So, one of the things that has annoyed me with Destiny so far is that far too many Hero characters seem to fall into high (sometimes overcosted) 'tentpole' characters and low cost support characters. So I decided to sit down and have a look at how many characters actually fit into four main brackets. I also wanted to have a look at the number of low cost elite 'fighter' characters, as I feel that Heroes have a *significant* lack of options compared to Heroes.

Note this includes the currently completely spoiled EoW cards. I believe we currently know six Heroes characters and three Villains; as such the Heroes have a few extras here.

Elite characters less than 16 points - i.e. half your total points or less

Heroes: 8 characters (# of characters with 2 damage sides = 2, average health = 8.9)

Villains: 11 characters (# of characters with 2 or more damage sides = 8, average health = 10)

Elite characters 16-19 points - You can still run another Elite character

Heroes: 9 characters

Villains: 6 characters

Elite characters 20+ points - You generally can't run a second Elite character (yes, Ezra changes this, but that's currently the only option)

Heroes: 6 characters

Villains: 3 characters

Non-Unique characters (7-10 points)

Heroes: 7 characters (# of characters with 3 damage sides = 1)

Villains: 7 characters (# of characters with 3 or more damage sides = 6)

Some observations:

• Villains have far more low cost characters, and far more low cost characters that can actually achieve the game's main objective (dealing damage). The ratio here is kind of ridiculous.
• Villains have multiple 15 point character options, heroes get none. Heroes get significantly more 16 and 18 point options, but have less choices on who to use alongside them.
• Elite characters is somewhat misleading, as in EoW the three spoiled Hero Legendary cards all fit this category, and the Villains Legendary doesn't. This may balance out.
• Villain characters tend to have more modified sides, though not to a huge degree overall. There are several characters that are exceptions to this.
• Villain characters have slightly more pay sides. This is likely due to the cost breakdowns.
• Average health for other cost brackets is mostly equal (except 20+ because of Palpatine), indicating that on average heroes aren't getting higher health totals to compensate. Though I didn't average health over specific costs which may changes things slightly.

There's been talk of a 'Villain bias' since Awakenings, and I find it hard to argue with it when you look at things like this. While I can understand a desire to make the sides feel different, the simple fact is that Villains have a multitude of good characters choices, where as Heroes often have to take what they can get. Heroes tend to have higher costs that are more difficult to fit into 30 points. Meanwhile almost all of the low cost Heroes characters fall into a support character role with comparatively limited damage output. This would be fine if Hero characters were receiving compensation elsewhere, however I do not believe they do.

Overall, After going through this, I really hope we see some changes in how characters are designed, otherwise I foresee Heroes continuing to be second rate in comparison to their dark side rivals. While Heroes have had successes with certain decks, Villains seem to have far more consistent overall results, and I'd like to see that be balanced a lot better going forward.

100% agree. The main problem with the current meta is that sure, Heroes are winning slightly above Villains, but that is based off 2 decks (1 mainly): ePoe/eMaz & eHan/eRey. While you look at Villains who have a magnitude of different decks to be competitive: eVader/Raider, eVader/Guard, ePalp, eUnkar/FN/Guard, eBala/FN/Guard, ePhasma/FO Trooper/Guavian, eVader/eKylo, eVader/eFN, eJabba/eDooku, eIg-88/FN, & eDooku/eAsajj.

There's some heavy hitters in their arsenal as well for such efficient point costs.

That's the problem that apparently FFG can't get. They need to focus on creating a bunch of 12-15 point cost characters so that way the meta can be so diverse. They're so focused on creating a 7-22 range cost, it's stupid. Let us create a bunch of fun combos, so we can play and be competitive. Not just, okay Heroes you get these 2 decks and Villains you can have these 10 decks...ready, set, go!

~D

Great points, @Abyss and @HoodieDM! You clearly did a ton of research for this, Abyss, and the quantitative data is really useful!

@Kieransi

Don't hijack someone's post with a topic completely different. The OP clearly did a lot of homework on his post so this thread should be focused on that and not your ridiculous post on banned semi banned cards.

