So an upgrade card lets you do something you otherwise couldn’t, therefore it’s broken. Funny, I thought that was the point of upgrade cards.

6 hours ago, gamblertuba said:

Adjusting points can fix errors in pricing, it can't fix bad design.

Exactly. They didn't fix the Jumpmaster by raising it's cost. They fixed it by removing a bunch of upgrade slots, and nerfing it's capabilities.

6 hours ago, gamblertuba said:

Adjusting points can fix errors in pricing, it can't fix bad design.

4 minutes ago, Koing907 said:

Exactly. They didn't fix the Jumpmaster by raising it's cost. They fixed it by removing a bunch of upgrade slots, and nerfing it's capabilities.

By definition, the cost of each card is part of the design. Since it's the only element continuous across all elements of the game (except obstacles), it's easily the most important element of design for any card in X-Wing. A card isn't broken by 'poor design', it's broken by an uncharacteristically high power for its cost - i.e. being 'above the power curve'. This is a well understood concept in all ccgs.

The 'fixes' given to the JM5k were as unwieldy as they could possibly be. Raising the point cost of every JM5K pilot by two would have stopped the triple JM5K spam. Raising it by 3 would have nerfed Dengaroo into oblivion (either Dengar is wimpy or Manaroo can't run away), and prevented Paratanni from being a thing at all.

Genius, in it's uber combo with Trajectory Simulator, could have easily been nerfed with a simple points increase. Making Genius (only ever used on nym competitively) cost 4 points would have prevented most of the jank that could be accomplished. Alternatively, they could have removed the freaking bomblet generator - the real culprit - from the game when they had the chance.

FFG, for some reason, has entirely avoided point cost changes in 1.0, but they're embraced it as the appropriate and effective means of balance that it is for 2.0.

58 minutes ago, Koing907 said:

Exactly. They didn't fix the Jumpmaster by raising it's cost. They fixed it by removing a bunch of upgrade slots, and nerfing it's capabilities.

We still do not know, but the app could easily programmed so, that

- Genius costs 0 on a suicide self bombing Ywing, while costing something like 10+ on Nym

or

-Genius cannot be placed in the slot at all when Nym is placed as pilot

6 hours ago, Koing907 said:

Exactly. They didn't fix the Jumpmaster by raising it's cost. They fixed it by removing a bunch of upgrade slots, and nerfing it's capabilities.

Did they fix anything in 1e by adjusting the cost? I think that had more to do with them not wanting to change costs than because costs couldn't fix anything. If I recall correctly, they also didn't want to change upgrade slots either, and made several attempts with the Jumpmaster prior to finally giving in and admitting it was the only real fix they could make.

I'll point out that upgrade slots are also in the app, and will also be available for balancing, as needed.

I don't really understand this thread

Genius is severely limited relative to it's 1e incarnation by its inability to combo with trajectory simulator - there are other options to let you Genius with alternate tools/speeds, but none nearly as dramatic as the five forward. Plus, bombing in general is a bit weaker.

If Genius (or any other card) does end up needing a fix that points can't manage, they can just... errata the card. It's not like gaining the ability to change points and slots has removed the ability for the devs to nuke cards with the FAQ if they see the need, same as 1e.

6 minutes ago, svelok said:

I don't really understand this thread

Genius is severely limited relative to it's 1e incarnation by its inability to combo with trajectory simulator - there are other options to let you Genius with alternate tools/speeds, but none nearly as dramatic as the five forward. Plus, bombing in general is a bit weaker.

If Genius (or any other card) does end up needing a fix that points can't manage, they can just... errata the card. It's not like gaining the ability to change points and slots has removed the ability for the devs to nuke cards with the FAQ if they see the need, same as 1e.

Good point. The game will definitely still have an FAQ, though it will hopefully be a bit thinner.

10 hours ago, Astech said:

By definition, the cost of each card is part of the design. Since it's the only element continuous across all elements of the game (except obstacles), it's easily the most important element of design for any card in X-Wing. A card isn't broken by 'poor design', it's broken by an uncharacteristically high power for its cost - i.e. being 'above the power curve'. This is a well understood concept in all ccgs.

