8 minutes ago, Joe Boss Red Seven said:

Yah but... I'm not mad at FFG, neither are most of my Star Brothers here either.

I'm pretty sure most of the competitive players aren't either.

The vocal minority at FFG for the FAQ is probably as big as the vocal minority mad at FFG for focusing on 100/6.

Most competitive players, even if the disagree with FFGs solution will just shrug and move on.

1 hour ago, LordBlades said:

I'm pretty sure most of the competitive players aren't either.

The vocal minority at FFG for the FAQ is probably as big as the vocal minority mad at FFG for focusing on 100/6.

Most competitive players, even if the disagree with FFGs solution will just shrug and move on.

I agree with you 100% My Star Brother. FFG is awesome with the plastic toys, but they have let a whole bunches of small details slip. For example the wonderful Star Viper is meh. All they needed to do was make four cool Viggos that could take all of the goodies that regular Vipers can not get. They did not do that and sure enough nobody plays them, except for Gurrie, and of course crazy Wingers like myself. I have all kinds of fun Vigos in my games.

Go BLACK SUN GOooo (FFG will catch up)!

5 hours ago, LordBlades said:

How is this in any way 'ugly' ?

It's ugly if they think they have a right to have an imbalance in the game maintained to protect their "investment."

5 hours ago, Karhedron said:

there is nothing wrong with playing competitively.

true

4 hours ago, Kumagoro said:

Competitive players aren't immature. Immature players are immature.

True also. But the FAQ ruling showed a lot of immature, overly-competitive players to the point of being not just immature, but immoral.

3 hours ago, Xerandar said:

Casuals should not have access to the best gear. They haven't worked for it.

I'm just going to assume you are trolling.

2 hours ago, LordBlades said:

These guys have a hobby: competitive x-wing. They invest their money into stuff that makes them enjoy their hobby more (competitive ships and cards to make competitive squads with). That's perfectly normal in my book.

Perhaps people would be a lot more comfortable with nerfs to their X-Wing stuff if they stop thinking of it as an INVESTMENT, but rather the EXPENDATURE that it really is.

1 hour ago, Darth Meanie said:

Perhaps people would be a lot more comfortable with nerfs to their X-Wing stuff if they stop thinking of it as an INVESTMENT, but rather the EXPENDATURE that it really is.

But even as an expense shouldn't you expect your purchase to perform as advertised? To some this might be an obvious 'yes'. To others, who embrace this is a living game, is should be equally obvious to expect changes, new mechanics, ships, rulings, etc. So for some there may indeed be a stopping point, a point where one quits the cycle.

There are both sides to this. The issues is still, can people be reasonable and I think the answer is, unfortunately, not everyone.

The game is different things to different people. For some people (and this is really only a subset even of what I would consider 'competitive players'), the game is "assemble a top-tier tournament list, and just that, and play it over and over and then take it to competitive events". That's all they really want to do and the models have little value for them outside of that context. For those people, this FAQ was a huge problem, because the definition of "top-tier tournament list" just took a huge U-turn.

For me, the game is "get ships that I like, build lists that look interesting, do my best to win with them. Also, play some campaign and epic games." For me, the FAQ is a wonderful thing, because it makes the game more balanced and more interesting. I mean, I play with a TIE Punisher fairly often, it's not like the x7 nerf is going to make me throw away my Defenders in despair. But that's me, and that's what I want out of the game.

If you aren't someone for whom "build and practice one competitive meta list" is really the whole game, then you might not get the reaction from those who are, but if you're going to agree that everyone can and should play the game however they enjoy, which I think most of us do, then you have to acknowledge that this is a big deal for those people. I don't get it myself but that's what's important to them and that's fine. I think they need to remember that the game is a lot bigger than what they want to do, and FFG has to think about the whole thing, but I get why they're upset.

52 minutes ago, Ken at Sunrise said:

But even as an expense shouldn't you expect your purchase to perform as advertised? To some this might be an obvious 'yes'. To others, who embrace this is a living game, is should be equally obvious to expect changes, new mechanics, ships, rulings, etc. So for some there may indeed be a stopping point, a point where one quits the cycle.

There are both sides to this. The issues is still, can people be reasonable and I think the answer is, unfortunately, not everyone.

As advertised? As in "CRUSH FRIENDS AND FOES ALIKE WITH THIS SHIP THAT IS AND ALWAYS WILL BE AT THE TOP OF THE META!!!"

Or just the part that says "an expansion for use with the X-Wing Miniatures game."

Cuz everything in this game is still playable, so everyone's expense is still justified.

