13 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

I find it interesting that the early consensus is that this card is a good addition to 1.0, and simply "too late" for the meta.

Missiles are not hurting this meta...

Not just missiles, but also QD and Quiz who thrive off of TL's. What if you had a 3/8 chance of telling them "NO"? Or if you had a Palp and a Defender and you ensured that "No, you may not target lock me". Is that denial of TL almost as good (or more good?) than ensuring an evade?

12 minutes ago, viedit said:

Is  that  denial of TL almost as good (or m  ore good?) than ensuring an evade? 

Depends on the attacker and his mods.

A 3dice attack will jump on average from 1.5 to 2.25 if it‘s the only mod, so an evade is more reliable while in some rare, extreme cases denying the TL would be better.

Double mods expect 2.8 hits, so removing the TL reduces the expected value by 0.55, which makes it clearly worse than palping an evade.

Then you can also play through other scenarios, eg a 3agi ship with focus. There the expected damage is 0.3 if you palp and 0.6 if you remoced the TL, so again worse.

I don‘t know whether there is a scenario outside of denying ordnance where palping the TL is better, actually.

Good card, even for RNG. With all the FCS around you should get a single use out of it, and that is worth the points when Quickdraw is on yo ****. Its just not a guarantee, so dont go jousting alpha strikes and be mad when it fails.

Sad thing is it makes Lowhhrick and Fenn better who dont need MORE buffs.

Also a good anti Omega Leader card if he is prevalent in your meta.

Palob could use this, steal focus and evade, and a chance to erase locks which was his weak spot.

Could definitely see this on Vessery since he is usually the first one taken down. Lot better than MK.II on him.

Countdown? If you dont have an extra point for LWF, this aint too bad.

Thane - you want to deter people from firing at him for his ability. 1pt to good use.

Rex - 1pt well worth it. He is always targeted, and three green dice with evade is super nice.

like @SOTL said, wish this came out last year

44 minutes ago, wurms said:

like @SOTL said, wish this came out last year

This card was designed by the Coruscant 2016 winner, but we get it after 2 years time...

i see people still automatically think RNG cards are bad.

Cards like this are not bad. Its cheap, if you arent mandated to an other mod just take it because its 100% passive rng unlike things like Saboteur which eat your action AND is random luck.

passive things like this are totally fine. If its cheap and only works some of the time, thats fine. If it eats my action or has some other cost like affects my dial/stress management AND only works part of the time, thats utter crap and needs to go away.

Does this have a 2.0 version?

16 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:

Does this have a 2.0 version?

No, the 2.0 cards are shown at the end of the video, and it was not among them.

1 hour ago, Vineheart01 said:

i see people still automatically think RNG cards are bad.

Cards like this are not bad. Its cheap, if you arent mandated to an other mod just take it because its 100% passive rng unlike things like Saboteur which eat your action AND is random luck.

passive things like this are totally fine. If its cheap and only works some of the time, thats fine. If it eats my action or has some other cost like affects my dial/stress management AND only works part of the time, thats utter crap and needs to go away.

I agree with you. The argument I still hear though is "one side will hate it" as in:

a) It fails and the user is disappointed (for 1pt you shouldn't be that disappointed!) or

b) It works way more than it should and the opponent feels like they lost a dice game.

It'd be interesting for Talonbane Cobra - a 'spare' mod slot and a free mod means that a 1/3 chance of fritzing your Fire Control System is probably worth the opportunity cost.

12 hours ago, nitrobenz said:

I agree with you. The argument I still hear though is "one side will hate it" as in:

a) It fails and the user is disappointed (for 1pt you shouldn't be that disappointed!) or

b) It works way more than it should and the opponent feels like they lost a dice game.

...but it is a dice game. If losing to dice upsets you don't play games with dice.

4 minutes ago, SOTL said:

...but it is a dice game. If losing to dice upsets you don't play games with dice.

It's a game about reducing or eliminating dice variance wherever possible.

High variance things, accordingly, are often irrationally annoying.

32 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

It's a game about reducing or eliminating dice variance wherever possible.

High variance things, accordingly, are often irrationally annoying.

But don't most people agree that one of the problems with 1st edition is that dice variation was too easy to eliminate?

3 minutes ago, SOTL said:

But don't most people agree that one of the problems with 1st edition is that dice variation was too easy to eliminate?

And this is a 1e upgrade. So.

15 hours ago, Vineheart01 said:

Cards  like this are not bad. Its cheap, if you arent mandated to an other mod just take it because its 100% passive rng unlike things like Saboteur which e  a  t your action AND is random luck. 

