First Destiny, now Armada... Everything comes in 3's

By atkrull, in X-Wing

Posted at
3 minutes ago, FrightfulCommand said:

I agree with the sentiment. If not the proposal here.

tumblr_ojbd1zglWn1qim9hqo3_400.gif

Posted at
1 hour ago, sozin said:

The rule change is based on a key scene from Star Wars: remember when Luke and Han share the gun turrets of the Falcon? Between the two of them they are able to achieve a 360 firing arc. Using this as our guide, let’s say that without one of them participating, their angle of arc is reduced by half: a 180 degree arc. (And with neither participating, they only can fire from their cabin, or 90 degrees forward).

The idea behind the change is basically that you can still achieve 360 degree arc, but you have to sacrifice both crew slots to get it, by filling them with dedicated crew (for example the now never used Luke Skywalker crew). If you choose to sacrifice one crew slot, you get either a back 180 or forward 180 arc.

My issues with this are threefold. First is that it would be a major nerf to these ships. Now that isn't in and of itself a bad thing but I think it would require a change in points cost for at least some of them and they so far have adamantly refused to do this. Second it makes it less apparent what capabilities a ship has just by looking at the model. We're already down that rabbit hole to some degree due to all the upgrade cards and ships like the Ghost which can potentially have forward, forward/back, or 360. But for the majority of ships you can tell at a glance where they'll be able to shoot you from. But if all turreted ships can have variable arcs then it becomes much harder. Third, my general feeling is that there will be one overwhelmingly objectively correct answer per chassis and we'll see that level of arc played almost exclusively.

Having said all that I don't hate the idea in isolation, if the game had been that way from the beginning it'd probably be fine. But I can't get behind it as a retrofit at this point

Posted at

Adding Epic actions into the normal dogfight games was a mistake to begin with.

Both reinforce and coordinate actions return huge dividens when they are placed on small cheap ships.

Edited by salnihra
Posted at
On 4/6/2018 at 10:52 PM, Commander Kaine said:

My take:

NERFS (AKA F#ck the rebels)

1. TLT. Make only hits count. OR have a TL requirement

2. Miranda: Regen works in primary arc only. You can now run away OR regen.

3. Harpoons: TL must be spent. No other changes.

4. Sabine: Her ship only is a good idea.

5. Reinforce is now a affected by Jam.

6. Phantom I & II: They are mutually exclusive. Only one of them can be used in a squad at a time.

I can agree with all of these, though I would make a slight change to Harpoons, and say that the harpoon condition only happens to 1. Large Base ships 2. small base ships that have no remaining shields after the attack. It doesn't make sense to me for a fighter to take all of 1 damage to its shields from a harpoon attack, but still have a freaking harpoon jabbed into it. On a large base ship, it's a little more believable that a missile can stick in without doing damage, but not a small base.

Posted at
9 hours ago, CRCL said:

I don't think it will really matter what they nerf in this next FAQ. There's so many poorly designed and balanced cards/mechanics in the game atm, that as soon as you nerf the dominant ones others will replace them.

X-wing's current state just reinforces to me that you don't design your way out of design problems. Most of the problem elements are cards they released to address previous imbalances.

Yup; this's just how nature works; you need to look at this game from an evolution stand point;

Ship = Organism

Cards = Trait/Mutation

Naturally an organism with the most helpful traits and mutations will raise to the top (Apex) that bet its prey; this can be any combination depending on the other Organism and traits/mutations in the environment.

Much like in nature some cards are by products of post builds (species) but you never know when something will either a) become worthless or b) useful. Having a large card pool (gene) is great, and lets be honest finding that combination to become the new Apex is great fun. (previous example Mindlink (which was wrote off on release)

I've only ever know three games to be perfectly balanced, noughts and crosses (tic tac toe), chess, and checkers. and even then player 1 has an advantage.

X-Wing is at heart Rock, Paper, Scissor and that game isn't balanced; since not all throws are not equally common. The World RPS Society reports these proportions (for tournament play, with mostly expert players):

Rock 35.4pc
Paper 35.0pc
Scissors 29.6pc

TL:DR

Balance would be nice; but it's a dream.

Edited by the1hodgy
Posted at

Don't let perfect be the enemy of good, or at least better. Things won't ever be perfect but that doesn't mean that they can't get better. Yes, there will be other combos that become the new best thing. But they will be less good than what we currently see. Keep sanding down the highest points and the game improves incrementally.

Posted at

I'm with gambler

The idea that perfect balance will never be achieved is a poor excuse for not desiring some form of improvement

If you elect not to try because you feel things will never change for the better or because they could be worse, you're going to be stuck in one place your entire life

The game is VASTLY improved from its torpscout and Miranda nym days, and it is WORLDS apart from the horror show that was the wave 5 turretfest

And it can be better still

Edited by ficklegreendice
Posted at
2 hours ago, the1hodgy said:

X-Wing is at heart Rock, Paper, Scissor and that game isn't balanced; since not all throws are not equally common. The World RPS Society reports these proportions (for tournament play, with mostly expert players):

Rock 35.4pc
Paper 35.0pc
Scissors 29.6pc

Posted at
5 minutes ago, FTS Gecko said:

Yes; there is always the outlier; **** stupid outliers

Posted at
22 minutes ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

Fug.

So tomorrow we have a 50/50- Do we get IA or X-wing?

Or is Legion going to get a FAQ in this mess as well?

In fairness, Legion still doesn't even have tournament regulations.

X-Wing only gets things on Monday and Friday. I'm just gonna wait until Friday... and then be disappointed again...

Posted at
10 hours ago, ficklegreendice said:

I'm with gambler

The idea that perfect balance will never be achieved is a poor excuse for not desiring some form of improvement

If you elect not to try because you feel things will never change for the better or because they could be worse, you're going to be stuck in one place your entire life

The game is VASTLY improved from its torpscout and Miranda nym days, and it is WORLDS apart from the horror show that was the wave 5 turretfest

And it can be better still

Yeah, I didn't mean to insinuate that we shouldn't strive to get as close to balance as possible. I just see lots and lots of problem cards, coupled with FFGs unwillingness to go hard on card nerfs/bans, as a huge barrier to getting to a decently balanced game.

I still can't believe it's been 13 waves, and they still haven't nerfed the mechanics of turrets.

Posted at
7 hours ago, Kieransi said:

In fairness, Legion still doesn't even have tournament regulations.

X-Wing only gets things on Monday and Friday. I'm just gonna wait until Friday... and then be disappointed again...

Skimming the news section, there've been some outliers, both previews and FAQ drops.