15 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

While I mainly play casual with my SO and some friends: for us it's more fun if the lists are as equal in strength as possible, and for that it would be nice if the points were somewhat reliable. Apart from that: epic is awesome!

Here's a neat, two-step trick that I like for making matches that are as close to fair as possible, while still allowing unorthodox list design:

1. One player creates two lists

2. At the start of the match, the player who has not created the lists chooses which list they want to fly during the game. Their opponent takes the remaining list

You can fool around with the specifics, but the core concept here is that one player makes both lists without knowing which one they will have to fly. They have a strong incentive to make the lists equal in power, because their opponent will be choosing the list that seems stronger. BUT, they have no restriction in terms of the power level of the two lists. You could pit two top-tier lists against one another, or you could bring a 6-HWK list and a 3 Outer Rim Smugglers - as long as the power level of the lists is about the same, you're not doing anything stupid competitively.

You can also have both players bring two lists, and just flip for whose lists you will use in the match.

4 minutes ago, Babaganoosh said:

Here's a neat, two-step trick that I like for making matches that are as close to fair as possible, while still allowing unorthodox list design:

1. One player creates two lists

2. At the start of the match, the player who has not created the lists chooses which list they want to fly during the game. Their opponent takes the remaining list

Yes, that's a good one. We also did that. But sometimes it's not as easy to really make them equally strong, even with best intentions. We got better at it over time, but the beginning was sometimes hard. And especially in Epic, where a game can take hours and hours, it's particularly frustrating if the points are so unreliable.

To give an example: the rebel opponent in the picture I showed did not fly a huge ship but only 1 VCX100, 2 A-Wings, 1 Dash, 1 B-Wing and 2 T70 X-Wings. If I remember correctly we made both lists together, and had no clue yet that few strong ships are a horrible in epic...

That review hits a little close to home. I'm looking over at my 5 full companies of 40k space marines and a large force of Heresy marines.

Because there's not a single truly competitive list that could realistically be made from them. At best I could simply limit Victory Points from a top tourney build

Much like my TIE fighters, Interceptors, Punisher, and others.

Now the fact it would take 23 books and $600 just to get all my space marine rules doesn't help... but the more FFG continues down this path, the closer we get to a critical mass of bloat that will motivate a walk away for more and more players.

I've got several ideas on how FFG could right the boat. But none of them are staying on this current course.

9 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

Yes, that's a good one. We also did that. But sometimes it's not as easy to really make them equally strong, even with best intentions. We got better at it over time, but the beginning was sometimes hard. And especially in Epic, where a game can take hours and hours, it's particularly frustrating if the points are so unreliable.

To give an example: the rebel opponent in the picture I showed did not fly a huge ship but only 1 VCX100, 2 A-Wings, 1 Dash, 1 B-Wing and 2 T70 X-Wings. If I remember correctly we made both lists together, and had no clue yet that few strong ships are a horrible in epic...

There's bound to be a bit of a learning curve, but theoretically this method should work. It could also be abused by people who made lists that required very particular skills to use effectively, but I think that's a manageable problem.

3 hours ago, DailyRich said:

Anybody can "net deck," but I'd rather fly something I feel like I have an attachment to.

this is part of the reason i took such a liking to strikers/sfs. Nobody runs them, or atleast pre-palp nerf nobody ran them. Few people got strikers to use them but majority of people bought a striker and sf for the cards, not the ship. The amount of flak i got for flying "such a fragile and immobile ship" on release was laughable, especially when it walked all over them (love ya backdraft!)

I more scoff at netlisters because they literally put 0 effort into planning their list than the list is a problem. Someone ran the miranda/biggs/titled ywing stressbot build that won a recent tournament because it won. Beat it with a quick/backdraft/sabaac list lol.

If you make the list yourself, you probably have a much better understanding how it works than you would by just stealing it. I fly rather kamikaze-like so even when people copy my lists they dont perform as well because theyre unwilling to take a risk - i am lol.

