21 minutes ago, Embir82 said:

Well, not so long ago constant moaning get them this precious Palpatine nerf - thus army of whiners started to think anything can get nerfed, you just have to point out enough times what is "broken" in this game.
From that point on, true whinefest begun.

Oh, my sweet summer child. What do you know of true whinefest?

You clearly never had to sit through the cold, endless winter of post-wave-five PWT / pre nerf Phantoms. When 20+ point initiative bids were actually a thing, simply because people could.

I think the claim that putting redesign topics into a dedicated subforum will force them into obscurity, only shortly before complete oblivion, is overblown. Those that want to engage in redesign discussions would be tasked with the onus of clicking one more button to get at the still-low-hanging fruit they seek to nourish themselves. I spend a lot of time in the listbuilding subforum, because I like it there enough to pay the price of one more mouse click.

On the other hand, if one shunted the redesign topics into a dedicated forum, what would be left of the main forum?

Only the gunboat thread, and spectres of salt past, methinks.

On 4/10/2017 at 8:45 AM, FTS Gecko said:

So, basically you want us to all start nerf herding?

12 hours ago, haritos said:

The Crusade to restore sanity is back. Lets give these trolls people a home, give them a subforum!

I think the general forum is the home of people and trolls, that's what it's for: discussion about the game, its parts and how they effect the game, the game mechanics and how they effect the game, etc. It's the place for "water-cooler" talk about the game we all love; open-ended and not framed or choreographed. Sub-forums are for specific facets of the game experience.

7 hours ago, Stevey86 said:

This thread needs a nerf.

Haha, yep, nerf-nerf threads are almost as prevalent as nerf threads, and they start out yammering about something that actually has nothing to do with the game really. Sure, nerf threads can go all wacky and troll-ish, but there are many jewels of wisdom through hard-earned experiences usually well penned located therein if you take time to read them. Or jokes...sometimes just jokes. Gunboat!

1 hour ago, Zazaa said:

How it is possible that all the forum topics end up way or another in to nerfing discussion? This was originally request to stop this nonsense that now is going on in the forum.....this forum is more broken than any ship or upgrade card in X-Wing at the moment..

"and now you see the power of the nerf-side. Yessss, let the anger flow through you....goood, gooooood!"

1. This game in its entirety is up for debate. We are on a forum debating the quality of different upgrades - considering unmade rules is a logical next step, and it greatly aids in understanding the game in a more objective sense. The idea that we should be shunning people's ideas because they aren't game developers is arrogant and stupid, and belies the fact that quality ideas can come from modest sources.

2. Along with a lot of Ill-thought ideas, some of the nerf threads have provided the best content on this board over the past two months because people actually attempt (regardless of their accuracy or truth) to delve into the underlying meta interactions. At the same time, those nerf threads are running away with the tone of the board and bleeding into additional repetitive topics. The OP has a good idea - not because it will banish these threads - but because it will give them an organized and sanctioned home I can easily visit, like the squad list page, instead of having to dig through pages of bickering to find a quality meta opinion.

3. Turbo Toker you aren't going to get anywhere aligning each dissenter with fascism and doubling down on your hyperbole like Trump off his leash. People aren't responding because your rhetoric makes you look foolish.

Best flamebait thread ever

20 hours ago, Verlaine said:

It's very hard to give facts that make the claim 'too good' objectively true. So such a debate will never end. The best I can say re: Palpatine is that the card could consistently do more points damage than it would cost to field, according to Majorjuggler.

But "why was a card nerfed" is actually a different question than "was a card too good". A defender with TIE/x7 seemed a bit too good relative to other imperial ships. One can argue that the nerf took away one of the few advantages the imperial faction had, but principally, the goal to make all ships in a faction equally attractive is a good one. To me it looked like x/7 was pushing away other ships. Perhaps the weak performance of imperial lists is a sign that this at least has been corrected.

As for Palpatine, I'm guessing he was restricting design space. If the card was OP (and I think that, from a theoretical perspective, he was), then this was already known for some time, but the actual performance of palpaces lists was not that dominant. But the ability to change any single die every turn after rolling it may very well have been restricting the new abilities of imperials, or it is possible that future crew carriers could not be made too strong in terms of defense, because opponents had to be given a reasonable shot at killing Palpatine. So if you want to know why he was nerfed, I would go looking in that direction rather than at long analyses of past meta.