I think that‘s te crux of the issue here. I agree that 3/8 for one point is fine, especially passive rng as you say.

But the opportunity cost is not fine, with the previously mentioned exceptions of Wookies, Fenn, Norra, Miranda, Defenders as example of good ships. (I think it could work on an ordnance-free Miranda because her alternative is usually chips/lrs (I think the amount of EI is surprisingly low))

So it helps the wrong ships?

What about turret/cannon carrying Y-Wings, Aggressors, or Gunboats? Does it have a place there?

14 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

I think that‘s te crux of the issue here. I agree that 3/8 for one point is fine, especially passive rng as you say.

But the opportunity cost is not fine, with the previously mentioned exceptions of Wookies, Fenn, Norra, Miranda, Defenders as example of good ships. (I think it could work on an ordnance-free Miranda because her alternative is usually chips/lrs (I think the amount of EI is surprisingly low))

So it helps the wrong ships?

What about turret/cannon carrying Y-Wings, Aggressors, or Gunboats? Does it have a place there?

Y Wings yes, it can definitely fit there.

TIE/AGs really need LWF.

Gunboats with Cannons maybe, but they probably prefer LRS.

I'd concur with the assessment that this is a decent upgrade that fits on entirely the wrong ships.

It's a bad design because it's a random effect with game changing consequence that both players can't plan around it.

There's a good reason why 2.0 got rid of rolling dice to remove crits...

3 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

It's a bad design because it's a random effect with game changing consequence that both players can't plan around it.

No, that's why it's good. Embrace the chaos and learn to adapt to a changing and unpredictable game environment.

16 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

It's a bad design because it's a random effect with game changing consequence that both players can't plan around it.

There's a good reason why 2.0 got rid of rolling dice to remove crits...

X-wing is not a game of chess. Rolling dice bring randomness to the game. Furthermore, you have a choice - you can build your list without this card...

9 minutes ago, SOTL said:

No, that's why it's good. Embrace the chaos and learn to adapt to a changing and unpredictable game environment.

I thought we were playing xwing, not talisman

For kitchen table it is probably fine thought, having a highly skilled tournament game decided by that single green die doesn't appeal me at all.

Different tastes for different people? Maybe, but an upgrade that's useless 5 out of 8 times and potentially list breaking the other 3 is a bad design for me

1 minute ago, Starvald Demelain said:

X-wing is not a game of chess. Rolling dice bring randomness to the game. Furthermore, you have a choice - you can build your list without this card...

I never claimed it was, I wouldn't be playing it if it was.

One of the most appealing aspect of xwing is that you usually have a good degree of influence on dice variation thought. I doubt many players have fun by just rolling dice.

Yeah you can build around the card and make it non random by using c3po or Palpatine, that's would be fine for me.

PS are you the coruscant 2016 winner? Or were you the 2017 one?

A lot of times, I notice the mod slot on my ships empty. Mostly on TIE Fighters, FOs, Advanced, and Interceptors (Autothrusters takes one of the slots automatically).

3 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

I never claimed it was, I wouldn't be playing it if it was.

One of the most appealing aspect of xwing is that you usually have a good degree of influence on dice variation thought. I doubt many players have fun by just rolling dice.

Yeah you can build around the card and make it non random by using c3po or Palpatine, that's would be fine for me.

PS are you the coruscant 2016 winner? Or were you the 2017 one?

2016. Thus you can partially blame me for the card

1 minute ago, Starvald Demelain said:

2016. Thus you can partially blame me for the card

I've cried too much on the malazan book of the fallen to be able to blame someone going with starvald demelain as name

20 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

I never claimed it was, I wouldn't be playing it if it was.

One of the most appealing aspect of xwing is that you usually have a good degree of influence on dice variation thought. I doubt many players have fun by just rolling dice.

Yeah you can build around the card and make it non random by using c3po or Palpatine, that's would be fine for me.

Have you played a game using just expected damage? It changes the game and makes maneuvering massively more important. It also makes it less fun for me. It helped me realize that I like a certain degree of randomness, even though I thought I prefer none.

The combo with c3po/palp is only worth it against ordnance as noted above, but there it is very valuable!

I think it‘s worth mentioning that it‘s possible to dislike the card for its variance without the card being bad design.

Different strokes for different folks.

It‘s imo interesting how there‘s this (anecdotal) inverse correlation between time of playing the game and preference for low variability (+turrets). Don‘t know how we could ever confirm/dismiss that though.

Carnor Jax says HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEY!