Power creep is a "soft rotation" where the overall pool of options keeps growing but the "viable" pool shrinks when new cards are released with increased power levels. in x-wing the developers attempt to keep the miniatures viable with new cards but the cards themselves may as well be disposable or on rotation.

overall I think this is great! The cool ships get to play and the old cards can just collect dust and maybe something comes along that makes them relevant.

however I do wish table clutter and stacks of upgrades were not required to fly old ships like an a-wing. maybe we will see more combo upgrade cards? but pobody's nerfect

how do you guys feel about this direction. I don't see a need to refresh the whole line at any point in the future. aside from wanting objective play in official events everything is fine.

Old cards... Wingman. Oportunist. Squad Leader.Do it yourself and boost this classics a little.

Veteran Squad Leader. 3 pts. As a FREE Action...

That's not what X-Wing 2.0 means

what do people want in a 2.0? a radical shift across all the numbers? different maneuver templates? what at the core of the game would you need changed?

There are so many threads, podcasts and blogposts on the topic, you should do some digging yourself.

Frequently mentioned, and colored by my biased memory, are:

• doubling of point costs for exacter balancing (e.g. Crackshot should then be 3pt because 1 now is not enough but 2 is too much)
• accuracy dice
• maybe differently colored attack dice (e.g. double hits, double evades)
• cancel crits with two evades
• inclusion of certain upgrades as core mechanic (e.g. Outmaneuver for everyone, +1 agility (or another defensive bonus) if you are shot out of arc)
• Review ordnance. Include range boni for laser weapons (turrets, cannons), make missiles good against high agility and torpedoes against low agility ships. This is easier with accuracy dice but could already be done now (cancel all results and deal X damage)
• change PWTs, they eat up a crew slot to mimic the gunner in the tower who actually shoots 360°
• review action economy - it's currently too easy to get full mods on shots
• review red/green dice creep
• review some ridiculously over- and undercosted ships (e.g. E-Wing and Jumpmaster)
• review some ridiculously good or bad dials (e.g. Jumpmaster and HWK/B-Wing)
• review the damage decks (see recent Mynock episode for that one)
• (not really part of X-Wing 2.0, but) A proper starter set that allows you to build a half decent list out of the box

That's all I can think of.

Common ciriticism is the fear that all currently available products will become useless. But many of those changes could be made without affecting ship models or cardboard. Only cards would need to be reprinted, and here FFG could resell them as card packs, or include the cards in a new "core" or "conversion" set. Of course they would have to break at least even, so naturally we'd have to pay for the upgrade.

4 hours ago, TylerTT said:

what do people want in a 2.0?

I think the most sought after thing is balance. A reason for players to play the ships they love without handicapping themselves competitively.

Most players (though certainly not all) understand that perfect balance in a miniature game is really hard to achieve. Almost impossible, I would say. But it could definitely be much better than what we have now.

Quote

Most players (though certainly not all) understand that perfect balance in a miniature game is really hard to achieve. Almost impossible, I would say. But it could definitely be much better than what we have now.

+1000

4 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

There are so many threads, podcasts and blogposts on the topic, you should do some digging yourself.

Frequently mentioned, and colored by my biased memory, are:

• doubling of point costs for exacter balancing (e.g. Crackshot should then be 3pt because 1 now is not enough but 2 is too much)
• accuracy dice
• maybe differently colored attack dice (e.g. double hits, double evades)
• cancel crits with two evades
• inclusion of certain upgrades as core mechanic (e.g. Outmaneuver for everyone, +1 agility (or another defensive bonus) if you are shot out of arc)
• Review ordnance. Include range boni for laser weapons (turrets, cannons), make missiles good against high agility and torpedoes against low agility ships. This is easier with accuracy dice but could already be done now (cancel all results and deal X damage)
• change PWTs, they eat up a crew slot to mimic the gunner in the tower who actually shoots 360°
• review action economy - it's currently too easy to get full mods on shots
• review red/green dice creep
• review some ridiculously over- and undercosted ships (e.g. E-Wing and Jumpmaster)
• review some ridiculously good or bad dials (e.g. Jumpmaster and HWK/B-Wing)
• review the damage decks (see recent Mynock episode for that one)
• (not really part of X-Wing 2.0, but) A proper starter set that allows you to build a half decent list out of the box

That's all I can think of.

