43 minutes ago, drail14me said:

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.

You already have 12 as the go to maximum. VI can only get you to 11. So it isn't exactly VI that the problem is with the pilot skill bid. It is the after dial maneuver repositioning but don't tell the TIE Interceptor pilots that (They still think their game would be perfect if it were not for turrets).

4 hours ago, Managarmr said:

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

As to alternating activations in other games, didn't they rework the rules of Imperial Assault to allow passing until both players have the same number of remaining activations? Some early competitive lists spammed activations, so that opponents with fewer would be left standing still by the end of the turn.

///

I wonder how PS would be if it was significantly flattened...

• PS 0-New unchanged from the few effects where it happens.
• PS 1-New would be the current 1-2 range, maybe some 3s (Contracted Scouts?). Most but not necessarily all entry level generics.
• PS 2-New would generally be 3s and 4s. Veteran generics and low PS uniques. Again, there may be some current-5s who ought to be in there (Biggs, Countess Ryad?), and redoing pilots on a case-by-case basis would be wise.
• PS 3-New would be low aces, mostly 5-7, maybe a few current 8s (Miranda and Nym, perhaps). Many of these folks are in here because they'd just be too strong to have higher natural PS (Dash, Whisper, Hera).
• PS 4-New would be mostly the 8-up crew today. This would put Rexler Brath, Boba Fett, and Corran Horn on even footing with Fenn Rau and Soontir Fel.
• PS 5-New would be at least the old PS-12 effects.
• In the new scheme VI would obviously have to be only +1 PS (and probably with a higher points cost), and capping at 4-New may or may not be preferred. I think it'd probably be fine to allow Corran or Vader to go to to the same level as Epsilon Ace, or Roark Garnet's pal. Adaptability would still be a 0-cost dual card, but instead of one side increasing PS, it would do nothing (so either +0 or -1 PS, to a minimum of 1).

Under such a scheme, initiative bids might well become too important, since there'd be a lot more overlap. An alternating initiative might relieve some of that (Player A has one turn, Player B the next).

And presuming VI gets a point cost adjustment, some ships probably would need cost changes, too. Many ships pay for that gradation in points, and if that's gone, then points costs should change too. With something like a G1A, the Elite-upgrade generic, 4-LOM, and Zuckuss would all probably translate into PS 3-New. And so, the thought experiment also rapidly becomes a re-balancing tool, as well...

1 hour ago, theBitterFig said:

As to alternating activations in other games, didn't they rework the rules of Imperial Assault to allow passing until both players have the same number of remaining activations? Some early competitive lists spammed activations, so that opponents with fewer would be left standing still by the end of the turn.

///

I wonder how PS would be if it was significantly flattened...

• PS 0-New unchanged from the few effects where it happens.
• PS 1-New would be the current 1-2 range, maybe some 3s (Contracted Scouts?). Most but not necessarily all entry level generics.
• PS 2-New would generally be 3s and 4s. Veteran generics and low PS uniques. Again, there may be some current-5s who ought to be in there (Biggs, Countess Ryad?), and redoing pilots on a case-by-case basis would be wise.
• PS 3-New would be low aces, mostly 5-7, maybe a few current 8s (Miranda and Nym, perhaps). Many of these folks are in here because they'd just be too strong to have higher natural PS (Dash, Whisper, Hera).
• PS 4-New would be mostly the 8-up crew today. This would put Rexler Brath, Boba Fett, and Corran Horn on even footing with Fenn Rau and Soontir Fel.
• PS 5-New would be at least the old PS-12 effects.
• In the new scheme VI would obviously have to be only +1 PS (and probably with a higher points cost), and capping at 4-New may or may not be preferred. I think it'd probably be fine to allow Corran or Vader to go to to the same level as Epsilon Ace, or Roark Garnet's pal. Adaptability would still be a 0-cost dual card, but instead of one side increasing PS, it would do nothing (so either +0 or -1 PS, to a minimum of 1).

Under such a scheme, initiative bids might well become too important, since there'd be a lot more overlap. An alternating initiative might relieve some of that (Player A has one turn, Player B the next).

And presuming VI gets a point cost adjustment, some ships probably would need cost changes, too. Many ships pay for that gradation in points, and if that's gone, then points costs should change too. With something like a G1A, the Elite-upgrade generic, 4-LOM, and Zuckuss would all probably translate into PS 3-New. And so, the thought experiment also rapidly becomes a re-balancing tool, as well...

I usually use a similar scheme when playing casual epic to speed up the game.

Low tier = PS 0-2

Mid tier = PS 3-5

High tier =PS 6-8

Ace tier = 9-11

Special tier = 12

This was just to condense the turn order and help speed up the game. But it would make VI into a unique situation. It would be useless on PS 3, PS 6 & PS9. It would only be viable on PS1, PS4 & PS 7. (Adaptability is cheaper on PS2, PS5 & PS8.)