The game is fine, it's this FORUM that needs a fix. It's entirely too easy for people to post their 'opinions' on here. That's crap! Follow the meta or DIE! (From your friendly neighborhood 100/6 Nazi)

@joe: Xanadu Blood forever!

I think part of that issue is what constitutes a "fix". Rarely are people opposed to custom content, homebrew or theorycrafting about the game (unless it gets crazy everywhere - but we'll talk about saturation in a second). That can be neat. However, many "fix" threads are often trying to "correct" the game in direct ways, often with sweeping rules changes, unguided or untested mechanical implementations or just outright adjustments to the nature of the game to follow their vision specifically (and occasionally **** everybody else who plays). These are not additive, but many are based around removal or restriction. If you're playing with your toys just fine, and somebody comes along and says "hey, for the health of the game, no more dumptrucks" but you're perfectly fine with how you play now and enjoy dumptruck play, or can play around dumptrucks this would be kind of annoying. Who is this clown who says he knows better than you to ban dumptrucks from the sandbox? Obviously, the other side might feel similarly to people telling them "hey, relax, it'll be fine" because clearly dumptrucks are ruining everything - but from a constructive perspective "just be cool and let it pass" is less restrictive and invasive.

And then there's saturation. One can only read so many X-wing fix threads before you see all the ideas. I say this as a person who has liked some "T-65 Fix" ideas, and would gladly try them - but that doesn't mean I haven't seen them a bunch of times. Repeatedly. With the same or similar ideas from different people who often act like they thought of it first. It wearies people, especially those who have no investment in the concept. Same for rules "fixes". If you're just minding your own business, it gets tiring to hear people exclaim "I don't like that Manaroo we need to restrict her range" over and over again until you're like "man, enough, I heard you all the first ****ing 10 times". People obviously have the ability to express their opinions, and in some cases repeated, collective expression can help affect desired change. But that means the other side also has the right to express their opinion that people need to stop saying the same thing over and over again. Just because you have a free platform to speak doesn't mean you should use it all the time.

15 minutes ago, UnitOmega said:

Who is this clown who says he knows better than you to ban dumptrucks from the sandbox?

The only thing I'm worried about in the sandbox is cat poo. YIck.

I love flying my X-wings in tournaments. Luke is so much fun. I especially love it when he gets blown up by that Jumpmast ship I don't know much about without fail every single game I play. I'm a little confused as to why Luke dies to Palpatine - didn't Luke win in the movies?

In all seriousness, I don't care so much that certain ships are a tad under powered, because that's the reality of complex games. I talk with my opponents before casual games to coordinate what we want out of them - a casual game with fun lists or a serious game with our most recent tournament builds. Where it gets painful is in tournaments, where it's entirely impossible to coordinate with all your potential opponents to not bring internet lists. Invariably someone will bring an internet list, take easy victories and get $50 + in prizes while the casual players get trinkets.

I like to win, and I like X-wings. Why can't I have both?

9 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

Um, you missed the OP's point entirely. He is saying exactly the opposite. He said that if you are not a WAAC kind of player (as you obviously are), then bring what you like, and do your best to beat the local meta with the ships you like to play . He's not even suggesting the meta will change, he's not forcing you to play sub-optimal ships, and heck, since you will probably crush his fun x-wing list with your WAAC net list, your bloated ego oughta do quite well in his scenario.

I'm thinking you're the one who's missing something, bub. I said right in my post that I could have taken a netlist to the tournament, but I designed something else that was still strong. So how am I a "Win At All Cost" player? Bloated ego? You're just trying to insult for no reason now?

The OP specifically says it's a GAME and something we PLAY and that the fix is to diminish competitiveness. Sorry, but some people don't feel that way.

I don't even know why I'm even attempting to argue with an obvious scummy troll, though. You're now just another name on my mute list.

I agree there is player onus to make the game fun. But the expectation of a hot fix from FFG when 1 list is winning 80% of the system open and 1 realitivily obscure in the lore ship has taken worlds and 100% of competitive play by storm is reasonable...

...as is wanting half of your ships to be viable without house rules.

But agreed. Stop trying to play for worlds at the FLGS and create a local meta that's about creativity not "to the death cage matches".

40 minutes ago, mkevans80 said:

I don't even know why I'm even attempting to argue with an obvious scummy troll, though.

Me neither, but it's not because of your superego.

no.

A tournament meta: I played in a Regional tournament yesterday (at Stockton, in England). It was fun and almost everyone ( my 2nd round opponent lost to dice and got fed up ) had a lot of fun in almost every game I played and observed.

