Different games, but it sets a precedence. A good one in my opinion.

Do it FFG. Change the costs of cards as fixes for XWing.

I'm just waiting for the tournament rules to have an updated price table - the numbers on the card being the default, and used in casual play.

... Because I'm a fan of wishful thinking, mostly, but...

Prediction : new faq will come out on Thursday with Guns For Hire !!

I wish they’d just suck it up and release a $10 tournament pack. Have corrected cards, updated costs, etc.

11 minutes ago, Kdubb said:

Do it FFG. Change the costs of cards as fixes for XWing.

I've been preaching that a lot for some time already. It's an obvious solution (the points are there for a reason: balance!), and would help immensely with so many of the problems that the devs themselves keep mentioning in their interviews (eg. how high PS on arc dodgers should be valued more than it was originally thought).

Maybe this is a sign of good things to come.

14 minutes ago, Kdubb said:

Different games, but it sets a precedence. A good one in my opinion.

Do it FFG. Change the costs of cards as fixes for XWing.

And they even did it on one card that is just over a month old. I think it's odd with all the tourney data we have that Destiny is able to make quicker, and more decisive/aggressive, decisions on cost and errata (It's not the first time they nerfed something within a single release cycle).

If the cost of the T-65 came down like 3 points (not Biggs), you bet we'd see them on the tables all the time! I'd even forgive the lack of repositioning.

7 minutes ago, AlexW said:

And they even did it on one card that is just over a month old. I think it's odd with all the tourney data we have that Destiny is able to make quicker, and more decisive/aggressive, decisions on cost and errata (It's not the first time they nerfed something within a single release cycle).

YES!!!

I am starting to accept fully that we have been feeding ourselves a lot of BS. “Xwing FAQs have to be approved by Lucas films and that’s why it’s taking so long for this and that to get an errata!”

Really..? Because Destiny just fixed their Nym and bomblet, and we are still waiting on a rules update that fixes jumpmasters.

Different designers, different philosophies. Personally, I feel a banned/restricted list would be more effective than huge errata to a card.

Also, I think the differences in releases and the tournament season is a factor. I suspect an X-wing FAQ is coming, as it seems most games are getting one.

8 hours ago, Sithborg said:

Different designers, different philosophies. Personally, I feel a banned/restricted list would be more effective than huge errata to a card.

Also, I think the differences in releases and the tournament season is a factor. I suspect an X-wing FAQ is coming, as it seems most games are getting one.

Hopefully, but in the past it was implied that nerfs like the one that occurred in Destiny weren’t really company philosophy. If that’s no longer the case, I think it sheds a new light on the developers' role and it’s really odd if something doesn’t change considering in the last SV podcast they basically said it’s nearly impossible to shoot a silver bullet at a target that you won’t even have a chance to hit for 18 months. Destiny nailed the new Phasma 5 weeks after release out of tourney season. They could easily have said it was too soon and waited for the next FAQ and that would have been reasonable. That kind of thing gives players the impression that developers care about the competitive meta and will act swiftly. In the end, if I were a Destiny player I’d feel much more confident going forward. If the X-Wing FAQ is released (Destiny has now had two since the last X-wing, btw), and doesn’t include similar measures I’m going to feel more discouraged and am less likely to heavily invest.

Not to mention, Android Netrunner just got a second edition (or at least a complete reworking featuring a banned and restricted list)... it was first published in 2012? Same as Xwing?

I for one would welcome our new Ban-happy overlords. If balancing the game is like shooting a bullet at another speeding bullet being fired from a year in the future or whatever, do the second best thing which is to nerf/ban stuff fast when it gets broken or metagame-warping (in a bad way).

I hate the idea of them changing the point values without providing a replacement card, otherwise the card itself is essentially meaningless. If there is nothing that is left as 'out of bounds' in terms of the errata, what's the point of the cards at all?

We'll end up like 40K and have to by new codex books every 12 months to keep up with all the changes.

4 minutes ago, BVRCH said:

I hate the idea of them changing the point values without providing a replacement card, otherwise the card itself is essentially meaningless. If there is nothing that is left as 'out of bounds' in terms of the errata, what's the point of the cards at all?

We'll end up like 40K and have to by new codex books every 12 months to keep up with all the changes.