1. Surely he´s not the only one who can hit hard compared to his price. And even then you are using him on offense, and let go of the chance to defend with him. And he needs a ride, Lambda is terrible, Decimator very expensive.

2. Ok, let´s assume x7 pushed away some ships, so what? Some ships will always see more play than others, it´s the same thing with the other factions. That´s no reason to nerf something.

3. Palpatine was not OP, not from any perspective. Otherwise Imperials would have dominated the competitive scene before the nerf, right? They didn´t. The game is full of abilities which change and add results, so in that sense Palpatine was not any different. I think that´s overthinking the nerf reason "restricting design space or restricting the new abilities of imperials, or that future crew carriers could not be made too strong ". He still changes that one die, so the actual ability is not changed, just made worse. Unnecessarily.

2 hours ago, Pretty Green said:

1. Surely he´s not the only one who can hit hard compared to his price. And even then you are using him on offense, and let go of the chance to defend with him. And he needs a ride, Lambda is terrible, Decimator very expensive.

2. Ok, let´s assume x7 pushed away some ships, so what? Some ships will always see more play than others, it´s the same thing with the other factions. That´s no reason to nerf something.

3. Palpatine was not OP, not from any perspective. Otherwise Imperials would have dominated the competitive scene before the nerf, right? They didn´t. The game is full of abilities which change and add results, so in that sense Palpatine was not any different. I think that´s overthinking the nerf reason "restricting design space or restricting the new abilities of imperials, or that future crew carriers could not be made too strong ". He still changes that one die, so the actual ability is not changed, just made worse. Unnecessarily.

1. That's what I meant when I said the debate will never end. It's not really my goal to convince you of anything.

2. Again, you don't have to accept anything from me. Point is that this may very well be why the title was nerfed. You don't have to accept it or agree with it.

3. See 1. There is no good common definition of OP, so there is very little point in debating if some card is. Again, if you want to know why he was nerfed, I wouldn't ask 'do I agree that the card is OP,' but rather 'what were the designers thinking?' And as an open question, rather a retorical one. As for Palpatine, my money is on opening up design space.

31 minutes ago, Verlaine said:

1. That's what I meant when I said the debate will never end. It's not really my goal to convince you of anything.

2. Again, you don't have to accept anything from me. Point is that this may very well be why the title was nerfed. You don't have to accept it or agree with it.

3. See 1. There is no good common definition of OP, so there is very little point in debating if some card is. Again, if you want to know why he was nerfed, I wouldn't ask 'do I agree that the card is OP,' but rather 'what were the designers thinking?' And as an open question, rather a retorical one. As for Palpatine, my money is on opening up design space.

Yes, this is pointless as you could have just written an empty post as well.

Just throwing this out there folks, but you are aware that there is already a sub-forum where you can post your thoughts on how well you think the game is going etc, right?

It's here . The Feedback part of the title should have given you a clue.

One thing if you want to be taken seriously though, instead of just posting "Nerf the U-Boat 'cause I hates it and it is ****", try articulating your arguments and give the designers something to chew over.

I return you all to your whinefest.

Cheers
Baaa

18 minutes ago, Baaa said:

Just throwing this out there folks, but you are aware that there is already a sub-forum where you can post your thoughts on how well you think the game is going etc, right?

It's here . The Feedback part of the title should have given you a clue.

One thing if you want to be taken seriously though, instead of just posting "Nerf the U-Boat 'cause I hates it and it is ****", try articulating your arguments and give the designers something to chew over.

I return you all to your whinefest.

Cheers
Baaa

"Holier Than Thou" -Baa

In case you haven´t noticed, some fine arguments have been made. If you don´t like reading something, don´t open the thread. The headline should have given you a clue.

1 minute ago, Pretty Green said:

"Holier Than Thou" -Baa

In case you haven´t noticed, some fine arguments have been made. If you don´t like reading something, don´t open the thread. The headline should have given you a clue.

Are you a natural **** or do you get up and practise?

Cheers
Baaa

Oh, and The Jam were **** too.

Maybe we need another separate sub forum where people can go to hurl insults at each other. Apparently enough people get their jollies that way too. Yeash.