Great analysis. I've also felt that Hero desperately needs more damage-oriented elite characters in the 12-15 point slots and that the primary hindrance for Hero is just inadequate pairings. Since EaW is apparently going to be completing (as in, filling in all the holes) the card pool I'm hoping we will see those slots filled. This would go a long way to making much more hero characters viable competitively instead of just the small handful that were lucky enough to get a good pairing early.

Also, very interesting trend you've found in regards to cost sides and modifiers across affiliations.

There are so many times I've started crafting a hero deck and wished I had a 7 point character! I feel they are holding out on combos that are obvious for this game. We've got Old Ben.... so where is Farmboy Luke to go with him? And why start with Old Ben when we already have Qui-Gon but no Obi-wan "Young Apprentice" to go with him? The Rebel Commando's are awesome and all, but I can't fit one in a Han and Leia deck to go raid Endor!

3 hours ago, Bigulf said:

Don't hijack someone's post

He says without a hint of irony...

Anyway, on topic:

It definitely is plain to see that heroes lack the mid-priced strong characters that villains seem to have buckets of. They desperately need some 10/13 cost characters capable of pumping out a reasonable amount of damage. Ideally they need some good 17 point elite characters to pair them with too(not "glorified +2 or 3 but only on once dice" specials...) Qui Gon is pretty good, but right now he (and every other high priced hero) has basically a choice of Rey(or Maz)for a partner.

Even the hero non uniques are upsettingly bad - how the hell is Jedi Acolyte 9 points? For that he needs 3 more health at a minimum, and even then he's still not gonna make many decks.

... i might go make an eRey/acolyte/acolyte deck now... just because.

3 hours ago, Bigulf said:

@Kieransi

Don't hijack someone's post with a topic completely different. The OP clearly did a lot of homework on his post so this thread should be focused on that and not your ridiculous post on banned semi banned cards.

Done. I had thought up the idea earlier today, and I guess I thought it was related, since there's a lack of diversity amongst hero decks, and until new characters show up the best we can do is try to get rid of Rey and Maz. The level of hostility in this post shows I was smart to not try to start a new thread.

And to get back on topic, yeah, the blue heroes other than Rey are really bad. But at least other factions have some decent non-uniques: Hired Gun is still really nice (lots of damage, nine health), so I'll continue to play Han/Gun/Gun and Mothma/Gun/Gun!

38 minutes ago, Stone37 said:

There are so many times I've started crafting a hero deck and wished I had a 7 point character! I feel they are holding out on combos that are obvious for this game. We've got Old Ben.... so where is Farmboy Luke to go with him? And why start with Old Ben when we already have Qui-Gon but no Obi-wan "Young Apprentice" to go with him? The Rebel Commando's are awesome and all, but I can't fit one in a Han and Leia deck to go raid Endor!

I wonder if FFG has fallen into a trap of trying too hard to have the heroes compete with each other for power? Each time they release one of the big name main characters, they try to make that character crazy powerful but then they end up making them too inflexible. For example, they didn't really need to make Jyn cost 20 points elite, but I think they did so because she is the main protagonist of Rogue One, so they decided she had to be even more powerful than Han Solo and Princess Leia, and thus she had to be more expensive. Then when they made K-2SO, they must've pointed out that he captured Jyn, and thus he had to cost 20 as well. I only think this will continue, with characters like Sabine and Mace Windu, for example. I'm guessing Ahsoka will be yet another high-power high-cost character. I agree that it would be really nice if we start to get more cheap, younger versions of characters like Spirit of Rebellion Darth Vader.

10 minutes ago, Kieransi said:

I wonder if FFG has fallen into a trap of trying too hard to have the heroes compete with each other for power?

You might be on to something here. And this misses the point of Star Wars. These characters work together and as fans we love that! Rebels character should fit well together. Rogue One characters should fit well together. etc. The fun in deck crafting is making the teams. It does feel very limiting at times.

