SPectral camo is the kind of bull designers keep getting out. A game altering randomic mod? Why they even considered it's something beyond me... It's an upgrade that might either useless or gamewinning and it is tied with a green die roll.

And people wonder why I have so little trust on 2.0, it is obviously a 1.0 upgrade, but it speaks lenght if the devs where ok with printing it so close to their work on the new edition...

Just now, Sunitsa said:

SPectral camo is the kind of bull designers keep getting out. A game altering randomic mod? Why they even considered it's something beyond me... It's an upgrade that might either useless or gamewinning and it is tied with a green die roll.

And people wonder why I have so little trust on 2.0, it is obviously a 1.0 upgrade, but it speaks lenght if the devs where ok with printing it so close to their work on the new edition...

game is already broken lets brake it some more mentality?

1 hour ago, Makaze said:

The question is in the timing and specific wording. Because just having an ion token doesn't prevent you from doing non-focus actions. Large and medium ships can have an ion token and be completely unaffected so it doesn't follow the pattern set forth by other cards where having an evade token means you're "evading". Rather it's when the ion tokens are removed and what effect that has that matters. We know that you remove them and are forced to do a 1 straight green and can only take a focus action as your standard action.

But does that kick in when you would ordinarily reveal your dial? If so then supernatural happens first and you can ignore that

Does it only apply to actions taken in the standard take action phase? Again supernatural doesn't care

Or during the planning phase is a chip classified as ioned for the duration of the turn which then restricts it from performing non-focus actions regardless of phase? Maybe. Are bonus actions exempt? Who knows?

Point is we're still not sure on several small but important details like that

My thought is the status "ionized" (like "evading," or "shielded," or "damaged," it seems) is applied when your ship has the appropriate number of ion tokens.

At that point, you are restricted to only focus actions and your move will be a green 1 straight.

Then, after you perform an ion move (probably after the Perform Action step, or else this is a really narrow effect), you remove all ion tokens and lose the "ionized" status.

1 minute ago, Sunitsa said:

SPectral camo is the kind of bull designers keep getting out. A game altering randomic mod? Why they even considered it's something beyond me... It's an upgrade that might either useless or gamewinning and it is tied with a green die roll.

And people wonder why I have so little trust on 2.0, it is obviously a 1.0 upgrade, but it speaks lenght if the devs where ok with printing it so close to their work on the new edition...

I'm a little confused about the pessimism of 2.0, given your excitement and interest in 1.0, as 1.0 is where all the clearly broken stuff is.

I mean, if you were pessimistic about 1.0, I'd get it, but the dichotomy is confusing to me.

For what it's worth, the stuff we've seen in 2.0, in aggregate, seems pretty balanced. The few things people in the thread have flagged, at least some have confirmed are quite expensive. Hence my cautious optimism and excitement for 2.0.

3 minutes ago, Wiredin said:

game is already broken lets brake it some more mentality?

It's not about the "brokeness" of the card that I complain about, it's the randomness.

It's a **** design, period.

Just now, Sunitsa said:

It's not about the "brokeness" of the card that I complain about, it's the randomness.

It's a **** design, period.

I Agree™.

1 minute ago, Sunitsa said:

It's not about the "brokeness" of the card that I complain about, it's the randomness.

It's a **** design, period.

It's not random - c3po or palpatine is involved, let's be honest.

7 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

SPectral camo is the kind of bull designers keep getting out. A game altering randomic mod? Why they even considered it's something beyond me... It's an upgrade that might either useless or gamewinning and it is tied with a green die roll.

And people wonder why I have so little trust on 2.0, it is obviously a 1.0 upgrade, but it speaks lenght if the devs where ok with printing it so close to their work on the new edition...

Harpoon Missiles were released into 1.0 last October. If you don't think they were done with 2.0 launch dev by then, you're fooling yourself.

They clearly decided to just have a big festival of brokenness before moving to 2.0.

Heh, you guys should look into current Hearthstone if you want to see some truly broken designs.

Their approach seems to be to create broken random things, and then create some more broken random things for the other side, to make it "balanced".

X-Wing (even in 1.0) is a shining example of designer restrain and balance compared to that..

And 2.0 doesn't even live in the same universe..

So on the topic of U-Wings being broken... how's this for a 59-point cross faction tourney coming up soon?