/rantoff

Just now, Babaganoosh said:

There's bound to be a bit of a learning curve, but theoretically this method should work. It could also be abused by people who made lists that required very particular skills to use effectively, but I think that's a manageable problem.

Usually I'm the guy making the lists by now, and we previously discuss them for strengths and weaknesses. I'm not interested in wasting an afternoon/evening to "win" without having fun.

7 minutes ago, Lobokai said:

I've got several ideas on how FFG could right the boat. But none of them are staying on this current course.

It does feel a bit like being in the backseat with a drunk driver. I'm more in the trunk, but some people are much closer to the driver and still can't do anything, apparently. And no offense intended, but the frustrating part is the lack of communication by FFG. You'd think that companies, especially ones that rely so much on a community and voluntary work, would be much more proactive nowadays.

A simple "we're currently reviewing these cards/mechanics/ships" or "we are aware of these problems" would suffice.
And I've mentioned it before, but WotC asks for feedback every time they release some new unearthed arcana. Even if they were to not even look at it, they still give us the feeling of caring about our opinions. Games like these have often some great people in the community that can provide excellent feedback. Basically for free. So why not use this ressource?

3 hours ago, Stefan said:

I started X-Wing only last year, but I certainly have a familiar feeling reading this. I played against a friend who's much more into tournaments and meta than I am, and he brought Paratanni (back before the nerf) to practice his own flying. Which is legit of course, but I wanted to play triple T70, and you can imagine how that went. The top meta lists, if flown half-way competently, will kill my own mediocre build anytime and in a hurry, and that's kind of a problem because I don't enjoy the current meta hits for Rebels. And I generally hate Atani mindlink, and Palob, and all of the other "free tokens and you can't do this and that"-stuff of Scum, but that may be only taste. Anyway, I have no intention of quitting, and we're playing more casual lists now, so everything is good. But I don't see myself going to tournament anytime soon.

You have described the problem perfectly. How can one fly casual when everyone else is flying meta? It's like bringing a nerf gun to a firefight (see what I did there?).

But take heart! T-70(3) is making a comeback! -Read the Triple T-70 thread in the list building forum!!

1 hour ago, Timathius said:

Why can't both casual and competitive play exist without people accusing competitive play of ruining the game?

Because when you go to your FLGS for a casual game, some competitive player has brought his Parattani or whatever the flavor of the Wave is and curb stomps you.

15 minutes ago, Vineheart01 said:

this is part of the reason i took such a liking to strikers/sfs. Nobody runs them, or atleast pre-palp nerf nobody ran them. Few people got strikers to use them but majority of people bought a striker and sf for the cards, not the ship. The amount of flak i got for flying "such a fragile and immobile ship" on release was laughable, especially when it walked all over them (love ya backdraft!)

I more scoff at netlisters because they literally put 0 effort into planning their list than the list is a problem. Someone ran the miranda/biggs/titled ywing stressbot build that won a recent tournament because it won. Beat it with a quick/backdraft/sabaac list lol.

If you make the list yourself, you probably have a much better understanding how it works than you would by just stealing it. I fly rather kamikaze-like so even when people copy my lists they dont perform as well because theyre unwilling to take a risk - i am lol.

/rantoff

Why should either party laugh at the other? Why can't you fly the ships you like and spend time creating lists, and he uses a net list because he wants to compete and improve his in game flying skills?

Just play the game you enjoy . Don't judge others for enjoying it the way they do.

EXCEPT CHEATERS **** THOSE GUYS.

3 minutes ago, BlodVargarna said:

Because when you go to your FLGS for a casual game, some competitive player has brought his Parattani or whatever the flavor of the Wave is and curb stomps you.

Then why did you play him? or her?

1 minute ago, Timathius said:

Then why did you play him?

But that's the problem isn't it? You are faced with either playing against a meta list (in a casual environment), or not playing. That's a problem.

Or being the guy that goes "im not playing against you" and unless everyone feels that way about someone in particular labels you in a negative way.