Common ciriticism is the fear that all currently available products will become useless. But many of those changes could be made without affecting ship models or cardboard. Only cards would need to be reprinted, and here FFG could resell them as card packs, or include the cards in a new "core" or "conversion" set. Of course they would have to break at least even, so naturally we'd have to pay for the upgrade.

Make 'Mobile Arc' the standard mechanic for turreted ships.

Btw. I am absolutely willing to pay a respectable amount of money on cardboard conversion kits but if FFG expects me to throw my collection in the bin and start over we are done.

5 minutes ago, Hannes Solo said:

Make 'Mobile Arc' the standard mechanic for turreted ships.

Yes, that's also frequently mentioned. I went with the crew here, as my list is by no means exhaustive.

5 minutes ago, Hannes Solo said:

Btw. I am absolutely willing to pay a respectable amount of money on cardboard conversion kits but if FFG expects me to throw my collection in the bin and start over we are done.

I don't believe they would require you to trash the models. At worst the tokens and dice, but definitely not the models. But then again the whole 2.0 is just a wish, so it doesn't matter anyways.

22 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

I don't believe they would require you to trash the models. At worst the tokens and dice, but definitely not the models. But then again the whole 2.0 is just a wish, so it doesn't matter anyways.

Well if there is no conversion and I had to buy a new TIE-Fighter expansion each, to get the new Dial, Pilot cards and upgrades I need to field my existing 12 (not counting FO) TIE Fighter models, they would become somewhat redundant.

And the Problem is that I might even be auto agressive enough to swallow the pitter pill grind my teeth and start buying products that (in preception of a sane person) I already own.

BUT FFG HEAR ME!

It is ABSOLUTELY impossible to convince my wife that this universe bears any justification for me to buy more plastic TIE-Fighters!
...

That said if they would change to wooden models, that might be a solution.

7 hours ago, TylerTT said:

what do people want in a 2.0? a radical shift across all the numbers? different maneuver templates? what at the core of the game would you need changed?

I'm not a fan of 2.0. Think we're years from it, but there are some obvious sweeping changes to be made if we're starting over:

medium bases

200 or 300-point scale for finer costing balance.

disengage attack accuracy and damage in base rules

New base rules for turrets and all secondary weapons.

My big ones would be:

• Medium bases (with nubs on all four sides for 'long' ships like the Aggressor and 'wide' ships like the K Wing, giving them radically different movement profiles).
• Rear-to-rear movement rather than front-to-rear to reduce the 'large ships are hella fast' effect somewhat.
• New dice - which do some divorcing of accuracy from damage - one that makes it easier to hit but doesn't change damage (e.g. double hit symbol requiring 2 evades but only dealing 1 damage if uncancelled) and one that makes it easier to deal damage (double hit needing 1 evade but doing 2 damage), also IA/Descent/RuneWars/Legion-style Surges.
• Reduction or complete elimination of defensive variance.
• 200 or 300 points being the base cost and points increased accordingly.
• Default penalties for attacking out of arc and bonuses for attacking ships that don't have you in arc.
• Mobile arcs rather than turrets.
• A set of default actions that all ships can do if they want, not least Focus, probably Reload, Move Arc (for turrets).
• A set of default upgrades which all ships can take if they want, not least title, configuration (i.e. by and large generic titles which more indicate a ship's loadout or variant), modification.
• Some significant price updates, dial updates, minor cardboard updates, to spread some of the newer mechanics more widely e.g. bullseyes.