Looking at current meta, here are the simple changes that could be made to point costs that would be great. (This is in contrast to FN, Unkar, Poe, Vader, Palp, Maz, & Rey):

Luke Skywalker: 15/19

Obi-Wan Kenobi: 14/18

Jyn Erso: 14/18

Chirruit Imwe: 12/15

Finn: 12/15

Luminara Undili: 11/14

Mon Mothma: 10/13

Admiral Ackbar: 10/13

Padme Amidala: 10/13

Asajj Ventress: 10/13

I think these simple changes would open up so many different decks that the meta would be awesome. But this is just my personal opinion. But comparing these to the above "Magnificent-Seven".

~D

4 hours ago, HoodieDM said:

Looking at current meta, here are the simple changes that could be made to point costs that would be great. (This is in contrast to FN, Unkar, Poe, Vader, Palp, Maz, & Rey):

Luke Skywalker: 15/19

Obi-Wan Kenobi: 14/18

Jyn Erso: 14/18

Chirruit Imwe: 12/15

Finn: 12/15

Luminara Undili: 11/14

Mon Mothma: 10/13

Admiral Ackbar: 10/13

Padme Amidala: 10/13

Asajj Ventress: 10/13

I think these simple changes would open up so many different decks that the meta would be awesome. But this is just my personal opinion. But comparing these to the above "Magnificent-Seven".

~D

I think you have luke and Obi-wan backwards. Obi-wan is clearly better but at the same time making Luke 14/18 would make him to strong. I think Luke should be 15/19 obi-wan is fine where he is at. Jyn I think you got right, Chirrut and Finn are dead on, Luminara is dead on, Mothma ackbar, and padme are honestly fine especially mothma with luke's change as they are as is ventress if anything should change with ventress its her health.

While it would be a bit tricky, FFG can make the above corrections to certain character costs, while leaving the dice the same.

They could then release a LCG style redux pack for these characters. Basically you buy a small box of cards to replace the old cards (no dice).

The artwork can be the same or they can change it up for less confusion.

Hero characters that are the primary damage dealers are over-costed across the board compared to Villian.

Aside from just the cost, Hero also lack a good utility characters like Plutt who is cheap enough to assist a number of decks.

I would from jedi acolyte to 7 based on current stats. 7 health for 9 points WTF!

I am sick of Rey being the auto support, her dice are rubbish and her ability just leads to NPE.

Both she and Nines need an errata to 'the first time each turn'.

On 7/28/2017 at 0:53 AM, tunewalker said:

I think you have luke and Obi-wan backwards. Obi-wan is clearly better but at the same time making Luke 14/18 would make him to strong. I think Luke should be 15/19 obi-wan is fine where he is at. Jyn I think you got right, Chirrut and Finn are dead on, Luminara is dead on, Mothma ackbar, and padme are honestly fine especially mothma with luke's change as they are as is ventress if anything should change with ventress its her health.

Thanks.

Obi-Wan needs to be 14/18. The 14 allows you to actually single die him bc you are going to Guardian two non-uniques (like Padawan). He has good sides, but even if youre going to double die him, hes got nobody to pair with thats decent. Maz is okay, but Id rather have Luke. Ezra....maybe...

MM, Ackbar, and Padme need to be 10/13 heck if not 9/12 bc you compare them to Unkar or even Hera now and theyre over costed.

~D

30 minutes ago, HoodieDM said:

Thanks.

Obi-Wan needs to be 14/18. The 14 allows you to actually single die him bc you are going to Guardian two non-uniques (like Padawan). He has good sides, but even if youre going to double die him, hes got nobody to pair with thats decent. Maz is okay, but Id rather have Luke. Ezra....maybe...

MM, Ackbar, and Padme need to be 10/13 heck if not 9/12 bc you compare them to Unkar or even Hera now and theyre over costed.

~D

You do realize Obi-wan is ALREADY better then Luke at the same price point. Gaurdian already saves more damage then the 1 extra health that Luke has. The Focus sides are already better then having a 1 shield. They both already have a 3 damage side. Seriously if you made Obi-wan CHEAPER then luke, Luke might as well not exist. Truthfully he already close to the "might as well not exist" catagory as Obi-wan is just better in almost every way would be less so if you could pair Luke with 2 dice Maz, but Obi-wan doesnt need to be better at all he is already really good. Luke isnt. Obi-wan's Guardian doesnt need to be used with a pair of non-uniques its good even with him as you can remove a base damage side and prevent them from resolving modifiers. If they go for Rey instead of Obi-wan then the guardian ability keeps them BOTH alive longer and if they go for Obi-wan first its no different then them going for Luke first except you get a free One with the force when the time comes instead of having to find both Premonitions or having to pay 4 for the same thing.

