2 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

All but the 12 ships at PS9 have to give up their EPT slot to be suddenly so viable as you predict it. Plus they have to take a large enough bid. While the PS9 ships have their EPT slot freed up. I'd love me some Intensity or Juke Vader, or IntensityPoe, or ExpertiseDengar, or PTL Kylo, or PTL Soontir. Freeing their EPT slot makes them better compared to the PS7 and PS8 ships, not worse.

And then there's the bid. Currently a highPS list has a bid between 1 and 3 points. Removing VI gives me a 4pt bid, some will even have 5pt bids. With free EPT slots! Do you realize how good ASTS on Quickdraw is? Or Trickshot? I'll gladly take the extra die.

You say all this like seeing a huge variety of EPTs with various pros and cons instead of the same monotonous boost on every ship would be a bad thing. That's infinitely preferable.

20 minutes ago, nexttwelveexits said:

Soontir Fel + 65 pt bid?

Hard countered by Fenn Rau +66 point bid

6 minutes ago, RampancyTW said:

You say all this like seeing a huge variety of EPTs with various pros and cons instead of the same monotonous boost on every ship would be a bad thing. That's infinitely preferable.

That's not the point. The hope for the hard ps cap is to increase diversity in ships and pilots and to balance the game better, right?

But that will not happen for the reasons I explained. The same good ships are still good ships, but now with more slots and points.

There's another point I didn't emphasize but just implied: a hard cap means that 78 ships can reach top PS instead of 12. Some of them are very, very hard to get if they secure initivative by a bid. This means those few will be inclined to bid ridiculous amounts - as seen in the worst Jumpmaster times, too - because they are virtually unbeatable. Removing higher PS means removing their natural predators.

10 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

Hard countered by Fenn Rau +66 point bid

Also by any Decimator with Vader/Gunner/HotShot.

1 hour ago, SabineKey said:

snip

1 hour ago, Scum4Life said:

snip

Guys I just advocated for a non turn based X-Wings played in real time, so I guess I will clarify now that it was a joke.

2 minutes ago, HammerGibbens said:

Guys I just advocated for a non turn based X-Wings played in real time, so I guess I will clarify now that it was a joke.

I had realized that possibility, but time on this forum has made me wary of assuming something that sounds ridiculous is a joke.

22 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

That's not the point. The hope for the hard ps cap is to increase diversity in ships and pilots and to balance the game better, right?

But that will not happen for the reasons I explained. The same good ships are still good ships, but now with more slots and points.

There's another point I didn't emphasize but just implied: a hard cap means that 78 ships can reach top PS instead of 12. Some of them are very, very hard to get if they secure initivative by a bid. This means those few will be inclined to bid ridiculous amounts - as seen in the worst Jumpmaster times, too - because they are virtually unbeatable. Removing higher PS means removing their natural predators.

Crazy bids also reduces the ability to deal with efficiency lists. The greater your bid, the harder you can get countered. What single-action ships become crazy and NPE without higher PS predators?

Also, isn't this a direct contradiction? If top PS is such a big deal and 78 ships can reach it, that should vastly increase the number of viable ships and pilots, yes?

17 minutes ago, RampancyTW said:

Also, isn't this a direct contradiction? If top PS is such a big deal and 78 ships can reach it, that should vastly increase the number of viable ships and pilots, yes?

not if initiative can be won by paying points for it

3 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

not if initiative can be won by paying points for it

... That makes zero sense, though. You can potentially initiative bid with any pilot. And as mentioned several times, initiative bid wars are self-balancing in many respects because bids too low sacrifice too much muscle against efficiency lists.

2 minutes ago, RampancyTW said:

... That makes zero sense, though. You can potentially initiative bid with any pilot. And as mentioned several times, initiative bid wars are self-balancing in many respects because bids too low sacrifice too much muscle against efficiency lists.

Ok

So you're telling me Tomax Bren with PS9 is as strong as Whisper with PS9? If not then you're very wrong and it does make sense.

2 hours ago, Scum4Life said:

Errata adaptability and VI to capping at 9 and add a new EPT (costs two points) that boosts ps by 3 that is also capped at ps 9. Now all pilots at ps 6-9 can be aces. So much untapped ace potential, while native ps 9 ships can excel with proper epts, most named pilots can be aces.

Surely this is a good thing, yes it means bidding is a thing but we will also get more simultaneous fire so ships don't get ps killed as easily also good.

Surely it is not.

You want to make the PS race even worse by adding an EPT so that EVERY PILOT IN THE GAME AT PS 6+ IS A 9??

