52 minutes ago, catachanninja said:

Regarding the idea of how ships move together, I'd argue that it's relevant but not all consuming. When the rebel tie came out it was pretty obvious where it wanted to be, but it did make life harder when it wanted to fly entirley with ships that want to do 1 straights every turn. There have been a few second edition lists i let up on, like a jabba falcon with Fenn and another friend because all the debris I was dropping was getting in fenns way. But in x wing there's only what 11 different shapes for the templates, unless two ships both have insane dials compared to the paradigm we're used to, I don't think it'll ever be too much of an issue.

I think about this as less of a dial/base combo thing (which as you point out generally will have enough overlap across ships to be manageable) and more of a *how* does this ship want to move in order to perform well individually and does that style of movement gel with the rest of the squad?

For example: QD + 3 Harpoon Nus always felt a bit off to me since Nus are high mobility "skirmishers" while QD just wants to get where she's going and and then maximize damage. For me, this ended up creating conflict within the squad as the Nus wanted to race ahead/run away and then that left QD either out of the fight, or stuck in without adequate support.

I would contrast this with Woodchipper (2 HLC Nus, TLT Aggressor, Vader TIE Shuttle) which starts with an initial alpha strike, attempts to draw aggro on the TIE Shuttle and then is left with 3 skirmisher type ships for the mid/endgame to toy with target priority. The ship combo feels more in "harmony"?

But that harmony also comes from my own playstyle choices of how I use the components vs. their on-paper characteristics so it's not clear how "objective" those sort of assessments can be?

16 hours ago, Biophysical said:

I don't recognize a qualitative difference between choosing to move from 0-6" and selecting a maneuver template. Lots of "vector" type movement systems have similar restrictions to the dial system, such as only having a cone of possible directions one can travel instead of every direction.

X-wing has line of sight, but it's 2d line of sight. Lots of minis games (especially ones in space) don't have line of site at all, or they have abstracted line of site that is effectively 2d.

Most minis games I've played has at least as much list building component as X-wing. Have you seen a 40k book?

3rd dimension is ostensibly in a lot of games, but it often doesn't matter a lot. Even then, it's just a state. Like flipping S-foils. Are you up high? If yes, ignore cover.

It's really the board that makes the difference, because all of a sudden there are spatial requirements to choices.

sorry I'm slow here, was thinking about it overnight.

I think there's a huge difference in analog vs digital movement. The same way the barrel roll change took us dramatically closer to video game status. I don't have a rational argument here, need to think more, it's just my gut speaking.

I was under the impression other minis games had just as much list building, but you don't see something like the variety of upgrades/slots on single ships. The decisions are more I want X of this unit we would think of as a generic in X-Wing.

There are spatial requirements to choices in card games too, and not uncommon ones:

I know it’s still early, but can we agree to be pleasantly surprised at how wholesome extended has been, at least for the time being?

It may just be “all the new things weeeee!” mentality keeping us from going into a degenerate place, but I don’t think I’ve had a single game yet where I’ve had a single “that’s totally not fun and I feel robbed” moment yet.

Also, I think second edition format being the standard would have been awkward. Do we just use material from the core and expansions? What about the xwing and Ywing pilots in the conversions? Are they acceptable? No? So you’re telling me we can’t use the conversion kit iconic characters ever? At what point does the conversion become second edition? Never?

58 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

So many different dials just to stay with effectively a 1 straight...

More thought than a tie swarm. You gotta set 4x as many dials!

The list actually started with a hwk in it so there was a bit of thought on keeping formation when k-turning if one of your ships doesn't k-turn.

35 minutes ago, Brunas said:

sorry I'm slow here, was thinking about it overnight.

I think there's a huge difference in analog vs digital movement. The same way the barrel roll change took us dramatically closer to video game status. I don't have a rational argument here, need to think more, it's just my gut speaking.

I was under the impression other minis games had just as much list building, but you don't see something like the variety of upgrades/slots on single ships. The decisions are more I want X of this unit we would think of as a generic in X-Wing.