21 hours ago, tunewalker said:

You do realize Obi-wan is ALREADY better then Luke at the same price point. Gaurdian already saves more damage then the 1 extra health that Luke has. The Focus sides are already better then having a 1 shield. They both already have a 3 damage side. Seriously if you made Obi-wan CHEAPER then luke, Luke might as well not exist. Truthfully he already close to the "might as well not exist" catagory as Obi-wan is just better in almost every way would be less so if you could pair Luke with 2 dice Maz, but Obi-wan doesnt need to be better at all he is already really good. Luke isnt. Obi-wan's Guardian doesnt need to be used with a pair of non-uniques its good even with him as you can remove a base damage side and prevent them from resolving modifiers. If they go for Rey instead of Obi-wan then the guardian ability keeps them BOTH alive longer and if they go for Obi-wan first its no different then them going for Luke first except you get a free One with the force when the time comes instead of having to find both Premonitions or having to pay 4 for the same thing.

I dont believe Obi-Wan is better than Luke. Ive seen nobody use him and pair anything with him thats competitive. Lukes draw power is great. Also, Guardian on your 2 die elite, 20 cost character is terrible. Why would I want to do damage to him? Especially with whats out there right now? Hardly anybody is playing with modifier sides, they focus on black. So why would I help them do damage to Obi-Wan when I dont want to do damage to Obi-Wan? Seriously, Obi-Wan needs to be 14/18 to be effective. You are the first person whose ever said Obi-Wan is better than Luke.

~D

1 hour ago, HoodieDM said:

I dont believe Obi-Wan is better than Luke. Ive seen nobody use him and pair anything with him thats competitive. Lukes draw power is great. Also, Guardian on your 2 die elite, 20 cost character is terrible. Why would I want to do damage to him? Especially with whats out there right now? Hardly anybody is playing with modifier sides, they focus on black. So why would I help them do damage to Obi-Wan when I dont want to do damage to Obi-Wan? Seriously, Obi-Wan needs to be 14/18 to be effective. You are the first person whose ever said Obi-Wan is better than Luke.

~D

Then you havent been seeing anyone run Obi-wan/rey the same way you have seen Luke/rey. The same deck that people have made with Luke Rey is made better simply by taking luke out and slotting in Obi-wan. With both Luke or Obi-wan they SHOULD be going for the elite character. With Obi-wan if they go for the Elite character then you can be happy knowing that even after he dies you will get a free 4 cost upgrade out, in addition when they DO run modified damage sides or say you are against a Poe where you know he is just going to focus into the much WORSE special side or against palpatine and you just remove his dice all together so he cant get that extra 2 you can basically heroism for free and with out taking up a card slot in your deck or your hand. Basically take what ever deck you run Luke in replace him with Obi-wan and your deck just got better unless you are running synchronicity which is super situational. Obi-wan is like having a Luke that gives you a free Premonition and a free heroism all without milling himself faster against mill decks and while having an even better side to use My Ally is the force with in the 2 focus side and because some people get scared about giving you a free premonition some wont even go for obi-wan first. Everyone I know that USED to run Luke competitively has swapped to Obi-wan and have not looked back as obi-wan is "just pure better". This is in SoCal and this is with people that have won store champs trust me Obi-wan doesnt need help if he goes down to 14/18 then he will be broken strong vs just strong like he is now.

Yeah, Obi Wan is good! His dice is better than Luke's (focus vs. losing a damage on one of his sides) and Guardian is limited, but can kill Palpatine (he doesn't get the bonus damage) and leaves modified damage stranded. The only reason Obi Wan doesn't win more tournaments is that half of the players are too scared to play him because they've heard he's not good, and the other half don't own him because he's a legendary.

Sorry, but Obi Wan is way better than Luke, and eObiWan/eRey would be completely broken.

Sigh!

There is a reason that most of us are not game designers.

