Would changing the casual and tournament builds by 5 to 10 points to wreck the meta, would it be better than nerfing individual cards or would that make any difference? Just asking how people would see this instead of nerfing all cards?

I have zero math or anything else behind of this theory, just gut feeling.

Well, casual wouldn't really care, to be honest. The majority of casual players I've encountered do what they want and use some of the rules as "more like guidelines than actual rules".

Competeitive level is where it would impact the most and I don't think it would be a good one. Things are geared for that 100 point matches. Up or down the point limit and things start to get a bit unwieldy. Plus, some troublesome combos would still work because while they are more limited, so is their competition.

In the end, it sounds like more trouble than it would be worth, though I am open to hear of success testing of the suggestion.

26 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

Well, casual wouldn't really care, to be honest. The majority of casual players I've encountered do what they want and use some of the rules as "more like guidelines than actual rules".

Competeitive level is where it would impact the most and I don't think it would be a good one. Things are geared for that 100 point matches. Up or down the point limit and things start to get a bit unwieldy. Plus, some troublesome combos would still work because while they are more limited, so is their competition .

In the end, it sounds like more trouble than it would be worth, though I am open to hear of success testing of the suggestion.

^This. I don't think it would break that many lists, it would just mean you would drop your filler ship. I think going the other way (105-110) might change things more, but not enough to really enough change the meta.

I may wreck some things in the current meta until things get settled into a new meta but then you're right back to whatever issues you thought you were trying to solve to begin with.

Many ships in the game are designed with that 100 point squadron in mind. Maybe it's a mistake but the X-Wing started at 21 points just to keep you from having five in a squadron. Play at 105 to allow that and now you could get the classic 8 TIE swarm getting a Howlrunner boost. You can field three 33 points ships but not more than two 34 point ships and that is rarely a design error. Boosting points makes more combos possible but that doesn't really make things any better.

Dropping points may not change a lot if you consider how some squadrons already operate just fine below 100 points either saving points for an initiative bid or using some points for conditional fillers that could be left by the wayside if needed.

If you were going to change the point allowance to have a real difference in how things play I think you'd need to change things by 25% or more. Playing at 150 or 65 probably will give you a truly different experience while 105 or 95 will likely feel like an odd day at 100 points.

1 hour ago, Zazaa said:

Would changing the casual and tournament builds by 5 to 10 points to wreck the meta, would it be better than nerfing individual cards or would that make any difference? Just asking how people would see this instead of nerfing all cards?

I have zero math or anything else behind of this theory, just gut feeling.

You think the complaining about Jumpmasters is bad now, do it I dare you reduce it to 95.

Example: Attanni Mindlink - Extra Munitions - Guidance Chips - Plasma Torpedoes (x3) is 93; if you wanted you could then take Boba and/or 4-LOM for 95 points but even this list without the crew in a 95 point meta would be strong; then say you make "Attanni Mindlink" small ship only then "Crackshot" becomes the next thing. Action economy you say I'll take one of the Scouts out replace them with Manaroo and run Manaroo in the middle which would allow for Manaroo to pass the token however she wanted (I just wouldn't upgrade either Scout with crew)

Just wanna provoke the conversation..

All lowering the point cap would do is make the undercosted ships more valuable. It would only drive players towards those ships not away.

25 minutes ago, MenaceNsobriety said:

All lowering the point cap would do is make the undercosted ships more valuable. It would only drive players towards those ships not away.

I'd say so too. Lowering the overall points hurts list with generics (not JM) or expensive synergy support much more than lists with powerhouse aces.