Outside of official Regionals etc, I am just going to pop an insert with an appropriate Initiative, copy a card as needed and fly whatever I like. For big events, I’ll borrow stuff.
I was disappointed as well since I would like more Strikers and Scyks and would have had some good trade stock it they gave more inserts and cards to match the dials.
Edited by Pewpewpew BOOMJust buy another kit.
3 hours ago, drail14me said:I think you're missing my point. I don't care who's on what token. I'm not worried about that or any combination of unique/generic. My point is that for the kit to completely convert two of the same ships, one more generic pilot token and card is needed for ships like the YV-666 and for the JM5K. Without that generic, it's really NOT two conversions.
The part I thought "odd" was just the T-65 that ended up with an extra generic token. There isn't an extra pilot card to go with it so it's really not useful.
It's a little disappointing, but I don't find where they claim "two full conversions", like that.
On the FAQ section of the product page, they even say, " The number of ships supported (by maneuver dials included) ," showing that Number of Identical Generics (NoIGs) wasn't the metric they were using.
4 hours ago, Commander Kaine said:Or, expressed more simply: Rebel bias
There is simply no excuse for this, unless other ships are similarly adjusted as well.
Well, the TIE interceptor (to take the example) got a massive kick up the backside with autothrusters as baked-in-free-repositioning. the Rookie may have double the health but without Flight Assist Astromech it's lost any repositioning without giving up its action to do so.
I could see, possibly, 6 unequipped alpha squadron pilots being a thing, but I suspect not. More likely you'll be able to fit in 5 alphas with a mod each.
A bigger question would be whether you can fit in 5 'clean' sabers. Because if you can, you may have half the health but you also have pseudo 'push the limit' boost and barrel roll and a higher initiative against a ship which can only barrel roll by giving up its tokens and can only boost by giving up an attack dice and giving up its tokens (or taking a red action, but without an astromech it's got a far worse green dial than the TIE).
With the X-wing getting +1 hull, integrated astromech isn't a thing....which means a 5 x X-wing squad probably won't have astromechs, and flight assist isn't a thing anymore regardless. So the x-wings in a 5 x-wing list are a lot less capable.
Double Post.
Edited by Magnus Grendel1 hour ago, Magnus Grendel said:Well, the TIE interceptor (to take the example) got a massive kick up the backside with autothrusters as baked-in-free-repositioning. the Rookie may have double the health but without Flight Assist Astromech it's lost any repositioning without giving up its action to do so.
I could see, possibly, 6 unequipped alpha squadron pilots being a thing, but I suspect not. More likely you'll be able to fit in 5 alphas with a mod each.
A bigger question would be whether you can fit in 5 'clean' sabers. Because if you can, you may have half the health but you also have pseudo 'push the limit' boost and barrel roll and a higher initiative against a ship which can only barrel roll by giving up its tokens and can only boost by giving up an attack dice and giving up its tokens (or taking a red action, but without an astromech it's got a far worse green dial than the TIE).
With the X-wing getting +1 hull, integrated astromech isn't a thing....which means a 5 x X-wing squad probably won't have astromechs, and flight assist isn't a thing anymore regardless. So the x-wings in a 5 x-wing list are a lot less capable.
So, X-Wings got a significant boost, and got cheaper, but the Interceptor should only get one of those?
X-Wings got a new dial, a new flappy wing mechanic (which still works great for torpedoes) an extra health, and got cheaper....
And its not like the Interceptors were well priced in 1.0. And with Targeting computer gone, their offense went down, and of course the evade nerf affects them as well.
In fact, I actualy agree in some way. For what I know, my firespray is not playable unless I buy the scum kit or a second firesprey. As it is the only scum I hown, it is a bit annoying. But I wait because there will surely be a convenient way to trade those cardboard and cards. Patience.
Edited by player24228451 hour ago, Commander Kaine said:So, X-Wings got a significant boost, and got cheaper, but the Interceptor should only get one of those?
That's not what I said.
Interceptors did get a significant boost (autothrusters is huge, especially for non-elite generics, and it looks from the unboxing like their dial picked up a speed 3 segnor to boot) and may well get cheaper. But taking Alpha Squadron Pilots down to a 6-strong squad requires them to drop more than a point each, which is possible but not necessarily likely. I think they're the second weakest heavy swarm ship (after zealous recruits) in 1.0, so I would like to see it, but I don't think it's too probable.
As it is, dropping by a (1.0) point would put them on a par with the Imperial trainee, meaning that you can't get a 6th ship but can either hand out a decent modification each, or promote one to Phennir or Fel. Getting cheaper can improve a squad without meaning an extra ship.
By comparison, Sabers only need to drop by a single point to go from 4-ship to 5-for ship, and do have big advantages over an ill-equipped rookie, because they don't need a 3-point elite upgrade stapled to them to 'work' as an arc dodger anymore.
