and as a byproduct of shopping the trench run image, here's a desktop image if you'd like:

Nice work ! Looks promising, thanks for putting all this work for the community. I will definitely look at this thread really often

10 hours ago, Giledhil said:

Nice work ! Looks promising, thanks for putting all this work for the community. I will definitely look at this thread really often

Thanks! The more people putting in information the better it gets!

Wow! This is so awesome. I recently printed out a hard copy of your X-wing vs Tie fighter mod to have for when my son and I play.

Thank you so much for all of your hard work. I really love the idea behind X-wing but the reality of it has gotten less fun for us over time.

Your variants are the perfect cure!

1 hour ago, No Pickles said:

Wow! This is so awesome. I recently printed out a hard copy of your X-wing vs Tie fighter mod to have for when my son and I play.

Thank you so much for all of your hard work. I really love the idea behind X-wing but the reality of it has gotten less fun for us over time.

Your variants are the perfect cure!

I'm so glad!
I'm setting up a simple result entry tool so people can deposit very quick stats on games they played at home (nothing fancy, just for each game 1. name the ships involved (upgrades if you remember them but it's not vital) 2. who won, and 3. did it feel close.).
This will be invaluable for spotting trends, ie. if I start seeing 3 xwings just routinely dominating, then I can start a closer analysis to home in on the problem to figure out what those ships were.

If you give it a go, I'd very much appreciate if you could post back here with those three things. I would be indebted! It helps further development!

My two cents about the current batch :

- T65 (global) : I quite liked the idea of the 2nd core set, where TIEs had BR and X-wings got Boost; each of the basic ships having a different repositionning ability was good. Now BR seems just like a standart option. Not sure it is the better way to go.

- Recon-X : good idea using Cassian's ability ! However, I do not feel the splash damage when dying is right. Rebels are supposed to have sturdy, secure ships; neither dead man's switch and/or unstable components that explode with the ship sound "Rebel Alliance" to me.

- BTL-A4 : not sure about the double tap after a torpedo shot. The thing can use linked ion canons and blasters (that's, imo, the fluff justification for the double attack), but not fire torpedoes and laser/ions at the same time.

- TIE/M2 : I think, they are too expensive, unless you have in mind a big discount on the upcoming Cannon upgrades. But for now, 6 pts to get an Ion cannon on a TIE fighter is too much.

- TIE/x1 : way too strong. Having the option, with Vador, of a double repositioning ace at high PS is alone a strong option. If you think that soon it will have access to FCS, this is just too powerful.
I think you may want to break the action economy a little for enabling double tap. Maybe having to spend an evade to get the second shot ?

- Ordnance : it would be a shame to redo everything and not differenciate Torps and Missiles more. Too bad concussion and proton trops are mostly the same.The idea of an additional Hit dealt is really good for torpedoes, as those are supposed to be powerful but a little slow, aimed to do damage to bigger targets (bonus against Large ships, maybe?).
But then, you really want to do something else with Missiles !! Those are supposed to be more accurate and fast than torpedoes, but do less damage. Missiles are basically designed to hit fast fighters. Maybe more dice, or the good old "can't spend evade" can do the trick.

- Ion weapons : I'm not sure about the double token thing on arc. I guess this is aimed at Large targets but, in some way, you have to get some bonus for being large. Those things are already easy to hit as they have (mostly) a bad defense, needing two ion shots seems fine to me. On the other hand, you could add the double token effect if a crit is dealt (that would add some options for upgrades aimed at Ion users).

- R2-F2 : still not convinced of its usefulness. The action header kills it. Maybe a green move trigger ?

- R5-K6 : maybe an "in arc" restriction? Else a turret carrier never has to bother about stress tokens.


Globally, I think those rules are really nice and well thought, I'm just afraid there's gonna be too much options for a good action economy, beware not to turn it into a token/action feast when adding future ships and upgrades.

I hope those comments will be useful to you. Keep up the good work !

Oh, and BTW, now that the community has also a lot of Scum only players, wouldn't it be nice to add some scum ships with the next wave? So that basic fighters are designed at the same time as their imperial and rebel equivalents.

I'd concur with that. I appreciate that this is intended to build the game from wave 1 up, but adding Scum in at the same time would make it a lot more usable for some players, and make it a lot easier to keep scum in balance than adding them as a whole later.

You could get scum in between waves, so for now they would only have Y-Wings, after wave 2 their getting a Slave One, wave 3 the HWK...

Another amazing contribution to the X-Wing community by Citrus Cannon!

I'll second the requests for an earlier implementation of Scum, but I trust your judgment on this. I'm looking forward to taking this for a spin at some point.

