i dont know anyone that left 40k because it got "nuked back to basic" - in fact, it got an outburst in popularity now that its not literally 60 pages of universal rules you gotta remember.

The bigger issue with xwing 2.0 is its a card/cardboard based system. Unless they abandon that, which i doubt they'd do since the card upgrade system is where a lot of their money comes from (how many people bought multiple G4H and do NOT use vipers/kfighters at all?), the only way they could release a 2.0 is if they also released updated cards/cardboards for EVERYTHING and theres no way they could do that that wouldnt end up A) being an absolutely abysmal money sink on their end for little potential gain or B) pissing everyone off because they gotta rebuy all the cards/cardboards. No matter how you deploy it, either FFG is taking a massive hit financially to just give out new cards/cardboards or players are basically buying the game from scratch again.

9 hours ago, Estarriol said:

Auzituck is a problem as is - reinforce is too good for the points but not easily nerfed without making it useless. My personal take is that it’s added to things that prevent you from taking that action, or force you to lose the token (Wes, jax, homing missile etc).

Or simply add this to Reinforce tokens rules: when you place this token next to your ship, place one "evade" token under it. After defending, remove an evade token under the reinforce token, or remove the reinforce token.

For Epic ship, make it up to 2 or 3 evade tokens.

Playtest to make things right given the number.

None of these. Phantom using the Phantom's turret is a horrible, horrible change--it's not a nerf!--which people really should stop suggesting. Putting a cap on the number of upgrades is just awkward and foolish: it nerfs a lot of ships which aren't broken, which aren't anything other than fun, meme-ships, and doesn't directly alter what actually needs to be fixed in the game.

As always the best solution is this:

Just change points costs.

• Engine Upgrade to 6 points on a large base ship, down to 3 on a small-base. It's both far to expensive to be used on small ships effectively, and far too powerful on a large base ship at any PS. Rather than fundamentally changing mechanics of how boosts work (I know they did with Barrel Roll, but it's a physically easy difference), a higher point cost helps to balance lists. Meanwhile, there isn't really a problem with IG-2000s, which would get pretty f'cked by a Boost nerf, rather than an Engine Upgrade nerf.
• TLT becomes 8 points, all other turrets except Blaster go up by 1 point, and Y-Wing, HWK, and TIE Aggressor go down by 2 points (maybe only down by 1 on the named pilots). Maybe non-unique K-Wings go down by 1 or 2 points. TLT on small ships is perhaps boring, but not broken. It's only problematic on a few ships, and increasing point costs balances those lists against the rest of the field.
• Harpoon Missiles become 5 points, same as Homing, to encourage list-building choices. Harpoon, although awkwardly over-complicated, isn't fundamentally broken, it's just a bit of power-creep which could be easily balanced by being properly costed.
• Bomblet Generator gotta be 4 or 5 points. It shouldn't be cheaper than Seismic + [ordnance tokens]. I think this is less of a power-issue, and more of a build-diversity issue. It'd be more interesting if Nyms and Mirandas carried other bombs more often, and only sometimes Bomblet.
• Sheathipede is just too cost effective, so make it more expensive. If it isn't as cheap, it'd be fine. Overly complicated nerfs like "only one of crew or droid" are kinda a mess. Just fix the points cost.
• Miranda does probably need to be nerfed to exclude turrets (at least). Go with just that to start: with 8 point TLT, 5 point Bomblets, 5 point Harpoons, and no low-opportunity-cost TLT regen, I think she's probably fine and doesn't need to exclude Missiles/Torps from her pilot ability. If not, adjust again later. Fenn Rau might need a small change too, like he can only prevent one token specifically from being used, more like 4-LOM. However, mostly the best nerfs or buffs would just be updating the points costs.

8 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

Putting a cap on the number of upgrades is just awkward and foolish: it nerfs a lot of ships which aren't broken, which aren't anything other than fun, meme-ships, and doesn't directly alter what actually needs to be fixed in the game.

Most of these meme level ships would be better off with just 4 upgrades. I can see there are exceptions. But, I'm going to let you provide the proof to your statement.

Honestly also, 4 upgrade Nym and Miranda are sooo much less stifling to diversity.

And yes, it does hurt Arcs (normal power level) and Tie SFs (those are doing well). However, most of them can make do: Norra, title, R2D2, PTL, Vectored. That's a fine ship.

---

Frankly I'm amazed how many people want power-crept broken stuff.

12 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

There's a million of these threads. That's ok. I want one for myself and the best ideas I've heard.

Its blindingly obvious that power creep in the last few waves has run completely rampant. New ships are basically non-sensically more mobile, defensible or hard-hitting than older ships. This is probably the last time we can curb it before the game simply gets out of hand.

THE WORLD CHANGER: Generally, everything with 4+ upgrades, 9+ health, repositioning, 180+ degrees of firing, regen, extreme upgrade synergy, auto-damage, on a large or fat-small base needs a nerf down to normal power levels.
Each ship can only equip 4 upgrades. Titles are exempted if they do not provide any positive bonuses except: Adding slots and/or changing point cost.
Ex. Virago and Vaksai do not count towards the 4 limit. Starviper mk3 and the Ghost title do. Assigned conditions do not count towards the limit either.

Large Base boost - When executing a straight boost, place the 1 straight on the side of the nubs and boost by the shorter distance of the template. When executing a slight or hard turn boost, place the template at the front of the ship opposite to the direction of the boost, and place the ship so that the back far corner contacts the template.
Handles ships:
Scurgg
super Miranda
Falcon
Dash

TARGETED BOMBARDMENT: Specific nerfs. Keeping these ships viable, but removing extremes.
Gunboats/Imps/ Harpoons : Spend TL to attack.
VCX/Phantom : Phantom Title changed to at the end of turn, the docked Phantom (has no mods) may make a turret attack.
Sheathipede : Remove EPT slot. Can only fill astromech OR crew.
Auzituck : An opponent may choose a reinforce token as if it was an evade token for the interactions of their abilities and upgrades.

Good thing you arnt in charge

28 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

Most of these meme level ships would be better off with just 4 upgrades. I can see there are exceptions. But, I'm going to let you provide the proof to your statement.

T65 - title/refit/droid/ept and additional mods

K-fighter - ept/title/3 mods/missile/illicit

Star Viper - ept/title/title/mod/illicit/system

A-wing - ept/ept/refit/title/mod

just a quick cursory glance at this idea and how it's not a good idea...

1 hour ago, Vontoothskie said:

i agree with much of that, but harpoons are insanely overpowered garbage and there is no "type" of ship that is excluded from EPTs. EPT slots go to pilots the designers want to be flexible but arent anticipated to be out of hand.

for example Laetin Ashara didnt get one for balance reasons even though most M3A pilots do. the only reason certain aces dont have ept slots is the concern that their abilities would interact in uncontrolled ways... like for example veteran instincts rebel Fenn.

I’ve heard good arguments on both sides of the Harpoon issue and I don’t really feel like getting into it, so I will merely comment from my personal preference rather than comment on actual game balance.

While your explanation of EPT use works, I disagree about ship types not being a factor. Previous heavy bombers do not have epts, with the Scruug showing perhaps why they shouldn’t. None of the Ghost pilots have EPTs, yet Hera over in the Attack shuttle has it. So, the ship itself has a factor in EPT use. Heck, i’d even say this kind of limitations is why the Y-Wing originally didn’t have EPTs.

Your Laetin example makes a case for removing Fenn Rau’s ept (Though I disagree) rather than removing epts from all sheathipedes.

16 minutes ago, Wiredin said:

T65 - title/refit/droid/ept and additional mods

K-fighter - ept/title/3 mods/missile/illicit

Star Viper - ept/title/title/mod/illicit/system

A-wing - ept/ept/refit/title/mod

just a quick cursory glance at this idea and how it's not a good idea...

Really look at it and think about it again. You're showing you don't understand it really. Your bottom two examples are completely in my favor: Only 1 starviper can get virago (which doesn't count for the limit). Awing title also doesn't count for the limit. They're perfectly 4 upgrades.

Guri: Virago , SVmk3, LW, Auto, FCS <- this is totally a fine build, esp against other 4 upgrade things.

Jake: Awing test pilot , VI, PTL, Auto, Prockets

Really think long and hard about it. Your examples are wrong!

And yes, amazing, you do have to choose! Most ships will have to drop an upgrade! Wow! So hard.

