6 minutes ago, gennataos said:

Passive rerolls for the rest of your list for simply flying near a medium base on either side? Huh.

I dont mind that or Drea or Howlrunner actually. At least by definition there you have to pay the pts for an entire ship.

Its when a ship can natively double modify one or both sides of its dice completely on its own that I think things get a little weird in comparison to the "normal" ships that make up about 90% of the card pool.

Its why Force is such an insane mechanic. Its PTL without the stress or threat of being blocked but doesn't always grant double reposition. At least Force is charge based though.

4 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

I dont mind that or Drea or Howlrunner actually. At least by definition there you have to pay the pts for an entire ship.

Its when a ship can natively double modify one or both sides of its dice completely on its own that I think things get a little weird in comparison to the "normal" ships that make up about 90% of the card pool.

Its why Force is such an insane mechanic. Its PTL without the stress or threat of being blocked but doesn't always grant double reposition. At least Force is charge based though.

The Force is why Delta's are going to be so incredibly dangerous. They need to be expensive AF... If I can field 4 of them naked or with either or of the titles it's going to be a fantastic day... for me.

6 hours ago, Sunitsa said:

Can we say that we were overrating supernatural quite a bit then? Or is SuperLuke faring better?

It's more of "there are things that are even sillier than supernatural". So, kind of? Yes, super Luke is faring better, and doing much better than rebels in general, but he isn't dominating the game. I vote we come back and re-discuss supernatural when kylo drops.

1 hour ago, Boom Owl said:

I want to set my dial and see what I screwed up.

Everyone else already hit it, but this.

37 minutes ago, RStan said:

Well that's a new message when going to listen to a Krayt episode on Podbean....

Rekt

8 minutes ago, Brunas said:

It's more of "there are things that are even sillier than supernatural". So, kind of? Yes, super Luke is faring better, and doing much better than rebels in general, but he isn't dominating the game. I vote we come back and re-discuss supernatural when kylo drops.

Everyone else already hit it, but this.

Supernatural is stupid good. I'd pay 20 points for it on Luke. Vader... I'm not so sure. Taking that damage to get out of jail is a good trick if you screwed the pooch. But when Kylo drops... Jesus... Watch me as I just pickup Kylo up and put him wherever the **** I want!

I mean I did that with Vader doing something absolutely crazy to dodge the board on Saturday... nothing like boost, roll, focus, 3T to get a R1 no consequences on Rexler. I can see the matrix! you cannot run from my power!!!!! Or you just rolled 3 natty crits @ R3 and I blanked... fml.

My local group was talking yesterday, how complicated is having upgrades that scale with initiative? Like, Han Gunner costs (initiative) +2 or (initiative) x2 or something?

Supernatural would probably be a good good candidate for the same, it’s probably too expensive on a generic Inquisitor but too cheap on Luke or Vader (separate from Vader maybe being too expensive).

It seems about as straightforward as sliding costs based on agility or base size.

32 minutes ago, AEIllingworth said:

My local group was talking yesterday, how complicated is having upgrades that scale with initiative? Like, Han Gunner costs (initiative) +2 or (initiative) x2 or something?

Supernatural would probably be a good good candidate for the same, it’s probably too expensive on a generic Inquisitor but too cheap on Luke or Vader (separate from Vader maybe being too expensive).

It seems about as straightforward as sliding costs based on agility or base size.

Could also depend on the chassis. The TIE v1 is really strong with SNR just because you can link a boost/br into a focus. They can pretty much just focus/evade every turn.

34 minutes ago, AEIllingworth said:

My local group was talking yesterday, how complicated is having upgrades that scale with initiative? Like, Han Gunner costs (initiative) +2 or (initiative) x2 or something?

Supernatural would probably be a good good candidate for the same, it’s probably too expensive on a generic Inquisitor but too cheap on Luke or Vader (separate from Vader maybe being too expensive).

It seems about as straightforward as sliding costs based on agility or base size.

I wish they would do this. It's applicable to a lesser degree with cards like Afterburners. They're a possibility on higher Initiative pilots, but a no-go on lower initiative ones.

1 hour ago, Biophysical said:

I wish they would do this. It's applicable to a lesser degree with cards like Afterburners. They're a possibility on higher Initiative pilots, but a no-go on lower initiative ones.

Afterburners is a good candidate, except it seems like it is better on an initiative 1 than on an initiative 3. In an ideal world it would be some crazy math like |3-init|+5 or something, and we are all nerds but not that much. That gets you 7, 6, 5, 6, 7, 8 I think?

