3 hours ago, Veldrin said:

MB: It's nit so much banning as certain events will have a list of specific cards that will be allowed. This might be based on theme, such as the Battle of Scarif, or it might be based on other considerations. X-Wing is a game with an enormous amount of possibility for different modes of play, and we are excited to explore them.

So here is to hoping that we just maybe not ONLY get 200/6 hypercompetitive tourney stuff, but other things like scenarios as well.

17 minutes ago, Ixidor said:

Someone did ask about faction balancing and then also asked if they'd consider adding more factions in the future. They only answered the first part of the request.

But I want to know now. Hahaha

Seriously though if I knew the Clone Wars were coming out that would be the factions I would buy into. Which actually is probably why they aren't announcing it until we all buy our conversion kits for 5 factions. Well played FFG...

Eh, not massively informative, but reassuring on Luke, and to some extent Dash, being costed high. Really we've had a ton of cards spoiled and the one thing that would tell us what we really want is the app, which we're not getting until September anyway, so not sure what else people expected. It just shows they're thoughtful people who do care about the game's community.

Also, I would love more scenarios. The lack of mission play in 1.0 really made me sad, particularly since the epic campaigns are so much fun.

1 minute ago, GILLIES291 said:

But I want to know now. Hahaha

Seriously though if I knew the Clone Wars were coming out that would be the factions I would buy into. Which actually is probably why they aren't announcing it until we all buy our conversion kits for 5 factions. Well played FFG...

They will probably announce clone wars after the redo epic play.

6 minutes ago, skotothalamos said:

that's a lot of loaded and accusatory language. Compare to the Luke Gunner question that got answered.

I agree that the language in that question was quite loaded. Still I am sad that a question regarding their plans for the B-Wing didn’t get through. Perhaps the question could have been phrased better, but he make several points I have to agree with... The B-Wing shouldn’t be balanced through points with a dial that red, and relatively low survivability. It should be a big, heavy fighter with plenty of firepower. As it currently stands in v2, it looks like the only way they will be able to balance it in comparison to other rebel heavies is to make it ridiculously inexpensive.

3 hours ago, Veldrin said:

What was your favourite design epiphany in 2.0?

FB: Making all turrets behave as mobile firing arcs. Also to account for ships that relied on that mechanic, we added the double turret arc.

That is... every 360 degree turreted ship in 1e now has a double mobile/turret arc in 2e, right? (YTs, K-Wing, Decimator, etc). The ships that only have a single mobile/turret arc icon also have access to some other arc.

The JM5K only has a single mobile/turret arc icon. Can we correctly assume then that it will get some sort of upgrade that will give it a front arc or double mobile/turret arc? If not, then it would be the only previously 360 degree turreted ship to be nerfed down to a single mobile arc.

(Can't comment on the Resistance bomber yet since it hasn't been revealed.)

2 hours ago, wurms said:

They missed a lot of good questions, and instead answered stuff that they already explained in previously videos which is a shame. Glad we heard their thoughts on Luke Gunner though. Still dumb as **** idea though. Beginners in casual games dont need a card. Any handicap they have can easily be solved with house rules. Having the Luke Gunner as an actual card just begs for Jeff Berling type of minds to abuse the crap out of it.

First off, I want to be clear that I am not attacking you.

With that out of the way, I just want to express my frustration that people assume casual players can change the rules however they want. Casual is the catch-all term for "not playing at tournaments." Tons of people play casually in their homes, trying to follow the rules as best they can. If I set up a casual game, I expect us to play by the rules. If my brother/cousin says, "Actually, I'm new, so can I pretend the 2.0 Falcon can shoot outside its firing arcs?" I'm going to say, "Get outta here, man! That's not the rules!"* I actually applaud the designers for coming up with a clever card to allow casual players to ride the learning curve, but lack efficiency in squad composition.

*I don't actually talk to my family like that.

P.S. I do agree that there is a possibility, however small, for clever players to take advantage of Luke Gunner, but I also suspect the developers are watching it very closely.

4 hours ago, ViscerothSWG said:

I was hoping they'd answer the 'what was swx71' question.

Not lando's falcon.

3 minutes ago, FlyingAnchors said:

Not lando's falcon.

I still think it was Lando's Falcon before they decided to go 2.0.

That was nice of them to do. Their focus on the future card restrictions they are going to put on tournaments is intriguing. Will regional level tournaments be subject to these card bans? Introducing official tournaments with alternate formats is fine for casual weekend store tournaments, but would they really ban a bunch of cards for next years system opens? How far in advance would they announce banned cards for the big events? I for one hope that the big events stay 200/6. Unless of course they straight up ban 2-3 ship lists. Now that would shake things up.