This looks GREAT! Please do one thing - delete VI (and maybe even adaptability) from this version. This upgrade makes no sense from a thematic view and is way too cheap and changes all the value of native pilot skill. It would be better if it was a one time use option for 1 point and that would make more sense as to how you boosted your skill - drug or temp boost from an instrument/engine/etc.

11 hours ago, citruscannon said:

I'm so glad!
I'm setting up a simple result entry tool so people can deposit very quick stats on games they played at home (nothing fancy, just for each game 1. name the ships involved (upgrades if you remember them but it's not vital) 2. who won, and 3. did it feel close.).
This will be invaluable for spotting trends, ie. if I start seeing 3 xwings just routinely dominating, then I can start a closer analysis to home in on the problem to figure out what those ships were.

If you give it a go, I'd very much appreciate if you could post back here with those three things. I would be indebted! It helps further development!

Will do!

I notice the A2 Xwing and most of the Tie Advanced have a system slot, but there's no system upgrades in wave 1. Any suggestions?

@citruscannon , are you going to implement the Biggs Darklighter errata and lower his squad point cost, or are you going to keep him the way he was before he was errata'ed to death and keep the higher point cost?

11 minutes ago, AwesomeJedi said:

@citruscannon , are you going to implement the Biggs Darklighter errata and lower his squad point cost, or are you going to keep him the way he was before he was errata'ed to death and keep the higher point cost?

kinda like him as is. no plans to change it unless people are certain that's what they'd like.

thanks so much for all the comments guys, really REALLY helpful!

19 hours ago, Giledhil said:

My two cents about the current batch :

- T65 (global) : I quite liked the idea of the 2nd core set, where TIEs had BR and X-wings got Boost; each of the basic ships having a different repositionning ability was good. Now BR seems just like a standart option. Not sure it is the better way to go.

- Recon-X : good idea using Cassian's ability ! However, I do not feel the splash damage when dying is right. Rebels are supposed to have sturdy, secure ships; neither dead man's switch and/or unstable components that explode with the ship sound "Rebel Alliance" to me.

- BTL-A4 : not sure about the double tap after a torpedo shot. The thing can use linked ion canons and blasters (that's, imo, the fluff justification for the double attack), but not fire torpedoes and laser/ions at the same time.

- TIE/M2 : I think, they are too expensive, unless you have in mind a big discount on the upcoming Cannon upgrades. But for now, 6 pts to get an Ion cannon on a TIE fighter is too much.

- TIE/x1 : way too strong. Having the option, with Vador, of a double repositioning ace at high PS is alone a strong option. If you think that soon it will have access to FCS, this is just too powerful.
I think you may want to break the action economy a little for enabling double tap. Maybe having to spend an evade to get the second shot ?

- Ordnance : it would be a shame to redo everything and not differenciate Torps and Missiles more. Too bad concussion and proton trops are mostly the same.The idea of an additional Hit dealt is really good for torpedoes, as those are supposed to be powerful but a little slow, aimed to do damage to bigger targets (bonus against Large ships, maybe?).
But then, you really want to do something else with Missiles !! Those are supposed to be more accurate and fast than torpedoes, but do less damage. Missiles are basically designed to hit fast fighters. Maybe more dice, or the good old "can't spend evade" can do the trick.

- Ion weapons : I'm not sure about the double token thing on arc. I guess this is aimed at Large targets but, in some way, you have to get some bonus for being large. Those things are already easy to hit as they have (mostly) a bad defense, needing two ion shots seems fine to me. On the other hand, you could add the double token effect if a crit is dealt (that would add some options for upgrades aimed at Ion users).

- R2-F2 : still not convinced of its usefulness. The action header kills it. Maybe a green move trigger ?

- R5-K6 : maybe an "in arc" restriction? Else a turret carrier never has to bother about stress tokens.


Globally, I think those rules are really nice and well thought, I'm just afraid there's gonna be too much options for a good action economy, beware not to turn it into a token/action feast when adding future ships and upgrades.

I hope those comments will be useful to you. Keep up the good work !