9 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

Really look at it and think about it again. You're showing you don't understand it really. Your bottom two examples are completely in my favor: Only 1 starviper can get virago (which doesn't count for the limit). Awing title also doesn't count for the limit. They're perfectly 4 upgrades.

Guri: Virago , SVmk3, LW, Auto, FCS <- this is totally a fine build, esp against other 4 upgrade things.

Jake: Awing test pilot , VI, PTL, Auto, Prockets

Really think long and hard about it. Your examples are wrong!

And yes, amazing, you do have to choose! Most ships will have to drop an upgrade! Wow! So hard.

Please comment on @Wiredin ‘s other two examples.

Additionally, while you are satisfied with that Guri build does not mean everyone else should be. More upgrades means more points. You are still making choices, so your claim that we aren’t currently falls a little flat.

34 minutes ago, Wiredin said:

T65 - title/refit/droid/ept and additional mods

K-fighter - ept/title/3 mods/missile/illicit

Star Viper - ept/title/title/mod/illicit/system

A-wing - ept/ept/refit/title/mod

just a quick cursory glance at this idea and how it's not a good idea...

9 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

Please comment on @Wiredin ‘s other two examples.

Let's assume Sfoils is the title. I haven't seen any info on how that provides more mods.

Xwing, Sfoils, R2D2, Integrated, Predator.

Khaiksjdnf - This one is relatively okay actually, but a bit tougher:

Cartel: Vaksai, Harpoon, GC, Glitter, Pulsed

Cobra: Vaksai, Predator, Cloaking, Vectored, Pulsed, you drop illicit and harpoon.

Remember, you're fighting other ships with only 4 upgrades as well.

Really, both of those work. You're just going to have to get used to not getting everything you want.

I also haven't seen how anyone has noted how much easier it makes to defeat the most powerful super upgraded fat ships.

I am playing with 2-3 different lists just in case something like this happens just before Worlds....

2 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

Let's assume Sfoils is the title. I haven't seen any info on how that provides more mods.

Xwing, Sfoils, R2D2, Integrated, Predator.

Khaiksjdnf - This one is relatively okay actually, but a bit tougher:

Cartel: Vaksai, Harpoon, GC, Glitter, Pulsed

Cobra: Vaksai, Predator, Cloaking, Vectored, Pulsed, you drop illicit and harpoon.

Remember, you're fighting other ships with only 4 upgrades as well.

Really, both of those work. You're just going to have to get used to not getting everything you want.

I also haven't seen how anyone has noted how much easier it makes to defeat the most powerful super upgraded fat ships.

Except you are assuming those builds will be enough when you have no proof. And you forgot about the retrofit in the T-65 example.

Let’s look at some top meta builds or close to it that won’t have to adjust much to comply with your rule and keep your reduced builds from being as good as you seem to claim.

Current Palp Aces would shift fully over to the Expertise version of QD (making it 4 upgrades). Since it is already seeing good use and wins, you restriction only makes it better and kills the little bit of diversity in the archetype we have. Likewise I don’t think Wookiee Gunships will actually be that hurt by your suggestions, so they will remain dominant.

You will also have other low mod ships coming back way before your builds, such as Fang Fenn Rau, who usually only has three upgrades, and already dominate ships with a slight slimming effect (like Vader). X7 Defenders will likewise gain a great boon from these limitations that do not apply to them.

You are also ignoring the big base ships that will replace the ones you are trying to get rid of. Ventress is currently highly regarded with LW,Latts/Glitter x2/Countermeasures. Only one thing would need to be removed for it to get past your limitations and suddenly the archetype you are trying to limit just mutates rather than being weakened. Jumpmasters are Likewise well placed for this. Even Dash isn’t that phased as it just means he cuts EU, still leaving him LW/Rey/Title/HLC, which is what some people are already flying.

This all on top of the assumption that the meta monsters won’t just make minor adjustments and stay where they are.

Unless you can show me that the builds you have suggested can stand up to the options I mentioned, then I maintain that your suggested upgrade limitation only rearranges the deck at the expense of lower level pilots/ships rather than actually makes a positive change.

Not hampered by 4 card upgrade limit, but will be even more dangerous against those that are limited.

