9 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Personally, I like reading players' thoughts about game balance, existing and desired.

Some of it I agree with (TIE/x7, Zuckuss), some of it I disagree with (all the stupid ideas for nerfing upgrades on the JM5K, instead of properly costing the JM5K; Palpatine (mostly)), and some of it I just sorta think, "I see where you're coming from, but enh" (TLTs, Biggs, Mindlink).

If anything gets too repetitive or strident I just, you know, stop reading it. (It's rough to take that kind of personal responsibility, I know. It would be so much easier if FFG would just nerf the nerf-sayers for you.)

The main problem is people crying that X needs a nerf. They say it's running rampant, ruining the meta. You use empirical data to show that it's not the case and point out that what they're complaining about is actually balanced.

"Yah well that doesn't prove anything."

If you're veeery lucky someone listens politely to you and disagrees. Maybe you listen and they prove you wrong. But most of these nerf threads devolve to "waaahh" and trolling, and it's easy to get drawn in. Best simply not click on any such topic.

And so it goes.

Now how about FFG hire JBR7 to make some expansions?

Double post is doubled.

Where do I sign?? Yes please I am tired of all the Nerf threads. I want to focus on talking about playing the game not sift through all the proposals on how to "fix" it.

1 hour ago, Turbo Toker said:

Palpatine and TIE/x7 were too good.

That why they were winning everything and poor scum couldn't get a pre-nerf win?

27 minutes ago, Turbo Toker said:

How else is FFG supposed to fix the game?

Through internal design, review, playtesting and broader consideration of the game, not a miniscule, vocal sliver of their top selling miniatures game in the world consumers rattling sabers on their forum they do not directly interact with?

29 minutes ago, Turbo Toker said:

If you nerf things that people don't like, that's good for the game.

What kind of populist bull**** tripe is this? THIS is what those people are complaining about, people who have no ******* clue about game design. Because just because an person or some number of people do not like something does not mean you should "nerf" it. "Like" is super subjective, if you need to do balance adjustments they should be based on directly attributable factors which also probably have a tendency to impact enjoyment - but your argument literally does nothing to counter what Stoneface said. When you get arc dodged or do no damage to Soontir Fel with a triple token stack (which can happen even with Palp rebalanced) do you "like" this? When Asajj Ventress hands you a stress, do you enjoy this process? Probably not, it's bad for you. But this doesn't necessarily mean either of those cards are poorly designed and need reworking. The fact that you, the opponent do not enjoy the commensurate effects of those cards is probably a pretty good indicator the other guy who is using them enjoys them very much. Should you not liking something cancel out somebody else who likes something - and perhaps as a consumer is willing to pay for that thing - paying for new things being way more ******* important than keeping a few dozen whiners happy?

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, and you're trying to smokescreen it by building a strawman of how all "anti-nerf" thread people are just opposed to negativity and don't want people to complain about the game. Guess what, there are actually legitimate arguments to be made about the mechanics of the game and their ongoing evolution "I like or do not like them" isn't really an actual way to frame them. Let's not even get how to if "dislike" is a genuine criticism to modify or remove something then the "anti-nerf" threads are completely legitimate.

I see a different argument, people don't want to see the same type of thread about the same subjects and cards which aren't covering new material over and over again. I like a lot of what they say, I don't think a new subform is going to come though, because a couple months ago "fix" threads were all the rage, or there was a big influx of threads for the CCL or whatever and there were subforum calls, and it blows over in like a week, just like nerfs will.

But if people are okay to keep throwing up nerf threads, or any other kind of thread, than other people are perfectly okay to throw up "hey, do we have to keep talking about the same stuff?" threads.

What if the forum developed a TLT that targeted nerf forms and auto damaged them into a sub-form, never to be replied to again?

21 minutes ago, UnitOmega said:

Through internal design, review, playtesting and broader consideration of the game, not a miniscule, vocal sliver of their top selling miniatures game in the world consumers rattling sabers on their forum they do not directly interact with?