@Abyss yes, as others have said: great crunching of the data. I noticed something immediately that you did not point out:

Yes, villains have more damage out put, but the heroes are (generally) more defensive: lots more avalibility of shields.

Does generating more shields off set the higher base damage of Villain character die? Now there would be some fun numbers to crunch!

Look at Luke's LS vs Kylo's LS. Perfect example of differing play styles, but not equal.

i understand the frustration with the points for heroes. Still pretty miffed that I can't run eBaze/eChirrutt. But what choice is there to make if I could do this? Instead the game designers have left me a puzzle to figure out: eBaze/Chirrut or Baze/eChirrut?

In my own personal opinion, I still think there is a LOT of puzzles to figure out with this game, and will continue to be more, with additional sets.

The Rebels had an uphill battle against the Established Law and Order of the Galaxy, I think the designers have captured that!

1 hour ago, Jut said:

Sigh!

There is a reason that most of us are not game designers.

You are right, most of us aren't game designers, but what we are good at (as a collective group) is evaluating points costs and abilities.

Right off the bat dealing damage and gaining shields are not even in the same league due to the cap on shields, were you able to gain unlimited amount of shields on a character we could possibly agree on a fair playing field, but then on top of the cap there are several very good cards that deal unblockable damage, further negating the value of shields over damage.

As for Luke's sabre vs. Kylo's sabre, Kylo's every day of the week! 4 damage sides vs. 3 and one of the Kylo sabre faces potentially gets to roll the die back in, no contest.

Same with the new Rebel mirror F11D that’s special gives shields instead of damage, if you could play either in a hero deck you would take the original F11D every time.

This is all beside the fact that character point pairing appears to actually be ignored by the developers (from the horse's mouth no less) in favour of creating the characters that best fit the theme of the character and its relative power in the Star Wars universe, which is great but Heroes are currently stuck with an oversupply of heavy hitters in the 15/20 point range with no good options to pair them with (except Rey) while Villains have a number of good quality elite characters that are in the 13-17 point range with a vastly superior pool of character combinations that fit within the 30 points.

3 hours ago, Jut said:

Sigh!

There is a reason that most of us are not game designers.

@Abyss yes, as others have said: great crunching of the data. I noticed something immediately that you did not point out:

Yes, villains have more damage out put, but the heroes are (generally) more defensive: lots more avalibility of shields.

Does generating more shields off set the higher base damage of Villain character die? Now there would be some fun numbers to crunch!

Look at Luke's LS vs Kylo's LS. Perfect example of differing play styles, but not equal.

i understand the frustration with the points for heroes. Still pretty miffed that I can't run eBaze/eChirrutt. But what choice is there to make if I could do this? Instead the game designers have left me a puzzle to figure out: eBaze/Chirrut or Baze/eChirrut?

In my own personal opinion, I still think there is a LOT of puzzles to figure out with this game, and will continue to be more, with additional sets.

The Rebels had an uphill battle against the Established Law and Order of the Galaxy, I think the designers have captured that!

I didn't point out shields for one very simple reason - it's mostly wrong. I originally assumed that Heroes were inherently better with shields; however based on the current characters there are actually several more villain characters with at least one shield (The current EoW spoilers do balance this out, but that's likely at least in part due to having three more characters spoiled). The only real stand out on shields for heroes is Qui-Gonn and Han, for obvious reasons. Granted, heroes do seem to get more focus on shields in terms of other cards, but I was only intending to compare characters. (Also, I don't think it really disproves 'heroes are bad' even if they did have a focus on shields, when they then print Vibroknife).

I actually don't particularly want 'thematic' pairings to start with - it forces too many restrictions on design, and as you've pointed out it removes a lot of deck building choices (but the second version of most main characters should be 14-16 points elite). But the issue for me isn't being able to particular theme teams- it's that right now, many of the 'big' Heroes characters feel either overcosted or poorly costed, and their choice for teamates is 'support character or Rey'. And heck, half the support characters do the same thing anyway. In comparison, Villains have significantly more variety in terms of character roles and points costs.