You may as well just drop PS as a game mechanic altogether.

Which is the exact opposite of what most people want; they want PS to matter more.

23 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

Ok

So you're telling me Tomax Bren with PS9 is as strong as Whisper with PS9? If not then you're very wrong and it does make sense.

No, but Tomax Bren is no worse off than he was before. And VI Rhymer is wayyyy better off at PS9 cap (still not good, but better).

Besides, all factions have ways to boost to PS12 (or reduce another ship to 0). There are still ways to mess with Whisper and the like.

3 minutes ago, RampancyTW said:

No, but Tomax Bren is no worse off than he was before. And VI Rhymer is wayyyy better off at PS9 cap (still not good, but better).

Besides, all factions have ways to boost to PS12 (or reduce another ship to 0). There are still ways to mess with Whisper and the like.

Ok, slowly now.

Do you agree that some of the 78 pilots profit more than others from moving last or firing first?

If yes then a bid has different value for different pilots.
If you also agree on this then it is clear that some pilots will have initially more incentive to get a high bid than others, because of the difference in value.
If you also agree on this then hard capping PS at 9 does not vastly improve pilot variation, because some pilots can now ensure that they will always move last and shoot first, which makes them relatively speaking better than they were before. At the same time, the other pilots can try to enter the new meta and underbid because that hurts certain, potentially dominating pilots so much more than previously. But without a bid they don't even have to try to compete.

On top of that comes the other point: PS9 have an inherent advantage in this whole spiel because they have a very important slot as advantage.
If you really think that PS11 is bad for the game - which I have to assume because otherwise you would hardly argue that much for a hard cap at PS9 - then part of your reasoning should be that you are forced to take VI and forced to take a bid.
If that really is part of your reasoning then a hard cap won't solve that problem: a PS7 Whisper is still forced to take VI and a bid. But that bid is now larger because more ships could potentially undercut you, taking a huge chunk out of your value. Which forces you to take an even larger bid - or another ship!

And that lands us all at pretty much the exact same space: ships have a best build and no variety. But with a new twist: players have to spend hughe amounts of points on initiative instead of cool upgrades and list flexibility, because their chosen ships lose a lot of worth otherwise and become unplayable.

48 minutes ago, RampancyTW said:

No, but Tomax Bren is no worse off than he was before. And VI Rhymer is wayyyy better off at PS9 cap (still not good, but better).

Besides, all factions have ways to boost to PS12 (or reduce another ship to 0). There are still ways to mess with Whisper and the like.

Not all.

Imps still don't.

11 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

Not all.

Imps still don't.

Best they can do is "Epsilon Ace" and Decoy...

Also, I will sign this petition to either cap VI/Adapt PS at 9, or only allow them on non-uniques.

The problem with VI currently is that the pilots who use it successfully don't really care about the "opportunity cost" of not using another EPT because they get such a huge advantage out of winning the PS war.

FWIW, this is also why initiative should pass back and forth, regardless of bids. Make both players' high-PS ships work for their wins during the game, rather than winning during list-building (or on a hit/miss die roll at the start of the game).

2 minutes ago, ObiWonka said:

The problem with VI currently is that the pilots who use it successfully don't really care about the "opportunity cost" of not using another EPT because they get such a huge advantage out of winning the PS war.

I don't understand that point of view. Are you implying that ships like Kylo, Whisper, Soontir don't get a huge advantage of winning the PS war at a PS9 cap? Because that is the alternative. And if you don't think so then you exchange one problem with another, very similar one.

I'm in favor.

Some adaptability also be capped at PS8 or less?

Do we consider PS11 to be an integral identity and strength of Vader (and possibly QD)? I would think not enough to remove my support for this restriction.

22 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

Not all.

Imps still don't.

EA w/ Decoy shenanigans

11 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

I don't understand that point of view. Are you implying that ships like Kylo, Whisper, Soontir don't get a huge advantage of winning the PS war at a PS9 cap? Because that is the alternative. And if you don't think so then you exchange one problem with another, very similar one.

My point was there isn't really an opportunity costs for ships taking VI to get to PS11. See also my point about initiative switching, which I think would actually do a lot more for this issue that VI/Adapt nerf.

52 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

Ok, slowly now.

Do you agree that some of the 78 pilots profit more than others from moving last or firing first?

If yes then a bid has different value for different pilots.
If you also agree on this then it is clear that some pilots will have initially more incentive to get a high bid than others, because of the difference in value.
If you also agree on this then hard capping PS at 9 does not vastly improve pilot variation, because some pilots can now ensure that they will always move last and shoot first, which makes them relatively speaking better than they were before. At the same time, the other pilots can try to enter the new meta and underbid because that hurts certain, potentially dominating pilots so much more than previously. But without a bid they don't even have to try to compete.