A lot of cards are meaningless as is;)

We already functionally have to do that, given errata to cards like Palpatine, x7 title, heavy Scyk title, the new Advanced slam card, Zuckuss crew, Deadeye, and Manaroo. The card text on those is flat out wrong already, whether it's the text or number that changes doesn't change that the card itself is now wrong.

Just now, AlexW said:

A lot of cards are meaningless as is;)

A lot of people think that, but its not true. There might be a lot of clarifications in the FAQ, but as far as actual erratum, there's barely any cards that have actually been changed.

51 minutes ago, BVRCH said:

I hate the idea of them changing the point values without providing a replacement card, otherwise the card itself is essentially meaningless. If there is nothing that is left as 'out of bounds' in terms of the errata, what's the point of the cards at all?

We'll end up like 40K and have to by new codex books every 12 months to keep up with all the changes.

I do understand the value of correctly printed cards (I'm a bit OCD myself) but, as discussed by others, that train has already left the station with errata'd cards (Palps, Heavy Scyk, etc) making the FAQs indispensable.

To which I add four things:

- the devs have hinted that prices will NEVER be completely balanced out of the gate, because they're pricing by feel, based on a small sample of playtests in an artificial environment that does not correspond to the real thing.
- the current policy of releasing "stapled-on" upgrades that are basically fixes (eg. Chaardan retrofit, Defender titles) is both fiddly (and a bit anti-consumer in practice, because they force you to buy another product to properly use the one you already own).
- obsolescence due to accretion and power creep makes old ships and upgrades unusable in competitive formats. Better to have a wrongly printed card than a useless plastic ship (and tons of useless upgrade cards).
- a finely balanced game, resulting in diverse play strategies and equivalence between the factions, with bad card text is vastly superior to an unbalanced game with perfectly "correct" text.

If I were to design X-wing 2.0 in 2017, I'd add a QR code on each card's face. Players would just fire up an app and have access to that card's current balance situation. That situation would be updated regularly, in sync with the required timetable for wave releases and major championships.

19 minutes ago, BVRCH said:

A lot of people think that, but its not true. There might be a lot of clarifications in the FAQ, but as far as actual erratum, there's barely any cards that have actually been changed.

I think he means things more like Flight Instructor and Fel's Wrath. Stuff that just really will never see the table for any reason, not even casual play. Well I guess FW actually does have something endearing about him, but Flight Instructor is just... What? 4 points for that???

Ohh so maybe we should have Random Model Boosters too then. That is always a game winning strategy.

How about NO!

Posts like these make me glad that we have the current dev team. Say what you want about the Jumpmaster, the devs don't make a mistake as seen as above.

2 minutes ago, takfar said:

I do understand the value of correctly printed cards (I'm a bit OCD myself) but, as discussed by others, that train has already left the station with errata'd cards (Palps, Heavy Scyk, etc) making the FAQs indispensable. To which I add four things:

- the devs have hinted that prices will NEVER be completely balanced out of the gate, because they're pricing by feel, based on a small sample of playtests in an artificial environment that do not correspond to the real thing.
- "stapled-on" upgrades that are basically fixes (eg. Chaardan retrofit, Defender titles) are both fiddly (and a bit anti-consumer in practice, because they force you to buy another product to properly use the one you already own).
- obsolescence due to accretion and power creep makes old ships and upgrades unusable in competitive formats. Better to have a wrongly printed card than a useless plastic ship (or tons of useless cards).
- a finely balanced game, resulting in diverse play strategies and equivalence between the factions, with bad card text is vastly superior to an unbalanced game with perfectly "correct" text.

If I were to design X-wing 2.0 in 2017, I'd add a QR code on each card's face. Players would just fire up an app and have access to that card's current balance situation. That situation would be updated regularly, in sync with the required timetable for wave releases and major championships.

The Dev's also mentioned they weren't going to change point values. I don't mind having to buy an extra title that gives me a point reduction/errata'd ability etc, because I then at least have some hard evidence to show the newbie that's rocked up to the shop and thinks he drop his cluster mines on me after he's slammed in front of my ship (thought that was a pertinent example :P), instead of spending 10mins finding the excerpt in the FAQ I printed off the internet to show him, and then another 10mins convincing him its a legitimate document.

