Just now, Marinealver said:

According to a lot of people X-wing was broken by Wave 2

And then Broken when the phantom came out.

Things will change. They always do. Trying to balance the game is like trying to balance a needle. Extremely difficult. I do agree that some large ships shouldn't have an agility of two while some fighters have an agility of one.

Ive said it before, there's more players than play testers and we have some truly evil geniuses playing this game. Just look at what was flown at Worlds Finals the last four years as an example of changes in the meta.

If FFG thinks large based ships are getting out of hand you know they will introduce a new upgrade or change a game mechanic to balance things out. The sky is not falling. It's only the shadow of a large based ship.

What about...

Heavy Bombs
Torpedo, Torpedo
Attack: 4, Range: -

Attack: Discard this card to perform this attack against a large ship at range 1, or a huge ship at range 1-2 (even ships that your are touching).
The defender treats its agility as 0.

4 minutes ago, Azrapse said:

What about...

Heavy Bombs
Torpedo, Torpedo
Attack: 4, Range: -

Attack: Discard this card to perform this attack against a large ship at range 1, or a huge ship at range 1-2 (even ships that your are touching).
The defender treats its agility as 0.

Two things that bother me about that:

1. The card is useless if your opponent has no large ships. It should probably work like Autothrusters or Tractor Beam and have an enhanced effect in the right circumstances. Otherwise, it needs to be extremely cheap.

2. Something that completely negates agility makes the high HP, low agility large ships much more attractive. I don't really think the Decimator and Ghost need that boost over other large ships.

29 minutes ago, Azrapse said:

What about...

Heavy Bombs
Torpedo, Torpedo
Attack: 4, Range: -

Attack: Discard this card to perform this attack against a large ship at range 1, or a huge ship at range 1-2 (even ships that your are touching).
The defender treats its agility as 0.

whats the use case for this? Is this better than proton torps? Its good against Shadowcasters and JM3k and Dash, but it doesn't really solve anything. especially requiring 2 torp slots.

Yes, because Large Ships have not been a major staple in the meta since Wave 2...

What is in the internet water recently? The whining seems to be at an all time high, and over inane things.

4 hours ago, WWHSD said:

Those are both way over the top.

I hope that 6 dice attack dice with no way to defend against never makes it into the game, even if it targets a specific type of ship. Most large ships would be destroyed by two of those, one of them could take out an Aggressor if you got lucky with crits.

The Infiltrator Missile will discourage low hull, and low agility small ships at least as much as it does large ships. If you want to see even more Defenders and Palp Aces on tables this is a way to do it.

They are definitely from the hip concepts, but I think the concept is the important point.

1 hour ago, Luke C said:

whats the use case for this? Is this better than proton torps? Its good against Shadowcasters and JM3k and Dash, but it doesn't really solve anything. especially requiring 2 torp slots.

It definitely gives some torp torp ships a niche.

What would a large ship point tax do? If one would help, a set extra cost? Or a percent?

BEING a large ship was suppose to be the tax to begin with, but for some reason as the game developed there became more benefits to being large than detriments.

5 hours ago, Vineheart01 said:

Werent Aggressors given large base because FFG was afraid they'd be brutal as small?

Current cost i kinda feel the same way. 36pts for an 8hp 3agi ship with the shenanigans they got? Not even defenders have that much going for them.

Though i still wish they were ~30pts base and the title cost 4-6pts. I really, really dont like them because they feel like "bring a pair or bust!" to me.

Aggressors were mostly given a Large base so they could justify charging so much for such a simple model. (I mean, it is a really simple model.) Balance was also a factor, yeah, but they could have simply upped the price by a couple of points and made them Small.

Aggressors were at the front of the power curve when they came out, for sure. Now? They're "pretty good."

They really are "play two or why bother," though. I did very well with IG-88B and Boba Fett at Regionals a couple of years ago, but those days are over. Competitiveness requires getting the Title in play.

3 hours ago, Sithborg said:

Yes, because Large Ships have not been a major staple in the meta since Wave 2...

What is in the internet water recently? The whining seems to be at an all time high, and over inane things.

There have been a long drought of news recently so people are looking for other things to talk about. Most of the time this leads back to people bringing up their personal gripe list. FFG please give us some news before we start tearing everything apart!

A somewhat simple solution which draws the average small ship closer to the synergies of the larger is conditions on how damage would be dealt. to make it universal makes no sense, but i'm all for the inclusion of more missiles and torpedoes,

so what if all ships firing a torpedo or missile simply got to roll 1 extra die when attacking larger ships?

Re: JumpMaster5000 - I keep telling everyone the solution was to swap point totals with the Rebels' severely outclassed ships. Drop the Outer Rim Smuggler to 25, the Wild Space Fringer to 27, and raise the Contracted Scout to 30. You can even undo the Deadeye nerf, because what are you going to win with 3 Scouts with a single Flechette Torpedo each? Plus, people might actually play the WSF and the ORS: 4x ORS could be decent, but certainly not overpowered, since it has no action economy and no upgrades, save "Chopper" on one ship.

Re: +1 die to Missiles and Torpedoes against Large ships - I like it because it's a very simple change, and doesn't really push the power of ordnance too far since it doesn't affect 72% of the field.

5 minutes ago, ObiWonka said:

Re: JumpMaster5000 - I keep telling everyone the solution was to swap point totals with the Rebels' severely outclassed ships. Drop the Outer Rim Smuggler to 25, the Wild Space Fringer to 27, and raise the Contracted Scout to 30. You can even undo the Deadeye nerf, because what are you going to win with 3 Scouts with a single Flechette Torpedo each? Plus, people might actually play the WSF and the ORS: 4x ORS could be decent, but certainly not overpowered, since it has no action economy and no upgrades, save "Chopper" on one ship.

