18 minutes ago, BlodVargarna said:

I'm missing something here. What's the point of bringing up the quadjumper?

Well

"I don't agree. At zero points for a double tap attack, its brutal and undercosted."

Is giving value to a title in the vacuum and not in reference at the ship assigned to it.
0 points for a double attack title surely would be brutal and undercosted in a TIE/f, but not in a HWK290.
In a 31-35 ship as overcosted as was the defender prior the fix?

So, to illustrate better the thing, I do the same with a pilot skill of other ship, one that would be completely broken in other ship. To made an example evento more extreme.

Reductio ad absurdum they call it.

49 minutes ago, Doppelganger said:

As for Fel: who cares what he is equipped with, in the sample he was picked 0 times.

OK, so your sample isn't representative of the game as a whole then, and as such it would be foolish to base any potential fixes or nerfs on it as it doesn't take into account relative power levels throughout the game. The sample is flawed, the conclusions which follow are equally flawed, and so it can be safely ignored.

Man, it's crazy how the Punishing One expansion introduced so many tournament dominating cards. Contracted Scout, Dengar pilot, Manaroo, Attani Mindlink, Overclocked R4...

Feels like the meta since Wave 8 has been based around countering stuff from Punishing One, even after the nerfs to U-Boats.

2 hours ago, FTS Gecko said:

Crackshot Black squadrons.

XX-23 Blount Homing Missle Z95 swarms.

Snapshot A-Wings.

Five. Cartel. Marauders.

I know crack blacks has done well a few times. Havent seen the others doing that well though.

8 hours ago, thespaceinvader said:

...

A policy of active and effective errata should be, including fiddling with point values.

...

WOn't happen though. FFG have repeatedly shown that this kind of errata isn't something they're interested in except in the most extreme cases (i.e. U Boats).

Thing is adjusting point values, stats, and other pen & ink changes via errata makes the game rather hard to keep track off since it is all physical print medium. When the pen and ink changes are merely for correction and clarification purposes it is easy because in reinstates how the card was intended to work which can be derived from the cards original text. But as far as sake for balance you can end up with way too many changes to keep track of. Right now there were 3 pen & ink changes for balancing purposes in standard. Tactician had restricted added to it, deadeye had small ship only. and the Heavy Scyk title Your Hull Value is increased By 1. Still if we start to get more of these balance pen & ink changes it will start to cause confusion as most people look to the card and not FAQs or emails for such event.s

Most people like the fact that X-wing doesn't require a library to play the game by the rules (unlike some table top games).

2 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

Thing is adjusting point values, stats, and other pen & ink changes via errata makes the game rather hard to keep track off since it is all physical print medium. When the pen and ink changes are merely for correction and clarification purposes it is easy because in reinstates how the card was intended to work which can be derived from the cards original text. But as far as sake for balance you can end up with way too many changes to keep track of. Right now there were 3 pen & ink changes for balancing purposes in standard. Tactician had restricted added to it, deadeye had small ship only. and the Heavy Scyk title Your Hull Value is increased By 1. Still if we start to get more of these balance pen & ink changes it will start to cause confusion as most people look to the card and not FAQs or emails for such event.s

Most people like the fact that X-wing doesn't require a library to play the game by the rules (unlike some table top games).

I think X-wing is approaching the limit of what can feasibly be maintained without more pen & ink changes. I have argued in the past (and gotten shouted down strongly) that the game would be better served if it embraced digital squad building aids and allowed for straight up point changes. Those changes would need to be used sparingly and altered no more than twice a year with plenty of warning before they became official. I am curious what percentage of players do NOT use an electronic aid to create squads.

3 hours ago, BlodVargarna said:

(/7 at -2 points btw is a joke, compare it to Chaardan it is laughably imbalanced).

Actually, no. It works out when you do the math. The loss of the missle slot is worth -2, as shown by chardaan. That means the free evade token it being paid for by loss of the cannon slot, the use of the title slot, and the speed requirement.

1 minute ago, SabineKey said:

Actually, no. It works out when you do the math. The loss of the missle slot is worth -2, as shown by chardaan. That means the free evade token it being paid for by loss of the cannon slot, the use of the title slot, and the speed requirement.

Poppycock. Chardaan is same price and you get -2 from your squad points total. /7 you get -2 AND the free token shenanigans.

1 minute ago, BlodVargarna said:

Poppycock. Chardaan is same price and you get -2 from your squad points total. /7 you get -2 AND the free token shenanigans.