The 'fixes' given to the JM5k were as unwieldy as they could possibly be. Raising the point cost of every JM5K pilot by two would have stopped the triple JM5K spam. Raising it by 3 would have nerfed Dengaroo into oblivion (either Dengar is wimpy or Manaroo can't run away), and prevented Paratanni from being a thing at all.

Genius, in it's uber combo with Trajectory Simulator, could have easily been nerfed with a simple points increase. Making Genius (only ever used on nym competitively) cost 4 points would have prevented most of the jank that could be accomplished. Alternatively, they could have removed the freaking bomblet generator - the real culprit - from the game when they had the chance.

FFG, for some reason, has entirely avoided point cost changes in 1.0, but they're embraced it as the appropriate and effective means of balance that it is for 2.0.

But this just illustrates my point. Raising the cost doesn't balance the pilot/upgrade, it makes it more expensive. The difference is important when FFG creates new content. Making the next Jumpmaster or Genius or Harpoon Missiles, seeing it dominate the meta, and then pricing it into oblivion, isn't a very good strategy for "balancing" the game.

6 minutes ago, Koing907 said:

But this just illustrates my point. Raising the cost doesn't balance the pilot/upgrade, it makes it more expensive. The difference is important when FFG creates new content. Making the next Jumpmaster or Genius or Harpoon Missiles, seeing it dominate the meta, and then pricing it into oblivion, isn't a very good strategy for "balancing" the game.

Except part of the point they made about balancing is that, if necessary, they can even adjust points based on other cards in your list. Usually, it's not one card that's a problem, but a particular combination of cards. Removing that particular combination can help balance the game without having to completely remove either individual card.

3 hours ago, svelok said:

I don't really understand this thread

Genius is severely limited relative to it's 1e incarnation by its inability to combo with trajectory simulator - there are other options to let you Genius with alternate tools/speeds, but none nearly as dramatic as the five forward. Plus, bombing in general is a bit weaker.

If Genius (or any other card) does end up needing a fix that points can't manage, they can just... errata the card. It's not like gaining the ability to change points and slots has removed the ability for the devs to nuke cards with the FAQ if they see the need, same as 1e.

The thread is probably premature and hyperbolic but if we are already talking about using a FAQ to errata a card, that's unsettling. Genius, even in this weakened form, does represent some of the worst aspects of X-wing design that many of us hoped to never see make their way into 2nd Ed.

Edit to add: It would make the pdf version of the pricing a nightmare but I would love to see Genius have vastly different prices on different platforms and even make prices multiplicative if you take certain combos together on one ship. More likely to see a restricted list a la some of the LCG's where you simply cannot combine certain cards in a given list.

32 minutes ago, gamblertuba said:

... but if we are already talking about using a FAQ to errata a card, that's unsettling.

It's either unsettling or it shows that people are overreacting without having played or seen the point cost of a card yet.

36 minutes ago, evcameron said:

It's either unsettling or it shows that people are overreacting without having played or seen the point cost of a card yet.

Well, in all fairness, it is not brand new mechanics. It's reworking some existing 1st Ed mechanics. And the whole point here is that some design choices cannot be balanced by cost. They can only be priced out of contention and that is not the same thing.

OG Palp was way too expensive in most lists and ridiculously under priced in Palp Aces lists. It was bad design.

1 hour ago, gamblertuba said:

Well, in all fairness, it is not brand new mechanics. It's reworking some existing 1st Ed mechanics. And the whole point here is that some design choices cannot be balanced by cost. They can only be priced out of contention and that is not the same thing.

OG Palp was way too expensive in most lists and ridiculously under priced in Palp Aces lists. It was bad design.