-In this x-wings have a pseudoboost and br, tie's have BR and.... numbers. I'm thinking based on current feedback and results a small adjustment needs to be made. so far people seem to really like the way the T65s fly, but the TIEs are lackluster for the input in points.
-btla4 ability is currently being kept as it's strong, but the turning of the y makes it hard to take advantage of more than once, or even set up, so currently it's staying unless it starts getting exploited I think. This is more a balance thing, to keep the Ys with an edge strong enough to crack the toughest ships so you can use them as line breakers and send in Xs to mop up.
-splash damage on reconx is canonical, apparently they could take out a light frigate.
-playtesting sets M2 as overcosted by at least a point, so it's getting adjusted
-vader is a little tooo strong. not by much though. i'm adjusting him to take a stress to take his next attack, which should slow him down a smidge.
-wedge conversely is not strong enough, and will see a point drop with luke by 1pt

-I was planning on splitting ordnance roles after concussions and proton torps, but it may well be you're right to do it sooner. we're having a good discussion over a major change to ordnance entirely in terms of ship discounts, so this is in the works.
-ion will stay for the minute, but keeping an eye on it so it doesnt make large ships impossible.

-r2f2 is currently useful on biggs, but not on much else, keeping an eye on it I think.

-r5k6, this is a very good point. flagged and noted!

didnt have much time to write but hope covered everything!!!!

18 hours ago, Giledhil said:

Oh, and BTW, now that the community has also a lot of Scum only players, wouldn't it be nice to add some scum ships with the next wave? So that basic fighters are designed at the same time as their imperial and rebel equivalents.

I didn't say anything but the firespray might be wearing different stripes in wave 2, and have a surprise friend.

11 hours ago, Cusm said:

This looks GREAT! Please do one thing - delete VI (and maybe even adaptability) from this version. This upgrade makes no sense from a thematic view and is way too cheap and changes all the value of native pilot skill. It would be better if it was a one time use option for 1 point and that would make more sense as to how you boosted your skill - drug or temp boost from an instrument/engine/etc.

VI won't exist, adaptability will be limited to ps9.

9 hours ago, Rakaydos said:

I notice the A2 Xwing and most of the Tie Advanced have a system slot, but there's no system upgrades in wave 1. Any suggestions?

systems starting to come next wave
laying foundations!

55 minutes ago, AwesomeJedi said:

@citruscannon , are you going to implement the Biggs Darklighter errata and lower his squad point cost, or are you going to keep him the way he was before he was errata'ed to death and keep the higher point cost?

Careful, people get fussy over T-65 getting blown up on the forums. Although that is exactly what FFG did to X-wings on X-wing.

What we need is just for FFG to get off their Banthas and just start changing point values, and even change dials if needed, oh and start releasing card only upgrade packs.

Gotta say I really love this so far. Props to you dude. This is really cool. Do you have any plans to create scenarios or missions (in the vein of Imperial Assault campaigns, or the Armada Corellian Conflict campaign)? I think that would work really well with this.

I think, while you're in the early stages of development, it might be good to look ahead a bit at the limitations FFG have set upon themselves. For example, with Range, with arc, with maneuvers. Perhaps different chasses/variants can allow you to use different maneuver dials? Perhaps you can give an X-Wing chassis a -1 cost, but restrict them to using a Z-95 dial (for example). Or perhaps you can set out early on to use the Range 5 ruler (and assume that people using this game would have access to it at this point). This can give you certain new abilities, such as a scout-type chassis (like the Longprobe) acquiring target locks at Range 4 or 5, or a long-range cannon (Heavy Laser Cannon? a long-range missile?) that gets a Range 4 attack but gives the defender a +1 die (or even a +1 evade, for better balance) at that range. This is also the time to look at the new actions FFG are creating, such as Reload, so that it gets onto the a TIE Bomber chassis, for example, if you think it should, or if the "Bullseye" arc could be implemented on ships other than the Kimogila. (I think the "bullseye" arc could be fun on a TIE Advanced chassis and an E-Wing chassis, but it's up to you)

I also would like to comment on the TIE Adv/X1 (not the prototype). The ability really feels like a Pilot ability or an EPT, not like something that is integrated into the structure of the ship (i.e. its maneuver dial, greens/reds, shields/hull/attack, upgrade bar & action bar, etc.). I would recommend scratching it or moving it to a future pilot, ept, astromech, etc. It does seem like something that has to do with the pilot and the skills he brings to the ship, not the thing the ship brings in its technology.

I also agree with someone earlier about the splash damage of the dying X-Wing chassis... it doesn't feel right. You ought to want to keep your X-Wings in formation together, and this mechanic sends them apart. Since this X-Wing model was created as a scout, why not allow something like a native Weapons Engineer (since the X-Wing can't take crew anyway). Just allow this X-Wing chassis to hold two different target locks (though you don't have to allow one action to generate two locks--one action can generate one lock, or you can test it out and see what you like best).