There are spatial requirements to choices in card games too, and not uncommon ones:

I suppose I would say that it's a continuum, then. X-wing is probably on the miniatures side of the spectrum, but more toward the center than some.

Really the upgrades are massively game dependent and largely arbitrary about how you define them. A common model is "buy X guys, equip them with certain weapons, buy other utility upgrades for the unit". The unit acts as one thing (as a ship does in X-wing), and each of the upgrades could easily be represented by cards and assigned go each unit, as in X-wing.

On analog vs digital movement, it only matters if it matters (duh). Does half an inch here or there matter? Depends, but I don't at all think that analog vs digital movement is a key feature of minis vs card games, just a design decision. Almost every movement decision matters only if it gets you to the position you need to be in. How many times have you said "I really wish I had a speed 1.5 turn"? If you've said it a lot, digital vs analog matters. I've never heard people wish for in-between maneuvers.

56 minutes ago, Kdubb said:

I know it’s still early, but can we agree to be pleasantly surprised at how wholesome extended has been, at least for the time being?

It may just be “all the new things weeeee!” mentality keeping us from going into a degenerate place, but I don’t think I’ve had a single game yet where I’ve had a single “that’s totally not fun and I feel robbed” moment yet.

Also, I think second edition format being the standard would have been awkward. Do we just use material from the core and expansions? What about the xwing and Ywing pilots in the conversions? Are they acceptable? No? So you’re telling me we can’t use the conversion kit iconic characters ever? At what point does the conversion become second edition? Never?

Agree with the sentiment for sure, extended has felt very wholesome. Some things are definitely too strong, but so far nothing feels more than a small point adjustment away from being perfectly fine.

As for the second edition format - All the Xwing and Ywing pilots in the conversion kit come from either the core set or the xwing/ywing expansion, so they would already be acceptable. Conversion kit cards will all come with their respective ships and therefore become acceptable when the ship is released. So I don't think that specific concern is an issue for "second edition" format, although I'm still a fan of the extended format because I like the variety.

3 hours ago, Brunas said:

No, that's the point - they're winning because they're playing well, but playing well does not involve somehow diving the board state 2 turns from now.

Generally, the game comes in a few phases:

1. Precombat. The goal in this phase is to get combat to occur at a place of my choosing, not of my opponent's. Here, you can plan more than one turn ahead as you both jockey for position before combat starts.

2. Blow things up! Goal in this phase is to not lose your red dice, while removing opponent's red dice. Here, I can't plan more than a turn ahead. Often, it's just "try to end up in a spot that I'll have good choices for next round / be behind or flanking my opponent / etc"

3. Mop-up. Generally, you know who's going to win at this point, and it's a matter of wiping out the opponent more efficiently to maximize MOV, or try to scrape some points out of a bad situation. Maybe you chase the one out you have in case the dice all fall your way. Here you can go back to planning further ahead since there are fewer variables.

Just saw my typo - diving -> divining, haha

Quote

2. Blow things up! Goal in this phase is to not lose your red dice, while removing opponent's red dice. Here, I can't plan more than a turn ahead. Often, it's just "try to end up in a spot that I'll have good choices for next round / be behind or flanking my opponent / etc"

that, more or less. Paul you're ruining my example already! I had a thing ready where my turn 1 1 straight with some bombers was wrong, not because I could predict the board state, but because it limited options for no reason.

15 minutes ago, pheaver said:

1. Precombat. The goal in this phase is to get combat to occur at a place of my choosing, not of my opponent's. Here, you can plan more than one turn ahead as you both jockey for position before combat

I think in general while this has ore advanced planning, making firm two turn plans is suboptimal, as it can end up limiting your ability to capitalize on an opponents mistakes.

3 hours ago, gennataos said:

GSP dropped the clip from the World panel with Alex Davey talking about how the majority of events will be Extended. I now get the vibe that Second Edition will be more of a side event for larger events and for local events will be "if you have a lot of new players, do that format" kind of thing.

I'm sad.