36 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

As advertised? As in "CRUSH FRIENDS AND FOES ALIKE WITH THIS SHIP THAT IS AND ALWAYS WILL BE AT THE TOP OF THE META!!!"

Or just the part that says "an expansion for use with the X-Wing Miniatures game."

Cuz everything in this game is still playable, so everyone's expense is still justified.

As advertised as in: you buy a ship and some cards. The cards have some rules on them and the buyer expects them to work according to those rules.

2 minutes ago, LordBlades said:

As advertised as in: you buy a ship and some cards. The cards have some rules on them and the buyer expects them to work according to those rules.

More this ^

32 minutes ago, LordBlades said:

As advertised as in: you buy a ship and some cards. The cards have some rules on them and the buyer expects them to work according to those rules.

And every single release thus far does that. You can play by the strict working on every card, or make up entirely new rules. Add extra maneuvers to your dials. Play mario kart. Build a space station. Anything is possible. I bet there are people out there playing that don't even know there IS a FAQ.

But if you want to play competitively, you have stay up to the minute on official rulings and conform to official power adjustments to keep the competitive playing field fair and diverse, and those are collectively held in the FAQ.

36 minutes ago, LordBlades said:

As advertised as in: you buy a ship and some cards. The cards have some rules on them and the buyer expects them to work according to those rules.

DAT...

33 minutes ago, Ken at Sunrise said:

More this ^

DAT...

4 minutes ago, ViscerothSWG said:

And every single release thus far does that. You can play by the strict working on every card, or make up entirely new rules. Add extra maneuvers to your dials. Play mario kart. Build a space station. Anything is possible. I bet there are poeple out there playing that don't even know there IS a FAQ.

But if you want to play competitively, you have stay up to the minute on official rulings and to conform to official power adjustments to keep the competitive playing field fair and diverse, and those are collectively held in the FAQ.

AND... DAT!

30 minutes ago, ViscerothSWG said:

And every single release thus far does that. You can play by the strict working on every card, or make up entirely new rules. Add extra maneuvers to your dials. Play mario kart. Build a space station. Anything is possible. I bet there are people out there playing that don't even know there IS a FAQ.

But if you want to play competitively, you have stay up to the minute on official rulings and conform to official power adjustments to keep the competitive playing field fair and diverse, and those are collectively held in the FAQ.

I'm going to agree with the post that said this is a false argument. Why is it that so many feel if you play casually you should invent your own game and rules? I bought the game Star Wars: X-Wing and that is what I would like to play. Yes I play casually and not in tournaments. But guess what, when I play I do play to win. So yes I can be very competitive if the situation calls for it.

Of course we are free to make our own rules, etc. as you say. But come on, seriously! Do you think you should, as you say, "make up entirely new rules" to play competitively? Before you answer, let me anticipate a response. NO! This is the same thing, it isn't different. Star Wars: X-Wing is the game we want to play competitively, casually, in tournaments, in 100/6 death matches, scenarios, etc. as we bought it, without an FAQ that is soon to be larger than the rules.

9 hours ago, Lightrock said:

Sometimes to appreciate the game you simply need to play whatever gives you a chance of winning, no matter what's on the other side of the table. Otherwise the game becomes really hard to love.

This is where I completely disagree, and why I'm more casual player. If I can't fly the ships I love I am not having fun.

2 minutes ago, AdamGATX105 said:

This is where I completely disagree, and why I'm more casual player. If I can't fly the ships I love I am not having fun.

DAT!

... !!!

2 minutes ago, Joe Boss Red Seven said:

DAT!

... !!!

But that means the competitive players are actually the real fans, because they will fly anything that has the SW logo and the right numbers, and they will luv it.

1 hour ago, LordBlades said:

As advertised as in: you buy a ship and some cards. The cards have some rules on them and the buyer expects them to work according to those rules.

Just to be devil's advocate, then it works both ways:

Buy a Scyk and it sucks? Tough titty, that's the way it goes. And don't like the X-Wing's abilities? Fly something else.

If you think underpowered things need fixes, then overpowered things need nerfs. You can't have your cake and eat it too, especially if you are THEN going to complain about power creep; down can go up, but up must come down, so that it all meets nicely in the middle.

X-Wing is an éclair. See you in the custard, boys!!

3 minutes ago, Verlaine said:

But that means the competitive players are actually the real fans, because they will fly anything that has the SW logo and the right numbers, and they will luv it.

NAH Brah... they need to feel like they are heroes back on the athletic fields in high school.

1 minute ago, Joe Boss Red Seven said:

NAH Brah... they need to feel like they are heroes back on the athletic fields in high school.

