As happy as I am with the Vaksai title, I have to ask the question - do you think the title was meant to read:

"The squad point cost of each of your equipped Modification upgrades is reduced by 1 (to a minimum of 0)."?

That was how I initially read the card.

7 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

But that's what power-creep is. Power-creep is misjudging where the line is, so something becomes too good. Then "fixing" the misjudgment by pushing other stuff up to the misjudged line of good, risking pushing that stuff further than it should be.

Fixes that (attempt to) push stuff to the level of the most powerful current stuff is exactly what power-creep is.

This isn't bringing them to the level of the most powerful current stuff (I don't see either of these fixes making them as OP as mindlink/jumpmasters right now). I DO think it brings them to the level of things like TIE/SFs, or most of the (non-bombing) rebel lists right now.

Power creep is pushing stuff PAST the most powerful stuff. Not bringing old ships up to being playable (even if it makes them better than other non-playable lists)

3 minutes ago, FTS Gecko said:

As happy as I am with the Vaksai title, I have to ask the question - do you think the title was meant to read:

"The squad point cost of each of your equipped Modification upgrades is reduced by 1 (to a minimum of 0)."?

That was how I initially read the card.

I did wonder the same thing myself - how making a starfighter more modifiable makes it cheaper to have the pilot be good at something is weird, but I guess (hope) this has been properly playtested.

Yes, but power-creep is almost never intentional. It comes from trying to make stuff "as powerful," not "more powerful." Since the ultimate fallout of whether the attempt overshot or not, by definition, can't be determined until after the fact, it's more useful to consider power-creep to be the overall effect, not the singular "this is too powerful" catalyst.

X-Wing, as a whole, has experienced power-creep. It isn't just that JumpMasters (to pick what I personally consider the most OP thing in the game) represent power-creep. The whole game has power-crept. (Including, just not enough to keep up, X-wings, ironically.)

3 minutes ago, FTS Gecko said:

As happy as I am with the Vaksai title, I have to ask the question - do you think the title was meant to read:

"The squad point cost of each of your equipped Modification upgrades is reduced by 1 (to a minimum of 0)."?

That was how I initially read the card.

Could be also and would not be first time that they have done mistake. Although that would be worse mistake ever, huge downer, anti-climax!

4 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Yes, but power-creep is almost never intentional. It comes from trying to make stuff "as powerful," not "more powerful." Since the ultimate fallout of whether the attempt overshot or not, by definition, can't be determined until after the fact, it's more useful to consider power-creep to be the overall effect, not the singular "this is too powerful" catalyst.

X-Wing, as a whole, has experienced power-creep. It isn't just that JumpMasters (to pick what I personally consider the most OP thing in the game) represent power-creep. The whole game has power-crept. (Including, just not enough to keep up, X-wings, ironically.)

Again, I've never argued whether there's been power-creep in x-wing. I'm just saying I don't believe THIS EXPANSION is power creep. And going by your argument, apparently FFG should just never fix broken ships and they can stay useless forever just in case they go to far in the fix and power creep the game.

1 minute ago, VanderLegion said:

Again, I've never argued whether there's been power-creep in x-wing. I'm just saying I don't believe THIS EXPANSION is power creep. And going by your argument, apparently FFG should just never fix broken ships and they can stay useless forever just in case they go to far in the fix and power creep the game.

It's easier to tone down a ship than it is to buff ten, though. This isn't a video game where you can just patch it all at once.

Its beginning to look a lot like Christmas

2 minutes ago, RampancyTW said:

It's easier to tone down a ship than it is to buff ten, though. This isn't a video game where you can just patch it all at once.

Toning down the jumpmasters (which I fully expect them to do), doesn't help ships like the starviper and kihraxz that have been dead since they released. Those 2 ships were NEVER good. It's not like the game just power creeped past them. They were bad when they first came out. Ditto the scyk.

You can tone down ships that are better than expected (and they have, with jumpmaster nerfs, even if they need more, and x7 nerf, zuckuss and palp nerfs, decloak nerf, etc). That doesn't mean other ships can't ALSO need to be buffed.

Just now, VanderLegion said:

Again, I've never argued whether there's been power-creep in x-wing. I'm just saying I don't believe THIS EXPANSION is power creep. And going by your argument, apparently FFG should just never fix broken ships and they can stay useless forever...

Well, judging whether this expansion is power-creep won't be valid until it's been out for at least a few weeks. I, personally, didn't really think the JM5K expansion represented your version of power-creep (or at least not much) ... until it came out and better list-builders than me proved me wrong. (Over and over and over again.)

And it's interesting that you phrased it the way you did: "FFG should never fix broken ships." It seems that in your view, the Kihraxz and StarViper are the broken ships, being fixed to push them up to the level of, e.g., the JumpMaster. My view is ... different. (At least in theory. In practice, it's very, very difficult for FFG to tone down the power levels of the game, at this point. Not impossible, but difficult.)