Frankly the evade nerf only really affects soontir fel out of the interceptors, because it's only really a nerf if you roll straight successes on your evade dice already, so it's only really noticeable when you can stack focus + evade reliably.
Edited by Magnus Grendel
Now that you must give a numeric ID to every of your ships because the new way Locks work, and that all ships bases have are divided into 9 regions (bullseye, front left, front right, left front, left back, right front, right back, back left, and back right) I don't understand why they didn't do one thing that would have reduced the costs of the conversion kits, and the amount of complains from the veteran customer base:
Universal Bases.
Your ship's firing arcs are specified on your pilot card. You don't need them printed on the cardboard token anymore.
Your ship name and type doesn't need to be printed on the cardboard either. The base is numerically identified and matched to the pilot card thru the Lock number, right?
FFG should have packed a bunch of universal small, medium and large base tokens, with the generic 9 arcs on them, and they would be usable for all ships.
Individual cardboard ship tokens made sense in 1.0 since they also listed the ship actions, and you needed them to be able to see where the rear or 180 degree arcs where.
But 2.0 ship tokens don't list actions anymore, and all ships show all 9 arcs. So what's the point of them?
Having individual cardboard bases that, for the most cases, the only difference between them is redundant with that on the pilot cards seems unnecessary. A vestigial remainder of 1.0 in 2.0.
Even in the case that you wanted to have a reminder, for the opposing player, of which arcs a ship can fire at by default, they could have managed it perfectly fine with the same solution they developed for showing the turret firing arc: a cardboard indicator on top.
This would have saved lots and lots of cardboard, and allowed them to instead pack more copies of the generics' pilot cards to satisfy more veterans.
I still think they could come in the future with "Premium Bases". Colored plastic bases that include the universal firing arcs, with premium turret (and normal) arc indicators.
9 hours ago, Azrapse said:Now that you must give a numeric ID to every of your ships because the new way Locks work, and that all ships bases have are divided into 9 regions (bullseye, front left, front right, left front, left back, right front, right back, back left, and back right) I don't understand why they didn't do one thing that would have reduced the costs of the conversion kits, and the amount of complains from the veteran customer base:
Universal Bases.Your ship's firing arcs are specified on your pilot card. You don't need them printed on the cardboard token anymore.
Your ship name and type doesn't need to be printed on the cardboard either. The base is numerically identified and matched to the pilot card thru the Lock number, right?FFG should have packed a bunch of universal small, medium and large base tokens, with the generic 9 arcs on them, and they would be usable for all ships.
Individual cardboard ship tokens made sense in 1.0 since they also listed the ship actions, and you needed them to be able to see where the rear or 180 degree arcs where.
But 2.0 ship tokens don't list actions anymore, and all ships show all 9 arcs. So what's the point of them?
Having individual cardboard bases that, for the most cases, the only difference between them is redundant with that on the pilot cards seems unnecessary. A vestigial remainder of 1.0 in 2.0.Even in the case that you wanted to have a reminder, for the opposing player, of which arcs a ship can fire at by default, they could have managed it perfectly fine with the same solution they developed for showing the turret firing arc: a cardboard indicator on top.
This would have saved lots and lots of cardboard, and allowed them to instead pack more copies of the generics' pilot cards to satisfy more veterans.
I still think they could come in the future with "Premium Bases". Colored plastic bases that include the universal firing arcs, with premium turret (and normal) arc indicators.
Best idea yet!!!!
14 hours ago, JJ48 said:It's a little disappointing, but I don't find where they claim "two full conversions", like that.
On the FAQ section of the product page, they even say, " The number of ships supported (by maneuver dials included) ," showing that Number of Identical Generics (NoIGs) wasn't the metric they were using.
When they first announced 2.0 they released a simple list of the number of ships converted. That’s where I got the 2 ships from. I assumed they meant it would convert 2 ships. But, that’s what I get for assuming.
For me, the disappointment comes from not being able to trade. I was looking forward to trading off some scum ships I don’t need for some empire and Rebel ships.
53 minutes ago, drail14me said:When they first announced 2.0 they released a simple list of the number of ships converted. That’s where I got the 2 ships from. I assumed they meant it would convert 2 ships. But, that’s what I get for assuming.
For me, the disappointment comes from not being able to trade. I was looking forward to trading off some scum ships I don’t need for some empire and Rebel ships.
I'm pretty sure the "by maneuver dials included" disclaimer was on that list on day one. At the time I was not sure what it meant, but I knew it meant something. And I was pretty sure that the 'something' would not make people happy.
54 minutes ago, drail14me said:When they first announced 2.0 they released a simple list of the number of ships converted. That’s where I got the 2 ships from. I assumed they meant it would convert 2 ships. But, that’s what I get for assuming.