Exhaustive timing charts for all phases and notes on all cards with abilities pointing to when on the chart they happen.

Just now, ViscerothSWG said:

Exhaustive timing charts for all phases and notes on all cards with abilities pointing to when on the chart they happen.

Only if they're not immediately invalidated by the next wave XD

in addition to what's already been mentioned:

-Wording and timing cleanup

-larger stats spread (for example: right now, the difference between 2 and 3 attack is humongous. That would be reduced if the minimum was, say, 5- with everything adjusted accordingly, of course).

-Long-term balance solutions, for example: rotation support, online-only rules reference, online-based points cost (official builder with up-to-date official costs)

-upgrade slot tax reduction adjustments (for example, the turret slot comes with a 3-4 point "tax", rather than turret upgrades just being 3-4 points more expensive).

-Removal of Pilot Skill in it's current form (to reduce list advantage issues)

If FFG would set a draft of base cost revisions on a PDF, take in feedback, revise, rinse & repeat, then a great degree of balance would occur and old ships would see the table b/c their cost would reflect what you get relative to the current environment. You prob would not need to do it again for at least a couple more years.

9 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

There are so many threads, podcasts and blogposts on the topic, you should do some digging yourself.

Frequently mentioned, and colored by my biased memory, are:

• doubling of point costs for exacter balancing (e.g. Crackshot should then be 3pt because 1 now is not enough but 2 is too much)
• +1 agility (or another defensive bonus) if you are shot out of arc
• Review ordnance. Include range boni for laser weapons (turrets, cannons), make missiles good against high agility and torpedoes against low agility ships. This is easier with accuracy dice but could already be done now (cancel all results and deal X damage)

Those would be very good.

I think missiles/torpedoes should work at long ranges (3-5 - and yes, we would need bigger range rulers), but very hard to "lock". Citruscannon developed an interesting alternative rule for Target Lock in his XvT mod.

And sure: torpedoes should be hard to hit, but do massive damage. Missiles easier to hit but less damage.

1 hour ago, thespaceinvader said:

My big ones would be:

• Medium bases (with nubs on all four sides for 'long' ships like the Aggressor and 'wide' ships like the K Wing, giving them radically different movement profiles).
• New dice - which do some divorcing of accuracy from damage - one that makes it easier to hit but doesn't change damage (e.g. double hit symbol requiring 2 evades but only dealing 1 damage if uncancelled) and one that makes it easier to deal damage (double hit needing 1 evade but doing 2 damage), also IA/Descent/RuneWars/Legion-style Surges.
• 200 or 300 points being the base cost and points increased accordingly.
• Default penalties for attacking out of arc and bonuses for attacking ships that don't have you in arc.
• Mobile arcs rather than turrets.
• A set of default actions that all ships can do if they want, not least Focus, probably Reload, Move Arc (for turrets).
• A set of default upgrades which all ships can take if they want, not least title, configuration (i.e. by and large generic titles which more indicate a ship's loadout or variant), modification.
• Some significant price updates, dial updates, minor cardboard updates, to spread some of the newer mechanics more widely e.g. bullseyes.

I like these.

It's not like it is a totally unprecedented thing for FFG to release a second edition to a game but include backwards compatibility. Look at Mansions of Madness. I would be all for them killing X-wing 1st ed. and putting out a new starter set for 2nd ed. and either include upgrade rules in the box, or maybe pack that includes all you need to convert. *IF* the dial change, maybe a trade in program?

If the rumored total conversion to the JM5K is true where they are stripping half of it's upgrade slots is true, then they may as well just release a faq of a total conversion of other ships re-balancing point cost, upgrade slots and stats.