4 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Well, judging whether this expansion is power-creep won't be valid until it's been out for at least a few weeks. I, personally, didn't really think the JM5K expansion represented your version of power-creep (or at least not much) ... until it came out and better list-builders than me proved me wrong. (Over and over and over again.)

That's true. And thats partly why I've repeatedly said "I don't believe" or "I don't think" that it's pwercreep. So far I haven't seen any combos that are just going to completely wreck everything else on the field and introduce us to our new kihraxz and/or starviper overlords.

Quote

And it's interesting that you phrased it the way you did: "FFG should never fix broken ships." It seems that in your view, the Kihraxz and StarViper are the broken ships, being fixed to push them up to the level of, e.g., the JumpMaster. My view is ... different. (At least in theory. In practice, it's very, very difficult for FFG to tone down the power levels of the game, at this point. Not impossible, but difficult.)

This would be true if the starviper or kihraxz (and scyk) had been competitive ships on release and were later surpassed by other releases. Except they weren't, they've ALWAYS been bad compared to other options. Talonbane had th epotential to be great, if he hadn't been released in the same wave as TLT which totally ignores his ability...

Heck, the kihraxz was even bad compared to it's closest comparison in the x-wing upon release. Sure, it was a point cheaper so you could run 5, but it was worse in just about every other way and sees far less play than the x-wing in it's current form (even if most of those x-wings are biggs). And that was before the x-wing got integrated astromech.

I'm not saying the jumpmaster isn't ALSO broken (as I've stated multiple times that it is), just that it's possible for BOTH to be true.

But, again, this started because you felt like a comparison to B-wings (being more powerful) wasn't fair, because B-wings aren't powerful enough to play anymore, right?

But they used to be. And you're not arguing that it's okay to push the Kihraxz and Starviper high enough to match what was good when they were released (B-wings), you're arguing that they need to be pushed high enough to be competitive against what's powerful now.

And that's what power-creep is. You push everything up toward what's most powerful now, and you accidentally overshoot with something, and then whatever you overshot with is now the new target, and only if you overshoot that new target is it "power-creep." And rinse, and repeat.

I just don't see that as very useful. I think I'd like to see things pinched toward a reasonable baseline, from below and above, and I think a "reasonable baseline" is further away from the top than it seems that you do. (But, again, that's harder to do, in practice, than it is to just keep accidentally pushing the top level further and considering that -- or somewhere close to it -- to be the new baseline.)

15 minutes ago, VanderLegion said:

Heck, the kihraxz was even bad compared to it's closest comparison in the x-wing upon release. Sure, it was a point cheaper so you could run 5, but it was worse in just about every other way and sees far less play than the x-wing in it's current form (even if most of those x-wings are biggs). And that was before the x-wing got integrated astromech.

I think it sees less play than the XWings, because Kihraxz are just some random sidekicks in the Star Wars universe.

Honestly, I have never heard of them before they got released for this tabletop game, even though I have loved Star Wars for decades. So why would I even want to fly them?

3 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

But, again, this started because you felt like a comparison to B-wings (being more powerful) wasn't fair, because B-wings aren't powerful enough to play anymore, right?

But they used to be. And you're not arguing that it's okay to push them high enough to match what was good when they were released (B-wings), you're arguing that they need to be pushed high enough to be competitive against what's powerful now.

First off, I'm not convinced 5 marauders is actually a good list, even if its POSSIBLY better than 4BZ, which I'm not entirely convinced is true. and itself is probably entirely match dependent. 5K can hve more modifications, but is getting 1 less damaging shot (assuming your tracers don't miss) to do it. It has more agility, but less health, etc.

3 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

And that's what power-creep is. You push everything up toward what's most powerful now, and you accidentally overshoot with something, and then whatever you overshot with is now the new target, and only if you overshoot that new target is it "power-creep." And rinse, and repeat.

Or you overshoot, then nerf back down like they've been doing. Again, I'm not saying there's not been power creep in x-wing. That still doesn't make THIS expansion power creep. 5 cartel marauders won't be pushing out 4BZ. It won't be pushing out 4X. It probably won't push out crack swarm, or even triple uboats.

3 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

I just don't see that as very useful. I think I'd like to see things pinched toward a reasonable baseline, from below and above, and I think a "reasonable baseline" is further away from the top than it seems that you do. (But, again, that's harder to do, in practice, than it is to just keep accidentally pushing the top level further and considering that -- or somewhere close to it -- to be the new baseline.