3 minutes ago, Dengar5 said:

That was nice of them to do. Their focus on the future card restrictions they are going to put on tournaments is intriguing. Will regional level tournaments be subject to these card bans? Introducing official tournaments with alternate formats is fine for casual weekend store tournaments, but would they really ban a bunch of cards for next years system opens? How far in advance would they announce banned cards for the big events? I for one hope that the big events stay 200/6. Unless of course they straight up ban 2-3 ship lists. Now that would shake things up.

Really dumb question, but what's the 6 in 200/6? Seems too low to be a threat rating.

14 minutes ago, PenguinBonaparte said:

Really dumb question, but what's the 6 in 200/6? Seems too low to be a threat rating.

6 obstacles on the field.

Lol, thanks!

Regarding restricting cards 'based on theme, such as the Battle of Scarif', I'm genuinely intrigued how they plan to do this without effectively barring a ton of single faction players from participating into such events. If they're going for an iconic battle theme, then Empire/Rebels and First Order/Resistance will be mutually exclusive due to the time-frame.

No answer on new factions?

Simple mistake or avoiding the question?

They said that Gunner Luke will cost the same as a cheap ship, but they didn’t mention that a cheap ship is 2pts!

DOOOOOOOMMM!!!!!!!

That luke question is pure salt lol

1 hour ago, markcsoul said:

No answer on new factions?

Simple mistake or avoiding the question?

(Not picking on you, just responding to the sentiment)

AMA =/= WAE (We Answer Everything)

Almost all AMA participants set aside a limited about of time to interact with the community. Almost no AMA's see every single question answered. I don't know how it could be considered a 'mistake' to leave a question unanswered, though with having to pick and choose due to time constraints yes it could be argued that they 'avoided' certain questions. However, just because they didn't answer something doesn't mean they simply didn't run out of time.

3 hours ago, Parakitor said:

6 obstacles on the field.

Which is a dumb way to say it. It is either 200/3 or 400/6. Why would you count only your ships but you and your opponents asteroids?

4 minutes ago, Varyag said:

Which is a dumb way to say it. It is either 200/3 or 400/6. Why would you count only your ships but you and your opponents asteroids?

This has been answered before, but....

because originally the game did not have different types of obstacles, it only had the 6 that came in the one core set and you used those. There was no suggestion of each player choosing 3 obstacles, you sat down for a game and said “are we using my asteroids or yours?”, so the standard game became the standard 100 point lists and the standard 6 asteroids, shortened to 100/6. Anything else was atypical. By the time wave 5 introduced debris fields the name had had a couple years to solidify and it is unlikely to change more than the minimum necessary for the point changes with the new edition.

2 hours ago, markcsoul said:

No answer on new factions?

Simple mistake or avoiding the question?

They talked about the first order and resistance about as much as you could expect I’d say.

So can we stop to said the sky is falling again with gunner Luke to be a 360 turret attack ship ?

Thematic tournament ! Finally something we can call "A star wars game"

9 hours ago, It’s One Of Ours said:

I agree that the language in that question was quite loaded. Still I am sad that a question regarding their plans for the B-Wing didn’t get through. Perhaps the question could have been phrased better, but he make several points I have to agree with... The B-Wing shouldn’t be balanced through points with a dial that red, and relatively low survivability. It should be a big, heavy fighter with plenty of firepower. As it currently stands in v2, it looks like the only way they will be able to balance it in comparison to other rebel heavies is to make it ridiculously inexpensive.

I think they said in an earlier video that upgrade costs could vary between pilots. I'm really thinking Bwing gets discount on cannons. But a confirmation of this would be nice. Guess we'll wait for the app !

4 hours ago, ObiWonka said:

(Not picking on you, just responding to the sentiment)

AMA =/= WAE (We Answer Everything)

Almost all AMA participants set aside a limited about of time to interact with the community. Almost no AMA's see every single question answered. I don't know how it could be considered a 'mistake' to leave a question unanswered, though with having to pick and choose due to time constraints yes it could be argued that they 'avoided' certain questions. However, just because they didn't answer something doesn't mean they simply didn't run out of time.

From what someone said earlier, it sounded like that question was part of a question that was answered, not a question avoided altogether, which is why it stood out.

I'd like to read into that, but I really can't all the same. I'm too used to people doing that, whether in interviews or in more casual conversation. If you offer up a layered question, they always seem to try to answer as little of it as possible, even if they have no reason to do that.

Looking forward to playing with restricted cards/thematic setup and hope that we can configure this ourselves for friendly tournaments etc.