Fair... but while Genius is not new mechanics, all the other related mechanics have changed so drastically that what we experienced in 1.0 is not even remotely similar. And was genius really bad design in 1.0? It only got broken once Nym's ability existed AND that ship had either trajectory sim or advanced sensors AND that ship carried overpowered/underpriced ordnance or turrets AND unlimited bombs existed AND it could be placed on a PS10 pilot AND it was an environment where all bomb decisions were made activation so genius gave an insane number of bomb placement options with full information. So perhaps the fix to the problem isn't a change to genius, but instead avoiding that combo (several points of which already have changed in 2.0). Plus genius probably won't be free anymore.

By the way - I disagree that palp could not have been fixed by point cost change. You're right, palp was too expensive in most lists and too cheap in palp aces. But that's true of any card in a game where synergies exist. The reality is that cards need to be priced right for their good uses, and that means there are going to be places where a card is too expensive. So if palp had been priced right, I think he still could have been balanced. Maybe that price was 12 points? Maybe 15? I don't know. He would have only seen use in palp aces, because he would have been massively over-priced for most lists, but that's true of many cards. (I preferred their FAQ fix, but I'm just saying a points fix could have worked too)

On 7/26/2018 at 2:27 AM, Koing907 said:

But this just illustrates my point. Raising the cost doesn't balance the pilot/upgrade, it makes it more expensive. The difference is important when FFG creates new content. Making the next Jumpmaster or Genius or Harpoon Missiles , seeing it dominate the meta, and then pricing it into oblivion, isn't a very good strategy for "balancing" the game.

See, there's a threshold between 'too strong' and 'nerfed into oblivion' in which cards are acceptable. Predator, despite being amazingly good, is considered a balanced card almost universally specifically because of its point cost. A ship like Fenn Rau (rebel) is on the other end - he's way too cheap for what he brings to the table. The JM5K isn't a good example of being nerfed into oblivion, but a card like Zuckuss is.

Zuckus (crew) had his ability nerfed like crazy, going from by far the strongest single upgrade card in the game (in an AGI 3 meta) to one of the least used and hardest to trigger well. For example, changing Zuckus' point cost to 4 would have made him a totally acceptable card - on par with cards like Expetise and Gunner in terms of pinning defensive aces.

On 7/26/2018 at 2:39 AM, JJ48 said:

Except part of the point they made about balancing is that, if necessary, they can even adjust points based on other cards in your list. Usually, it's not one card that's a problem, but a particular combination of cards. Removing that particular combination can help balance the game without having to completely remove either individual card.

I think, personally, that flat-out bans on specific cards on ships will be a more elegant and enjoyable way to play than a labyrinth on price dependencies. In this case, preventing Nym from taking Veteran Instincts, Genius or Trajectory Simulator would have made him almost perfect from the beginning.

On 7/26/2018 at 5:14 AM, evcameron said:

By the way - I disagree that palp could not have been fixed by point cost change. You're right, palp was too expensive in most lists and too cheap in palp aces. But that's true of any card in a game where synergies exist. The reality is that cards need to be priced right for their good uses, and that means there are going to be places where a card is too expensive. So if palp had been priced right, I think he still could have been balanced. Maybe that price was 12 points? Maybe 15? I don't know. He would have only seen use in palp aces, because he would have been massively over-priced for most lists, but that's true of many cards. (I preferred their FAQ fix, but I'm just saying a points fix could have worked too)

The price of Palpatine is a tricky example. Since PS 9 imperial aces pretty much always beat PS8 aces in the endgame, it was often crucial for players to have top-PS pilots in a palp aces list. SO increasing Palpatine from 8 to, say, 15 points means you're guaranteeing a palp aces player loses to a triple imperial ace player, because triple aces will flatten a lambda before losing a ship, then out-PS the remaining aces. You could put him, maybe, at 10 points, but there'sa far more effective way to nerf Palpatine - effective errata.

The way he was nerfed was pretty awkward. A range limitation (say R0-2 at 8 points) makes him much better. Not because he's harder to use, but because he's easier to play against . Making Palpatine's escort play close to him is both thematic and thematically awesome, and avoids the whole changing point cost issue.

