have created the complexity and resulting power curve that has pushed the game away from its true core and calling and then set a blanket counter? What if, a new "simplifying mechanic" was created? I'm speaking of a new mechanic that allowed squads of highly trained and prepared fighters, when working in tandem, to disrupt, defeat or outright ignore these complex effects of the powerful crew members, ship abilities or crazy combinations, rendering them useless against these valiant fighter pilots and their stalwart wing-mates?

I like this concept as well, although maybe effects wouldn't have to be completely blocked, but surely some counters would be nice. Something like this might create more of the complexity that has resulted in the problems with the current state of the game. But if FFG is going to continue focusing on creating combos with squad building, and continue making the game feel like Yu-gi-Oh or any other card game, then some harder counters to the gimmicks in the meta should at least be implemented. That is the lowest bar they'd have to pass, and failing to do so may only lead to the state of the game becoming worse.

My two cents on this game and how to fix it right now. No changes to cards. Changes to rules

1) Whenever you move and overlap or bump another ship, you cannot gain any actions from friendly ships. Period. No Manaroo passing, no special cards that allow. No Evade for Defenders. No Mindlink. Fly Better!!!

2) Whenever you roll 4 or more attack dice with a Primary Weapon, all crits are turned to hits. Use the same rule as heavy laser cannon, so target locked re-rolls can be crits. However, you may choose to roll less than 4 dice for any PW attack.

3) Whenever you have 5 or more stress, all white maneuvers become red.

IMO - This makes the game more about maneuvering and flying better (What the developers want for the game) and less about throw dice or take free actions.

No cards are changed, just 2 simple rules and the game goes along way to being balanced again. Swarms would make a comeback also

1 hour ago, eagletsi111 said:

My two cents on this game and how to fix it right now. No changes to cards. Changes to rules

1) Whenever you move and overlap or bump another ship, you cannot gain any actions from friendly ships. Period. No Manaroo passing, no special cards that allow. No Evade for Defenders. No Mindlink. Fly Better!!!

2) Whenever you roll 4 or more attack dice with a Primary Weapon, all crits are turned to hits. Use the same rule as heavy laser cannon, so target locked re-rolls can be crits. However, you may choose to roll less than 4 dice for any PW attack.

3) Whenever you have 5 or more stress, all white maneuvers become red.

IMO - This makes the game more about maneuvering and flying better (What the developers want for the game) and less about throw dice or take free actions.

No cards are changed, just 2 simple rules and the game goes along way to being balanced again. Swarms would make a comeback also

If you can't beat ships as they are now, then it sounds like YOU need to fly better.

6 minutes ago, Luke C said:

If you can't beat ships as they are now, then it sounds like YOU need to fly better.

Its not about not being able to win, its about shifting the focus of the game because of enjoyment purposes.

2 minutes ago, Admiral Deathrain said:

Its not about not being able to win, its about shifting the focus of the game because of enjoyment purposes.

I enjoy the game as it is now. Why is your enjoyment more important than mine?

Just now, Luke C said:

I enjoy the game as it is now. Why is your enjoyment more important than mine?

It isn't, thats why its important to have this discussion, so multiple viewpoints can be explored - saying the other side of the argument is just salty because they can't win doesn't help with that in any way.

3 minutes ago, Luke C said:

I enjoy the game as it is now. Why is your enjoyment more important than mine?

I don't enjoy the game as it is now. Why is your enjoyment more important than mine?

1 minute ago, Admiral Deathrain said:

It isn't, thats why its important to have this discussion, so multiple viewpoints can be explored - saying the other side of the argument is just salty because they can't win doesn't help with that in any way.

I regret that I have but one like to give.

7 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

I don't enjoy the game as it is now. Why is your enjoyment more important than mine?

Exactly, 'Enjoyment' is not a good category for determining whether a game is good or not.

Are you ******* serious?!?!?!

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/game

Enjoyment is the PRIMARY category for determining whether a game is good or not. That's ******* sociopathic. Are you mentally ill?

1 hour ago, eagletsi111 said:

My two cents on this game and how to fix it right now. No changes to cards. Changes to rules

1) Whenever you move and overlap or bump another ship, you cannot gain any actions from friendly ships. Period. No Manaroo passing, no special cards that allow. No Evade for Defenders. No Mindlink. Fly Better!!!

2) Whenever you roll 4 or more attack dice with a Primary Weapon, all crits are turned to hits. Use the same rule as heavy laser cannon, so target locked re-rolls can be crits. However, you may choose to roll less than 4 dice for any PW attack.

3) Whenever you have 5 or more stress, all white maneuvers become red.

IMO - This makes the game more about maneuvering and flying better (What the developers want for the game) and less about throw dice or take free actions.

No cards are changed, just 2 simple rules and the game goes along way to being balanced again. Swarms would make a comeback also

4

Your first two points may be a bit too harsh, but the third suggestion regarding stress having more of an effect might be the better way to go.

For your first suggestion, I don't think that the mistake of one ship would or should affect other friendly ships in the way you've suggested. If average players do start learning to fly more effectively, then this rule would become useless for all but newcomers. Those newcomers might simply feel cheated and quit the game altogether, as opposed to encouraging them to improve through taking calculated risks.

The second suggestion might not be a bad idea if applied to particular ships in order to balance out their damage, but again, this might be too cheap of a rule to implement and might have a similar effect to your first suggestion.

The third suggestion is something I can get behind, perhaps not in the exact format you provided, but making ship stress more of a factor would be a good way to encourage better piloting. I feel this idea holds the most merit out of the ones you suggested because it fits into the game's risk-taking gameplay. Overworking your ship could cause potential for your ship to fly out of control, lose power, or maybe take damage. Thematically this makes sense, and mechanically it means the stress tokens may not become so easy to remove should you push your ship past its limits.

8 minutes ago, Luke C said:

Exactly, 'Enjoyment' is not a good category for determining whether a game is good or not.

Enjoyment is actually a very good category for determining if a game is good. It's the reason most people play games in the first place. However, the vast majority of people who have posted a comment on this thread have stated good reasons why they aren't getting the enjoyment from X-Wing that they used to get. Others have also said that they are still enjoying the game, and have given their own reasons why they believe this. Enjoyment on its own may not the most descriptive way to tell if a game is good, but listing reasons for enjoyment or lack of enjoyment is a very important way to help a game improve. If you don't feel bothered by any of the game's new mechanics that have upset others, then why are you commenting on this thread in the first place?

17 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

Are you ******* serious?!?!?!

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/game

Enjoyment is the PRIMARY category for determining whether a game is good or not. That's ******* sociopathic. Are you mentally ill?

well thats a little mean. If I am mentally ill, how do you feel now?


There are lots of games I don't find enjoyable. I don't play them, or I house rule them. What I don't do is go on a forum and whine and complain, hoping that the developers will change the game for me.

23 minutes ago, Luke C said:

What I don't do is go on a forum and whine and complain, hoping that the developers will change the game for me.

In truth, there are 8 pages of great ideas, and civil discourse about the state of the game right now. Then, you showed up.