So far the Dev's have been quite controlled in their errata, only doing it when they deem absolutely necessary for the game as a whole. If they have an easier platform to do so, and extend it to point costings, then the horse really will have bolted (I don't believe that is the case now, 19 out of hundreds of cards isn't precedent enough for me). What's stopping them from then changing it whenever they feel like? Constant, frequent changes are going to be much more detrimental than infrequent, fixed changes.

Thinking about it now, if i had to, I think I'd rather a printed codex I had to pay for. The harder it is for them to implement these changes, the less intrusive and disruptive it is to the game. I'd rather I not have to pay for it, but in a pinch I'd rather that than an app that can be changed on a weekly basis.

1 minute ago, HammerGibbens said:

I think he means things more like Flight Instructor and Fel's Wrath. Stuff that just really will never see the table for any reason, not even casual play. Well I guess FW actually does have something endearing about him, but Flight Instructor is just... What? 4 points for that???

That has nothing to do with the accuracy of cards, so even if that is the point he was making, its a moot one.

15 minutes ago, BVRCH said:

The Dev's also mentioned they weren't going to change point values. I don't mind having to buy an extra title that gives me a point reduction/errata'd ability etc, because I then at least have some hard evidence to show the newbie that's rocked up to the shop and thinks he drop his cluster mines on me after he's slammed in front of my ship (thought that was a pertinent example :P), instead of spending 10mins finding the excerpt in the FAQ I printed off the internet to show him, and then another 10mins convincing him its a legitimate document.

Hence, my suggestion of an app. It would take all of two seconds to point the phone at the card, show the screen to the newbie, and there you have your evidence.

15 minutes ago, BVRCH said:

So far the Dev's have been quite controlled in their errata, only doing it when they deem absolutely necessary for the game as a whole.

And so far they have failed to balance the game, as evidenced by the small diversity in "tier 1" and "tier 2" list archetypes in every wave.

15 minutes ago, BVRCH said:

What's stopping them from then changing it whenever they feel like? Constant, frequent changes are going to be much more detrimental than infrequent, fixed changes.

Again, "changing wherever they like" is par for the course for online competitive games, and these do just fine. It would be unthinkable for, say, Blizzard, to have a character in Overwatch so weak to the point of being unusable, and then force people to buy an upgrade for said character as a "fix". Instead, they balance characters and their abilities constantly so that no character is either overly dominant or relegated to uselessness. Same could be said for Street Fighter, or any number of competitive games.

I'm not even advocating that kind of support, tho. Quarterly scheduled revisions to card abilities and prices should be enough to keep the game reasonably balanced, while giving time for strategies to spring up and mature. You could even have an official printed copy of that revision sold to you, if you wanted.

25 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

Ohh so maybe we should have Random Model Boosters too then. That is always a game winning strategy.

How about NO!

Posts like these make me glad that we have the current dev team. Say what you want about the Jumpmaster, the devs don't make a mistake as seen as above.

Did Mtg make that mistake? I'm not a fan of CCGs anymore because of how much I spent on magic years ago; at the same time, I wont lie, the thrill of opening a pack and getting something rare and pricey was a very nice (and to addictive personalities like my own) feeling and highly addictive. The random packs wasn't a mistake, it was a game design choice. For those of us done with CCGs but still wanting a Star Wars card game, FFG makes the aptly named Star Wars: The Card Game.

Fixing point costs after release, would do more to balance the game than errata ever will. Doing both would be an amazing step towards a near perfect balance. I REALLY hope that this next X-Wing FAQ was delayed because one of the devs FINALLY realized, "Hey guys, what if we changed the point costs of a card to reflect am appropriate level of balance based on observed performance in the tournament setting?" and another dev said "hmmmm, can we do that?" to which a third dev said, "I bet we can, we're the ************* DEVS!" We can do anything! Remember when we released that toilet seat and players KEPT giving us money, kept playing, and even lied to themselves and the world justifying that abomination online?"

Eh, just post the updated cards online to print out for free. Sell fancy stock ones in the “tournament expansion” if it matters that much.

personally, I like the stabled on upgrades to adjust things but I agree with @takfar that it is a bit anti-consumer. I say just put it on the site to print out and allow those cards to be used in tournaments.

and heck, just for funzies, let the old prints still usable. That way we don’t over complicate things for casuals.

