So with 2.0 around the corner, our favorite alternate format could use a facelift. Giving that facelift requires knowing whats coming, so we're limited to what we can update at any given time, but by getting started now, we can get the finished version out faster.

It's tempting to just update AI cards and call it a day, but there's a lot more changes in 2.0 than just ship dials and Linked actions. The 1-6 init rating implies "leveling up" is going to give us less stuff, and variable point costs per ship means we're going to need a database to keep track of what upgrades cost in HOTAC. There's also codifying some of the most common houserules, like group XP and Awing-starting-ship. Then, there's the fun to have stuff- More ship options, more missions, more enemies to put into missions. Those are lowest priority.

HOTAC 2.0

Needs:

-New AI for updated imperial dials and action logic (possibly including blue maneuvers and bullseye arcs?)

--Tie fighter

---Dial: (no change)

---Actions: (no change)

--Tie Advanced

---Dial: (white 1 straight added, 3 talon rolls, 2 banks become green)

---Actions: Focus PTL roll, Roll, TL. (no evade)

--Lambada (Rear Arc)

---Dial: (no change)

---Actions: ???

--Tie Bomber

--Tie Interceptor

--Tie Defender

--Decimater

-Pilot ability database

--With 2.0 having variable pricing based on ship or even by pilot, this is going to be much more complicated. I figure that there will need to be an app to stay up to date with FFGs buff/nerf cycle.

-Mission scaling revamp to match the new 1-6 inititive rules

-Enemy elite cards updated for the new IMPERIAL pilot abilities and 1-6 inititive rules.

-Complied versions of all the houserules done to update HotAC since it was abandoned by the creator.

--Group XP for rebels

--Rebalance starting/upgrade ships (Awing vs Ywing, ect)

--Expanded ship list and “tier list” for upgrading to better ships.

Nice to Haves:

-New enemy ships

--Scum

--First Order

--other Imperial.

--Renegade (rebel)

-New missions

--Missions vs scum

--Missions vs first order

--Missions vs renegade rebel cells

-Fancy Document.

Fortunately, it sounds like the FFG app will be designed to support alternate formats, so it may be possible to track all the HotAC ship-costs and stuff in the app. We’ll have to wait and see.

Should HotAC remain first edition?

only if nobody is going to take the time and effort to do it right with second edition

Do you think it's worth incorporating blue maneuvers into enemy AI this time around? Or does the AI need to cheat that hard to keep up?

Bumping this for a bit more attention.

The TIE fighter doesn't actually change from 1.0 to 2.0: the barrel roll action becomes a bit more limited and that's it.

The specialized TIEs will need a little reworking but the main overhaul needed will be the player ships.

I think the pre-built ship cards can help do some of our work for us. Those will probably have some theme, and we can build off of them. I think the biggest hurdle is looking at when a ship would want to use its new maneuvers. As for ships that gain an aux. arc, I think treat it as a bonus. For turret rotate we make that 1ST priority I think. I also think we wait for the app to release to see if we can put stuff in there.

While I’m totally going to buy into V2 myself, my gaming group and I will stick with original HotAC (V1) probably well into 2019 and possibly “forever” depending on how everything pans out in the long run.

On 5/3/2018 at 4:22 PM, Firespray-32 said:

The TIE fighter doesn't actually change from 1.0 to 2.0: the barrel roll action becomes a bit more limited and that's it.

The specialized TIEs will need a little reworking but the main overhaul needed will be the player ships.

Player ships indeed.

I think the biggest difference, even more than the PS->init change, is the variable pricing for upgrades- not just over time, but different prices for the same upgrade on different ships or even different pilots.

If we accept that prices for upgrades will change going in, I think we can make things easier on ourselves. Scale encounters to player group Combined Threat rating, rather than just player count and pilot skill, so you can quickstart a game with the quickbuild cards. Then we can work out an XP and level system to add RPG elements to it and scale into absurdity, like we expect from HotAC.

On ‎5‎/‎4‎/‎2018 at 6:38 PM, Rakaydos said:

Player ships indeed.

I think the biggest difference, even more than the PS->init change, is the variable pricing for upgrades- not just over time, but different prices for the same upgrade on different ships or even different pilots.

If we accept that prices for upgrades will change going in, I think we can make things easier on ourselves. Scale encounters to player group Combined Threat rating, rather than just player count and pilot skill, so you can quickstart a game with the quickbuild cards. Then we can work out an XP and level system to add RPG elements to it and scale into absurdity, like we expect from HotAC.

I think XP and PS is actually easier than it may appear. think about lining it up like this:

PS1 = INT1

PS2 = INT2

PS4=INT3

PS6=INT4

PS8=INT5

PS9=INT6

This leaves the brackets for EPTS to be purchased almost the same, and cost them according to the highest former PS in that INT group (maybe you need exceptions though, not sure yet).

As for variable priced upgrades, I think going with the cost increasing over time would work wonders, maybe with an increased cost to "INT up".

New question: should medium-base ships be playable?

Re medium base player ships- the issue was that AI didn't handle large base displacement well. It's probably something that will need play testing.

HotAC is already wildly out of date, since the whole content is basically aligned with Wave VII. A lot of the stuff incorporated in the game since then has produced balancing issues, as have attempts to bring in additional ships. For my Battlestar Pallas campaign, I wrote extensive modding rules for the thing, so it's not like it can't be done for 2.0.

Regarding those new player ships, especially the medium based ones, you can go a long way by for tweaking difficulty by scaling up enemy shields and maneuverability.

On 5/3/2018 at 7:24 PM, Do I need a Username said:

I  think the pre-built ship cards can help do some of our work for us. Those will probably have some theme, and we can build  off of them  . 

