Playing with the idea of how to make a "base level" fighter better without introducing power creep, this was my idea:

What secondary weapon does the title refer to?

I think the base model is appropriately costed. It's basically an A-Wing that loses 1 shield into hull and gains the system slot. So that seems fair.

With the title, however, it resembles a TIE Interceptor, but is 1 point cheaper for a shield and the System slot, plus a cool, if weak double tap. I feel like the title should be 3 or 4 points (I know Alphas are overcosted) but other than that, it looks pretty cool. I'd fly it!

17 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

When?
Try this: Your Action Bar gains the [barrel roll] icon

9 minutes ago, Dwing said:

What secondary weapon does the title refer to?

Second primary. Not secondary. Should be "perform another primary weapon attack against the defender"

Vp Sq Vet + AC + AT + Juke 25 pts filler

Always 2 hits, always Evade + AT, Juke always triggers. What is the dial like? It could be very strong. 27 with the title...

12 minutes ago, Dwing said:

What secondary weapon does the title refer to?

OK< bad phrasing. "an additional primary. . ."

4 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:

When?
Try this: Your Action Bar gains the [barrel roll] icon

Vp Sq Vet + AC + AT + Juke 25 pts filler

Always 2 hits, always Evade + AT, Juke always triggers. What is the dial like? It could be very strong . 27 with the title...

Again, needs better lingo. Thanks.

Not too strong, I hope.

In the lore, this ship has 4 rapid-fire cannons, so it should be pretty potent. It's basically a riff on the idea of the /sf. You have tactical choices on how to use your guns.

And, lastly, an exercise in "there is plenty of design space left." How to take a basic 2-3 attack ship and make it interesting without power creep.

That title is nutty. A 2/3/3/1 for 15 with a System is already solid, presuming a reasonable dial. Accuracy Corrector and Autothrusters for 20 points gets you a ship which seems good. Consistent offense without requiring actions is strong (so you'll be free to boost and evade), and compared to the 21 point Tempest, you lose a shield and a PS but gain Autothrusters, for a point cheaper. I can't tell which would be stronger.

But once you add in the title, that's a problem. A ship which has an extra shield over a TIE Interceptor, but for a point less, with a better upgrade bar, at the same PS. I'd certainly call that power creep, unless the dial is hot garbage. Particularly given how strong the double-tap is.

Personally, I think the title needs a drawback. Perhaps I'd make the title something of a Dual card, where if you double-tap or add a die, you either can't shoot next turn, or your primary attack value is reduced by a die. Well... that wouldn't work, since Accuracy Corrector could just add you back up to two hits. But something like that: using the extra die or double-tap costs you something, probably in your next attack. Alternately, perhaps it could only be used unstressed, and assign a stress to your ship. Another option would be that if you use the title, if your attack hits, cancel all dice and deal 1 damage to the target (and you could probably reduce the points cost).

Depending on the drawback, I might make it not either an extra die or a double-tap, but only one of the two. Taking a stress for an extra die is kinda boring: it's just Zeta Leader. But a 17 point generic Zeta Leader is good. Double-tap with Accuracy Corrector is going to be really strong. 4 guaranteed hits in a 22 point fighter (AccC, AT, title), with attack dice your opponent can't mess with, without spending actions on your attack. It'll be weaker against high-agility ships, somewhat, but as we know from TLT against high agility ships, the sheer number of attacks matters. Three of these and a Quickdraw (following the 3BQD structure) would be brutal.

Frankly, I've long thought that a good E-Wing fix would be to have a title "Rapid Firing Solution" which permanently reduced your primary attack value by 1 (so it doesn't give you a choice, like this title does), but gave you two attacks in the Combat phase.

2 hours ago, Commander Kaine said:

Vp Sq Vet + AC + AT + Juke 25 pts filler

Always 2 hits, always Evade + AT, Juke always triggers. What is the dial like? It could be very strong. 27 with the title...

Could take Ruthlessness instead of Juke and doubletap with that. Ruthlessness is 3 pts instead of 2, so can't run 4 of them, but can put the title on them then. Could be fun dealing up to 6 unavoidable damage is someone flies in formation. Lowhhrick would not approve.

I mean, it’s definitely power creep over current base-level ships, but that’s literally the only way it’ll be competitive considering how terrible things like a PS 1 squint or an A-Wing are now.

