1 hour ago, Kdubb said:

Yea. In case it isn't perfectly clear yet, the whole "the complainers on these forums decide what FFG does" thing I was throwing out isn't what I believe at all. I'm discussing it sarcastically since some of those who are upset about the changes seem to really think FFG looked on these forums, read a couple posts and said, "Yep. Nerf it."

But, I also like the idea of discussing how bad cards need help just as much as overpowered cards need nerfs, so I threw that in to give this thread some more "proper" discussion instead of having it be just another droll thread about the FAQ.

So you think the errata would have happened without a single post complaining about Palpatine?

You probably think you are funny starting a thread like this and then when nothing happens you think you have proven your point.

Ship design is a different thing, I believe they have not been influenced at all by forum talk.

But regarding the errata, it´s not the first time FFG changed something after forum uproar. Do you really think they DON´T listen to players at all when planning errata?

1 hour ago, Darth Meanie said:

My only counter to the crap card argument would be that as the game grows, today's trash could be tomorrow's gold.

Or, as I said, if the card is crap, let it die. I would rather see new and improved variants of the card that an endless stream of FAQed (read: misprinted) cardboard.

I think that might be pretty far fetched in many cases, but I can't argue with your second point. Much more elegant way to do it.

28 minutes ago, Pretty Green said:

But regarding the errata, it´s not the first time FFG changed something after forum uproar. Do you really think they DON´T listen to players at all when planning errata?

I think they listen only a little. This forum represents a tiny sample size of the player population it would be silly to ascribe it more value than it really deserves as a broad indicator of what the wider player base is thinking.

In a football game the refs don't call a foul just because the crowd shouts loudly, but maybe the volume of the reaction could convince them they need to send it to a video replay to make a decision.

While you're at it: Flight Instructor

3 hours ago, heychadwick said:

What would make Expose work? Would it be removing the ACTION requirement?

How we fixed Expose.

"Action. Your Primary +1 and Agi +1 for this round. You gain a Expose Token"

Expose Token works as Focus but only when attacking with Primary. Also reminds the players Expose is active. We use a wargame counter with 2 sides. Disponible / Used.

Works fine. A Focus only to attack +1 red /-1 green.

Ahhhh...and our versions of "Saboteur". SABOTEUR: Action but no need to roll dice. PARTISAN: no Action but only works with Crit or Hit

2 hours ago, Nyxen said:

The wheat/chaff argument holds no water in a game where you're not drafting your build.

Yeah. If you want to hold water, you really need psyllium fiber.

2 hours ago, Nyxen said:

The wheat/chaff argument holds no water in a game where you're not drafting your build.

I don't really think that's true. If it's true then why do so many new players lose because they play Marksmanship and so many experiencing players win because they don't?

If you've got a selection element in how you are constructing your forces then good/bad choices are a valid way of introducing skill into the game. If every choice was equally good then you remove that as a skill determinant and the end result is more matches are decided by variance of dice & matchup - a % of matches that are currently being won by better player despite bad dice because their opponent's squad made poor choices would now be lost due to the variance of the dice.

5 hours ago, heychadwick said:

triple post

You like exposing, don't you?

24 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

I don't really think that's true. If it's true then why do so many new players lose because they play Marksmanship and so many experiencing players win because they don't?

If you've got a selection element in how you are constructing your forces then good/bad choices are a valid way of introducing skill into the game. If every choice was equally good then you remove that as a skill determinant and the end result is more matches are decided by variance of dice & matchup - a % of matches that are currently being won by better player despite bad dice because their opponent's squad made poor choices would now be lost due to the variance of the dice.

But don't you think that all elements in the game should be usable at the top level in some way? I'm not saying every card should be amazing in every build, but I do think every card should be able to find at least SOME niche role in the competitive game, even if it is not immediately apparent how it can best be utilized immediately upon release.

I really, REALLY dislike the idea that I am buying a dead card because it was intentionally designed to be a dead card simply so I could "figure out" that it's a dead card. That's like a restaurant having bad dishes on its menu because they want the customers to learn what bad food tastes like so they can better appreciate their other dishes. It's a ludicrous idea to think that somehow helps the restaurant.

