Saw the other post about Nym and it got me wondering about Veterans Instincts. I love running VI on many pilots, including Nym. However, would the game be better if VI was limited to generic pilots only? Canon wise, it would seem that unique pilots should have a PS and that should be their PS. VI would be a way to have some variable among generic pilots.

If it balanced the game better, I wouldn't mind giving up VI to generics only.

Thoughts?

Well, Phantom would still bad so no change there.

Yeah pilots like Whisper have to have it or they are immediately unplayable. My preferred fix would be to just cap PS at 9 for everyone. 9 would become the 'Ace Round', and you'd have to think out your bid a lot more than now.

2 minutes ago, Favoritism Flight Games said:

Yeah pilots like Whisper have to have it or they are immediately unplayable. My preferred fix would be to just cap PS at 9 for everyone. 9 would become the 'Ace Round', and you'd have to think out your bid a lot more than now.

a local store is trying this rule in an upcoming tournament. I can't make it, but there is already some lists being discussed with 10 point bids.

1 minute ago, Wiredin said:

a local store is trying this rule in an upcoming tournament. I can't make it, but there is already some lists being discussed with 10 point bids.

I've played with it pretty extensively. It's good, and even if you bid and get initiative, the other player can final salvo you- it just seems so much more balanced.

As a generic swarm player, I would be fine with either rule change. I would suggest an errata only for VI that says "Increase your pilot skill by two to a maximum of 9." The real aces can still use Adaptability to get above the riff-raff if they so choose. And all these crazy bids would end up throwing a bone to efficiency swarms.

No.

Treating the symptoms of the actual problem of ps being too huge an advantage for too few points, but which can paradoxically also be rendered completely ******* pointless by a higher ps

Ps wars are inevitable by (bad) design

Should adopt the Armada style of alternating activation, albeit with an addition of cheap ships (fighters and Zs) activating in pairs so spam doesn't become TOO strong

I honestly don't know why Armada considers floatilas to be full ships when they're less than half price of the cheapest capital ships, esp when uncommanded squadrons already activate in pairs

What about: 'During the combat phase, increase your pilot skills by 2.' ?

So you want to make Phantoms actually unplayable? No thanks.

15 minutes ago, defkhan1 said:

So you want to make Phantoms actually unplayable? No thanks.

Totally agree, same with Ashoka. Which is why a PS9 cap overall I think is "better" but starting to disbelieve good for the game. What would be good for the game would be if Scurrgs didn't have an EPT for example.

Just make it Imperial Only. Problems solved,

2 hours ago, Wiredin said:

a local store is trying this rule in an upcoming tournament. I can't make it, but there is already some lists being discussed with 10 point bids.

I'm hosting a tournament with this rule at the end of this month.

I'm wondering what the biggest bid is going to be.

19 minutes ago, BadMotivator said:

Just make it Imperial Only. Problems solved,

Really liked this!

Or maybe we should cap the skill gains of VI and adaptability to 9. A bid war would be much more interesting than the current ps era.

4 minutes ago, Nyt said:

I'm hosting a tournament with this rule at the end of this month.

I'm wondering what the biggest bid is going to be.

I'm wondering if it's the same tournament in little town in Alberta....

2 hours ago, ficklegreendice said:

Should adopt the Armada style of alternating activation, albeit with an addition of cheap ships (fighters and Zs) activating in pairs so spam doesn't become TOO strong

I honestly don't know why Armada considers floatilas to be full ships when they're less than half price of the cheapest capital ships, esp when uncommanded squadrons already activate in pairs

No. I cannot understand why people keep clamoring for Armada everywhere lately. Alternating activation has its huge problems as well. One is, as you self have to admit, that it can be gamed heavily if one player A has more cheap units, and thus more activations. A moves units on the fringe, the other player B has to commit one of the few expensive units (s)he has, moves. A then can at leisure move in with full knowledge with his/her better units. This accelerates if one player is loosing ships, and the other has more left. You can forget about asymmetric scenarios from the setup, the player with more units has the advantage.

Back to X-wing, I am inclined to say OP's proposal would better, cause the game suffers from FFGs tendency to give the top dogs not just top PS, but even top abilities.

So, you want to ban VI?

I like adding "to a maximum of 9" to the card. Same with the other card that can raise or lower by 1.

2 hours ago, Wiredin said:

I'm wondering if it's the same tournament in little town in Alberta....

Depends on your definition of "little", Mission: Fun and Games in St. Albert.

1 hour ago, Managarmr said:

No. I cannot understand why people keep clamoring for Armada everywhere lately. Alternating activation has its huge problems as well. One is, as you self have to admit, that it can be gamed heavily if one player A has more cheap units, and thus more activations. A moves units on the fringe, the other player B has to commit one of the few expensive units (s)he has, moves. A then can at leisure move in with full knowledge with his/her better units. This accelerates if one player is loosing ships, and the other has more left. You can forget about asymmetric scenarios from the setup, the player with more units has the advantage.

because Armada is better designed, as it was built well after X-wing made a number of critical gameplay flaws

every system will have flaws, but Armada's are far more easy to cope with and do not result in the vast majority of its catalog being obsoleted. Not to mention that the effect of having more bodies is highly exaggerated on the Armada forums, whereas the PS issue on x-wing is very real and has noted fallout on competitive tables

of course, this has been an issue since the game came out, when either extremes of PS were preferred at all times other than that brief window of Vessery and Ryad domination. This has been an issue ever since a high PS arc-dodger was viable and forcing people to continuous undercut their lists for the sake of initiative bids.

the Armada system is, simply put, less bad, and it would probably have even fewer flaws once you incorporate X-wing's movement dials

Considering how widely different X-wing is to Armada, I don't think it is fair to hold Armada up as "learning lessons" from X-wing. The same goes for Legion. The core skeleton of the designs are so different, I just don't see it.

Getting rid of PS I think would take away some of the flavor of X-wing. A flavor which Armada doesn't need.

1 hour ago, ficklegreendice said:

because Armada is better designed, as it was built well after X-wing made a number of critical gameplay flaws

(...)

Not to mention that the effect of having more bodies is highly exaggerated on the Armada forums, whereas the PS issue on x-wing is very real and has noted fallout on competitive tables

Probably just not enough people playing competitively to abuse it. I have played systems with alternate activations, and it can be gamed a lot.

Armada is better designed, avoiding some X-wing flaws due to experience with X-wing. But it has a totally different focus, it is also more expensive, less players, takes a lot longer (sucks esp if you already more or less lost when making a critical error in your deployment). I also really dislike the fixed end at 6 rounds. Fixed ends open up for gaming as well.

But that's not focus of this thread

Personally I think as a general game rule that PS 8 will cost 1 additional squad point. PS 9 will cost 2. PS 10 will cost 3. Ps 11 will cost 4.

Considering most generics don't have EPTs the best answer is NO.

Plus how would you put in the restriction. You have to remember putting in upgrades cards is like writing a program. There is no "generic" pilot. There is only pilots that are unique and those that are not.

25 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

Considering most generics don't have EPTs the best answer is NO.

Plus how would you put in the restriction. You have to remember putting in upgrades cards is like writing a program. There is no "generic" pilot. There is only pilots that are unique and those that are not.

If you read the actual card I posted in the OP, it's listed as "non-unique only". There are about 20 non-unique pilots with an EPT, mostly Empire though. The restriction could be easily added with the next FAQ via errata.

However, I like the idea of having the card increase PS to a maximum of 8 idea better.