On ‎7‎/‎30‎/‎2017 at 6:39 PM, tunewalker said:

Then you havent been seeing anyone run Obi-wan/rey the same way you have seen Luke/rey. The same deck that people have made with Luke Rey is made better simply by taking luke out and slotting in Obi-wan. With both Luke or Obi-wan they SHOULD be going for the elite character. With Obi-wan if they go for the Elite character then you can be happy knowing that even after he dies you will get a free 4 cost upgrade out, in addition when they DO run modified damage sides or say you are against a Poe where you know he is just going to focus into the much WORSE special side or against palpatine and you just remove his dice all together so he cant get that extra 2 you can basically heroism for free and with out taking up a card slot in your deck or your hand. Basically take what ever deck you run Luke in replace him with Obi-wan and your deck just got better unless you are running synchronicity which is super situational. Obi-wan is like having a Luke that gives you a free Premonition and a free heroism all without milling himself faster against mill decks and while having an even better side to use My Ally is the force with in the 2 focus side and because some people get scared about giving you a free premonition some wont even go for obi-wan first. Everyone I know that USED to run Luke competitively has swapped to Obi-wan and have not looked back as obi-wan is "just pure better". This is in SoCal and this is with people that have won store champs trust me Obi-wan doesnt need help if he goes down to 14/18 then he will be broken strong vs just strong like he is now.

Then maybe when he starts winning more I'll pay attention.

At this point I haven't seen a single SC he's won. Now this is just going off The Chance Cube's reports. But they have well over 200+ SC recordings and they don't have anything with Obi-Wan at all. Luke decks barely made any of the pre-errata top 4 characters...like 2%. Now eLuke/Maz has won a couple since the errata took place, but that's not saying much. Obi-Wan still hasn't even shown up in their database as Winning/Top4.

~D

5 hours ago, HoodieDM said:

Then maybe when he starts winning more I'll pay attention.

At this point I haven't seen a single SC he's won. Now this is just going off The Chance Cube's reports. But they have well over 200+ SC recordings and they don't have anything with Obi-Wan at all. Luke decks barely made any of the pre-errata top 4 characters...like 2%. Now eLuke/Maz has won a couple since the errata took place, but that's not saying much. Obi-Wan still hasn't even shown up in their database as Winning/Top4.

~D

I understand that, its kind of people discovering him still like Phasma didnt really show up big till the end of Awakenings I think that's kind of Obi-wan in this set people are just now starting to discover him and most of the SC in my area anyway, are already done by the time people started even testing with him.

I played Armada for about 2 years and in all that time I played an Imperial Fleet about 6 times. I enjoy playing the Rebels in my Star Wars games. I think with Destiny I can play 4-6 games in the same time I played an Armada game and thus I am not quite so precious. However, I think with SoR my time is spent with the villains far more than the heroes. So at least in terms of my general experience, it seems to agree with what is being said.

I'll just throw this out as a crazy silly idea, I like the idea of those acetate cards you use in gloom to play over the top of cards and change the card underneath. While I am confident that cards will be corrected and changed as we move forwards and rotate sets this could be used to make small changes easily and in a timely manner.

I think part of the problem seems to be that FFG are working off a list of cards to create and for the Heroes they just ended up working out as they have worked out, in terms of theme and cost.

14 hours ago, Amanal said:

I played Armada for about 2 years and in all that time I played an Imperial Fleet about 6 times. I enjoy playing the Rebels in my Star Wars games. I think with Destiny I can play 4-6 games in the same time I played an Armada game and thus I am not quite so precious. However, I think with SoR my time is spent with the villains far more than the heroes. So at least in terms of my general experience, it seems to agree with what is being said.

I'll just throw this out as a crazy silly idea, I like the idea of those acetate cards you use in gloom to play over the top of cards and change the card underneath. While I am confident that cards will be corrected and changed as we move forwards and rotate sets this could be used to make small changes easily and in a timely manner.

It was also be fine if they just changed the costs, so they can easily create Alt Art cards and use them in quarter kits or such. You'd the dice anyways and if they don't alter the dice, it's no big deal. There will be a printable errata card, but a physical AA would definitely work. This way we don't have to wait till reprints, rotation, etc.

~D