2 minutes ago, SEApocalypse said:

EI would actually fit as well if it would not have been a typo. Actually it fits even in that case. Someone buying 5 expansions for EI, just to get an FAQ that he can only use one is a slap into the face. A much larger than just changing point costs. It creates much larger issues for players bringing illegal squads as well. So at this point they indeed could have changed just the points of cards directly, they starting to rewrite complete ships and make cards limited anyway.

I'm not convinced there's a point cost at which the pre-nerf Jumpmaster is a balanced ship. Either it's too expensive to be used, or it's cheap enough to be used and the sheer power of the ship and upgrade bar automatically breaks it.

Just now, RufusDaMan said:

1 minute ago, RufusDaMan said:

As I said before. That change is fitting with the lore. I understand you don't like it, but its fluffy (like the Biggs change). That makes it okay in my opinion.

From a design perspective? It should have been limited to two cards right from the beginning. And most likely zero points and maybe manaroo/dengar only, just to give us a direct hint to build dangaroo right from the start. ;-)

And I am just pissed about the business practices shown here. Basically FFG scammed me out of 30 bucks. ;-)
Though I got 1 year worth of playtime, so I am not that pissed. Just enough to cancel 8 gunboats

27 minutes ago, SEApocalypse said:

EI would actually fit as well if it would not have been a typo. Actually it fits even in that case. Someone buying 5 expansions for EI, just to get an FAQ that he can only use one is a slap into the face. A much larger than just changing point costs. It creates much larger issues for players bringing illegal squads as well. So at this point they indeed could have changed just the points of cards directly, they starting to rewrite complete ships and make cards limited anyway.

Tactician got Limited, too. I shudder to think of someone who tried to pick up 8 Phantoms and 4 Shuttles to try it, but it was technically possible!

Needless to say, 'buying ships for upgrades' en masse is a dangerous proposition, and that's a thing we'll have to accept going forward.

I think the point of the original post is that FFG is not doing nearly enough play testing. And I agree.

Apparently they're play testing not against card effects and possible combinations, but rather against the meta itself. That's how they miss things like Lowhhrick/Biggs and the like.

They also seem to just now be learning things like players should have the ability to respond to one another's actions.

I think part of the problem is that they're j just considering things like "is this balanced?", or (too occasionally) "is there counterplay?" but they need to also consider "is the counterplay fun?" And that last part seems to pass them by.

24 minutes ago, Punning Pundit said:

I think the point of the original post is that FFG is not doing nearly enough play testing. And I agree.

Apparently they're play testing not against card effects and possible combinations, but rather against the meta itself. That's how they miss things like Lowhhrick/Biggs and the like.

They also seem to just now be learning things like players should have the ability to respond to one another's actions.

I think part of the problem is that they're j just considering things like "is this balanced?", or (too occasionally) "is there counterplay?" but they need to also consider "is the counterplay fun?" And that last part seems to pass them by.

Hey, SLAM started out as "Oh man, thi could be cool ... and missed the part where with enough practice, 'cool' rapidly ends up 'achievable with almost guranteed certainty', and that pretty rapidly leads to inevitable doom.

15 hours ago, Archangelspiv said:

Whilst I dont agree with your OP, I do agree that FFG owe it to new players to release the updated cards to read how it is supposed to read. It's only because we have been playing for a while that we know how /X7 now works for example. if you were new, didn't read the forums you could be forgiven if you thought that /X7 works the way it is written on the card. There has been talk that FFG can't release card only packs for licensing reasons, but surely if we already own the cards we can get them updated somehow.

I do agree mostly, but to your point "It's only because we have been playing for a while that we know how /X7 now works for example."; I only play occasionally so I honestly don't know how a lot of cards play without look them up, even though I've been in the game for years now.

Of course we can ignore the rules, make up our own, choose what we like. Many of use have been borrowing parts from things to create out own game since we were children. But mostly likely most of us didn't buy Star Wars: X-Wing so we could make our own rules and game system. But we did hope to find an game that was reasonably easy to use with rules reasonable easy to follow. The rules in this game are so complex we have a flow chart just for combat and even that cannot address all of the questions.

I do not believe it is just a new player problem, it is a problem for just about anyone not on the tournament scene who still wants to play this game, and probably some tournament players may find it difficult to find/follow all of the rule interpretations too.

18 minutes ago, Ken at Sunrise said:

I do not believe it is just a new player problem, it is a problem for just about anyone not on the tournament scene who still wants to play this game, and probably some tournament players may find it difficult to find/follow all of the rule interpretations too.

It's funny you should say, there is a question about Palp and LWF interaction on another thread, created recently I believe. Some people believe you can modify any of the die after you have rolled a third for your LWF equipped TIE Aggressor for example. I am saying you either modify one of the 2 original die or the third die, but you have to say at which roll you are using Palp because of the timing chart and missed opportunities etc. I could very well be wrong, but as to what you are saying, we shouldn't be having the discussion in the first place, it should be clearly defined already.

2 hours ago, Ken at Sunrise said:

I do agree mostly, but to your point "It's only because we have been playing for a while that we know how /X7 now works for example."; I only play occasionally so I honestly don't know how a lot of cards play without look them up, even though I've been in the game for years now.

Of course we can ignore the rules, make up our own, choose what we like. Many of use have been borrowing parts from things to create out own game since we were children. But mostly likely most of us didn't buy Star Wars: X-Wing so we could make our own rules and game system. But we did hope to find an game that was reasonably easy to use with rules reasonable easy to follow. The rules in this game are so complex we have a flow chart just for combat and even that cannot address all of the questions.

I do not believe it is just a new player problem, it is a problem for just about anyone not on the tournament scene who still wants to play this game, and probably some tournament players may find it difficult to find/follow all of the rule interpretations too.

As a very filthy casual (just play with friends) i could not care less about meta, timing tables, etc. But i agree with the growing complexity. In my gaming group we haven't even used bombs...