The 'meta':

I took Norra, Braylen & Biggs. ( Went 4-2, 22nd out of about 120 starters. Smug but lost one game by poor flying )

I played against: 4 x Blue Squadron T-70s; Ketsu + Assaj; Han & Jake (Jack Mooney!); Corran + Miranda; 3x Contracted Scouts (only one had a torp); 4 x Thug Y-Wings TLT.

I saw a lot of non-standard lists around the room, with slightly more scum and rebels than Imperials.

The top 16 featured:

5 lots of Parattanni; 2 x Triple Defenders; double Defenders + OL; Kenkirk + Vader; RAC + Jax; 2 x Biggs, Kanan, Zeb; Han + Jake Farrell; Chewie, Ahsoka, Airen Cracken; Quad Thug-TLT; Miranda + Poe.

That seems to me to a pretty healthy spread of lists, with even the top players bringing a mix of different things. I think that the Quad Y-Wings won in the final against Han & Jake, but it hasn't been comfirmed yet.

On 3/4/2017 at 2:04 PM, MarekMandalore said:

The "fix" for X-wing is to diminish the competitiveness with which we approach it

That's fine for random games at your LGS or something. But when people play the game for the sake of the competition it's not an answer to the problem.

What really needs to happen is for people to accept that not everyone plays the game for the same reason. Some play it for the sake of pushing starfighters around and going pew pew, others play it because they enjoy a hard earned win.

Saying that you shouldn't be so competitive is no better and no more helpful than saying you should just get better at the game.

On 3/4/2017 at 5:12 PM, iamfanboy said:

The main complaint isn't the lack of alternatives or balance. Both of them are addressed by playing alternate formats: Heroes of the Aturi Cluster, Mario Kart (or Kessel Kup as I prefer), home-made ban lists, or a focus on Epic.

The main complaint underlying everything else is that Fantasy Flight Games itself has no apparent interest in supporting or creating alternatives to 100/6 - aside from Epic, which is an upsell rather than a real alternate format.

Because of that lack of alternatives, everything that FFG creates and has created is judged against the only standard that the company itself endorses: 100/6.

On top of that **** sundae is the crap cherry that FFG's design standard itself has shifted over the past five years, and the ships that people remember most fondly from the actual movies are obsolete by 100/6 standards. Is Countdown really the same value as a PS2 X-Wing? REALLY?

From a purely mechanical standpoint, the game is fine - it's getting more and more complicated, it's true, but that happens and the small scale of the matches means that you don't have a lot to remember if you bump across something new and weird. The cost of the game isn't expensive compared to many other wargames I've played.

But from a thematic standpoint of a Star Wars game where people want to see Wedge Antilles and Chewbacca fighting off a TIE horde, or skillfully pilot an A-Wing into the six of an Interceptor and ride it until it goes down in flames, or pit Slave 1 against Darth Vader? It's an utter failure, and getting worse all the time.

There are ways to correct that. But there's no corporate will to do so.

so what would the game based on if not 100/6? Every game needs a "standard" format to begin somewhere. And if you look at the little side missions, those aren't all straight up 100/6 either. It's nice to have the freedom to play however you want, which is why we get such good fan creations like HOTAC and dagobah dave's trench run. We don't exactly need an official FFG blessing when we have such good fan content creators. (Although one would be welcome, especially given the campaign box for armada. it would do wonders to have a good one for X-wing.) So there's basically not a reason for FFG to branch out.

As for thematics, you are free to fly whatever you like as long as you and your opponent both agree on the pre-existing rules condition and are met by your squad. There's nothing in the handbook saying "must play 100 points" (well except for official tournaments, again going back to that baseline standard.) for every match. And the hard truth, not every point of star wars is a thematic moment, especially dogfighting. You see Vader kill a Y-wing in one burst, gameplay wise that's at least 2 rounds of shooting at range 1 + ATC assuming your opponent rolls blanks and you roll all hits/crits/focus with a token. This is difficult to do when playing the trench senario, now try doing that with K-turns and barrel rolls and boost and other moves thrown in. (So let's make all dials the same and remove K-turns. Congrats, you are literally playing yourself). Point being, there's allot more to a dogfight than galaga's "spaceship shoot laser go boom" formula, that the clone wars, and even the prequels, did allot of good to remedy(TFA(minus the "Poe deserves a PS 9" scene) and rogue one as well).

And why should people grumble because a ghost is on the table and they don't watch rebels? More whining from the "not muh sterwerz" group. Same goes for any Scum fighter, excluding Slave 1, Z-95, and Y-wing. If people want to see Wedge and Chewie take on a tie swarm then they should go fly it, not make people at regionals fly it for their entertainment. Or make un-realistic changes to the game so that's all that gets seen.