Of course, in 2.0 you've got extra space on cards for important stipulations. Like a list that includes Palpatine cannot have any pilots of initiative 5 or higher, in order to prevent the characteristic point fortressing of 1.0.

This is balanced?

We'll have to see. And if it turns out that the zero price point isn't, then it can be adjusted.

19 hours ago, Astech said:

See, there's a threshold between 'too strong' and 'nerfed into oblivion' in which cards are acceptable. Predator, despite being amazingly good, is considered a balanced card almost universally specifically because of its point cost.

I disagree. I think Predator is balanced because it isn't an overwhelming advantage, regardless of the point cost.

6 minutes ago, Koing907 said:

I disagree. I think Predator is balanced because it isn't an overwhelming advantage, regardless of the point cost.

Predator is an enormous advantage for ships that cannot otherwise get double mods. If predator cost 0 (or one) point, 5 Zealots would be infinitely better than 5 Rookies. Similarly, Lone Wolf would be very, very powerful at 0 points.

There have only been a couple of times in the game's history where you could get an 'overwhelming advantage'. All of them could have been solved by increasing the cost of a combination to be prohibitively expensive. Even then, the cards will likely still see use in epic play.

Refusing to accept that Genius isn't OP at the right cost, because his ability is 'too powerful' is a refusal to accept the inherent mechanics in the game built to deal with him. Nym is no longer higher PS than aces, no longer has infinite bombs, and no longer can turret spam at long range. All the pieces of the Genius puzzle have been removed.

5 hours ago, Lace Jetstreamer said:

This is balanced?

Most likely.

Nym can't ignore his own bombs, isn't PS10, and doesn't have unlimited ammo, which are three of the bigger things that caused the trouble with his 1.0 iteration. He's also a medium base now, making arc-dodging harder, and his barrel roll is red unless he sacrifices his EPT to it, and he doesn't have Accuracy Corrector Autoblaster or TLT to hit people with while bombing them.

It's probably fine. And if not, it's an easy fix.

6 hours ago, Lace Jetstreamer said:

This is balanced?

Probably.

I don't think you actually understand what made the Genius/Nym combo so broken. @DR4CO is right to point out the other elements that made it broken which aren't present any more. I'd add in that Autoblaster/Accuracy Corrector isn't a thing any more, nor is TLT, which all added up to making Nym so good. No Harpoons also hurts the power of the build. Literally every single thing that made that build so broken no longer exists. Genius itself wasn't really broken, only the combo of Genius with everything else Nym could do was.

3 hours ago, Jike said:

Probably.

I don't think you actually understand what made the Genius/Nym combo so broken. @DR4CO is right to point out the other elements that made it broken which aren't present any more. I'd add in that Autoblaster/Accuracy Corrector isn't a thing any more, nor is TLT, which all added up to making Nym so good. No Harpoons also hurts the power of the build. Literally every single thing that made that build so broken no longer exists. Genius itself wasn't really broken, only the combo of Genius with everything else Nym could do was.

Which is further supported by Genius basically going unused from his release back in Wave 6 till the release of Nym in Wave 11.

18 hours ago, Astech said:

There have only been a couple of times in the game's history where you could get an 'overwhelming advantage'. All of them could have been solved by increasing the cost of a combination to be prohibitively expensive. Even then, the cards will likely still see use in epic play.

And we're back around to the idea of an unbalanced card being priced into oblivion, instead of balancing it mechanics-wise.

The initial card capability wasn’t a broken mechanic. The sum of a lot of broken **** went into making the ridiculousness that has been Nym, who even with all of this ridiculousness is still beatable.

54 minutes ago, Koing907 said:

And we're back around to the idea of an unbalanced card being priced into oblivion, instead of balancing it mechanics-wise.

No, we're back around to you ignoring the fact that it was balanced/underpowered for nearly 2 years until other factors broke it.

Genius used to be a joke, until he became the terror he was in the waning days of 2.0.