I'm not saying that I don't think FFG does do this (cards like R3 Astromech really make you wonder), but I think it is an atrocious strategy if they are. If there was evidence that they are doing this, it would quickly become my biggest issue with their design practices.

I don't understand why this would be better than just making all the cards as balanced as possible. Let the list building skill be separated by good combos and bad combos and pairing the right upgrade with the right pilot. That seems like a million times better way of allowing your players to show their creativity and innovation than throwing a stack of a 100 cards at the players to sift through to find the 8 that aren't designed to be bad as the other 92 are placed in a binder never to be seen again.

I think truly dead cards are few and far between.

2 hours ago, Hexdot said:

How we fixed Expose.

"Action. Your Primary +1 and Agi +1 for this round. You gain a Expose Token"

Expose Token works as Focus but only when attacking with Primary. Also reminds the players Expose is active. We use a wargame counter with 2 sides. Disponible / Used.

Works fine. A Focus only to attack +1 red /-1 green.

It took me a bit, but your solution is basically Expose + Marksmanship in one card action? I think that does work, yes.

4 hours ago, Kdubb said:

But don't you think that all elements in the game should be usable at the top level in some way? I'm not saying every card should be amazing in every build, but I do think every card should be able to find at least SOME niche role in the competitive game, even if it is not immediately apparent how it can best be utilized immediately upon release.

I really, REALLY dislike the idea that I am buying a dead card because it was intentionally designed to be a dead card simply so I could "figure out" that it's a dead card. That's like a restaurant having bad dishes on its menu because they want the customers to learn what bad food tastes like so they can better appreciate their other dishes. It's a ludicrous idea to think that somehow helps the restaurant.

I'm not saying that I don't think FFG does do this (cards like R3 Astromech really make you wonder), but I think it is an atrocious strategy if they are. If there was evidence that they are doing this, it would quickly become my biggest issue with their design practices.

I don't understand why this would be better than just making all the cards as balanced as possible. Let the list building skill be separated by good combos and bad combos and pairing the right upgrade with the right pilot. That seems like a million times better way of allowing your players to show their creativity and innovation than throwing a stack of a 100 cards at the players to sift through to find the 8 that aren't designed to be bad as the other 92 are placed in a binder never to be seen again.

Exactly; I'm not saying power levels should be different between cards, I'm saying they shouldn't be designed without a use.

Give Defender Maarek Miranda's ability.

Game solved!

I considered doing the following for a fix to Saboteur, using the dual-card mechanic. My version below allows you to use the ability at a greater range, automatically, and for no action. However, you must spend an action in order to enable the ability once again. So it's great for a one-off ability, but takes some dedication to make it work repeatedly. I do think it might be too good with "I'll Show You the Dark Side" allowing you to get a really nasty crit through under shields. Then again, I think that ISYTDS is maybe the worst-designed card I've seen in this game. Clunky to execute, confusing the first time you place it, allows you to ignore certain rules (critting through shields), and provides a very strong NPE. Anyway, I digress, here's my version of Saboteur:

Saboteur
Side A: During the End Phase, you may choose 1 enemy ship at range 1-2. Choose 1 random facedown damage card assigned to that ship, flip it faceup, and resolve it. Then flip this card.
Side B: Action: Flip this card.

Regarding Expose, do kind of like Hexdot's idea... it's basically a condition card now. The ability could be worded better to fall in line with conditions, but I like the general idea. Might be a bit strong on the Decimator, since they don't suffer the downside. Maybe add a restriction that the buff has to be in arc? It would really change how you use that ship, if it's arc-restricted.

I love brainstorming ideas to buff crappy cards. Do we want to keep brainstorming ideas for different cards all in this thread, or make a new thread for each card?

11 hours ago, Stay On The Leader said:

I think they listen only a little. This forum represents a tiny sample size of the player population it would be silly to ascribe it more value than it really deserves as a broad indicator of what the wider player base is thinking.

In a football game the refs don't call a foul just because the crowd shouts loudly, but maybe the volume of the reaction could convince them they need to send it to a video replay to make a decision.

That was my point. Loudmouthed minority opening up threads nearly daily complaining about Palpatine made it seem like the majority had a problem with it. I don´t doubt for a second it did not have an impact on the decision. And that´s not the only example.