I'm just gonna tell new players to pick a different game, this one isn't for them

3 hours ago, Tlfj200 said:

So many different dials just to stay with effectively a 1 straight...

I mean the tie fighter made it harder lol

5 minutes ago, catachanninja said:

I mean the tie fighter made it harder lol

Big Brain plays.

21 minutes ago, catachanninja said:

I'm just gonna tell new players to pick a different game, this one isn't for them

I mean, If its not 2.0 rerelease only, I agree. Telling someone to find a ship that may he out of print and then a conversion that may also be out of print is not something I want to do. If only coroscant is extended, I'm good, but if every tournament is extended, I'm significantly less excited.

Just now, Do I need a Username said:

I mean, I its not 2.0 rerelease only, I agree. Telling someone to find a ship that may he out of print and then a conversion that may also be out of print is not something I want to do. If only coroscant is extended, I'm good, but if every tournament is extended, I'm significantly less excited.

In the clip of Alex I mentioned, he said "most" (I think?) will be extended. He did go on to dance around some, talking about local TOs deciding event formats based on their player base, etc. But, yeah.

I'm really not sure what FFG's business model is going to be for 2.0? In order for the game to continue to be financially successful, they have to drive existing players to keep buying new ships, while also bringing in new players. If Extended is the de-facto standard format, what incentive do old players have to buy new things rather than just sit on their existing collection + one time buy of a conversion kit? Why would new players buy into a game that has a meta built around ships that aren't currently in print? "Second Edition" being standard would keep the barrier of entry low and focus sales on the new stuff coming out. I don't get it.

3 minutes ago, gennataos said:

In the clip of Alex I mentioned, he said "most" (I think?) will be extended. He did go on to dance around some, talking about local TOs deciding event formats based on their player base, etc. But, yeah.

hopefully that means world and high level stuff. The local ones being TO choice makes me less angry though.

7 minutes ago, Do I need a Username said:

I mean, If its not 2.0 rerelease only, I agree. Telling someone to find a ship that may he out of print and then a conversion that may also be out of print is not something I want to do. If only coroscant is extended, I'm good, but if every tournament is extended, I'm significantly less excited.

3 minutes ago, gennataos said:

In the clip of Alex I mentioned, he said "most" (I think?) will be extended. He did go on to dance around some, talking about local TOs deciding event formats based on their player base, etc. But, yeah.

So, I know what he said, and it's depressing, BUT... other than like 2-4 system opens, there are no premier-level events until frickin' MARCH of next year for 2.0; so by then, we [should] have 7 factions and be at wave 3-4. Thus, 'second edition' format will NOT be very narrow. I hope they consider doing second edition format for hyperspace cups.

4 minutes ago, Transmogrifier said:

I'm really not sure what FFG's business model is going to be for 2.0? In order for the game to continue to be financially successful, they have to drive existing players to keep buying new ships, while also bringing in new players. If Extended is the de-facto standard format, what incentive do old players have to buy new things rather than just sit on their existing collection + one time buy of a conversion kit? Why would new players buy into a game that has a meta built around ships that aren't currently in print? "Second Edition" being standard would keep the barrier of entry low and focus sales on the new stuff coming out. I don't get it.

Basically, you laid it out perfectly.

They need new ships for old players, and they need that barrier to entry to be reasonable and affordable for new entrants.

Even WOTC mentioned a few years back that their player 'churn' was 25% annually, meaning they needed to get 25% new players per year to tread water. I suspect there's a similar issue in x-wing, and straight up ignoring the barriers to entry for new players seems like an incredibly bad business move.

You know what would solve all of this?

Tournament Regulations.

1 minute ago, Do I need a Username said:

You know what would solve all of this?

Tournament Regulations.

I mean, I don't expect they'll announce/clarify what premier events will be for a LONG time.

We'll probably find out about system open formats the week before unplugged...

Despite my prolific posting rate lately, it'd be double that if people didn't post the same things I was typing before I finished.

I'm going to try not to get too twisted about it all. I just hope local event TOs lean more toward Second Edition over Extended.