Several people in my group i dont like facing, but im not going to go "No, im not facing you"

Just now, BlodVargarna said:

But that's the problem isn't it? You are faced with either playing against a meta list (in a casual environment), or not playing. That's a problem.

No the problem is that you don't talk to your opponent in this scenario. A lot can be accomplished with a little conversation. For example, I was practicing for naboo and there was a guy who was strictly casual and it would be a while before another pair opened up. So I made a list on the spot to play with.

What if they don't have another list? Then offer to switch lists with them and you run theirs. A lot of players would love a chance to see it from the other side.

The thing I find odd is that Netrunner has a mechanism, in the form of rotations, for dealing with several of the problems described in the article. Maybe it's not working, rotation was implemented relatively late and core expansions don't rotate which creates a larger than average card pool. Or maybe it's more an issue with specific cards than core structure.

Also though I think part of the problem are aspects of Netrunner itself which X Wing doesn't share. In my experience Netrunner games tend to be rather one sided. There are certainly some games that come down to nail biters but I've found many games are simply curb stomps where the winner is a forgone conclusion only a few turns in when one player draws their core combo and the other doesn't. And that's with balanced decks, it's only exacerbated with imbalanced ones. Plus due to the bluffing nature of the game you can't just be good with your deck you also have to be a master of your opponents deck, know every card and how many of it they have (though I think this is where some of the hate for Sabine lists come from, you can't just be good with your ships you also need to be able to visualize the SLAM bloom of a K wing 2 turns ahead even if you've never played a K wing in your life)

On a brighter note I'd say most of the negative sentiments were about the game as it was a year ago and decisions made by FFG well over a year ago. The campaign box itself, a few quibbles aside, seems to have been well received. That gives me hope that perhaps FFG has seen the problem, is taking steps to correct it, and just maybe is considering applying those lessons to its other product lines.

I used to have people round to play at my old flat a lot and we'd always just lark about with jank. I may have occasionally broken out a tournament build in testing but it was never really a great test as my opponents were flying jank Long story short; I moved and ended up near a gaming store. Most of the local players there were quite competitive so flying jank slowly started to go out the window (although we did have a couple of janky tournament formats that were great fun). I enjoy both ends of the spectrum in all honesty. Playing competitive X-Wing allows me to really test my brain and I enjoy that. I usually try to do something a bit different from the meta and see where I can take it. But I also really long for the days of playing in my kitchen with a few beers or tea and biscuits with some herbal relief.

Currently I'm in a crappy living situation with no where to play, paint or build models and no FLGS near by. Frankly; I'm hankering for either right now! Not long till I start HotAC with a few locals at least...

EDIT: I guess my point is; you don't know what you've got till it's gone. It's easy to get frustrated with things in a game but if it's no fun; leave it alone and see if you miss it. That'll tell you something

We've talked about this in every war game community I've ever been part of.

Why are people so fearful of the pre game conversation? As gamers where does all our over assertiveness go? Just ask the person what they're flying? Ask them if they'd mind making a more casual list? Why is that so tough for our community

4 minutes ago, Lobokai said:

We've talked about this in every war game community I've ever been part of.

Why are people so fearful of the pre game conversation? As gamers where does all our over assertiveness go? Just ask the person what they're flying? Ask them if they'd mind making a more casual list? Why is that so tough for our community

Honest answer for me when I was frequenting the FLGS; most people only brought a list or 2 with them. It was play what they have or don't play most of the time.

5 minutes ago, Lobokai said:

We've talked about this in every war game community I've ever been part of.

Why are people so fearful of the pre game conversation? As gamers where does all our over assertiveness go? Just ask the person what they're flying? Ask them if they'd mind making a more casual list? Why is that so tough for our community

I'd say that X-Wing does not make it easy to make fair lists. The points are unreliable.
So it's very much possible to go casual end the list ends up much better than the opponent's list. Which in turn makes you look like an ass because you did not make a casual list (even though you tried and thought you did)

51 minutes ago, BlodVargarna said:

You have described the problem perfectly. How can one fly casual when everyone else is flying meta? It's like bringing a nerf gun to a firefight (see what I did there?).