On top of that comes the other point: PS9 have an inherent advantage in this whole spiel because they have a very important slot as advantage.
If you really think that PS11 is bad for the game - which I have to assume because otherwise you would hardly argue that much for a hard cap at PS9 - then part of your reasoning should be that you are forced to take VI and forced to take a bid.
If that really is part of your reasoning then a hard cap won't solve that problem: a PS7 Whisper is still forced to take VI and a bid. But that bid is now larger because more ships could potentially undercut you, taking a huge chunk out of your value. Which forces you to take an even larger bid - or another ship!

And that lands us all at pretty much the exact same space: ships have a best build and no variety. But with a new twist: players have to spend hughe amounts of points on initiative instead of cool upgrades and list flexibility, because their chosen ships lose a lot of worth otherwise and become unplayable.

Okay, so let's just clear something up: You're not smarter than me, you don't know/understand more about the game than me, we simply have a different opinion. We don't need to do things "slowly now". That's super condescending, and not at all productive to conversation.

A bid has different value for different pilots, but that doesn't mean that there is no benefit to being PS9 (even if you don't always get initiative choice), and there are advantages to moving first or shooting first that can be leveraged.

Deep initiative bids have inherent disadvantages against lists that don't contain PS9 pilots and have no interest in taking part in the bidding wars, which provides a natural balancing act and gives multiple viable approaches to playing at PS9

Some ships benefiting more than others from bumping up to PS9 is not really a problem for this reason-- those that benefit the most will often bid to make sure they receive that benefit, while those that benefit less can choose to go up to PS9 or not as desired by the player and will be less concerned about initiative bids. There is NO reason why this should not improve the variety of ships seen-- a lot of things improve when you know that points/slots spend are unlikely to be wasted points. For example-- PS10 alpha lists right now aren't really a thing, because PS11 lists are so prevalent.

I (and others) are 100% okay with PS9 pilots getting an inherent advantage (in the form of an open EPT) to being PS9. Being PS9 (you know, the highest native PS in the game) is supposed to confer an advantage in that regard. I think that such crazy PS wars in general are bad for the game, because it adds so much RPS to upgrade choices in the PS7-9 range. I would much rather the decision making come down to how much you want to invest into being the one who moves and shoots when desired as opposed to whether or not boosting to PS9 or 10 is a complete waste of points. The EPT slot shouldn't be just a VI slot on PS9, and PS7-8 should have more valid options. I know there would be some reshuffling of what ships are viable/better, and that's unavoidable. But I firmly believe it would lead to more variety, since it reduces the RPS elements in turn -1.

I just don't understand how the logical conclusion is that ships have a "best build" and no other options. Look at all the different ways that players kitted out Poe before the PS race started! Quickdraw has so many great EPT possibilities. Soontir can see the field again. Turr Phenir gets to have a little bit of fun. Dash has several different kit options. Vader's EPT choices are wide open. Talonbane, too. Old Teroch. PS 7-8 pilots can choose to trade off between good synergistic EPTs and getting to play with the top dogs. The top dogs get to build their ship however the heck they want instead of worrying about getting PS killed if they don't take VI. Players don't HAVE to go with a huge bid, either-- it's simply a choice with better balanced tradeoffs versus a simple pass/fail of whether or not your ship gets to shoot before it explodes.

There are obviously exceptions, but generally if you're the same PS as your opponent there's a way to leverage that because you always get a chance to shoot. Ace vs. Ace, for example, gives the player who has to move first the chance to block-- even though they can't react to their opponent's moves, they have a way to dictate the battlefield. And since PS is even, the player moving last can't just dedicate actions to offense unless they've outflown their opponent.

Just gonna throw this out there as an actionable concept rather than just arguing about how bad the pitfalls of this may or may not be:

Why don’t we all (who agree that this would be a good idea) get people in our local groups to test it out. Play with it casually, even with some local tournaments. Playtest it for FF, and if it gains traction, it’s much more likely to come about officially than if they just hear us whining about it. ✌️

5 minutes ago, RampancyTW said:

Okay, so let's just clear something up: You're not smarter than me, you don't know/understand more about the game than me, we simply have a different opinion.

I neither said so nor did I want to imply as much. If you go back to your first five (!) posts you'll maybe see though how vastly different they were in quality as well as pretty dense and (based on this post now) intentionally misunderstanding. So right back at you with your "not at all productive to conversation".