Partisan Renegade (28) - U-Wing
Trajectory Simulator (1), Renegade Refit (-2), Sabine Wren (2), •Cad Bane (2), •Bomblet Generator (3)

Scarif Base Pilot (31) - TIE Reaper
•Ezra Bridger (3), •Kylo Ren (3), •Experimental Interface (3), Advanced Ailerons (0)

4 minutes ago, Kieransi said:

So on the topic of U-Wings being broken... how's this for a 59-point cross faction tourney coming up soon?

Partisan Renegade (28) - U-Wing
Trajectory Simulator (1), Renegade Refit (-2), Sabine Wren (2), •Cad Bane (2), •Bomblet Generator (3)

Scarif Base Pilot (31) - TIE Reaper
•Ezra Bridger (3), •Kylo Ren (3), •Experimental Interface (3), Advanced Ailerons (0)

It seems like a lot of points to be reveal bombing at PS1.

2 minutes ago, viedit said:

It seems like a lot of points to be reveal bombing at PS1.

Seriously, put Sabine on that Reaper - you thought the advanced slam gone?

16 minutes ago, player44455 said:

Heh, you guys should look into current Hearthstone if you want to see some truly broken designs.

Their approach seems to be to create broken random things, and then create some more broken random things for the other side, to make it "balanced".

X-Wing (even in 1.0) is a shining example of designer restrain and balance compared to that..

And 2.0 doesn't even live in the same universe..

I played a bit of the TCG Shadowfist in the early 2000s. Not seriously at all, just some buddies around a card table. It was readily apparent that the designers of that game thought crazy **** was a feature. It was the "if everybody has nukes it's okay" attitdude. It was a lot of fun, but I wouldn't want a competitive game based on it.

6 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

I'm a little confused about the pessimism of 2.0, given your excitement and interest in 1.0, as 1.0 is where all the clearly broken stuff is.

I mean, if you were pessimistic about 1.0, I'd get it, but the dichotomy is confusing to me.

For what it's worth, the stuff we've seen in 2.0, in aggregate, seems pretty balanced. The few things people in the thread have flagged, at least some have confirmed are quite expensive. Hence my cautious optimism and excitement for 2.0.

As I already said, I like 1.0

I would have loved some adjustment (like every passive mod not working if the ship bumped and half points granted by any 40+ points ship), but overall I like the state of the game, I even like the meta.

It involves much more manouvers and mind games than people give credit, and I speak from an avid competitive players who regularly play top meta lists against other similarly competitive players point of view, and after a season that saw me playing in the top in more than a couple of big tournaments.

I like playing against harpoon and tlt because they make it a game of manouvers and range control with less luck involved than some previous "golden era" of arc ships when jousting was far more common.

To put things into prospective, some of the most fun I have ever had with xwing involved playing against 3 attanni torpedoes jumpmasters flown by good players, because that was really a time where arcs and blocks mattered and I couldn't relay on them blanking out to carry home the game.

I also like to play with and against TLT because they have a freaking r1 bubble that I can exploit (or I need to not let my opponent exploit) and they actually punish me if I fail.

In general, the more the dice are modified, the more I know I need to relay on manouver to win game. That's why I like 1.0 (even thought, as I said, some modifiers are a bit too much, I would love to see blocking mattering more). I also think current meta is more varied than what people give credit, maybe because I've never been a "faction guy" but mostly a "list guy": I see 6-7 different tier 1 lists and plenty more tier 2, the lack of scum doesn't really bother me in this context.

On the other side, what I see of 2.0 seems to oriented to less modifications with all the luck implications it carries with it and an alleged focus on manouvers that I'm failing to see, with the same Devs that designed obscenity like Palpatine, Manaroo and x7 in charge of making a new game all yet to explore while scrapping the good old one.

As we have already discovered, it seems I'm the only one sharing this feeling in the crowd who write in this thread... Will 2.0 be balanced? I don't know, but previous experience with xwing designers tends to put me on the side of that it won't, thus my pessimism.

At least I'm hoping they will be more eager to fix eventual mistakes in 2.0

5 minutes ago, skotothalamos said:

Harpoon Missiles were released into 1.0 last October. If you don't think they were done with 2.0 launch dev by then, you're fooling yourself.