I was in the "no 2.0, please" camp. But, my reasons are diminishing, as there are fewer and fewer interesting ships to release, and we get weird things like the Auzituck as a result. My initial opposition to 2.0 was based on a desire to see new material to play with, which also offers opportunities to fine tune the balance of existing products IF FFG CHOOSES to USE such opportunities. Unfortunately, each failed "fix" makes for more clutter on the table. Both Integrated Astromech and Vectored Thrusters offered fixes for the humble T-65, but neither alone is enough. Thus, you'd need a third upgrade that allows the use of both, or maybe a dual sided upgrade that offers similar but not identical benefits based on S-foil position or some such. The pattern established so far suggests that we'd go the card bloat route.

There are not very many ships to hold out hope to see them release. To wit, I can think of the Rogue Shadow, maybe the Sith Infiltrator. Lady Luck, Slave II, and the Wild Karrde could be argued for, but I don't really see much need for them.

Hence, from my perspective, the chances of implementing 2.0 halting the production of something as yet unreleased are greatly diminished in importance, and its not as though upgrading to the new edition would be compulsory. For casual gamers, it would remain entirely viable to play with what has already been released, and conceivably there are still many, many years of fun to be had using only materials presently in production. Add in the possibilities of house rules, campaigns (a la Aturi Cluster), and so forth, and anyone who doesn't want to upgrade has no need to ditch their investment. Enjoy what you have without further concern for further investment.

Meanwhile, 2.0 could address many of the balance issues in a cleaner, more elegant manner than simply piling on an ever-increasing collection of upgrade cards. (Do any of us really want to have to lay out at least 6 upgrade cards beside a single T-65 in order for it to have a decent chance of performing well in a match?) Consider the upcoming fix for the Starviper; now, at least one ship will be deployed with 2 titles; or the Vaksai with its collection of modifications. Its as if they aren't even trying to come up with creative fixes any more, and instead just printing errata to say: "F*** it; just add more stuff to it, maybe with a discount!"

An across the board redesign could make the game more varied. I wouldn't expect every ship and every upgrade to be of equal use in all situations, but the proper combinations and use should make any upgrade or ship usable for its cost, with a reasonable expectation of gaining some use from it. As the game currently stands, some upgrades, even some ships, offer so little that you might be better off saving those points for an initiative bid.

Personally, I would not like to see some of the changes suggested on these forums. Or, at least, I'd like to see a compromise. For example, on defense, I wouldn't want to see the variability of dice entirely go away. As I see it, the dice represent the variability and luck involved in making just the right maneuver at the right second to evade the hail of blaster fire that otherwise may have crippled you. (Armada lacks these dice, but it also deals with ships at a scale that isn't exactly well suited to rapidly dodging anything. As we all know, Star Destroyers are so lacking in responsiveness that they can't even dodge other Star Destroyers at low speed!) I'd favor maybe a base, static defense which is augmented by dice.

Anyway, that's just my evolving thinking on the idea of X-wing 2.0. Would I buy in to it? Maybe, but probably not. I'm mostly a casual gamer, so X-wing as is has already largely given me everything I need to enjoy fighter combat in the Star Wars universe. A few house rules, here and there, even if they're just thematic ones, remedy a lot of the balance issues for me. So does a strongly apathetic response to Scum as a faction. (Really, the only scum ships I've bought were some of the early offerings, plus the Protectorate due to my admiration for the Mandalorians. The IG-2000 has only been on my table once, I think, and I have proudly never owned a Jumpmaster.)

Dream X-Wing 2.0

It will never happen, but this would be it, if I was in charge

- Complete rework of all ships with all new mechanics and everything. No longer will be the older craft held back by not having access to new moves and actions!

- Create ship classes, where each faction has access to at least 1 ship of each "class". (example class: Heavy Ordnance carrier, example Scurrg, Punisher, K-wing) The flavor of different factions might be apparent through the quality and number of ships in each class. Rebels have better turrets, scum has better jousters, imps have better arc dodgers, etc.

- Separate ships and pilots. Each pilot has their own reference card, with icons of ships available. When a new ship for that pilot comes, it is updated through an official app, and newer prints of the card show the correct information. Not everyone can fit into every ship of course.