Looks like a decent filler as is. PS 1 with title is two points cheaper than a PS 1 Striker with LWF, and they basically have the same statline (and this should be cheaper than its counterpart, since the PS 1 Striker sees zero competitive play). Malgus is 1 point more than Sabaac, which seems about fair for +2 PS on that chassis. AdvS is roughly on par with Ailerons; Malgus doesn’t lose his ability when he takes damage, but he doesn’t get five dice Range one. Seems fair.

7 minutes ago, kris40k said:

Could take Ruthlessness instead of Juke and doubletap with that. Ruthlessness is 3 pts instead of 2, so can't run 4 of them, but can put the title on them then. Could be fun dealing up to 6 unavoidable damage is someone flies in formation. Lowhhrick would not approve.

So, +1 for this ship then?

10 minutes ago, Ailowynn said:

I mean, it’s definitely power creep over current base-level ships, but that’s literally the only way it’ll be competitive considering how terrible things like a PS 1 squint or an A-Wing are now.

Looks like a decent filler as is. PS 1 with title is two points cheaper than a PS 1 Striker with LWF, and they basically have the same statline (and this should be cheaper than its counterpart, since the PS 1 Striker sees zero competitive play). Malgus is 1 point more than Sabaac, which seems about fair for +2 PS on that chassis. AdvS is roughly on par with Ailerons; Malgus doesn’t lose his ability when he takes damage, but he doesn’t get five dice Range one. Seems fair.

Fair enough, it's a bit of power creep, but as you point out, who's playing Squints?

19 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

That title is nutty. A 2/3/3/1 for 15 with a System is already solid, presuming a reasonable dial. Accuracy Corrector and Autothrusters for 20 points gets you a ship which seems good. Consistent offense without requiring actions is strong (so you'll be free to boost and evade), and compared to the 21 point Tempest, you lose a shield and a PS but gain Autothrusters, for a point cheaper. I can't tell which would be stronger.

But once you add in the title, that's a problem. A ship which has an extra shield over a TIE Interceptor, but for a point less, with a better upgrade bar, at the same PS. I'd certainly call that power creep, unless the dial is hot garbage. Particularly given how strong the double-tap is.

Personally, I think the title needs a drawback. Perhaps I'd make the title something of a Dual card, where if you double-tap or add a die, you either can't shoot next turn, or your primary attack value is reduced by a die. Well... that wouldn't work, since Accuracy Corrector could just add you back up to two hits. But something like that: using the extra die or double-tap costs you something, probably in your next attack. Alternately, perhaps it could only be used unstressed, and assign a stress to your ship. Another option would be that if you use the title, if your attack hits, cancel all dice and deal 1 damage to the target (and you could probably reduce the points cost).

Depending on the drawback, I might make it not either an extra die or a double-tap, but only one of the two. Taking a stress for an extra die is kinda boring: it's just Zeta Leader. But a 17 point generic Zeta Leader is good. Double-tap with Accuracy Corrector is going to be really strong. 4 guaranteed hits in a 22 point fighter (AccC, AT, title), with attack dice your opponent can't mess with, without spending actions on your attack. It'll be weaker against high-agility ships, somewhat, but as we know from TLT against high agility ships, the sheer number of attacks matters. Three of these and a Quickdraw (following the 3BQD structure) would be brutal.

Frankly, I've long thought that a good E-Wing fix would be to have a title "Rapid Firing Solution" which permanently reduced your primary attack value by 1 (so it doesn't give you a choice, like this title does), but gave you two attacks in the Combat phase.

So, I would not make the dial hot garbage, but take a riff off of the current Squint dial:

So, possible design solutions:

Add a point (or 2) to the base chassis to bring it more inline with the Squint.

Make the Title cost more.

Both of the above.

I like the in-game choice built into the current Title, but then again I could create a second Title. Pick one at list building: +1 die, or double tap at 2 dice.

OTOH, as is point out above, is this power creep vs. XWM 1.0 (the old Squint) or power creep on XWM 2.0 (the meta game now). I think the former one is irrelevant--the TIE/ln is no longer a game design benchmark for XWM. I would try to avoid the latter.

12 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

OTOH, as is point out above, is this power creep vs. XWM 1.0 (the old Squint) or power creep on XWM 2.0 (the meta game now). I think the former one is irrelevant--the TIE/ln is no longer a game design benchmark for XWM. I would try to avoid the latter.

It's not my power creep. . .

Another note: I did base this idea off the FO. Wonder if I should ditch the TL for BR and give Minax her own ability.

1 hour ago, Commander Kaine said:

So, +1 for this ship then?

I dunno. I'd put it on the table, but honestly, its Sith Empire, which means introducing Old Republic ships, which gets me one step closer to my Sith Fury and I'm all over that idea.