They clearly decided to just have a big festival of brokenness before moving to 2.0.

I wasn't complaining about that card being broken, we will have to see where it fits (probably on miranda and lowhrick thought, both ships that definetely didn't need it), I'm complaining about the designing of strong effect triggered by a die roll

42 minutes ago, Brunas said:

It's not random - c3po or palpatine is involved, let's be honest.

But muh variance

13 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

I wasn't complaining about that card being broken, we will have to see where it fits (probably on miranda and lowhrick thought, both ships that definetely didn't need it), I'm complaining about the designing of strong effect triggered by a die roll

I didn't mean to seem like I'm attacking you. Our disagreement on what mods to the game are well defined.

However, this new card is only random for some lists - it's NOT random for others.

It just seemed odd to pick on 2.0 for a silly 1.0 card, when the card looks as silly as a LOT of 1.0 cards.

29 minutes ago, Kieransi said:

So on the topic of U-Wings being broken... how's this for a 59-point cross faction tourney coming up soon?

Partisan Renegade (28) - U-Wing
Trajectory Simulator (1), Renegade Refit (-2), Sabine Wren (2), •Cad Bane (2), •Bomblet Generator (3)

Scarif Base Pilot (31) - TIE Reaper
•Ezra Bridger (3), •Kylo Ren (3), •Experimental Interface (3), Advanced Ailerons (0)

RAC with Adapt, Engine, Kylo, Boba, Sabine, and Bomblet is 59.

Can we get a Krayt bounty on first store championship that features 4 jumpmasters vs 5 U-wings on the finals table?

Just now, Kaptin Krunch said:

RAC with Adapt, Engine, Kylo, Boba, Sabine, and Bomblet is 59.

The guy running it made us have two ships, both from different factions.

Basically he tries his hardest to make sure he can break formats by just flying Kihraxes.

Otherwise I'd totally cheese a fat falcon with Cad, Sabine, and Bomblet

2 minutes ago, viedit said:

Can we get a Krayt bounty on first store championship that features 4 jumpmasters vs 5 U-wings on the finals table?

Adding on to this, I want the jumpmaster bounty to continue into 2.0.

With all the nerfs, I'm guessing 5 or maybe even 6 Jumpmasters fits into 200 points

25 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

In general, the more the dice are modified, the more I know I need to relay on manouver to win game.

I think this is the piece that could use a little more elaboration.

For me at least I find that the less passive or double modification that is available the more my dial choices matter.

Basically if I have to use a re-position action to make up for a mistake I am sacrificing focus or target lock actions I desperately need to modify my dice.

That paired with the fact that blocking kinda matters and bullseye arcs serve a real purpose leads to a little more depth.

Also you may be over-estimating how hard it actually will be to modify your dice in 2.0.

Double defensive mods are not readily available to all that many things but red dice mods are pretty widely available between Coordinate, Force Users, Focus, Target Lock sharing, bullseye mods, etc.

Its not like in 2.0 your just gonna be shooting unmodified dice at each other all game.

If you are some serious mistakes were made either with dials, actions, or list building.

All this said I could see a version of X-Wing that didnt involve dice at all almost working but im not sure it would be more fun.

@Sunitsa - It sounds like you want more of a European style game, whereas X-Wing is more of an Ameritrash game.

7 minutes ago, viedit said:

Can we get a Krayt bounty on first store championship that features 4 jumpmasters vs 5 U-wings on the finals table?

I don't think we do bounties on alternate formats, but that is ultimately decided by @Brunas

1 minute ago, Boom Owl said:

Its not like in 2.0 your just gonna be shooting unmodified dice at each other all game.

I mean, we know some people will be...

50 minutes ago, player44455 said:

Heh, you guys should look into current Hearthstone if you want to see some truly broken designs.

Play Shudderwock, get a sandwich, come back and see if you won.

Just now, gennataos said:

@Sunitsa - It sounds like you want more of a European style game, whereas X-Wing is more of an Ameritrash game.

I'm not sure that's a fair assessment.

If every ship simply did an expected/average damage, the game would be far more deterministic, edging increasingly closer to chess.

Chess is great, but not every game needs to be chess/deterministic. A small, dedicated, and predictable amount of variance means decisions fall on a probabilistic spectrum, and that can be interesting unto itself.