I probably do think a reasonable baseline is higher than you. Jumpmasters definitely are not it. I actually think current imperials are a fairly reasonable baseline to shoot for. None of their ships are super overpowered right now (that anyone has figured out at least), but they have quite a few that are able to be played (and won with) competitively. Jumpmasters definitely need to be reigned in. Mindlink needs to be reigned in. After those 2, they can probably wait and see how the scumf action settles out bfore doing anymore nerfs. Rebels probably need something done for sabine + advanced slam bombs, but don't have a lot else thats overly OP feeling either.

None of this has anything to do with the fact that the kihraxz and starviper both desperately needed buffs, regardless of where you think the baseline should be. Those 2 ships were going to under that line no matter what.

1 minute ago, VanderLegion said:

None of this has anything to do with the fact that the kihraxz and starviper both desperately needed buffs, regardless of where you think the baseline should be. Those 2 ships were going to under that line no matter what.

I do agree with that. And I'd like to see X-wings (!Biggs) and E-wings (!Corran) and non-EPT generics get boosted, as well, if FFG can find a non-boring way to do it.

But I do think this expansion is nudging too close toward the current highest power level for me to be completely comfortable with it. I think people are going to find a way to push it higher than you or I think it can be pushed.

But, you know, it is subjective. My preferred power level for X-Wing is lower than most people ... certainly lower than most people who haven't been playing since the beginning.

DALAN OBEROS!

Scourge of my Players in Force and Destiny!

3 hours ago, heychadwick said:

I find it interesting that no one talks about the StarViper title at all. No thoughts? Will a 24 pt Black Sun Vigo be worth taking? What about a 22 pt Black Sun Enforcer? Is it better than a cheap Fang Fighter? It's 2 pts more than Zealous Recruit. You get a Shield for it. The dials are....different. Most will probably say the Fang Fighter has a better dial for the speed 2 Greens, but the Viper can do speed 2 moves.

I guess Vaksai tittle took the spotlight being awesome! I would say that Star Viper MK.II tittle was good, not as awesome as Vaksai, but it have bring Viper back in the game by giving bit extra "wonky" repositioning with barrel roll, it is also wider move than normal barrel roll. It makes me wanna try out Expert Handling with Experimental Interface on one of the Vipers. I feel that Viper will be seen more as lone rider, just because Virago is still limited to one ship in the squad, unless there is another tittle that would be hidden.

That -3p cost makes although great price for those standard Vipers, I will dig 22p Viper, after getting the "guns for hire" I will have four Vipers and making them work in one squad takes only 88p, leaves 12p for upgrades so it would be 3p each and that is enough to introduce some interesting upgrades I'm sure. Haven't been exploring this yet, but I will soon enough.

I say that not only was the tittles what we needed for Kihraxz nor Viper, but also some extra pilots with awesome abilities, at least Viktor Hel has interesting ability against mindlink me other ships by making him bit less wanted target, might be good chance to use something very strong offensive upgrades, maybe Expose, FCS with Virago, some torps. I'm looking forward to try it!

Just now, Zazaa said:

I guess Vaksai tittle took the spotlight being awesome! I would say that Star Viper MK.II tittle was good, not as awesome as Vaksai, but it have bring Viper back in the game by giving bit extra "wonky" repositioning with barrel roll, it is also wider move than normal barrel roll. It makes me wanna try out Expert Handling with Experimental Interface on one of the Vipers. I feel that Viper will be seen more as lone rider, just because Virago is still limited to one ship in the squad, unless there is another tittle that would be hidden.

That -3p cost makes although great price for those standard Vipers, I will dig 22p Viper, after getting the "guns for hire" I will have four Vipers and making them work in one squad takes only 88p, leaves 12p for upgrades so it would be 3p each and that is enough to introduce some interesting upgrades I'm sure. Haven't been exploring this yet, but I will soon enough.

I say that not only was the tittles what we needed for Kihraxz nor Viper, but also some extra pilots with awesome abilities, at least Viktor Hel has interesting ability against mindlink me other ships by making him bit less wanted target, might be good chance to use something very strong offensive upgrades, maybe Expose, FCS with Virago, some torps. I'm looking forward to try it!

The maneuver options for an advanced sensors starviper with the mk2 title are insane. You can get crazy stuf flike moving 5s to the right or left and turned 90 degrees to face back where you started. You can effectively k-turn or talon roll by using other combinations of barrel roll and sloop. You can br then hard 1 back toward wher eyou started and end up partly overlapping your starting position but rotated 135 degrees one way or the other. You can barrel roll back instead of forwards and hard turn back to end up to one side of your starting point and rotated 45 degrees back in that direction. You can do a hard 1 THEN a barrel roll to end up BEHIND your starting positoin (also partly overlapping) and rotated 135 degrees.

Just wanted to make this here! We actually might get some four ships squads again..