1 hour ago, Darth Meanie said:

Fair enough, it's a bit of power creep, but as you point out, who's playing Squints?

Yeah, I didn’t mean to be critical of your design, I think it’s on point. Just the zero power creep idea is unrealistic.

12 minutes ago, Ailowynn said:

Yeah, I didn’t mean to be critical of your design, I think it’s on point. Just the zero power creep idea is unrealistic.

You critiques (and everyone else's, for that matter) have been very helpful.

I guess it must be inherently difficult to make something "good" and/or "novel" without making it "better," even if only by a little bit.

1 hour ago, kris40k said:

I dunno. I'd put it on the table,

Best compliment I could hope for. An idea sound enough that you'd have to give it a spin to decide if it was truly workable.

I made up some mankvims awhile ago with a similar idea, swarming accuracy corrector light fighters.

They powned almost everything except high agility arc dodgers, and that was WITHOUT a doubletap. i had to nerf them hard, and they are still great.

the way your ship is setup now, a swarm of 5 would do 20 auto damage a turn. that quite simply isnt going to work in X-wing.

to put it another way, this gives them a speed 3 cruise missile attack that always rolls all hits, every turn, with no drawback... for 4 points.

it would make harpoons look like hot garbage overnight

That said, your cards are gorgeous and everything else seems thematic and balanced. good work!

2 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

Fair enough, it's a bit of power creep, but as you point out, who's playing Squints?

So, I would not make the dial hot garbage, but take a riff off of the current Squint dial:

So, possible design solutions:

Add a point (or 2) to the base chassis to bring it more inline with the Squint.

Make the Title cost more.

Both of the above.

I like the in-game choice built into the current Title, but then again I could create a second Title. Pick one at list building: +1 die, or double tap at 2 dice.

OTOH, as is point out above, is this power creep vs. XWM 1.0 (the old Squint) or power creep on XWM 2.0 (the meta game now). I think the former one is irrelevant--the TIE/ln is no longer a game design benchmark for XWM. I would try to avoid the latter.

I think a few folks have flown heavy swarm with Squints, but it's a niche version of a niche list.

Mostly, I just think it's easy to underestimate the power of Accuracy Corrector. Again, double attacks with AccC is 4 automatic hits without spending actions. If this doesn't have Accuracy Corrector, it's probably not an issue. Double-tap Dorsal Turret Y-Wings are about 21 points, and not at all a problem. But if one of those Y-Wings had Accuracy Corrector, too, that might start to be an issue. If one of these had a Tech slot instead of a System slot, I don't see it being a problem or all.

One thing: I wouldn't increase the base cost at all. It's comparable to a TIE/FO and ultimately fair. The title, particularly when combined with a system slot, seems under-priced. AccC issues aside, I'd say... 18-20 points is probably fair for the ship with title. Being one or two points more than a Squint with title seems fair in current XWM power levels. 19 points is also the same cost as a Striker with LWF.

27 minutes ago, Vontoothskie said:

I made up some mankvims awhile ago with a similar idea, swarming accuracy corrector light fighters.

They powned almost everything except high agility arc dodgers, and that was WITHOUT a doubletap. i had to nerf them hard, and they are still great.

Accuracy Corrector is incredibly strong on 2-dice ships. It's probably good there aren't more in the game right now.

1 hour ago, Vontoothskie said:

I made up some mankvims awhile ago with a similar idea, swarming accuracy corrector light fighters.

They powned almost everything except high agility arc dodgers, and that was WITHOUT a doubletap. i had to nerf them hard, and they are still great.

the way your ship is setup now, a swarm of 5 would do 20 auto damage a turn. that quite simply isnt going to work in X-wing.

to put it another way, this gives them a speed 3 cruise missile attack that always rolls all hits, every turn, with no drawback... for 4 points.

it would make harpoons look like hot garbage overnight

That said, your cards are gorgeous and everything else seems thematic and balanced. good work!

Not sure I agree with this. I mean, I’m sure you see an effect on the meta, but you’re doing two hits per attack, not two damage, and pretty much every ship worth a **** competitively can shrug off two hits routinely. Timewalk Asajj laughs at it. Rey is fine with it. Arc-dodgers can arc dodge some and dice dodge the rest. Wookiees laugh at your twenty damage...if they roll two evades or less against your eight attacks, you kill ONE.

The competitive ships that are most hurt by it, in my mind, are Miranda, Nym, Ghost, QuickDraw, and Deci. That last one sucks, but the others are acceptable losses in my mind.