But take heart! T-70(3) is making a comeback! -Read the Triple T-70 thread in the list building forum!!

Thanks, will do.

24 minutes ago, Makaze said:

The thing I find odd is that Netrunner has a mechanism, in the form of rotations, for dealing with several of the problems described in the article. Maybe it's not working, rotation was implemented relatively late and core expansions don't rotate which creates a larger than average card pool. Or maybe it's more an issue with specific cards than core structure.

The rotation is probably just too large currently. I believe its just about to cut the first expansion cycle, which means, up to this point it has not been relevant at all.

1 hour ago, BlodVargarna said:

Because when you go to your FLGS for a casual game, some competitive player has brought his Parattani or whatever the flavor of the Wave is and curb stomps you.

The same problem can be looked at from the other perspective: you go to the FLGS to practice your Parattani for the next tournament you're going to and some casual player has brought his 4 x-wing list, which you curbstomp without having gotten much practice at all, since the game is so one sided.

1 hour ago, Vineheart01 said:

this is part of the reason i took such a liking to strikers/sfs. Nobody runs them, or atleast pre-palp nerf nobody ran them. Few people got strikers to use them but majority of people bought a striker and sf for the cards, not the ship. The amount of flak i got for flying "such a fragile and immobile ship" on release was laughable, especially when it walked all over them (love ya backdraft!)

I more scoff at netlisters because they literally put 0 effort into planning their list than the list is a problem. Someone ran the miranda/biggs/titled ywing stressbot build that won a recent tournament because it won. Beat it with a quick/backdraft/sabaac list lol.

If you make the list yourself, you probably have a much better understanding how it works than you would by just stealing it. I fly rather kamikaze-like so even when people copy my lists they dont perform as well because theyre unwilling to take a risk - i am lol.

/rantoff

That's kind of a weird attitude to take. Maybe someone actually wants to learn the list because it looks fun? Also, there's only a finite number of combinations in the game.

For example, I currently fly old fenaroo... because i *like* the list. Also, it hardly takes a brain surgeon to create that list - I didn't even have to check online results.

It seems pretty weird to s^&$ on someone for flying any list - whether it's a popular list, or triple T-65s.

Literally, play whatever you want.

Now I have to admit, I want to fly the Kanan/Biggs squad I saw at one of the system opens. Not because it did well though, but because it looks like it'd be neat to fly.

2 minutes ago, DailyRich said:

Now I have to admit, I want to fly the Kanan/Biggs squad I saw at one of the system opens. Not because it did well though, but because it looks like it'd be neat to fly.

Exactly!

As to the article itself; I'm personally someone who pretty much likes to play casually on the competitive side of "the door". I don't really care for the "how powerful is too powerful?" tightrope of the kind of environments that get labeled as friendly or casual; I think games are more fun when nobody is pulling their punches.

That said, what the article speaks to me is a big part of the reason I don't buy into FFG's games competitively either. The biggest criticism I have with their games is that I find their competitive scenes very fragile. New releases rarely seem to tweak or add variety to the meta but instead demolish the entire thing and reshape it. Some of this is power creep, but more it has to do with the games themselves not having room for subtle adjustments. Netrunner has pretty binary lock and key interactions for example, and X-Wing's combat engine really doesn't have any meaningful distinctions to adjust.

I generally prefer minis games because I find the good ones are generally more stable meta experiences than card games. Things might be in or out of meta competitively, but a competitive list generally just needs refinement and practice as new things disrupt the game state. This isn't something I feel holds true for X-Wing unfortunately, and while it doesn't get reshaped as often as Netrunner does; I really wish it was a bit more stable so that new releases were more likely to cause lists to shuffle points around a bit more rather than getting the feeling the game has just been scrapped and rebuilt from the ground up.