3 hours ago, Brunas said:

There are spatial requirements to choices in card games too, and not uncommon ones:

get those KeyForge cards out of here!

10 minutes ago, gennataos said:

I'm going to try not to get too twisted about it all. I just hope local event TOs lean more toward Second Edition over Extended.

Why not both? Most major cities probably have enough events going on to have both second edition and extended. You probably already are, but if you're not, make sure you are making your voice heard in your local scene that you feel they should be holding at least some "second edition" events.

Extended events are important to keep the interest of many veteran players who want to get to use most of their collection (especially right now when "second edition" means 3 ships per faction). "Second edition" events are important to get some of the newer players in!

21 minutes ago, evcameron said:

Why not both? Most major cities probably have enough events going on to have both second edition and extended. You probably already are, but if you're not, make sure you are making your voice heard in your local scene that you feel they should be holding at least some "second edition" events.

Extended events are important to keep the interest of many veteran players who want to get to use most of their collection (especially right now when "second edition" means 3 ships per faction). "Second edition" events are important to get some of the newer players in!

Oh, rest assured, I'm vocal. For better or worse, I think I might be the primary local voice.

I see all sides, have a preference, but will be fine with whatever. I'd just like to see the local community grow, and it's not going to grow without catering to new players.

3 hours ago, pheaver said:

Generally, the game comes in a few phases:

1. Precombat. The goal in this phase is to get combat to occur at a place of my choosing, not of my opponent's. Here, you can plan more than one turn ahead as you both jockey for position before combat starts.

2. Blow things up! Goal in this phase is to not lose your red dice, while removing opponent's red dice. Here, I can't plan more than a turn ahead. Often, it's just "try to end up in a spot that I'll have good choices for next round / be behind or flanking my opponent / etc"

3. Mop-up. Generally, you know who's going to win at this point, and it's a matter of wiping out the opponent more efficiently to maximize MOV, or try to scrape some points out of a bad situation. Maybe you chase the one out you have in case the dice all fall your way. Here you can go back to planning further ahead since there are fewer variables.

By far my favorite part of the game is #1 pre combat/pre engagement.

Choices once your in the mix are rewarding to but its all the little stuff leading up to initial combat that keeps bringing me back for more game.

I know I get it wrong and over/under think it, but its the “phase” that I spend the most time trying and failing to get good. It was true for 1.0 as well just less obviously neccessary to fully think through in each matchup.

What makes it interesting is that the pre-engagement decisions are just as connected to the list I bring as they are to the list my opponent puts on the table. 2.0 makes me feel like I have a slightly different pre combat puzzle to solve from one game to the next. Where in 1.0 i was often just solving an alpha strike puzzle, a range bubble, or a decision not to engage at all last year in both competitive and casual play.

I'll just add to the bandwagon that good players seeing many turns ahead is not how it seems to work. I used to try to do it, but I quickly figured that looking at my opponent's ships too hard was actually not helpful. Just getting a general idea of where they could be and a ballpark of the most likely places seemed to be sufficient.

It can basically be summed up with "most people are ridiculously predictable." You don't need to think hard about it and try to predict the future, they will more or less be where you'd expect them to be.

It's also why people kept getting crushed by my 7 year old. He appeared to be unpredictable to many because he didn't look at the board the same way they did, he played his ships, only loosely caring about all the options opened to the other ships. And he did so very, very quickly, adding psychological pressure and forcing people to play his "ballpark" game. When I play him, I do have to think ahead to figure out what "story" he's planning for, because he plays his game a few turns ahead and adjusts according to changing situation without a care about having to change his entire strategy.

People get attached to their way of playing. That's why they become predictable (and boring).

I've often picked wrong moves on purpose to be forced to figure out how to get out of that position. But then again, I play for the fun of puzzle solving, so my goals may not align with most

In other news, 401Games said they'd ship the bonus alt art damage decks soon, which may trigger my son to want to play some more if he has the chad deck (if we buy an Imperial box... scum is not what he likes to play).