Edit: nah, that’s not right It should be something like 5, 3, 3, 5, 7, 9? So factor of 2, but an absolute value and b. I’m bad at algebra today.

2(|init-2.5|)+2, now no one can mentally build lists!

8 minutes ago, AEIllingworth said:

5, 3, 3, 5, 7, 9

uhh

4 or 5 seems fine, thanks

29 minutes ago, Brunas said:

uhh

4 or 5 seems fine, thanks

Yeah, no, this is a terrible idea. In some video game where we never have to do the math, maybe. (My idea is the terrible one here, not calling you out)

Is there ever a fixed cost that you’d be happy with it on a blocker and an ace, though?

pending THE’s definition of an ace, of course.

Edit: I’m trying too hard. Some things should scale with initiative. Linear is fine to try it out. Maybe some things should scale with a chassis having boost or barrel roll built in? I like what they did with agility and base size, but I’d like to see a few other ones too.

3 hours ago, Brunas said:

It's more of "there are things that are even sillier than supernatural". So, kind of? Yes,

Before 2.0 dropped I was scared by highest ps repositioning and too efficient generics.

It turned out I only had to be scared of the few things who kept having easy to get double modifiers. Shame on me, it wasn't like I had the whole first edition to figure it out

3 hours ago, Brunas said:

super Luke is faring better, and doing much better than rebels in general, but he isn't dominating the game.

You know you can't say that without handling out some numbers to satisfy my junky addiction to stats right?

Han/Luke

(92) Han Solo
(14) Kanan Jarrus
(2) Jyn Erso
(1) Trick Shot
Points 109

(62) Luke Skywalker
(12) Supernatural Reflexes
(0) Servomotor S-foils
(9) Proton Torpedoes
Points 83

Total points: 192

Been doing pretty good with this Han and Luke is of course really good. Just haven’t decided if R5, R2, or R2-D2 should be the droid or no droid at all and the bid is the better option. Seems like most Luke’s have been no droid, but typically 3-4 ship builds.

1 hour ago, Sunitsa said:

Before 2.0 dropped I was scared by highest ps repositioning and too efficient generics.

It turned out I only had to be scared of the few things who kept having easy to get double modifiers. Shame on me, it wasn't like I had the whole first edition to figure it out

You know you can't say that without handling out some numbers to satisfy my junky addiction to stats right?

Haha, at some point I'd like to track down all the things we (as a community) said about second edition and how far we missed the mark. I remember someone saying Boba Fett wouldn't be good because of a lack of dice mods, we're all running around with chickens with our heads cut off because of supernatural reflexes and advanced sensors(1 for 3 isn't bad!)... Pretty funny, actually

Here's your stats!

GENERIC SMALL SAMPLE SIZE WARNING

Super luke does fine - 28% better than your average rebel list, but these numbers are so small if any one person made a single decision different he'd be at 11.4% or 5.7% instead of 8.7%

1 minute ago, Brunas said:

GENERIC SMALL SAMPLE SIZE WARNING

The mantra of rebel cut data.

2 hours ago, Brunas said:

Haha, at some point I'd like to track down all the things we (as a community) said about second edition and how far we missed the mark. I remember someone saying Boba Fett wouldn't be good because of a lack of dice mods, we're all running around with chickens with our heads cut off because of supernatural reflexes and advanced sensors(1 for 3 isn't bad!)... Pretty funny, actually

Here's your stats!

GENERIC SMALL SAMPLE SIZE WARNING

Super luke does fine - 28% better than your average rebel list, but these numbers are so small if any one person made a single decision different he'd be at 11.4% or 5.7% instead of 8.7%

I kinda love that the Force Upgrade that has the best cut % is "none".

Do you guys have a similar data set for lists that went 4-2? While I doubt it would be terribly different from the cut data, but it would be interesting to see what all is knocking on the door but coming up short due to the various reasons one falls short of a cut (sub-optimal list building, meeting an unexpected hard counter, losing slightly more MOV than someone else, outlier dice/crit variance, etc.).

If it's too much work, don't worry about it, but I just thought it would be interesting to see.

10 hours ago, PorgLeader said:

Do you guys have a similar data set for lists that went 4-2? While I doubt it would be terribly different from the cut data, but it would be interesting to see what all is knocking on the door but coming up short due to the various reasons one falls short of a cut (sub-optimal list building, meeting an unexpected hard counter, losing slightly more MOV than someone else, outlier dice/crit variance, etc.).

If it's too much work, don't worry about it, but I just thought it would be interesting to see.

