Fellow forumites,
In the past, I have been known to bring up certain theories citing the possibility of a sub 41 point xwing in 2.0. Today those misconceptions were proven wrong, and as promised, I'd like to say that I was mistaken.
You were right.
(Although the Advanced is still atrocious, and I maintain everything I said about it)
They had to be for the sake of game balance
Though sad about the x1, that definitely deserved to be 18/19
Still, TIE fighters, phantoms, Punishers, Gunboats, bombers...holy **** they look amazing
10 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:Fellow forumites,
In the past, I have been known to bring up certain theories citing the possibility of a sub 41 point xwing in 2.0. Today those misconceptions were proven wrong, and as promised, I'd like to say that I was mistaken.
You were right.
(Although the Advanced is still atrocious, and I maintain everything I said about it)
We need proxy games of 4 x’s vs 4 adv stat! Sept is still a long way off to right this injustice!
::salute:: Commander, for you integrity. Many people harshly punish things they disagree with and rarely praise good stuff. I’d fly with you anyday but we likely would get stomped lol
Well how FFG balances Generics is the problem they had with 1st edition. There is no way a Rookie Pilot has 21/100 points of value. It was more like 20.5/100 (and even that is being generous to the power of X-wings). Thing is 5 Rookie pilots would have been broken and too much for even a howlrunner swarm.
“The advanced is still atrocious”
Love the humility. I can see you really took this to heart and will be totally reasonable now.
... 41 points for a tempest?
what
Oh, and applause for your humility and all that. But... 41 points? I really don't get it.
Edited by SquarkBig of you to own it man, props.
I, on the other hand, will take back my optimism about the TIE Advanced.
You were right, it's been ****ed. With the options available to each ship, it seems unfair that 5x Saber Squadron Pilots is a thing, but not 5x Advanceds.
Just got to hope we'll see that cost come down before the first official Wave 1 tournament. Or allow it at least limited access to boost the way the X-Wing has it, without spending a mountain of points on just three uses per game via Afterburners.
Internet gloating time:
But I was wrong about FIVE. CARTEL. MARAUDERS. ?
Edited by Jo Jo41 minutes ago, TasteTheRainbow said:“The advanced is still atrocious”
Love the humility. I can see you really took this to heart and will be totally reasonable now.
But... isn't it?
Like i said in the other thread, there was no way they'd allow 5 xwings with the statboost, actionbar boost, and the "toning down" of 2.0 in general.
However i dont understand why the TIE Adv is the same cost as an Xwing.
Just now, Vineheart01 said:Like i said in the other thread, there was no way they'd allow 5 xwings with the statboost, actionbar boost, and the "toning down" of 2.0 in general.
However i dont understand why the TIE Adv is the same cost as an Xwing.
I feel like it takes away from my character progression to say it... but I think we all know.
40 minutes ago, Jo Jo said:But I was wrong about FIVE. CARTEL. MARAUDERS. ?
This is the really weird one, honestly. How on earth are 4 Tempests supposed to compete with 5 Cartel Marauders?
Edited by Squark1 hour ago, Squark said:This is the really weird one, honestly. How on earth are 4 Tempests supposed to compete with 5 Cartel Marauders?
Why not go 4 Storm Squadrons (43 x 4 = 172) with a Talent and higher Initiative, instead of 4 Tempests (41 x 4 = 164)?
Plus, with either one, you get a Sensor, Missile and Mod slot you can fill with your left over points. And ATC, which is 3 red dice as long as you are locked. And that linked Roll.
Just because you can't fit 5 doesn't mean you can't add stuff to your 4.
Sounds better than 5 naked Cartels. Or does it?
Edited by thomedwards
You know what you can fit five of though?
11 minutes ago, Kieransi said:You know what you can fit five of though?
Tempest being locked out of 5-per seems unfortunate. They lose an HP for an Agility compared to an X-Wing or Cartel Marauder, and only get their 3rd attack die on ships they have locked, which greatly reduces flexibility. Maybe they tested it and it was too strong on the table. Hrm. What's the 4-per list build? Tempest with FCS and missiles? Storm aces with FCS and Elusive? Three 44 point FCS Tempests with a 68 point ship rounding things out? A little high for fitting in a naked Delta.
This is why you must make sue your words are nice and tasty, because it makes it easier to eat them later.
and hey, you’re better than many in being open about it.
Haha. Good sport.
5 K-ings though, Nice.
On 7/27/2018 at 10:02 AM, Squark said:... 41 points for a tempest?
what
Oh, and applause for your humility and all that. But... 41 points? I really don't get it.
for the most parts they are just the 1st edition point costs x2 and either -1 point if they were underperforming or +2 points if they needed a nerf.
Edited by Marinealver
MFW I read the X-wing costs
On 7/27/2018 at 2:28 PM, Kieransi said:You know what you can fit five of though?
Hm...I still think I'd prefer trying seven Quadjumpers...
41 point X-wing is extremely balanced with 23 point TIE fighters. Everyones thoughts about generic TIE advanced is correct, they're overcosted.
What I really wanted to see was 33 point TIE strikers or TIE Interceptors for some neat 6-ship options. As it stands they are overcosted compared to 41 point X-wings. #RebelBias
40 point Protectorate Fighters should be allowable too. But noooo, those got a cost increase to 44 for some reason. Gaining linked actions WITHOUT a cost increase would have been enough to make them viable.
9 minutes ago, Dengar5 said:41 point X-wing is extremely balanced with 23 point TIE fighters. Everyones thoughts about generic TIE advanced is correct, they're overcosted.
What I really wanted to see was 33 point TIE strikers or TIE Interceptors for some neat 6-ship options. As it stands they are overcosted compared to 41 point X-wings. #RebelBias
40 point Protectorate Fighters should be allowable too. But noooo, those got a cost increase to 44 for some reason. Gaining linked actions WITHOUT a cost increase would have been enough to make them viable.
13 hours ago, Dengar5 said:41 point X-wing is extremely balanced with 23 point TIE fighters. Everyones thoughts about generic TIE advanced is correct, they're overcosted.
What I really wanted to see was 33 point TIE strikers or TIE Interceptors for some neat 6-ship options. As it stands they are overcosted compared to 41 point X-wings. #RebelBias
40 point Protectorate Fighters should be allowable too. But noooo, those got a cost increase to 44 for some reason. Gaining linked actions WITHOUT a cost increase would have been enough to make them viable.
I think 5 Striker squads will be stronger than they were, though. I mean, 5 Black Sq. Scout with Predator should be pretty shooty and squirrelly. Mostly, I think I'll be using them as filler. 5 Planetary Sentinels with Proton Bombs, Skilled Bombardier, and Ablative Plating? It sounds hilarious.
On 7/27/2018 at 1:53 PM, Sk3tch said:Haha. Good sport.
5 K-ings though, Nice.
Someone might field this, but I don't think it'd really have much bite, just a lot of Hull to chew through and a difficult time choosing what arc to shoot out of, which action to take, and a fat base for BEA's to beat on. I'm not scared. ?