But you are giving up more on the Defender. Chardaan takes away the A-Wing's missle slot for -2 points and uses the missle slot to do so. x7 requires you to give up two slots by using a third. As I explained in the first post, the missle slot being axed can account for the -2 price, while the other two slots being given up plus the speed condition can equal the evade. You can argue the cost isn't enough for the benefit (I disagree) but the pricing checks out when compared to chaardon due to what is being axed.

Nothing. Targeting specific combos with the Restricted List is the way to go, imo.

2 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

But you are giving up more on the Defender. Chardaan takes away the A-Wing's missle slot for -2 points and uses the missle slot to do so. x7 requires you to give up two slots by using a third. As I explained in the first post, the missle slot being axed can account for the -2 price, while the other two slots being given up plus the speed condition can equal the evade. You can argue the cost isn't enough for the benefit (I disagree) but the pricing checks out when compared to chaardon due to what is being axed.

I do disagree. I think if you look at the EFFECTS of the title compared to the EFFECTS of the Chardaan refit, its clearly imbalanced and an excellent example of power creep.

Just now, BlodVargarna said:

I do disagree. I think if you look at the EFFECTS of the title compared to the EFFECTS of the Chardaan refit, its clearly imbalanced and an excellent example of power creep.

And that's where I must pull the "disagree" flag. I see the effects of x7 as mathematically paid for, especially with Chardaan in mind. More is paid, therefore more should be given in return.

I had a weird thought ...

What if Palpatine was inversely range-limited? That is, what if Palpatine only worked on ships beyond Range 3 of his ride?

Thematically, this represents Palpatine's influence being over a wide-ranging battle, with self-preservation and fear coming into play when he's in actual danger.

Mechanically, this means that in order to get full benefit from the Emperor, they need to leave the Emperor somewhat vulnerable.

I'm not one who personally thinks Palpatine is so OP he must be nerfed, but if he is nerfed, this seems like a really interesting and power-appropriate way to do it.

1 minute ago, Jeff Wilder said:

I had a weird thought ...

What if Palpatine was inversely range-limited? That is, what if Palpatine only worked on ships beyond Range 3 of his ride?

Thematically, this represents Palpatine's influence being over a wide-ranging battle, with self-preservation and fear coming into play when he's in actual danger.

Mechanically, this means that in order to get full benefit from the Emperor, they need to leave the Emperor somewhat vulnerable.

I'm not one who personally thinks Palpatine is so OP he must be nerfed, but if he is nerfed, this seems like a really interesting and power-appropriate way to do it.

While I too don't think Palp needs nerfing, that is a more interesting way to place limitations on him, if it was ever decided that he needed it.

1 hour ago, gamblertuba said:

I think X-wing is approaching the limit of what can feasibly be maintained without more pen & ink changes. I have argued in the past (and gotten shouted down strongly) that the game would be better served if it embraced digital squad building aids and allowed for straight up point changes. Those changes would need to be used sparingly and altered no more than twice a year with plenty of warning before they became official. I am curious what percentage of players do NOT use an electronic aid to create squads.

Didn't GW started the whole Digital Codex thing where you need an Ipad? This is like the old Xbox 1 always online DRM. Also the main reason why I dropped out from GW. (I can no longer get all the codexes that were being printed out because not all of them were being printed).

Thing about X-wing not all X-wing player have Ipads. But all X-wing players do have cards and models. You can't be treating table top games like video games and visa versa. Sure the digital format can simulate the table top format but should be used only for that, simulating the table top not replacing it.

Now is the design space crowded, yeah, it is a little crowded with all the different ship types. Most of the factions are starting to get 2 different variations of all the classic ship roles with the later often (but not always) being the better one. Still X-wing is a table top game with enough peripherals but all of those peripherals come from the core set and expansions. Last thing you need is an Ipad requirement for X-wing.

21 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

And that's where I must pull the "disagree" flag. I see the effects of x7 as mathematically paid for, especially with Chardaan in mind. More is paid, therefore more should be given in return.

I've never heard of a "disagree" flag.

The concept of squad building is based around points, each thing (and its effects) in the game being worth something right? So If you look at what Chardaan is actually worth to the game in terms of its effect on the game, it is no where near the same as /7. There's imbalance all over this points system and that you refuse to recognize that seems counterproductive to discussion.

In an ideal points allocation taking everything into effect (NOT including driving up sales of new releases) 100 points of virtually any list should be able to defeat any other 100 points. This is not the case in X Wing Miniatures.