Most of the players just don´t comment. For example I read this forum for years without any need of commenting until now. Most don´t bother but follow the discussions still. That leads to distorted view of what the majority thinks, because we only read the most active posters´ opinions.

8 hours ago, Punning Pundit said:

It took me a bit, but your solution is basically Expose + Marksmanship in one card action? I think that does work, yes.

As we know the problem with Expose is that +1 Red with 3 dices is not better that Focus. But we like the idea of agresive maneuvers to hit harder and forget evasive maneuvers. And if you are playing 600 pts not easy to remember who Exposed Himself.

So added a new token to the game. When you took Expose Action you gain an unused Expose Token. +1 Red and -1 Green. When firing Primary weapons you can flip it to used side and works like a Focus token.

You can choose Focus or Expose while executing your action. If you choose Expose you gain the text of the card plus a "Special Focus" that works only with Primary weapons. Well tested. Example.

Wedge is equipped with Expose. During Action Step ( or free action given by a CR 90 etc) he Exposes his ship. Expose token. +1/-1 this round. He executes an attack vs a target at R2. 3 Reds +1. Hit, Eye, Eye, Blank. Turns his Expose Token to the Used side. Modifies Eyes to Hits. He can NOT use the token to modify Eyes while defending.

Simple. Easy. And works fine.

What if Expose was an All The Time affect and only 1 pt? It didn't take an action.

If it were on all the time, 1 point would be around right for it, I think. I do prefer the thematics of being able to choose when to use it, though. I might change the name of the card to something like, "Reckless" or "Aggression." "Expose" is a verb and implies that you're doing something on purpose.

Hexdot, why the part about turning the Expose Token to the "used" side? Is this so you can only perform one attack with the benefit? Why not just allow you to use it more than once if you can somehow attack more than once in a turn, à la Quickdraw/Corran?

I would word it something like this:
Expose
Action: Assign the "Exposed" condition card to your ship.

Exposed Condition Card
While this condition card is assigned to your ship, increase your primary weapon value by 1 and decrease your agility value by 1 (to a minimum of 0). When attacking, you may change all of your focus results into hit results. Remove this condition card during the End Phase.

Btw here's a thread I started last year about ways to fix Expose: https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/226252-homebrew-brainstorming-expose/

45 minutes ago, heychadwick said:

What if Expose was an All The Time affect and only 1 pt? It didn't take an action.

VT-49 Decimator... Can't do that.

Just now, Jo Jo said:

VT-49 Decimator... Can't do that.

Decimator can take it now, but it's not even really a good choice for the Deci. It's too expensive AND it costs 4 pts.

Just now, heychadwick said:

Decimator can take it now, but it's not even really a good choice for the Deci. It's too expensive AND it costs 4 pts.

If Expose was an all the time effect, you essentially make the Decimator a 4 dice PWT. It would be too good.

3 minutes ago, Jo Jo said:

If Expose was an all the time effect, you essentially make the Decimator a 4 dice PWT. It would be too good.

Ya this is one of the issues with fixing Expose. It has to have some primary arc restriction if it is going to be substantially buffed because a 4 dice PWT is something I don't think any of us want to see.

9 minutes ago, heychadwick said:

Decimator can take it now, but it's not even really a good choice for the Deci. It's too expensive AND it costs 4 pts.

Expose + Experimental interface = 7 pt

Which, is the same price for a heavy laser cannon, and same amount of dice if used on a 3 dice primary ship in range 2 and 3. Stress penalty and range 3 green penalty, but 5 dice(!) in range one. Surely, worth 7 pt.

I have no problems with cards being useless by themselves, as long as they work in conjunction with another card, which combined price makes the price on par.

Saboteur however + Experimental interface..... no way. Saboteur should be the crew version of Lt. Coltzet. Would work fantastic on Chiraneu.

23 hours ago, Kdubb said:

Not according to those who are upset with the latest FAQ! They've made me realize that, as long as I grab enough buddies to post about the cards I want changed on these forums, it's pretty much guaranteed the changes will happen! Join in on the fun SotL! You were one of the ones who made this last FAQ happen! In fact, I'm pretty sure FFG takes your posts into account more than others because you even have a nifty blog! Don't you want to take some credit??

It's also not the first change the forums made happen.

Sotl is incorrect. They pay quite some attention to the forum, and it's good that way, because we are the best playtesters they have.