10 minutes ago, RampancyTW said:

A bid has different value for different pilots, but that doesn't mean that there is no benefit to being PS9 (even if you don't always get initiative choice), and there are advantages to moving first or shooting first that can be leveraged.

PS9 without a bid in a PS9cap situation is almost as useful as current PS9, yes. Slightly more because of simultaneous fire and the odd crit/blinded pilot. But essentially you outPS ships that don't participate in the PS war, and you lose to those that do.

13 minutes ago, RampancyTW said:

Deep initiative bids have inherent disadvantages against lists that don't contain PS9 pilots and have no interest in taking part in the bidding wars, which provides a natural balancing act and gives multiple viable approaches to playing at PS9

That's the crux. Reports of solo Kylo winning small tournaments, or Kylo+Soontir doing pretty good, or Whisper taking apart entire lists, or Vader doing the same; all these tell me that the advantage for some pilots outweighs the "inherent disadvantages" of spending 10 points on a bid and not on upgrades/another ship.

PS10 alpha lists are not a thing because of PS11, yes. And yet you don't think that PS9+initiative for certain ships also has such a huge advantage?

I (and others) are 100% okay with highest PS pilots being able to stay highest PS pilots and getting an inherent advantage. Being PS9 (you know, the highest PS in the game) is supposed to confer an advantage in that regard. Also, talk about condescending!

31 minutes ago, RampancyTW said:

I think that such crazy PS wars in general are bad for the game, because it adds so much RPS to upgrade choices in the PS7-9 range. I would much rather the decision making come down to how much you want to invest into being the one who moves and shoots when desired as opposed to whether or not boosting to PS9 or 10 is a complete waste of points. The EPT slot shouldn't be just a VI slot on PS9, and PS7-8 should have more valid options.

You think crazy PS wars are bad for the game? You don't want boosting to PS9 or 10 be a complete waste of points? You want the EPT slot have more valid options on PS7-8? That's exactly why bidding wars are a horrible idea!

I won't repeat myself yet again for the whole argument, but more PS9 means more bidding wars. As such it means that boosting to PS9 without a sufficient bid will be a complete waste of points, too! And PS7-8 will only have more valid options if they don't participate in PS wars at all - which is the exact same situation as they are in right now. Introducing a cap at PS9 will reduce, not increase, options for them. Same for PS9: either they take a massive bid or they don't participate. That massive bid is not a problem for some few pilots, but a huge problem for most.

37 minutes ago, RampancyTW said:

Look at all the different ways that players kitted out Poe before the PS race started!

You mean IntensityPoe with either R2D2 ("the correct choice") or BB8 ("the fun choice")? Those "all the different ways"?

All your examples have a huge downside: they will have to underbid others or can forfeit. You play soontir and only brought an 8pt bid? Too bad, you move first and get arcdodged the whole game by a ship that's most likely worth more points and wins by default.

2 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

Surely it is not.

You want to make the PS race even worse by adding an EPT so that EVERY PILOT IN THE GAME AT PS 6+ IS A 9??

You may as well just drop PS as a game mechanic altogether.

Which is the exact opposite of what most people want; they want PS to matter more.

Since that post, Having read some other peoples posts I actually think it would be better to cap ps at ten so native 9s have to use adaptability to definitely be top ps, and then bid for the right to move first or last. Also add in a whole bunch of epts so pilots can bump their pilot skill up. Why not. If it is scaled properly, a low ps named pilot could be paying by 3 points and losing their EPT to get to ten. So they gain simultaneous fire, and if they want to win the bid they will have to bid even more, but now all these pilots who normally never see play have a chance of going first and seeing the tables.

People with ps11 and big bids already exist, the counter play to that is low ps swarms or action efficency epts on generic pilots, with the full 100 points being spent.

If people want to cap ps, so lower ps ships can be made into the ships that move last shoot first with a sufficient bid or at least get simultaneous fire, and we have adaptability and VI, why stop at ps 7.

The alternative route is to do away with adaptability and VI. If you don't think messing with pilot skill should exist, however I find being able to pilot skill match 3 ships with originally different pilot skills infilled useful in my games, hence if VI is a thing why not take that concept further, and open up new avenues and potential builds of ships.

Hence I think cap ps at ten, add new epts that cost more and increase ps more.

29 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

I neither said so nor did I want to imply as much. If you go back to your first five (!) posts you'll maybe see though how vastly different they were in quality as well as pretty dense and (based on this post now) intentionally misunderstanding. So right back at you with your "not at all productive to conversation".