At this point in the game, I feel like the question isn’t whether a new ship is OP, it’s what that ship is OP at. If we got arced ships that are okay with jousting, I’d be okay with that.

What is this EU abomination? I love it!

oh it’s from SWTOR.

I still love it!!

i have a mighty need!

7 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

Accuracy Corrector is incredibly strong on 2-dice ships. It's probably good there aren't more in the game right now.

5 hours ago, Ailowynn said:

but you’re doing two hits per attack, not two damage, and pretty much every ship worth a **** competitively can shrug off two hits routinely.

These are both completely valid points. And i think the only way to truly know is playtesting.

If it is OP, trading system for tech would be a nice solution.

5 hours ago, Ailowynn said:

Not sure I agree with this. I mean, I’m sure you see an effect on the meta, but you’re doing two hits per attack, not two damage, and pretty much every ship worth a **** competitively can shrug off two hits routinely. Timewalk Asajj laughs at it. Rey is fine with it. Arc-dodgers can arc dodge some and dice dodge the rest. Wookiees laugh at your twenty damage...if they roll two evades or less against your eight attacks, you kill ONE.

The competitive ships that are most hurt by it, in my mind, are Miranda, Nym, Ghost, QuickDraw, and Deci. That last one sucks, but the others are acceptable losses in my mind.

At this point in the game, I feel like the question isn’t whether a new ship is OP, it’s what that ship is OP at. If we got arced ships that are okay with jousting, I’d be okay with that.

So lemme get this straight... you think that the 3 most op ships in the game have a chance of not being immediately destroyed it must be balanced?

TLT has a CHANCE to do 2 damage a turn and the cheapest you can kit it is 21 points... and its considered one of the most powerful cards in the game.

these things would statistically deal more damage and you can fit a 5th in a list. you could kiss every low agility ship goodbye. i mean dont know about you, but i wouldnt feel great about losing a patrol leader round 1 of combat garaunteed

23 minutes ago, Vontoothskie said:

So lemme get this straight... you think that the 3 most op ships in the game have a chance of not being immediately destroyed it must be balanced?

TLT has a CHANCE to do 2 damage a turn and the cheapest you can kit it is 21 points... and its considered one of the most powerful cards in the game.

these things would statistically deal more damage and you can fit a 5th in a list. you could kiss every low agility ship goodbye. i mean dont know about you, but i wouldnt feel great about losing a patrol leader round 1 of combat garaunteed

They are also arc-locked, and they almost deal no damage to certain ships.

I think you overvalue accuracy correctors. They are not autoblasters...

6 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:

They are also arc-locked, and they almost deal no damage to certain ships.

I think you overvalue accuracy correctors. They are not autoblasters...

i said in my initial post that i understand high agility "turtles" are immune to AC.

the ships that are not immune(all 0-1 agility ships) would be pushed even farther out of favor.

So ill say it again... I play tested this archetype of ship, but without a double tap. it is extremely powerful in groups. against a low agility ship, this thing is a tie phantom for 20 points.

imagine an ace tie-D with tractor beam and 3 of these things... lower a ships agility by 1 then chug 12 damage in? sounds pretty brutal to me.

I honestly love the concept, but i feel like the title needs to restrict modification of the second attack somehow. its just way too reliable for a game of chance

Just now, Vontoothskie said:

i said in my initial post that i understand high agility "turtles" are immune to AC.

the ships that are not immune(all 0-1 agility ships) would be pushed even farther out of favor.

So ill say it again... I play tested this archetype of ship, but without a double tap. it is extremely powerful in groups. against a low agility ship, this thing is a tie phantom for 20 points.

imagine an ace tie-D with tractor beam and 3 of these things... lower a ships agility by 1 then chug 12 damage in? sounds pretty brutal to me.

I honestly love the concept, but i feel like the title needs to restrict modification of the second attack somehow. its just way too reliable for a game of chance

4 tempest SQ pilots aren't taking over. I doubt a 5, with less health would be much better.

Just now, Commander Kaine said:

4 tempest SQ pilots aren't taking over. I doubt a 5, with less health would be much better.

that makes no sense.

first, phantoms have the same health.

second, if you think 5 phantoms of any p.s. for a hundred points wouldnt be powerful we must be playing different games entirely.

4 minutes ago, Vontoothskie said:

that makes no sense.

first, phantoms have the same health.

second, if you think 5 phantoms of any p.s. for a hundred points wouldnt be powerful we must be playing different games entirely.

http://xwing-miniatures.wikia.com/wiki/Tempest_Squadron_Pilot