- Create and maintain faction identity for all three factions, each having their own unique slot not available to others in any way, with great synergy for that faction's ships.

- Increase the point limit, maybe 150 or 200. Large battles for everyone! It feels more star wars anyway.

- Rework torps and missiles. Torps against bulky, slow ships. They are hard to hit, but hit hard. Missiles should be easy to hit but deal limited damage. Ace catchers.

- Add different dice to the game, armada style. There should be heavy damage dice with double damage sides and crits, but no focus, and there should be dice with no blank sides, but no crits or double damage either. Only focus and hits. These two dice are added to the current ones.

- Remove defensive rolls. All defense comes through tokens, cards, and actions like Armada. The agility value might determine the number of tokens that can be stacked on the ship.

- Cannons would also be reworked. Cannons no longer add alternative fire options, instead, they enhance your primary attacks. Ion cannon adds the ability to ionize, while some cannon would increase primary value, or swap dice to a better one (see above). Most primary based ships would have a cannon slot, and the primary source of offensive modifications aside from actions.

- Turrets are also reworked. Ships with turrets would have a dedicated gunner upgrade icon, which are crew like Bistan, Luke, or Gunner. These upgrades only affect the turret weapon, which now requires an action to swivel, both as primary and secondary weapons.

- Titles are more powerful and expansive. The power of unique ships is shifted towards the title. the YT is a cheap **** ship, but the falcon title makes it awesome (and expensive).

- Scum gets Solo and the wookiee as pilots.

I think that's all.

I honestly did not expect most of your answers.

Many of them are intresting but not quite what I would call necessary. Some of you may want to play a different game.

The game already has weapons where acuracy & damage are not the same. TLT is an example, so is any ion weapon. So far they are high acuracy but low damage. You could reverse that easy.

base size is an intresting thing. I like small bases personally given they work better for barrel rolls.

I could see a place for extra die types but they already have "half die" style abilities like LWF.

Ordnance already has enough elements of hard counter to it. I don't want the game to lean harder on that.

Blanks are way too important to the psychology of die rolls. However variance is already well on its way to being reduced to the point where die rolls are almost formality.

Granted many of these things are workarounds and less slick than more dice types but they still work and have their own character.

perhaps slickness is worth it?

I like X-Wing as now. But if I have to desire a 2.0 version, I should like a deeper version of it. I want a deeper version of the building up a ship, I want to feel myself as a vicious smuggler who had modified his ship well.

So the entire mechanics of cards upgrade and ship's slots. Definy better the control archetype vs the pure damage one. Deeper Ordnances, deeper flying, deeper bombs, ions, tractors etc. Maybe in the structure on the ship too, so I can fire at your engine instead of the cockpit etc.

Basically, a complex X-Wing. Otherwise, let X-Wing as it. I honestly don't feel a 2.0 right now, I just love the game as it is.

Having moved into playing Armada over the last year - and playing more of it than X-wing since the Wave 11 launch - I can say that the simple idea of ranged dice, rather than adding a red/green, does an awful lot to open up expanding a ship's capabilities, and differentiating between ship types that may be in the same, or similar, class. I've heard loads of calls for a "2.0" version of X-wing, and frankly most of them are either unworkable, or heavily biased on personal experiences/taste. However, on a sheer point of allowing for rebalancing, and for a much easier way to expand the game out further, those ranged dice are very hard to look beyond when you consider their potential on all ships to date. That's about the only major change I could ever envisage.

On 8/25/2017 at 1:17 PM, GreenDragoon said:

Yes, that's also frequently mentioned. I went with the crew here, as my list is by no means exhaustive.

I don't believe they would require you to trash the models. At worst the tokens and dice, but definitely not the models. But then again the whole 2.0 is just a wish, so it doesn't matter anyways.

Lolz good shout