11 minutes ago, takfar said:

Hence, my suggestion of an app. It would take all of two seconds to point the phone at the card, show the screen to the newbie, and there you have your evidence.

And so far they have failed to balance the game, as evidenced by the small diversity in "tier 1" and "tier 2" list archetypes in every wave.

Again, "changing wherever they like" is par for the course for online competitive games, and these do just fine. It would be unthinkable for, say, Blizzard, to have a character in Overwatch so weak to the point of being unusable, and then force people to buy an upgrade for said character as a "fix". Instead, they balance characters and their abilities constantly so that no character is either overly dominant or relegated to uselessness. Same could be said for Street Fighter, or any number of competitive games.

I'm not even advocating that kind of support, tho. Quarterly scheduled revisions to card abilities and prices should be enough to keep the game reasonably balanced, while giving time for strategies to spring up and mature. You could even have an official printed copy of that revision sold to you, if you wanted.

Well for one you are comparing an online video game to a living table top game. Sure both have updates, but on one end giving everyone the mandatory update is easy. Once you change a value on the server everyone's value matches. With printed distribution media that doesn't work like that.

So changing the point value on cards how will that disrupt the game. Well let me tell you, for one the cards still serve as a list building set up. For FFG it makes sure you have made all the purchases and for the player you still match upgrade card to pilot card and add it all up. Now if all of a sudden the point cost could be different depending on what card they have it now becomes ridiculous to demand that all players have either up to date cards or even the appropriate upgrade cards at all. Currently list building is now the only serviceable mechanic pilot and upgrade cards have.

So if points changes become a thing I won't say I will flat out reject it, but I cannot find it acceptable without specific conditions or certain concessions from FFG. So one such condition is well 2nd edition, just remake X-wing and now that FFG has the experience that it does now it could fix may things, make YT-2400 a mobile firing arc, TIE Punishers get the reload action and so on and so on. But then with 2nd edition there arises other problems such as what to do with all the 1st edition stuff.

The other option is for FFG to allow a printout that is verified up to date on all pilot and upgrade cards in place of well the pilot and upgrade cards in the list. Models, dials and tiles will still be required to ensure that players have made the proper purchases but if cards are just going to have their values and words change via website then there should be no point in making them a requirement. Sure they can still be used without a list printout providing the up-to-date FAQ is provided with them but otherwise just accept the printout to accompany the models, and the only cards required is the damage deck.

As for the post again just because something is done in one game doesn't mean that other games should emulate it. One of the biggest faults with a game I use to play called Hearthstone is that the players convinced the Devs to make it just like Magic the gathering which was the worst thing to do. Modeling business decisions for X-wing from SW: Destiny just screams bad idea (see earlier reply for example). X-wing is not a perfect game but thankfully the living set up with expansions allows for some corrections. It is just these corrections are not as instantaneous as a video game patch for obvious reasons. But patience is key, sometimes it is better to leave things be, then to apply a fix that causes more problems than the one just solved.

52 minutes ago, takfar said:

Hence, my suggestion of an app. It would take all of two seconds to point the phone at the card, show the screen to the newbie, and there you have your evidence.

And so far they have failed to balance the game, as evidenced by the small diversity in "tier 1" and "tier 2" list archetypes in every wave.

Again, "changing wherever they like" is par for the course for online competitive games, and these do just fine. It would be unthinkable for, say, Blizzard, to have a character in Overwatch so weak to the point of being unusable, and then force people to buy an upgrade for said character as a "fix". Instead, they balance characters and their abilities constantly so that no character is either overly dominant or relegated to uselessness. Same could be said for Street Fighter, or any number of competitive games.

I'm not even advocating that kind of support, tho. Quarterly scheduled revisions to card abilities and prices should be enough to keep the game reasonably balanced, while giving time for strategies to spring up and mature. You could even have an official printed copy of that revision sold to you, if you wanted.

I like how you curated my post to suit your argument. I stated why a disagreed with the idea of an app in that post.

This 'balance' that everybody speaks of and wishes for realistically does not exist, its not possible in a game as large as this. There will always be an advantage somewhere to turn the tables. There will always be an 'Anakin" that the Dev's miss, or deem not note-worthy. I completely agree some things need to be tweaked, but I detest this idea that the game needs to be overhauled as so many say. I don't believe this is an effective way to achieve a 'fix' for the game.