24 minutes ago, BlodVargarna said:

I do disagree. I think if you look at the EFFECTS of the title compared to the EFFECTS of the Chardaan refit, its clearly imbalanced and an excellent example of power creep.

Chardaan Refit is a is about a 12% price reduction to the base cost of the A-Wing. /X7 is just under a 7% price reduction in the base cost of the TIE Defender.

When comparing Chardaan Refit to the /X7 title, you should also factor in the benefits of the A-Wing Test Pilot title (on all but the Prototype Pilot).

You also can't really directly compare the cost of a fixes for ships and expect it to come out the same for each ship. If the A-Wing received a point adjustment that was the equivalent to how overpriced the TIE Defender was, we'd be flying around 12-13 point Prototype A-Wings.

8 minutes ago, BlodVargarna said:

I've never heard of a "disagree" flag.

The concept of squad building is based around points, each thing (and its effects) in the game being worth something right? So If you look at what Chardaan is actually worth to the game in terms of its effect on the game, it is no where near the same as /7. There's imbalance all over this points system and that you refuse to recognize that seems counterproductive to discussion.

In an ideal points allocation taking everything into effect (NOT including driving up sales of new releases) 100 points of virtually any list should be able to defeat any other 100 points. This is not the case in X Wing Miniatures.

Yeah, the "disagree" flag was a weird reference to a penalty flag. It was something that popped into my head at time of writing and I ran with it. Not one of my best made up terms.

So, you are right on the surface. The Chardaan Refit does do less then x7. But you keep forgetting or ignoring the fact that the x7 title takes more from the Defender then Chardaan does from the A-Wing. Don't bring in the point system until you consider what affects the price.

Let's take an alternate direction to view this from. The Heavy Scyk title (pre-buff) gives a either a missle, torpedo, or cannon slot for 2 points. This matches the Chardaan Refit's negative cost to remove a missle slot. So, that means if we remove the evade part of the x7 title, it should cost -4. See? The x7 gives up 4 points of slots for the benefits it enjoys, plus the opportunity cost of using the title slot, and the speed requirement. Where as the A-wing only has to give up a third of that for half the benefits.

The counterproductive part of this is that you are only saying I'm wrong, but you aren't touching my formula. So it's on you. Why is my formula wrong? Are you saying a cannon slot is worthless? That opportunity costs doesn't exist. You aren't countering my points, just trying to bury them in surface points without seeing how they strengthen my argument.

What IS an evade token a turn worth anyway? It's kind of a reusable Shield Upgrade, so what do we reckon... 3x Shield Upgrade cost? 4x? 10x?

6 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

What IS an evade token a turn worth anyway? It's kind of a reusable Shield Upgrade, so what do we reckon... 3x Shield Upgrade cost? 4x? 10x?

And one in which the opposing player is powerless to stop (i.e. you cannot block the defender to deny the action)

17 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

What IS an evade token a turn worth anyway? It's kind of a reusable Shield Upgrade, so what do we reckon... 3x Shield Upgrade cost? 4x? 10x?

I'm not sure how FFG actually does it, but if we continue using other cards as evidence, then the TIE/v1 title indicates that it costs one point, with a prerequisite condition for the token. The x7 also does that plus an extra point for a somewhat less limiting prerequisite.

32 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

What IS an evade token a turn worth anyway? It's kind of a reusable Shield Upgrade, so what do we reckon... 3x Shield Upgrade cost? 4x? 10x?

Oh, follow up thought. Even if you disagree with the v1 analogy, the free evade a turn x7 give would only be up at 4, due to similarities to R2-D2.

R2 is a good comparison though /x7 is better in a couple of key regards - the Defender gets better options for the Evade than R2 gives in green moves, and Evade prevents damage up front so better vs lethal damage.

4 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

R2 is a good comparison though /x7 is better in a couple of key regards - the Defender gets better options for the Evade than R2 gives in green moves, and Evade prevents damage up front so better vs lethal damage.

Fair points, but r2 is more versatile. He can go on four different ships while the x7 is limited to one ship type. Also, while I think the number of evade negating cards is roughly equal to the amount of shield ignoring cards, the anti-evade tricks are generally easier to use/get to work.

15 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

R2 is a good comparison though /x7 is better in a couple of key regards - the Defender gets better options for the Evade than R2 gives in green moves, and Evade prevents damage up front so better vs lethal damage.

The evade token isn't always the equivalent to a point of health. Weapons that cancel results on hit (like TLT) or do damage without requiring defense dice to be rolled make evade tokens less effective than health.