8 hours ago, Baaa said:

Just throwing this out there folks, but you are aware that there is already a sub-forum where you can post your thoughts on how well you think the game is going etc, right?

It's here . The Feedback part of the title should have given you a clue...

Oh Baaa.

What a mistaka to make-a.

That subforum has NOTHING TO DO WHATSOVER for feedback on the X-Wing Miniatures Game in general. It had a very specific purpose.

It's for Mission Control - which is/was a web based system for creating mission content for the game. Whether it's still supported or not is a different matter, but the fact remains, it was never intended for rules discussion, but for feedback on the Mission Control portal and reporting bugs etc.

The first (stickied) post in the subforum should have given you a clue.

15 hours ago, Pretty Green said:

"Holier Than Thou" -Baa

In case you haven´t noticed, some fine arguments have been made. If you don´t like reading something, don´t open the thread. The headline should have given you a clue.

!!! why didnt we think of this!!!!

I should apply it in real life!!! If someone is publicly taking a dump in front of me when im sitting at a restaurant, i should just rotate my chair a few degrees so I dont have to look at him.

THANKS MAN! DUMP AWAY!

I think they have this forum already, it /dev/null on the web server, now they just would need to move all the stuff over there …

On ‎13‎.‎5‎.‎2017 at 3:55 AM, haritos said:

!!! why didnt we think of this!!!!

I should apply it in real life!!! If someone is publicly taking a dump in front of me when im sitting at a restaurant, i should just rotate my chair a few degrees so I dont have to look at him.

THANKS MAN! DUMP AWAY!

If you go to a place which has a clear blinking sign "Toilet", you shouldn´t be surprised if somebody is taking a dump there. Unless you´re illiterate.

The best response to this is still "well if you don't want to talk about nerfs/balance, then start a thread to talk about what you do want to talk about".

That always exposesthe intellectual void behind these complaints because they've nothing else they do want to talk about, they just want to stop other people talking about the topics those people are interested in. It's entirely non-constructive.

Still waiting for a single reason against creating a new sub-forum.

Not a single one of you has provided one (I will take a wild guess but its probably because... it makes absolute sense to have one! It's just that humans don't act based on logic).

And I will repeat it again, cause again, people conveniently ignore this: we already have sub-forums. There is no single x-wing dump of threads. FFG has organised it in sections. Because guess what? People find it annoying/inconvenient having to ignore 10 threads on the main page to find the one they want to talk about. So the great internet forum pioneers came up with the concept of a subforum! Fascinating stuff!

The Crusade for Logic continues. 7 pages, zero rational counter arguments.

I don't think we need to make one.

Right now I think the only thread on the front page of the forum relating to balance/nerf etc is this one. You're creating your own problem.

1 hour ago, SOTL said:

I don't think we need to make one.

Right now I think the only thread on the front page of the forum relating to balance/nerf etc is this one. You're creating your own problem.

SO THE CRUSADE IS WORKING

PS: Yes, you really do need to make an argument.

You've changed the world! What a hero.

Now stop being a ****** and do something constructive instead.

2 hours ago, haritos said:

Still waiting for a single reason against creating a new sub-forum.

Not a single one of you has provided one (I will take a wild guess but its probably because... it makes absolute sense to have one! It's just that humans don't act based on logic).

And I will repeat it again, cause again, people conveniently ignore this: we already have sub-forums. There is no single x-wing dump of threads. FFG has organised it in sections. Because guess what? People find it annoying/inconvenient having to ignore 10 threads on the main page to find the one they want to talk about. So the great internet forum pioneers came up with the concept of a subforum! Fascinating stuff!

The Crusade for Logic continues. 7 pages, zero rational counter arguments.

The two biggest arguments for such a subforum are that 1) it would probably clear up the general forum and that 2) these discussions are very recognizable; it's not hard to see if a post would belong in such a subforum or not.

The best arguments against, as I see it, are that 1) discussions about the relative strengths of pilots and upgrades are general discussions about the game itself, so you can make a pretty good argument that they belong in the general forum, and 2) the debates about cards tend to go in the direction of 'is this balanced or not', which is not always a bad thing, because it can help with listbuilding. But this could mean that good posts suddenly become off-topic.