Have you played Overwatch? There's a bunch of characters that never see competitive play. Its exactly like X-wing in that regard.

Quarterly is too frequent an update in my eyes. With regulating competitive tournaments etc, and players can go an entire season playing a single list. This is the disruption I'm talking about, and not to mention the fact that the Dev's said it takes up to 18 months to get a new ship from concept to table. Annual updates I could get behind, or an update released with a new wave perhaps.

14 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

Well for one you are comparing an online video game to a living table top game. Sure both have updates, but on one end giving everyone the mandatory update is easy. Once you change a value on the server everyone's value matches. With printed distribution media that doesn't work like that.

Which is why I suggested a) quarterly updates and b) an app

15 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

So changing the point value on cards how will that disrupt the game. Well let me tell you, for one the cards still serve as a list building set up. For FFG it makes sure you have made all the purchases and for the player you still match upgrade card to pilot card and add it all up. Now if all of a sudden the point cost could be different depending on what card they have it now becomes ridiculous to demand that all players have either up to date cards or even the appropriate upgrade cards at all. Currently list building is now the only serviceable mechanic pilot and upgrade cards have.

Which is why I suggested, again, an app.

15 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

So if points changes become a thing I won't say I will flat out reject it, but I cannot find it acceptable without specific conditions or certain concessions from FFG. So one such condition is well 2nd edition, just remake X-wing and now that FFG has the experience that it does now it could fix may things, make YT-2400 a mobile firing arc, TIE Punishers get the reload action and so on and so on. But then with 2nd edition there arises other problems such as what to do with all the 1st edition stuff.

The problem with 2nd ed is the same thing that devs have already stated in their interviews: They just can't get everything right out of the door. It's impossible. Even if they have learned stuff as they say they have, something will slip through the cracks, and it could be a big thing (eg. the jumpmaster). Plus, a bunch of new stuff being adjusted at the same time won't be easy to balance. Plus, after the 2.0 release, they will still keep expanding, so, problems may STILL arise.

That said, I'm fully on board with the idea of a 2.0 edition. I think X Wing needs it, I just don't think it will solve all the problems by itself. I also don't think (no evidence whatsoever) that it will be coming out before X-Wing sales start to lose steam or before the current trilogy is over (whichever comes first). Also, 2.0 would be a chance to add a QR code to the cards and integrate them with an app (yea, this again).

18 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

The other option is for FFG to allow a printout that is verified up to date on all pilot and upgrade cards in place of well the pilot and upgrade cards in the list. Models, dials and tiles will still be required to ensure that players have made the proper purchases but if cards are just going to have their values and words change via website then there should be no point in making them a requirement. Sure they can still be used without a list printout providing the up-to-date FAQ is provided with them but otherwise just accept the printout to accompany the models, and the only cards required is the damage deck.

I'm ok with that. Heck, they could even provide official paste-on stickers to put on cards (preferably on top of a sleeve!) for those who wanted. As long as it's optional, anything would be welcome that improves game balance while solving people's needs for physical components.

20 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

As for the post again just because something is done in one game doesn't mean that other games should emulate it. One of the biggest faults with a game I use to play called Hearthstone is that the players convinced the Devs to make it just like Magic the gathering which was the worst thing to do. Modeling business decisions for X-wing from SW: Destiny just screams bad idea (see earlier reply for example). X-wing is not a perfect game but thankfully the living set up with expansions allows for some corrections. It is just these corrections are not as instantaneous as a video game patch for obvious reasons. But patience is key, sometimes it is better to leave things be, then to apply a fix that causes more problems than the one just solved.

Oh, definitely, copying for the sake of it is not a good idea. But while you think the current setup for X-Wing is fine, I personally disagree, and I feel a lot of other people do, as well. The current model is simply prone to balance distortion (see: on one hand, a huge stable of abandoned ships and upgrades, and on the other a history of clear imbalance in favor of fat han, phantom, super dash, palpmobile, jumpmaster, jumpmaster, jumpmaster, jumpmaster). It's also slow to correct itself, and it forces people to buy "fix" cards to play their outdated ships, which is both fiddly and not customer-friendly.

Again, take all of these opinions as coming from someone who does not play competitively and collects all ships because they are pretty toys, but is nonetheless aware of the balance issues in the game.