Also, re: Biggs--I think it might be good to put more limits on him now, while your game is still early... even if it is a simple cost adjustment (like adding +3 points to his cost, for example). That way you can create really fun astromechs with no regrets that Biggs will break them (like Astromechs that add evade tokens, evade dice, scramble target locks, etc). R2F2 just doesn't integrate with action economy and green dice are fickle--it would be better if it were, "When you reveal a red maneuver, increase your agility by 1 for the rest of the round" (well, if you're doing a red, you won't have an action to modify those dice anyway, unless you combo with other mechanics) or "Once per round, immediately after defending against an attack, if you blocked at least 1 hit, you may assign 1 evade token to your ship."

Also, if you can't tell, I prefer the term "chassis" to "variant" but I won't make you edit your eight or nine page document over it.

3 hours ago, citruscannon said:

-vader is a little tooo strong. not by much though. i'm adjusting him to take a stress to take his next attack, which should slow him down a smidge.

Stress is a good start, but maybe you'll want to strip him from his System slot also.
Wouldn't be akward since its the first prototype of the advanced, and it will prevent Vader from becoming even more powerful when you release what's gonna look like FCS or worse, Adv. Sensors (this thing has to remain blockable !).

The pricing is not a problem, it's more Vader being possibly a massive NPE to people with lower PS and no turrets. But you surely have more intel than me thanks to playtests !

20 minutes ago, Giledhil said:

Stress is a good start, but maybe you'll want to strip him from his System slot also.
Wouldn't be akward since its the first prototype of the advanced, and it will prevent Vader from becoming even more powerful when you release what's gonna look like FCS or worse, Adv. Sensors (this thing has to remain blockable !).

The pricing is not a problem, it's more Vader being possibly a massive NPE to people with lower PS and no turrets. But you surely have more intel than me thanks to playtests !

excellent points on both. Man, I feel for the game designers when it comes to powerful ships. I mean on the one hand vader soloed gold squadron in the film, on the other you don't want him to be just unstoppable in the game.

I'll add one more from my personal gripe list, R2-D2, and any similar, reworded to be like Genius, Advanced Slam, Defender, "When you complete a green move and DO NOT bump or overlap...

5 hours ago, Cusm said:

I'll add one more from my personal gripe list, R2-D2, and any similar, reworded to be like Genius, Advanced Slam, Defender, "When you complete a green move and DO NOT bump or overlap...

good idea, I'll add it to the list

adapted from a really interesting idea by WITC_Dan on the reddit forum, I'm exploring the possibility of "stacked" munitions, instead of even having the extra munitions mechanic at all.

This would effectively mean that some ships would get white slots, for a torpedo, some would get a blue slot, for two, or red for three. But only pay once and put munitions tokens on top. (blue gives 1 token, red gives two)

So a TIE bomber gets way more bang for the buck from a missile than say, a tie advanced.




interested to hear your thoughts.

53 minutes ago, citruscannon said:

adapted from a really interesting idea by WITC_Dan on the reddit forum, I'm exploring the possibility of "stacked" munitions, instead of even having the extra munitions mechanic at all.

This would effectively mean that some ships would get white slots, for a torpedo, some would get a blue slot, for two, or red for three. But only pay once and put munitions tokens on top. (blue gives 1 token, red gives two)

So a TIE bomber gets way more bang for the buck from a missile than say, a tie advanced.




interested to hear your thoughts.

The mechanic is interesting, however, that means you end up considering a fully loaded ship when calculating its naked cost. Which means you don't consider the ship viable without upgrade cards on it.
So yeah, it's good for heavy ordnance carriers, but not multi-role ships (like Y-wings or B-wings for exemple).

26 minutes ago, Giledhil said:

The mechanic is interesting, however, that means you end up considering a fully loaded ship when calculating its naked cost. Which means you don't consider the ship viable without upgrade cards on it.
So yeah, it's good for heavy ordnance carriers, but not multi-role ships (like Y-wings or B-wings for exemple).

I was thinking that it would show up on a variant, whereby the intention from the variant effect would be for the ship to take munitions. But on the basic variant of the ship it may not have that option.

For example (not a real ability, not balanced, just off the top of my head):
TIE Bomber Cluster Assault configuration:
upgrades: double missile, triple missile.
"When you perform a [missile] secondary weapon attack, if this attack does not hit, you may acquire a target lock on another enemy ship at range 1-2 inside your firing arc and perform an attack against this ship. You may not attack again this round."

but the regular bomber may simply be a variant like:

TIE Bomber /sa
upgrades: bomb bomb torps, etc.
"When you have a target lock on an enemy ship, you may consider range 1-2 as range 1 when determining bomb explosion radii"

or something. So yes, the cost would be baked in, but in a way where it would make sense to be.