Dengar - Expertise, Punnishing 1, K4, Engine

Dash - Outrider, Mangler, Rey, Lone Wolf

Poe - VI, Optics, B1, R2D2

Rey - Expertise, Finn, Kanan, Engine

Ventress - LW/Latts/Glitter/Counter

3 hours ago, Zura said:

What? Warhammer 40k went through 8 editions or so and uts doing well

Fantasy

No, one of the nice things about this game is that I have those list building freedoms. I want to sink 73 points into Miranda, I’m allowed to do that, and also pay the consequences when your 5 ship list obliterates mine in one turn.

I don’t know why you think the whole punch idea is good. It was a necessary exception to the jumpmaster at the time, not a rule or thumb that needs to be applied to every ship.

I think the upgrade limitation is a bit janky as a suggestion (only in how it deals with titles, I think all should be fine as not counting as upgrades but can see titles like the Falcon being a bit good in a 4 limit world)

pas far as I can tell the roiginal design philophy for Xwing was that extra upgrades place more points on the same chassis (though some upgrades boost defence) and therefore adds risk to that ship, a diminishing return of sorts.

the issue is that upgrades are carrying more than their weight, which is fine in some cases and not so much in others (optics is a perfectly fine card, very good but still enjoyable, while bomblet and regen are pretty often complained about even if I have no personal issue with them).

basically upgrades used to have an inherent risk, unless they really paid off they were usually ignored for another filler ship, with most ships having 1 or 2 upgrades with ordnance carriers being the exception.

Im not of the belief that we need this upgrade card change, or really too many of the nerfs mentioned above, but there are some things do are obviously a bit too dominant or perceived to be NPEs.

And while the errata and buff system we have now is heavy handed, it does seem to be working, and FFG has hit something of a designs stride with more balanced ships nowadays (Wookie, Nym and sheathipede are exceptions) with the striker, Uwing, Kimogila, tie Agressor, Guns4hire and GUNBOAT being pretty fair, fun and balanced

We need a 2.0 at this point. We also need to keep Epic mechanics out of standard play.

That's problem number one right now.

Problem number two? New moves for ships. Was a terrible idea, very unfortunate that it happened, was never okay with it.

5 minutes ago, Captain Lackwit said:

We need a 2.0 at this point. We also need to keep Epic mechanics out of standard play.

That's problem number one right now.

Problem number two? New moves for ships. Was a terrible idea, very unfortunate that it happened, was never okay with it.

agreed, co-ordinate and reinforce are pretty nasty abilities in the 100/6 format.

the Troll and Sloop are pretty fun. wish they could have been around since day 1 tho.

I rather limit the total points spent on upgrades as opposed to the total number of upgrades.

Something is seriously wrong with this game when someone can field a list like Nym and Miranda and have a ton invested in upgrades and it's not a detriment in any way.

1 hour ago, Wiredin said:

agreed, co-ordinate and reinforce are pretty nasty abilities in the 100/6 format.

the Troll and Sloop are pretty fun. wish they could have been around since day 1 tho.

Coordinate was fine when it was shackled to the upsilon, it's the cheap chassis of the Sheathipede and the fact that it can go as far as PS11 that make it so nasty.

I'm not sure re-enforce is fixable, it's very strong but inevitably beatable, if there's a slight nerf out there I'd like to here it, I feel it wonky just above the curve of average as it is

I do not know with what weapons World Nerf III will use but World Nerf IV will be fought with Salt and Tears.*











*Take with tongue placed firmly in cheek.

8 hours ago, Quadjumper King said:

Coordinate was fine when it was shackled to the upsilon, it's the cheap chassis of the Sheathipede and the fact that it can go as far as PS11 that make it so nasty.

I'm not sure re-enforce is fixable, it's very strong but inevitably beatable, if there's a slight nerf out there I'd like to here it, I feel it wonky just above the curve of average as it is

Coordinate is literally only close to problematic on Fenn. Regardless of past history he simply shouldn't have been PS9. 7 at best, 6 preferably. As so often, the problem arises with giving out free actions at top PS, not with giving out free actions generally.

Reinforce would be fine on a ship that wasn't functionally a half turret with too much toughness and a really good dial. If the Auzituck had AGI 0 or two or 3 fewer HP it would be a lot less problematic.