Re: +1 die to Missiles and Torpedoes against Large ships - I like it because it's a very simple change, and doesn't really push the power of ordnance too far since it doesn't affect 72% of the field.

The Contracted Scout is not worth 30 points. The solution to a ship being really common in the meta is NOT to make it useless. And since the deadeye nerf Scouts have all but disappeared from the meta. http://meta-wing.com/pilots/182?large_tournament_multiplier=true&widespread_use_multiplier=true&use_ranking_data=all&ranking_start=2016-12-15&ranking_end=2017-02-15&tournament_type=& Only 43 contracted scouts, compared to, say, 325 Countess Ryads. Or 281 Fenn Raus.

Hell, even Braylen Stramm, who people were just complaining about being the same cost as the scout while the scout was "better in every way" has been used 44 times.

Maybe Large base ships should have its own, different, activation phase. Like it happens with Epic ships.

40 minutes ago, VanderLegion said:

The Contracted Scout is not worth 30 points. The solution to a ship being really common in the meta is NOT to make it useless. And since the deadeye nerf Scouts have all but disappeared from the meta. http://meta-wing.com/pilots/182?large_tournament_multiplier=true&widespread_use_multiplier=true&use_ranking_data=all&ranking_start=2016-12-15&ranking_end=2017-02-15&tournament_type=& Only 43 contracted scouts, compared to, say, 325 Countess Ryads. Or 281 Fenn Raus.

Hell, even Braylen Stramm, who people were just complaining about being the same cost as the scout while the scout was "better in every way" has been used 44 times.

The contracted Scout has weaker stats than the Wild Space Fringer. I would severely counsel against implying it should cost the most out of the lot of 'em.

Attempts to make Large ships limited to one per game would make Brobots, if nothing else, pretty peeved.

Large ships are meant to be powerful, but there are other factors at work for the immediate moment, too. We must be cautious not to overestimate things, lest we swing too hard in the other direction.

59 minutes ago, Reiver said:

The contracted Scout has weaker stats than the Wild Space Fringer. I would severely counsel against implying it should cost the most out of the lot of 'em.

By "weaker stats" do you mean -1 Shield? Because the Contracted Scout gains:

• +1 PS
• an EPT
• an arguably better dial, including a white turn-around
• 2 additional upgrade slots, after putting Snuggling Compartments on the WSF

If anything, I could see it as break-even. But definitely not "severely against" costing the most...

To me most of the miscosting seems to come from dials and pilot abilities (e.g. Manaroo) rather than from base stats and PS. Some of the large ships should cost more, I'm not sure if any should actually be less. Cost corrections can be done, but it is a blunt method that game co's rarely use. Instead we get endless tweaking with a resulting domino effect.

Besides cost corrections a few things to consider:

• Boost should either cost less for small and/or more for large (say 3 & 5 pts) or should move Lg ships less (distance of a Sm base)
• 2 tractor tokens should be able to move a Lg ship the distance of a SM base. They just need to define an official method to execute the movement (also TBs should be able to move ships backward, not just fwd or sideways)

1 minute ago, Cpt Hellcat said:

Cost corrections can be done, but it is a blunt method that game co's rarely use. Instead we get endless tweaking with a resulting domino effect.

There's a very legitimate reason for that. It's one thing to tell someone who's just rocked up to your store tournament that their list functions a little differently due to errata but they can still play; it's quite another to say their list is [X] points over due to errata and they can't play unless they completely rebuild it.

Large ships use the Huge ship movement template. Simple. All those pancakes become wallowing pigs while all the starfighters dance around them.

too bad the energy rules were t used for the large ships as well, it would make them very different beasts.

5 hours ago, MenaceNsobriety said:

There have been a long drought of news recently so people are looking for other things to talk about. Most of the time this leads back to people bringing up their personal gripe list. FFG please give us some news before we start tearing everything apart!

I think it's also that the game is feeling less and less balanced to many players. The level of complexity makes it difficult to put your finger on EXACTLY what the issue is so people are lashing out at anything and everything. They're not necessarily wrong, but restoring balance to the force is trickier than "nerf X"

Honestly, although I really hated large ships around waves 5-6 when fat turrets, super dash, and brobots were everywhere. Now I can tolerate them a bit more, it's often the small ships (mainly aces) that bug me more. High agility with multiple tokens and often auto thrusters and/or palp. What a nightmare, and that's assuming you can get shots on them if they don't outmaneuver you first.

Is funny that 2 of the most powerful lists of this meta are fully small ships (3 Defenders AND 3 K-Wing, probably the last one is The List), and that all of those top large ships lists works thanks by SMALL SHIPS.

Kanan is great thanks to Biggs.

Paratanni first enemy? Fenn Rau.

Fennaroo? The 2 little Aces.

Palpaces? The Aces.

Without the Dengaroo (which is a list that is going down, replaced by Paratanni), all the top lists still works thanks by small ships.

Plus, this is StarWars! The main ship of the show IS a large ship. Why I have to complain that large ships are commons? They are here since ever. PalpAces is here since the beginning (nearly), Scums? BroBots. Rebels? Han/Chew/Dash.

Or we prefer the 4Y meta? Brrrr...

Well when taking a look at large based ship they are not the MOV vaults that they used to be but they still have some MOV loss mitigation. A Z-95/TIE Fighter which doesn't give any points until its dead gives at a minimum 12 points for MOV. A Lambda shuttle without shields gives 10.5 points (and a U-wing is 11.5 points). Also any upgrade could be split in half for MOV. A Engine Upgrade on a dead Z-95 is a full 3 points making it a 12 point kill. A Lambda with EU that lost all shields is only 12 points. Sure it is not dead but when counting Large ships like 2 ships they do give out less MOV points than a small ship of equivalent value.