StarViper: Black Sun Enforcer (25)

• Plasma Torpedoes (3)
• MK.II (-3)
• Guidance Chips (0)

StarViper: Black Sun Enforcer (25)

• Plasma Torpedoes (3)
• MK.II (-3)
• Guidance Chips (0)

StarViper: Black Sun Enforcer (25)

• Plasma Torpedoes (3)
• MK.II (-3)
• Guidance Chips (0)

StarViper: Black Sun Enforcer (25)

• Plasma Torpedoes (3)
• MK.II (-3)
• Guidance Chips (0)

-- TOTAL ------- 100p. --

59 minutes ago, VanderLegion said:

Heck, the kihraxz was even bad compared to it's closest comparison in the x-wing upon release. Sure, it was a point cheaper so you could run 5, but it was worse in just about every other way...

Hi, I'm FTS Gecko, a veteran of competitive Kihraxz play, and I disagree with this statement.

For a start, the Kihraxz has a better dial than the X-Wing with a choice of two speed k-turns and white hard 1 turns.

2 minutes ago, FTS Gecko said:

Hi, I'm FTS Gecko, a veteran of competitive Kihraxz play, and I disagree with this statement.

For a start, the Kihraxz has a better dial than the X-Wing with a choice of two speed k-turns and white hard 1 turns.

I've also played the kihraxz a lot. It has 1 hards, but no 3 hards and no 1s. The lack of 1s especially can HURT. It's a fast ship (usually only the fast ships lose the 1s) that...can't go fast unless it kturns. No 5s, and again, no 3 hards. It's a DIFFEENT dial than the X-Wing, but I disagree it's "better". At best I'd give it parity. Might even say worse.

Additionally, the X-Wing gets the astromech slot. While the illicit slot has good options (and has gotten better since release), I'd probably rather have the astromech. Then there's the (later added) integrated astromech to push the X-Wing further ahead in the time since the kihraxz released.

14 minutes ago, VanderLegion said:

The maneuver options for an advanced sensors starviper with the mk2 title are insane. You can get crazy stuf flike moving 5s to the right or left and turned 90 degrees to face back where you started. You can effectively k-turn or talon roll by using other combinations of barrel roll and sloop. You can br then hard 1 back toward wher eyou started and end up partly overlapping your starting position but rotated 135 degrees one way or the other. You can barrel roll back instead of forwards and hard turn back to end up to one side of your starting point and rotated 45 degrees back in that direction. You can do a hard 1 THEN a barrel roll to end up BEHIND your starting positoin (also partly overlapping) and rotated 135 degrees.

Yes!!! I gotta take my ships out and give this a try, this will have almost good as pre nerf repositioning like "Echo". Assuming that you will be using Advanced Sensors with it. I would like to get PTL, Expert Handling or VI, Advanced Sensors and Experimental Interface on one of the PS 7 pilots.

So this is actually very good thing!

1 hour ago, Jeff Wilder said:

I, personally, miss when B-wings were good. Many of y'all won't remember that B-wings were arguably the first power-creep in the game, because they all but displaced X-wings. Now B-wings are so bad, they're being used as an argument that other similarly costed things should be much better than they are.

I don't disagree with your overall argument, but point of order: B-wings were never power creep. The X-wing was an overcosted piece of junk on release, but given there was literally no other options the Rebels were stuck with it. Once they were given a not-so-badly overcosted option they unsurprisingly jumped ship.

3 minutes ago, VanderLegion said:

I've also played the kihraxz a lot. It has 1 hards, but no 3 hards and no 1s. The lack of 1s especially can HURT. It's a fast ship (usually only the fast ships lose the 1s) that...can't go fast unless it kturns. No 5s, and again, no 3 hards. It's a DIFFEENT dial than the X-Wing, but I disagree it's "better". At best I'd give it parity. Might even say worse.

Additionally, the X-Wing gets the astromech slot. While the illicit slot has good options (and has gotten better since release), I'd probably rather have the astromech. Then there's the (later added) integrated astromech to push the X-Wing further ahead in the time since the kihraxz released.

Agree to disagree then. I certainly had much more success with Kihraxz than I ever did flying X-Wings. Never needed to "go fast" with the Kihraxz unless repositioning or disengaging, at which point the 5K is invaluable, and the 1-turns won many a battle for me. Not sure I ever wished they had a 3 turn, though.

1 hour ago, Jeff Wilder said:

But, again, this started because you felt like a comparison to B-wings (being more powerful) wasn't fair, because B-wings aren't powerful enough to play anymore, right?

But they used to be. And you're not arguing that it's okay to push the Kihraxz and Starviper high enough to match what was good when they were released (B-wings), you're arguing that they need to be pushed high enough to be competitive against what's powerful now.

And that's what power-creep is. You push everything up toward what's most powerful now, and you accidentally overshoot with something, and then whatever you overshot with is now the new target, and only if you overshoot that new target is it "power-creep." And rinse, and repeat.

This. ^

And soon we will have a 2nd and 3rd cumulative titles (and yet more repaints) for TIE Interceptors, for instance.