Standard play Jam is going to be a totally different action anyway.

And I doubt very much we're going to see Recover - not least because regen is already in standard play.

16 hours ago, the1hodgy said:

Fantasy

Age of sigmar was a mistake, but previous instance went through a lot of reeditions. Yeah, one of them was bad. You can make an argument that making a new star wars movie is a bad idea because the room was a bad movie. That's exactly your argument.

On 3/20/2018 at 2:17 PM, Blail Blerg said:

Most of these meme level ships would be better off with just 4 upgrades. I can see there are exceptions. But, I'm going to let you provide the proof to your statement.

Honestly also, 4 upgrade Nym and Miranda are sooo much less stifling to diversity.

And yes, it does hurt Arcs (normal power level) and Tie SFs (those are doing well). However, most of them can make do: Norra, title, R2D2, PTL, Vectored. That's a fine ship.

---

Frankly I'm amazed how many people want power-crept broken stuff.

Personally, I've had a bunch of fun with Cassian with Expert Handling, Advanced Sensors, Inspiring Recruit, Kyle Catarn, title, and Expert Handling. I'd probably call it a fair ship, but well over the limit. Why should a silly Cassian--built more for fun than brokenness and power-creep--be nerfed because there's a problem with Miranda? And doesn't even really crush Miranda: TLT, Harpoon, Bomblet, Crew is still going to be a very strong ship. So you just killed Cassian, and Miranda is still Miranda. Well done . Putting a cap on the number of upgrades pretty much annihilates the entire concept of an upgrade bar (the three-crew Decimators and YT-666s suffer greatly), and breaks all early design work in the game. Again, it nerfs things which don't need nerfing, and leaves untouched things which do. That's not a wise nerf or fix to the problems of the game.

Another fun ship which would be killed is a wicked loaded Guri: PTL, both titles, FCS, Autothrusters, Adv. Proton Torpedos, and Scavenger Crane. Would it be better without the torp package? Probably, but that's not the point. Why shouldn't a ship be able to have the upgrades it was designed to take? If it's too powerful, change the upgrades. Change the ship. Don't obliterate the baseline design of all chassis in the game. There's also something kinda odd in saying "we're limiting ships to 4 upgrades, to prevent power creep" at the same time as "most ships are more powerful with only 4 upgrades."

It also drives the game towards a boring sameness. With only 4 upgrade slots, you'll never see oddball little tech choices which might help a list against some thing: you'd only ever see the absolute best 4 upgrades. Back before Kylo in the Attanni heyday, I remember someone making some waves with a VI/Palp/Rebel Captive/Engine/Dauntless/ Ion Bomb RAC. That little twist helped the ship in some match-ups, but moreover, it says "this person thought about the list, and made a change to suit their playstyle." In a world with a 4-upgrade cap, you'd never see that Ion Bomb. Players will be hard-pressed to carve out their own little niches in the game, to put their own twist on common archetypes. Likewise, taking upgrades which are intended to counter a ship you might face rarely will be over. The opportunity cost of giving up a more key upgrade is gone.

All that (killing fun ships, destroying early game design, eliminating deviation from standard builds) doesn't seem like a worthwhile cost to pay, for a "fix" which doesn't even really fix anything.

On 3/20/2018 at 3:08 PM, SabineKey said:

I’ve heard good arguments on both sides of the Harpoon issue and I don’t really feel like getting into it, so I will merely comment from my personal preference rather than comment on actual game balance.

While your explanation of EPT use works, I disagree about ship types not being a factor. Previous heavy bombers do not have epts, with the Scruug showing perhaps why they shouldn’t. None of the Ghost pilots have EPTs, yet Hera over in the Attack shuttle has it. So, the ship itself has a factor in EPT use. Heck, i’d even say this kind of limitations is why the Y-Wing originally didn’t have EPTs.

Your Laetin example makes a case for removing Fenn Rau’s ept (Though I disagree) rather than removing epts from all sheathipedes.

I think we're saying the same thing?

EPTs arent given to pilots that would be broken with one. in some cases its because of potential upgrade combinations, others pilot abilities. this means more potential abuses is a lower likelyhood of EPT across all ship types

there are currently more fighter aces without EPTs than Bomber aces without EPTs, so claiming its bombers doesnt make sense.