A bit like Luke Skywalker, but without the cause.

12 minutes ago, Verlaine said:

But that means the competitive players are actually the real fans, because they will fly anything that has the SW logo and the right numbers, and they will luv it.

No, real love is adopting a 3-legged puppy Scyk.

Just now, Verlaine said:

A bit like Luke Skywalker, but without the cause.

Dat steel open whatever's-squadron guy is an example of what I mean.

I rather hang out with Jimbo or Kris... or you and other Star Brothers right here.

19 minutes ago, Ken at Sunrise said:

I'm going to agree with the post that said this is a false argument. Why is it that so many feel if you play casually you should invent your own game and rules? I bought the game Star Wars: X-Wing and that is what I would like to play. Yes I play casually and not in tournaments. But guess what, when I play I do play to win. So yes I can be very competitive if the situation calls for it.

Of course we are free to make our own rules, etc. as you say. But come on, seriously! Do you think you should, as you say, "make up entirely new rules" to play competitively? Before you answer, let me anticipate a response. NO! This is the same thing, it isn't different. Star Wars: X-Wing is the game we want to play competitively, casually, in tournaments, in 100/6 death matches, scenarios, etc. as we bought it, without an FAQ that is soon to be larger than the rules.

Your level of effort in non-tournament games is irrelevant to my post so I'll call your entire premise in your reply a false argument.

I said you CAN invent rules. You CAN also play strictly by the card text you bought as the post I was replying to stated. Play without the FAQ. Play with the FAQ. Play with pages 3, 5, and 11 of the FAQ only. Proxy every single component from movement templates to dials with paperclips and post-it notes. It's up to you. And you can do any of that while playing "casually," whether you are competitive in your causal play or not.

My point stands. Competitively play non-tournament games with as many or as few of the official rules as you choose, and add as many of your own as you want to that mix, even if the number you want to add is zero. The card text as released worked for days/months/years before being adjusted for officially sanctioned events, so it can continue to work for you for as long as you want it to.

Just don't expect to play "your way" in "their" official tournament if "your" way differs from "theirs."

19 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

Players who drop $300 on X-Wing not out of a love for the game, but to score 3 JM5Ks to win with a net list.

Just curious, who made you the final arbiter of who properly "loves" the game?

People generally don't pump that much money into things they don't enjoy. I'm sure they love the game, just not the way you want them to.

5 minutes ago, miguelj said:

Just curious, who made you the final arbiter of who properly "loves" the game?

No one. But feel free to gerrymander the issue based on semantics, by all means.

I don't care for the meta, I expect the meta to change with each wave. Although the design space may be a bit crowded and that is getting harder to do without accretion and more power creep.

I don't like the whole dumping a bottle of ink on the cards to where they no longer remotely work in a way they were originally printed just to shove them in a certain spot in the meta . If that is the case then why even include standard cards in huge ship expansions? Why even include small ships with the large ships? Just keep releasing updated expansion packs like Aces or what not? IMHO at first Aces was to give something to the Imperial Players while the Rebels got their big toys. Later with Rebel Aces it became a way to update certain under-powered ships to the new meta standard. Now the words on the card can figuratively change while literally still say the same thing?

52 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

Just to be devil's advocate, then it works both ways:

Buy a Scyk and it sucks? Tough titty, that's the way it goes. And don't like the X-Wing's abilities? Fly something else.

If you think underpowered things need fixes, then overpowered things need nerfs. You can't have your cake and eat it too, especially if you are THEN going to complain about power creep; down can go up, but up must come down, so that it all meets nicely in the middle.

X-Wing is an éclair. See you in the custard, boys!!

I agree completely. Most of my gaming background comes from online video games, where you don't even have a chance to keep playing with your old toys casually. Buffs/nerfs are a fact of life for such games.

I do understand however where people that feel cheated are coming from.

34 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

I don't care for the meta, I expect the meta to change with each wave. Although the design space may be a bit crowded and that is getting harder to do without accretion and more power creep.

I don't like the whole dumping a bottle of ink on the cards to where they no longer remotely work in a way they were originally printed just to shove them in a certain spot in the meta . If that is the case then why even include standard cards in huge ship expansions? Why even include small ships with the large ships? Just keep releasing updated expansion packs like Aces or what not? IMHO at first Aces was to give something to the Imperial Players while the Rebels got their big toys. Later with Rebel Aces it became a way to update certain under-powered ships to the new meta standard. Now the words on the card can figuratively change while literally still say the same thing?

Not that I disagree, but then how do you adjust the game over time? Ban cards, and release the "corrected" idea as a new card?