What kind of populist bull**** tripe is this? THIS is what those people are complaining about, people who have no ******* clue about game design. Because just because an person or some number of people do not like something does not mean you should "nerf" it. "Like" is super subjective, if you need to do balance adjustments they should be based on directly attributable factors which also probably have a tendency to impact enjoyment - but your argument literally does nothing to counter what Stoneface said. When you get arc dodged or do no damage to Soontir Fel with a triple token stack (which can happen even with Palp rebalanced) do you "like" this? When Asajj Ventress hands you a stress, do you enjoy this process? Probably not, it's bad for you. But this doesn't necessarily mean either of those cards are poorly designed and need reworking. The fact that you, the opponent do not enjoy the commensurate effects of those cards is probably a pretty good indicator the other guy who is using them enjoys them very much. Should you not liking something cancel out somebody else who likes something - and perhaps as a consumer is willing to pay for that thing - paying for new things being way more ******* important than keeping a few dozen whiners happy?

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, and you're trying to smokescreen it by building a strawman of how all "anti-nerf" thread people are just opposed to negativity and don't want people to complain about the game. Guess what, there are actually legitimate arguments to be made about the mechanics of the game and their ongoing evolution "I like or do not like them" isn't really an actual way to frame them. Let's not even get how to if "dislike" is a genuine criticism to modify or remove something then the "anti-nerf" threads are completely legitimate.

I see a different argument, people don't want to see the same type of thread about the same subjects and cards which aren't covering new material over and over again. I like a lot of what they say, I don't think a new subform is going to come though, because a couple months ago "fix" threads were all the rage, or there was a big influx of threads for the CCL or whatever and there were subforum calls, and it blows over in like a week, just like nerfs will.

But if people are okay to keep throwing up nerf threads, or any other kind of thread, than other people are perfectly okay to throw up "hey, do we have to keep talking about the same stuff?" threads.

Why is the subjective taste of a few talentless Imperial players that want to maintain the ability to k-turn back and forth in place all game with invincible, 6 health ships more valuable than mine? Maybe I don't want to play against that garbage.

Make Fantasy Flight Forums Great Again!

6 minutes ago, Turbo Toker said:

Why is the subjective taste of a few talentless Imperial players that want to maintain the ability to k-turn back and forth in place all game with invincible, 6 health ships more valuable than mine? Maybe I don't want to play against that garbage.

It isn't. Hey, guess what, your opinion has the same intrinsic value as everyone else's.

On the other hand, FFG felt after seeing it in the wild, probably taking both subjective opinions and the nature of the cards on tournament results and practical gameplay in the wild also decided "Yeah, the upgrade is too good if it ignores blocking and stress, the lack of counterplay means there's no reason not to do it", or something to that effect. Since errata requires thinking about how to "fix" a card (which can be to the card's detriment or benefit, you have to have more logic and reasoning behind why and how you edit something than just "man, some people are upset". Since, also some people are not upset, or will become upset when you make a nerf. People's enjoyment or happiness on it's own is a terrible metric. You must examine how, and why they are unhappy and translate that into what you as the designer and developers want to the game to be, both in terms of players and actual design space and play.

I don't have any problem with all the nerf posts. I tend to ignore post of them. I only read the threads I find interesting. It seems to me, that alot of people insist on reading threads they don't find interesting - and then complain about them. I would suggest simply to ignore the nerf posts and instead, populate this forum with threads that you want to see.

If you want to talk about what ships you want to see next, start a thread on that, (or reply if there's already one). If you want to talk about Paul Heaver's latest list... talk, then get that discussion going.... but there's not much sense in dwelling on the threads that you don't like.

Well a balance subforum would not be the solution. It would be an awful place to go with the only replies to threads would be how the OP is so wrong. Also it would not stop the nerf threads from coming on the main forum, the rules subforum doesn't exactly stop rules questions from popping up here.