I think this is a fantastic idea, and rather than just drawing inspiration from the Quick Builds for the enemy squads, why not incorporate them directly? If we can pull that off then it will make incorporating future expansions infinitely easier. We just have to set it up so that instead of difficulty X calling for you to field so many of this ship and randomly draw an ace at such and such pilot skill, just say difficulty X = a total number of enemy quickbuilds equal to X.

Obviously there will be some fine tuning that needs to be done to make it work, but if we can make quick-builds as a basic framework fit into the game we’ll be golden.

1 minute ago, Stefan said:

HotAC    is already wildly out of date, since the whole content is basically a  ligned with Wave VII. A lot of the stuff incorporated in the gam  e since then has     produced balancing issues, as have attempts to bring in additional ships.  

Speaking of which, a Quick-build model would address that issue nicely. FFG releases a new imperial ship? Great! Just shuffle that ship’s quickbuild card(s) into the deck and print out a maneuver sheet and you’re good to go.

I honestly think the best option is just to consider HotAC a closed loop, exclude anything from wave VIII or later, and call it done. The focus is on narrative and co-operative play, not competition, so it doesn't need the same reboot that X Wing at large did.

I'd just like to see a few more campaigns released and that's about it.

That's a possibility, sure, but I really like the added variety that comes with more ships and upgrades.

Some people already suggested this but there is a chance FFG buys HotAC. Maybe we get to see a reworked version that works with the new 2.0 printed arcs. I would love to see free scenarios/campaigns through the official app.

On 5/3/2018 at 12:42 PM, Rakaydos said:

-- Lambada (Rear Arc)

Lambada is coming back!!

12 minutes ago, Andreu said:

Some people already suggested this but there is a chance FFG buys HotAC. Maybe we get to see a reworked version that works with the new 2.0 printed arcs. I would love to see free scenarios/campaigns through the official app.

That usually don't happen (a major developer buying fan made content). BUT, I really hope FFG will release their own sets of campaigns. In fact, I'm pretty disappointed they didn't announce it with 2.0.

3 hours ago, Andreu said:

Some people already suggested this but there is a chance FFG buys HotAC. Maybe we get to see a reworked version that works with the new 2.0 printed arcs. I would love to see free scenarios/campaigns through the official app.

It’s been discussed before, but unless something drastic has changed it’s not going to happen. The creator of HotAC, Josh Dersken (IIRC), spoke with Alex Davy about it a few years ago and Alex strongly encouraged him not to consider selling because then he would lose control over the project and it wouldn’t become what he wanted it to be.

9 hours ago, Chucknuckle said:

I honestly think the best option is just to consider HotAC a closed loop, exclude anything from wave VIII or later, and call it done. The focus is on narrative and co-operative play, not competition, so it doesn't need the same reboot that X Wing at large did.

I'd just like to see a few more campaigns released and that's about it.

I'm sorry, you seem to have the wrong thread. this is the 2.0 design thread. you seem to want the HotAC 1.0 thread. I can dig up a link for you, if you want?

Re: Quickbuilds- I feel it would work best if we could convince the app to spit out Threat ratings for leveled up ships (Hint hint, FFG, I know you're reading!), then we can scale missions with a combination of Academies hacked with crackshot (1 tie per two party threat), threat 2-3 builds specified in the mission (again, totalling half the party's threat), and random aces totalling half the party's threat. Adjust for best playability

4 minutes ago, Rakaydos said:

Re: Quickbuilds- I feel it would work best if we could convince the app to spit out Threat ratings for leveled up ships (Hint hint, FFG, I know you're reading!), then we can scale missions with a combination of Academies hacked with crackshot (1 tie per two party threat), threat 2-3 builds specified in the mission (again, totalling half the party's threat), and random aces totalling half the party's threat. Adjust for best playability

I don't know about the crackshot ties. we ight want to see how threatening they are in the longer term before doing that. Otherwise, I think the quickbuild thing is spot on.

What also might be helpful is if FFG allows random people to publish "tournament" setups to the world, because then we can use those to make pilot cards.

9 minutes ago, Do I need a Username said:

I don't know about the crackshot ties. we ight want to see how threatening they are in the longer term before doing that. Otherwise, I think the quickbuild thing is spot on.

What also might be helpful is if FFG allows random people to publish "tournament" setups to the world, because then we can use those to make pilot cards.

I raise the idea of crackshot ties because the AI really isnt going to use them effectively... but if they do line up a shot, even the lowly tie fighter should be a reasonable threat to a high level player, rather than just an XP pinata.

Josh has stated that he's out, basically. He's moved on from HotAC, and he's not involved with FFG in any capacity.

On 5/3/2018 at 11:52 AM, LagJanson said:

Should HotAC remain first edition?

It gives the cards a place to be used. I would keep it first edition, with the caveat that a new campaign replace it

6 minutes ago, Stefan said:

Josh has stated that he's out, basically. He's moved on from HotAC, and he's not involved with FFG in any capacity.

HotAC proved to be a great stepping stone for him I think. It was a very good design that landed the eyes of people making games. If I was in charge if FFG, I would have certainly tried to recruit him based on his work. Failing that, I would certainly try to emulate his work - which with an application you could do so many interesting things. Imagine taking a picture/view from the TIE AI ship perspective(or above) and that chooses the maneuver and action? FFG could do that. I would certainly buy that.

Second edition opens up a lot of design space for the game. Any update will have to wait till the game is released. But, my two credits are that the humble TIE will need to have elite pilots/upgrades at least to use the bullseye arc.

Experience should be lessened, and perhaps, be used to purchase charges for abilities and upgrades even custom ones such as for rerolling dice.