Hmm, no we don't at the moment, but I'm not sure it would be impossibly difficult to build. Like you said, I'd expect it to be similar to what we have just a little less filtered towards "the good stuff"

Lando Calrissian — Modified YT-1300 Light Freighter 92
Nien Nunb 5
Ship Total: 97

Norra Wexley — ARC-170 Starfighter 55
Intimidation 3
“Zeb” Orrelios 1
Veteran Tail Gunner 4
Ship Total: 63

Sabine Wren — Attack Shuttle 38
Debris Gambit 2
Ship Total: 40
200/200

11 hours ago, PorgLeader said:

Do you guys have a similar data set for lists that went 4-2? While I doubt it would be terribly different from the cut data, but it would be interesting to see what all is knocking on the door but coming up short due to the various reasons one falls short of a cut (sub-optimal list building, meeting an unexpected hard counter, losing slightly more MOV than someone else, outlier dice/crit variance, etc.).

If it's too much work, don't worry about it, but I just thought it would be interesting to see.

100% of Luke Gunner’s on Han Solo have gone 4-2. Obviously, what Rebels really need is their training wheels back.

What would X-Wing look like if all ships were restricted to modifying dice only once per turn?

13 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

What would X-Wing look like if all ships were restricted to modifying dice only once per turn?

You mean for both offense and defense? Stuff would die quicker and engagements would be rarer imho.

Better Crack Shot or Predator on generic Saber Interceptor Aces?

I had a weird thought, and wanted to see what others thought.

We have an A-wing base I1 at 30 points. Great dial, tough enough for the points, low offense.

The I3 version is 34.

The mundane Baron of the Empire is also 34 for similar abilities (linked actions worse, but arguably better dial).

They can all get missiles to put them in the mid 30s to low 40s, depending on the exact upgrades.

These ships are not particularly good, they're certainly not tearing up the meta.

The TIEx1 has more in common with these ships than it does the X-wing. It's priced like an X-wing, but its additional die is very context dependent. A context that is strikingly similar to A-wings and V1s with missiles. The x1 has worse action economy and a much worse action selection, and is more expensive, but has that extra hit point.

My assertion is that an x1 generic should be priced more like an Imperial "dude" (Interceptor, Bomber with Barrage Rockets, Striker) than an X-wing. It's toughness is worth something, but only to let it get a lock and start contributing. In this context, is 36 points too few points for a Tempest? Is 33 too few?

I understand the price point of the x1 isn't one of the real sources of problems in the X-wing world, and it's not hamstringing Imperials by any means, I'm just wondering if this fairly radical assessment of costs feels accurate to you.

9 minutes ago, Biophysical said:

I had a weird thought, and wanted to see what others thought.

We have an A-wing base I1 at 30 points. Great dial, tough enough for the points, low offense.

The I3 version is 34.

The mundane Baron of the Empire is also 34 for similar abilities (linked actions worse, but arguably better dial).

They can all get missiles to put them in the mid 30s to low 40s, depending on the exact upgrades.

These ships are not particularly good, they're certainly not tearing up the meta.

The TIEx1 has more in common with these ships than it does the X-wing. It's priced like an X-wing, but its addition die is very context dependent. A context that is strikingly similar to A-wings and V1s with missiles. The x1 has worse action economy and a much worse action selection, and is more expensive, but has that extra hit point.

My assertion is that an x1 generic should be priced more like an Imperial "dude" (Interceptor, Bomber with Barrage Rockets, Striker) than an X-wing. It's toughness is worth something, but only to let it get a lock and start contributing. In this context, is 36 points too few points for a Tempest? Is 33 too few?

I understand the price point of the x1 isn't one of the real sources of problems in the X-wing world, and it's not hamstringing Imperials by any means, I'm just wondering if this fairly radical assessment of costs feels accurate to you.

This kinda goes back to our sliding scale of pricing per initiative. The chassis ability on x1 gets drastically better the later in a round you move (and the better your action economy).

The difference between the Tempest and Maarek is 9 (22% increase). The difference between a Scimitar and Tomax is 6 (21%). The difference between an Academy and Mauler is also 9 (39%).

Without a way to get a lock ahead of time, a low initiative x1 should be priced like a 2 dice gun, but initiative 5 and 6 should probably be priced like a 3 dice gun, and we don’t see that.

I would agree - I'd definitely take a Planetary Sentinel/Alpha Squadron/Barrage Scimitar over a Tempest.

It should probably be one of those fancy Title/Modification combo cards ala Wave III but you get the idea.