I get the frustration with say TLTs, also with power meta builds as accretion and power creep has moved in a way that only your cookie cutter netlists have a chance to be at the top. thing is such elements are the nature of a living collectible game. In order to change the meta they have to introduce stuff that is simply better than what is already out. Now for nerfs it doesn't exactly bring balance as much as it takes what once was good and put it on top again.

I made a post (which acts more like an article) HERE addressing the issue behind TLTs and how they were a necessary evil for the meta. Problem is we haven't got a better solution from FFG, and also the Pen & ink balance erratas from FFG which were all nerfs and no buffs tend to give the latest FAQ it's negative atmosphere which has spilled all over the forum (hence why I started two additional threads for ideas for buffs to bad cards). I don't think FFG handled the meta that well, but despite all that they still have the biggest tabletop miniatures game in the world so they are doing something right. At least they haven't gone all Games Workshop on us.

It wouldn't do a lot of good and may also be a detriment unless FFG just completely ignores everything that gets put in there.

It doesn't do any good as people will still post their rants to the main boards because those are the easiest ones to find and get the most traffic. Put it in a sub-forum full of other haters and you are unlikely to get any kind of real discussion on a topic. That also leads to why it would be detrimental because if the only people who bother with it are the whiners who think "X need to be NERFED NOW!!!!" and those are the ones who reply in complete agreement then you are presenting the view of a small group but giving them a VERY BIG megaphone to yell through with no one else caring enough to stop by and counter their radicalism.

You have all of those threads on the TLT lately and when you start going through them you'll see there are plenty of people who will say "just keep your paws off" but there are likely many more who think the exact same thing but "don't want to make waves" or get on someone else's bad side by disagreeing with them. Now hide all of those naysayers on another page is just like giving them exclusive access so they can do whatever they want without "the general public" really knowing what they are up to.

In a forum that uses a "most recent reply" formula to determine what is placed at the top of the board, you'd think people would be able to figure out that if they just go back a few pages and start replying to the threads they DO want to discuss, that the threads people don't want to discuss would eventually disappear if others were truly looking to discuss something different...

But, as it currently stands, it seems people DO want to discuss nerfs, because a lot of those topics are sticking to the front page. Which means, whether you like it or not, the majority of posts ARE happening in those threads, and people ARE choosing to discuss those topics for their enjoyment. Perhaps some users post more than others, but let's not act like there are 2 dudes posting back and forth on all of these discussions.

And let's be serious. There is not really any sub forums, except maybe the rules questions which are only looking for a single reply anyways, and the painting one where you are just looking for pretty pictures anyways. If you made a subforum for nerfs, anyone who really wanted a discussion would plant their nerf thread here anyways.

11 hours ago, Stoneface said:

No, I don't want to hear whiners that don't like how somethings affect their builds. Play the game. If there are things you don't like ask your opponents not to use them.

I don't like to be out maneuvered by Soontir Fel. I don't call for a nerf. I don't like Omega Leader's ability either. No nerf on him either. Don't like to face Ventress, Rau and Teroch but you won't hear a call for a nerf from this side of the table.

Just because you don't like how something works is not a reason to ask for a nerf.

Exactly,

and on top of that if FFG does indeed nerf something, just accept that it probably needed to be done.

I am also not a big fan of nerf because they take something away from cards and lists and as a consequence people start whining, like it is the case at the moment

Instead balancing the game by new reeleases and maybe buffing underused options is probably the better way.

But the OP is totally right. Make a subforum for the guys that want to whine all day long, because now if i see this miserable threads i just always feel compelled to see things right and them get bogged down in endless discussions with whiners.

If they were compelled to use a subforum where not much is going on, they would stop much earlier, and even better, i would not have to look at some of the dumbest thread names on the internet on the front page of the forum.

Beautiful idea!

Edit: Just answering in reply to the guys saying that such a subforum would get ignored. On other forums you get called out very quickly if you don't use the right subforums for your threads. Why could this not be the case here?

44 minutes ago, ForceM said:

Edit: Just saying in reply to the guys saying that such a subforum would get ignored. On other forums you get called out very quickly if you don't use the right subforums for your threads. Why could this not be the case here?