Also yeah, countdown is one point cheaper than the rookie pilot. But everyone knows Generic X-wings need some title/super special awesome mod support. I know it. You know it. The forums know it. FFG knows it.

21 hours ago, Astech said:

I love flying my X-wings in tournaments. Luke is so much fun. I especially love it when he gets blown up by that Jumpmast ship I don't know much about without fail every single game I play. I'm a little confused as to why Luke dies to Palpatine - didn't Luke win in the movies?

In all seriousness, I don't care so much that certain ships are a tad under powered, because that's the reality of complex games. I talk with my opponents before casual games to coordinate what we want out of them - a casual game with fun lists or a serious game with our most recent tournament builds. Where it gets painful is in tournaments, where it's entirely impossible to coordinate with all your potential opponents to not bring internet lists. Invariably someone will bring an internet list, take easy victories and get $50 + in prizes while the casual players get trinkets.

I like to win, and I like X-wings. Why can't I have both?

Blame... the.... internet?

I've written that before, and I think the honest truth is:

This game just isn't for some people anymore!

There are the four types of complaints, and it's important to tell them apart:

1. Powercreep
2. Complexity creep
3. New action/listbuilding-heavy game
4. No Star Wars ships

FFG and new movies will take care of 4, so we can be patient there. Powercreep will always happen, but at least it might change into a style that suits you, so patience again helps.

However the other two problems are more likely to be irreversible.
The game just won't become simpler anymore, unless they will really do a reboot to X-Wing 2.0. If that's the problem for you, then I have some bad news.
And the same is true for the related but different point: the game does care a lot now about your abilities to listbuild (or netlist), and less about your flying compared to the beginnings. I have also some bad news for these people.

However, and that's why all these complaints are valuable in my opinion, there might be hope. FFG could potentially introduce a new mode that statisfies all 4 at the same time! Magic has 9-16 official, depending on how you count.
There were so many not-so-great to great ideas, from wave1-3 only to thematic play where only certain ships&upgrades are allowed. If FFG were to support this in organized events, then the complaining would be reduced significantly!

So if you are tired of patience, and if you are afraid that the game isn't for you anymore, you have two options:
Quit or keep complaining! And in the meantime, have fun with HotAC, custom games, missions or just casual 100/6 with your own rules and fun lists as OP suggests

1 minute ago, FlyingAnchors said:

so what would the game based on if not 100/6? Every game needs a "standard" format to begin somewhere. And if you look at the little side missions, those aren't all straight up 100/6 either. It's nice to have the freedom to play however you want, which is why we get such good fan creations like HOTAC and dagobah dave's trench run. We don't exactly need an official FFG blessing when we have such good fan content creators. (Although one would be welcome, especially given the campaign box for armada. it would do wonders to have a good one for X-wing.) So there's basically not a reason for FFG to branch out.

So, we totally agree then? That 100/6 is okay to start with, but in the last five years FFG should have done SOMETHING more creative with their game than just, "New ship is better! Has cards you need! Must buy, 100% recommend!"

Malifaux has its core game balanced at 50 points and 1 strategy/2 schemes for tournament play, but it ALSO has 'story scenarios' where you can create weird situations like fighting in a bar over an ancient monolith or at a fancy party where you're not allowed to actively attack each other - and it has a campaign mode where you can get your boss characters to superpower level, and it did all this while still creating and balancing new models to add to their product line and supporting an international tournament scene .

And in the same amount of time.

The reason the alternative needs to be official is that there are some players out there who seem to believe that anything other than 100/6 "dilutes their ability to play the REAL game", and other players who say, "You're playing the game wrong, if you don't like the OP stuff than just don't use it lawl."

An official alternative would give the middle ground - the idea that the game is good, but could be BETTER - more pushback against both halves. It would bring to the fore the idea that some things are created for tournament play and some are created for the casual environment, closing down the arguments for an X-Wing 2.0 or radical revision to older ships that don't see play.

Per new FAQ, seems the people making the game disagrees?

1 hour ago, Dwing said:

Per new FAQ, seems the people making the game disagrees?

Dengaroo players?

?

On 3/4/2017 at 5:56 PM, Darth Meanie said:

Thou doth speak with logic and rationality, for sooth. Heretic!! Burn* him!!!

Fixnerf! Fixnerf!! Fixnerf!!!

*Or maybe "Space him!!!"

*Insert Monty Python Witch scene