What they really mean is you get enough dials for 2 ships, and enough unique pilots to run one. For example, if you previously purchased two K-Wing models and want to have two copies of Miranda that doesn't happen. You only get one. So yeah, you can technically fly two legal K-Wings (can't fly two Miranda's in the same squad) but you don't get the equivalent of buying two individual ships.
20 minutes ago, JamesWG said:I'm pretty sure the "by maneuver dials included" disclaimer was on that list on day one.
It was not. Nor was it ever made clear in any other promotional videos and such. The "(by maneuver dials included)" language was added after some people went, " ... Wait a second ... "
It's very disappointing that we're not getting actual full conversions (which would have great value when trading to try to fully convert 1.0 collections), and it's quite disappointing that FFG made such poor decisions -- apparently with zero research -- on the number of ships of each type in each Conversion Kit. But the most disappointing thing is that they were not forthright about it.
11 hours ago, Azrapse said:Now that you must give a numeric ID to every of your ships because the new way Locks work, and that all ships bases have are divided into 9 regions (bullseye, front left, front right, left front, left back, right front, right back, back left, and back right) I don't understand why they didn't do one thing that would have reduced the costs of the conversion kits, and the amount of complains from the veteran customer base:
Universal Bases.Your ship's firing arcs are specified on your pilot card. You don't need them printed on the cardboard token anymore.
Your ship name and type doesn't need to be printed on the cardboard either. The base is numerically identified and matched to the pilot card thru the Lock number, right?FFG should have packed a bunch of universal small, medium and large base tokens, with the generic 9 arcs on them, and they would be usable for all ships.
Individual cardboard ship tokens made sense in 1.0 since they also listed the ship actions, and you needed them to be able to see where the rear or 180 degree arcs where.
But 2.0 ship tokens don't list actions anymore, and all ships show all 9 arcs. So what's the point of them?
Having individual cardboard bases that, for the most cases, the only difference between them is redundant with that on the pilot cards seems unnecessary. A vestigial remainder of 1.0 in 2.0.Even in the case that you wanted to have a reminder, for the opposing player, of which arcs a ship can fire at by default, they could have managed it perfectly fine with the same solution they developed for showing the turret firing arc: a cardboard indicator on top.
This would have saved lots and lots of cardboard, and allowed them to instead pack more copies of the generics' pilot cards to satisfy more veterans.
I still think they could come in the future with "Premium Bases". Colored plastic bases that include the universal firing arcs, with premium turret (and normal) arc indicators.
That’s just what second edition needed, having to ask every round which TIE was which member of Inferno squad.
Unique cardboard serves a purpose, and that is making the board easily readable.
I, too, am a bit disappointed that dial count does not necessarily equal generic count. So I get it, we each had our hopes and dreams of what would be in these desirable boxes coming in September. Wishful thinking. I don't know why I assumed those numbers would match, but I did. They don't. I'll get over it. I don't like it, but I don't think FFG is "morally hollow" because of it.
I also don't think they are somehow misleading us because someone is not able to avoid buying a kit because there aren't 5 "full conversions" in there and they couldn't trade 4 of them to get a few scum ships on the table. What, did people plan on getting with 10 friends and each buying 1 kit each and just spread it out amongst themselves? That does not sound like a sustainable business model.
I wonder if the "full conversion" that people are talking about will be in the yet-to-be-finalized card packs they have spoken of. Or, will it be only new pilots?
I've heard some say that 2.0 is "just a money grab." Isn't everything that is a consumer product just that? From Hyundai to Bentley, from Hanes to Chanel, everyone wants our money.
On 7/8/2018 at 1:26 PM, Rakaydos said:1 kit (and a core) lets you play any ace list for any ship of that faction
2 kits lets you play any swarm list for any ship of that faction. (Double deci is a deci swarm)This logic holds up most of their decisions for the kits.
Not true, unless A-wings max out at 4 and Z-95s max out at 6. Because that’s how many generic Pilots you get from 2 kits for those ships.
2 hours ago, Tvboy said:Not true, unless A-wings max out at 4 and Z-95s max out at 6. Because that’s how many generic Pilots you get from 2 kits for those ships.
yea, and I already mentioned Intercepters. There's some holes in the theory, but most of them could be fixed with "And a new ship pack." Some cant be covered even with that, so I dunno.
16 hours ago, Commander Kaine said:So, X-Wings got a significant boost, and got cheaper, but the Interceptor should only get one of those?
X-Wings got a new dial, a new flappy wing mechanic (which still works great for torpedoes) an extra health, and got cheaper....
And its not like the Interceptors were well priced in 1.0. And with Targeting computer gone, their offense went down, and of course the evade nerf affects them as well.