PS9 without a bid in a PS9cap situation is almost as useful as current PS9, yes. Slightly more because of simultaneous fire and the odd crit/blinded pilot. But essentially you outPS ships that don't participate in the PS war, and you lose to those that do.

That's the crux. Reports of solo Kylo winning small tournaments, or Kylo+Soontir doing pretty good, or Whisper taking apart entire lists, or Vader doing the same; all these tell me that the advantage for some pilots outweighs the "inherent disadvantages" of spending 10 points on a bid and not on upgrades/another ship.

PS10 alpha lists are not a thing because of PS11, yes. And yet you don't think that PS9+initiative for certain ships also has such a huge advantage?

I (and others) are 100% okay with highest PS pilots being able to stay highest PS pilots and getting an inherent advantage. Being PS9 (you know, the highest PS in the game) is supposed to confer an advantage in that regard. Also, talk about condescending!

You think crazy PS wars are bad for the game? You don't want boosting to PS9 or 10 be a complete waste of points? You want the EPT slot have more valid options on PS7-8? That's exactly why bidding wars are a horrible idea!

I won't repeat myself yet again for the whole argument, but more PS9 means more bidding wars. As such it means that boosting to PS9 without a sufficient bid will be a complete waste of points, too! And PS7-8 will only have more valid options if they don't participate in PS wars at all - which is the exact same situation as they are in right now. Introducing a cap at PS9 will reduce, not increase, options for them. Same for PS9: either they take a massive bid or they don't participate. That massive bid is not a problem for some few pilots, but a huge problem for most.

You mean IntensityPoe with either R2D2 ("the correct choice") or BB8 ("the fun choice")? Those "all the different ways"?

All your examples have a huge downside: they will have to underbid others or can forfeit. You play soontir and only brought an 8pt bid? Too bad, you move first and get arcdodged the whole game by a ship that's most likely worth more points and wins by default.

Are you implying that you "slowly now"ed and asserted my agreement with chains of logic I clearly don't agree with because you respect my opinion in this matter? Because I'm not going to apologize for calling that spade a spade. You don't get to act offended when somebody calls you out for being condescending. If you don't intend to condescend, don't say things that pretty clearly condescend.

Boosting to PS9 without a bid will not be a waste of points, because it all but guarantees simulfire and means than an alpha strike list can't just nuke you off the board. It's really that simple. Boosting to PS9 gets you above Miranda, gets you above Lone Wolf Dash, gets you above non/VI Norra, etc. It means Fenn/Ghost can be more readily bid under to prevent the coordinate-as-the-last-move-in-the-phase shenanigans. A higher resolution of tradeoffs (versus the current pass/fail PS wars) should result in a higher variety of choices.

It also isn't as simple as massive bid or no bid at all-- there might be certain archetypes that you might want to make sure you bid under, while others don't cause problems. A 100-point Soontir Fel list, for example, accepts that Fel will be a turbo-blocker as opposed to an arc-dodger against other PS9 ships while getting to arc-dodge everything else-- a 96-point Fel list only cares about bidding below Fenn/Ghost, because they feel feel confident about the other 61 points' ability to deal with other PS9 ships. A Fel/Kylo player might feel just dandy at 82 points, because they're all-in on arc-dodging. Alpha strike lists might bid super low to make sure that they move last, but others might roll with 100 points and just use LRS to achieve similar results.

"You mean IntensityPoe with either R2D2 ("the correct choice") or BB8 ("the fun choice")? Those "all the different ways"?" Oh hey look, more condescension. But you're right, I totally misread your intent. Budget regen, Predator, PTL, Intensity/Comms, Intensity/Primed were all iterations that saw play and had pros and cons (as well as different point values). Currently it's VI/AO or bust, but opening up the EPT slot means that all of the possibilities have different pros and cons again.

5 minutes ago, RampancyTW said:

Because I'm not going to apologize for calling that spade a spade. You don't get to act offended when somebody calls you out for being condescending. If you don't intend to condescend, don't say things that pretty clearly condescend.

Hi pot, I'm kettle.

4 minutes ago, RampancyTW said:

Budget regen, Predator, PTL, Intensity/Comms, Intensity/Primed were all iterations that saw play and had pros and cons (as well as different point values). Currently it's VI/AO or bust, but opening up the EPT slot means that all of the possibilities have different pros and cons again.

Because they all coexisted at the same time? Otherwise this comparison would be incredibly disingenuous. Oh, wait...

At this point you're just wasting my time, so I might as well waste yours.