There are two problems with "ignored" here. The first is when the thread would still start in the wrong form. With the Rules questions those are usually answered pretty quickly anyway (although posting them to the Rules Forum would get them answered just as quickly) and then move on. With those complaints you'd have to see a lot of thread getting moved.

The other "ignored" problem is that if you let the whiners complain with no one offering a contrary opinion it may start looking like they must be right. After all if 10 people in a group says something is wrong and no one contradicts them then something MUST be wrong and FFG should "fix" it; never mind that those 10 are out of a group of say 100+ where the rest of them never gave the way things worked a second thought and wouldn't until FFG does something to pacify the whiners.

5 hours ago, Stoneface said:

No, I don't want to hear whiners that don't like how somethings affect their builds. Play the game. If there are things you don't like ask your opponents not to use them.

I don't like to be out maneuvered by Soontir Fel. I don't call for a nerf. I don't like Omega Leader's ability either. No nerf on him either. Don't like to face Ventress, Rau and Teroch but you won't hear a call for a nerf from this side of the table.

Just because you don't like how something works is not a reason to ask for a nerf.

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

3 hours ago, Crabbok said:

I don't have any problem with all the nerf posts. I tend to ignore post of them. I only read the threads I find interesting. It seems to me, that alot of people insist on reading threads they don't find interesting - and then complain about them. I would suggest simply to ignore the nerf posts and instead, populate this forum with threads that you want to see.

If you want to talk about what ships you want to see next, start a thread on that, (or reply if there's already one). If you want to talk about Paul Heaver's latest list... talk, then get that discussion going.... but there's not much sense in dwelling on the threads that you don't like.

On the surface, I agree with you.

However...

I feel that the "Nerf This" threads get too much weight with the devs and we get what we now have. I hope that is not the case.

5 minutes ago, Scopes said:

On the surface, I agree with you.

However...

I feel that the "Nerf This" threads get too much weight with the devs and we get what we now have. I hope that is not the case.

What is it that we now have? A better, or a worse game?

I'm open to opinions.

I prefer if we had a tagging system so you can filter out those threads that use the particular tag.

Then forum default is to only view tagged threads, so users are compelled to tag their threads or have zero replies.

13 hours ago, Kdubb said:

What is it that we now have? A better, or a worse game?

I'm open to opinions.

I honestly LOVE this game. It's such a nice diversion from the daily grind I grind through. It's the closest thing to my beloved X Wing flight sims that I can get, and it doesn't require me to sit in a room by myself in front of a computer all day (not that there's anything wrong with that ).

What we have here is an epidemic of players who min/max their way to wins, in my experience. And that's fine, if that's how you want to play. I don't complain when I lose to a list that happens to be min/maxed. I may be really angry about it, but I don't complain. A Sabine KWing list is a great example of a Min/Maxed list. It's a solid list. Now folks want it nerfed. Please. You'd better go ahead and nerf "fortressing" while you're at it. And then nerf this, and that, and on and on until the game is nerfed into obilivion. If and when we get an X Wing "fix", I guarantee people will SCREAM for Wedge's ability to be "nerfed"...somehow.

I played AD&D and FASA Battletech for a very, very long time and I am familiar with min/maxing. Min/maxing is not going away.

This also is just my opinion: I don't like "nerfs". Granted, I got into the game right before the Phantom was "nerfed", so I didn't have a lot of experience with it prior, but I will say that I didn't have much issue (not that it would really matter if I did) with the mechanics as they were originally designed. It seemed to make sense, at least from a fluff perspective.

And now we have "nerfs" for stuff that, while not enjoyable to play against, was still beatable. Games just had a different texture to them; triple Uboats were beatable, it just took a different strategy than say versus a triple X7 list. Yes, it wasn't easy. I lost many times to Trip U until I figured out how to beat it. I never once thought to say "Geez, let's just change the game since this aspect of it is too hard". I fear that where we are with this game, and it's sad.

I don't agree with the last batch of changes in the recent FAQ. It seemed to me like that FAQ was a response to the whining on this forum.

Yes, I thought Manaroo's ability was really stupid (that there was no range restriction), but I just chose not to fly scum lists. My feelings for Zuckuss and some of the other Scum scummery isn't fit to say in polite company, so I simply just didn't play Scum lists. I still don't. Why? I just think the Scum faction has a lot of crap that I think is "dishonerable", if that makes sense. It should, because it IS the Scum faction, after all! They at least deserve their reputation.

Sabine doesn't need a nerf. I fly dual K-Wings (Miranda/Warden) regularly, and my list suffers mightily to:

Tractor Beam Lists (Absolutely wreck it if the TB is the high PS ship in its list)

Any Bossk Build where they castle or cover Bossk's 6

Stress Lists

Ion Control Lists (Arguably worse, since you don't reveal a dial and if you're stressed? Sabine who?)

Lists with Quickdraw as a Swarm Leader

Swarms (few and far between)

Crackshot Ordinance Lists

Lists with Homing Missiles or other burst damage

That's not a sliver of the meta by any stretch. High health ships laugh at Sabine's 1 point per round premium as they hammer home 3+ hits versus my 1 agility, because I sacrifice defense for offense by using Sabine. Should I probalby have C3P0 in my list? Maybe. I like the offense I get from Sabine because I hate relying on my red dice. I have horrible dice. Alwyas have. That's why I started flying bomber K-Wings, a ship I think is really stupid, honestly. I got tired of rolling 1 hit and two blanks into 1 hit and two blanks. I got tired of always having to take PTL for my Elite Talent JUST SO I could TL and Focus to "guarantee" at least a point of damage. And two dice attacks are just laughable when your red dice are as inconsistent as mine are.

My green dice are so bad that I switched to K Wings simply because I felt it a waste of time to roll 1 green die, let alone 3. At least with 1 I can accept the inevitable blanks that come my way constantly. I hated throwing 3 or 4, hoping and hoping, only to roll 3 blanks and (maybe!) 1 focus.

So sorry, folks. No sympathy from me. My dice suck, and have always sucked, so I'm okay with a once per round damage premium being applied to an ordinance item that MAY NOT ACTUALLY CATCH ANYONE in its area of effect.

/rant

6 hours ago, Turbo Toker said:

The things the nerf threads are complaining about are more likely to bring about the death of the game than the actual threads themselves. They're just saying (sometimes) true things.

Sir this is something i was wanting to point out but you did say it better then me thanks.And yes some arguments do come out of this that do need to be addressed. When i posted this first i was tired of all the nerf this or that threads that have shown up here. But, with that said. I know some ideas from them might be valid maybe with some forethought and play testing as needed.

1 hour ago, Scopes said:

On the surface, I agree with you.

However...

I feel that the "Nerf This" threads get too much weight with the devs and we get what we now have. I hope that is not the case.

We get what we now have?

No more pre-nerf Phantoms.

No more fat turrets.

No more U-Boats.

No more Dengaroo.

A tolerable amount of Parattanni.

No more Palpatine, and a tolerable amount of Defenders.

So yeah, we got what we now have. A better game.

6 hours ago, Pretty Green said:

You got anything to back that claim? Didn´t think so.

They were nowhere near too good. Now especially Palpatine is reduced next to useless for the price you pay.

Agreed. I never had too much trouble with either. My younger brother plays X7s alot so i have learned to deal with them. In reality they die just like other ships and are VERY predictable. That's their weakness. Use it.

4 minutes ago, 4fox100 said:

Agreed. I never had too much trouble with either. My younger brother plays X7s alot so i have learned to deal with them. In reality they die just like other ships and are VERY predictable. That's their weakness. Use it.

Die just like other ships? Not with pre-nerf x7 and Palpatine.

12 minutes ago, Turbo Toker said:

No more U-Boats.

Well, you know, except the flood of Mindlink Triple U-Boats we just saw in the post FAQ meta. But I get your point.