Interceptors will have flappy wings, also. After the Xwings shoot them down, they flap all over space
On 7/8/2018 at 2:13 PM, Darth Meanie said:Your anti-2.0 thread in 3, 2, 1. . .
Man, that is some great shooting!
4 hours ago, HolySorcerer said:That’s just what second edition needed, having to ask every round which TIE was which member of Inferno squad.
Unique cardboard serves a purpose, and that is making the board easily readable.
What information is included on the playing field?
You have to lookup ALL of that information. Adding a pilot NAME, pilot initiative, and colored firing arc doesn't speedup play. Assuming the FFG app allows you to load your opponents list, it will be trivial to lookup.
Look at what happened with Wave 1. Take X-Wings, for example. The conversion kit includes 3 dials, but only enough cardboard for two of the same generic. Some pilot combinations allow you to fly 3 X-Wings, but lets ignore that for now.
The wave 1 expansion baggy (with X-Wing and Y-Wing cardboard) is not part of the conversion kit's listed contents, but is still in the box. This baggy includes no extra dials, but it does add enough cardboard to fly 3 of the same generic X-Wing. Thus, the conversion kit includes enough dials to support a ship fully once you buy the cardboard baggy for that ship.
7 hours ago, HolySorcerer said:That’s just what second edition needed, having to ask every round which TIE was which member of Inferno squad.
Unique cardboard serves a purpose, and that is making the board easily readable.
Why do you need to know who is who in the lore? Apart from initiative, you only need to know who has which pilot abilities, and that doesn't either come on the cardboard base plate.
If you totally must
, a little rectangular 10x30 mm plate with the name and initiative number could be inserted on one of the two base's slots (those used for the IDs) without having to create a full 40x40 mm, 60x60 mm or 80x80 mm cardboard square for every single pilot pair.
Or even easier: leave a rectangular hole on each universal base, where the name currently is, for inserting there a little cardboard rectangle with the pilot's initiative and name.
Something like this (please ignore the colored arcs):
The current 2.0 cardboard bases are a huge waste of cardboard for just a little name and number. Even the ship icon is redundant with the very ship plastic model that lies just above it. Can you tell me, other than name and initiative, what is the difference between all the Falcon's plates, all the Outrider's plates, all the decimator's plates, all the Jumpmaster's plates, etc? They all look exactly the same save for a couple square cm. It's a big waste of cardboard.
It would have been also easier to store and sort those name tags alphabetically or something, or by initiative, than what we have now.
1 minute ago, Azrapse said:Why do you need to know who is who in the lore? Apart from initiative, you only need to know who has which pilot abilities, and that doesn't either come on the cardboard base plate.
If you totally must , a little rectangular 10x30 mm plate with the name and initiative number could be inserted on one of the two base's slots (those used for the IDs) without having to create a full 40x40 mm, 60x60 mm or 80x80 mm cardboard square for every single pilot pair.
Or even easier: leave a rectangular hole on each universal base, where the name currently is, for inserting there a little cardboard rectangle with the pilot's initiative and name.
Something like this (please ignore the colored arcs):
The current 2.0 cardboard bases are a huge waste of cardboard for just a little name and number. Even the ship icon is redundant with the very ship plastic model that lies just above it. Can you tell me, other than name and initiative, what is the difference between all the Falcon's plates, all the Outrider's plates, all the decimator's plates, all the Jumpmaster's plates, etc? They all look exactly the same save for a couple square cm. It's a big waste of cardboard.
It would have been also easier to store and sort those name tags alphabetically or something, or by initiative, than what we have now.
The most important info is the initiative and the name! It makes the board infinitely more readable. Being able to look at the table and easily identify Wampa, Howlrunner, Iden, Mauler, and the Acadamy Pilot is critical.
If you want to talk about waste then this game is a waste of plastic. The ship models serve zero purpose, this whole game can be played with just the base plate and cardboard token. Think of the cost savings and space savings if we didn't have to store all these tiny plastic ships!
Just now, HolySorcerer said:The most important info is the initiative and the name! It makes the board infinitely more readable. Being able to look at the table and easily identify Wampa , Howlrunner , Iden, Mauler , and the Acadamy Pilot is critical.
If you want to talk about waste then this game is a waste of plastic. The ship models serve zero purpose, this whole game can be played with just the base plate and cardboard token. Think of the cost savings and space savings if we didn't have to store all these tiny plastic ships!
The plastic spaceships is the only thing that strongly ties this game to the Star Wars IP. Remove the ships and you could be playing any random game.
Also, they are kind of the main point on a spaceship game, to see the spaceships we have. How many would have jumped in if all we had was square cardboard bases with names?
It's like saying "Movie images and music serve zero purpose, this whole story could be told just with the script. Think of the cost savings if we didn't have to film and postproduce all these scenes!"
But now you are changing the subject.