1 minute ago, Bad Idea Comics said:

I never said "better" - I said "interesting" solution. There will be a 2.0 Falcon coming out, and other ships that have gunners. It's an option and one that hasn't been discussed. I don't think errata for a card like Luke is a bad idea either, but having the option of a new card with the errata or even a new ability on it isn't a bad proposition for new players. I know we already have Falcon models coming out of our ears and we're used to seeing errata, but new players may gain a lot of benefit from a new card.

I think it was mentioned several times in the thread.

34 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:

How is you paying for a whole new card (coming in a no doubt pricey box, that you might not even need or want) is better than having the old card errataed by 1 word, a better solution in your mind?

I'm honestly curious

You clearly don't have the same aversion to errata some of us share - and, for basically all FFG games, we often see the whole spectrum of erratum support/aversion in players. "None ever!" "Typos only" "A functional erratum is OK (to make it actually work)" "An erratum to rebalance a card is OK" "An erratum to balance a card is good". Bad Idea Comics and myself clearly lie a lot further to the left of that spectrum than you do!

My personal experience in the LCGs is that players, especially new players, dislike having cards not do what they think they do. They'll complain about it with signature words like "unintuitive". Having them not do what they actually *say* they do is even moreso. There's also an increasingly large burden of card-text memorization/knowledge that just accumulates as balance errata accumulate. I played Thrones 1.0 for years, and look at this list of errata (p4-6). When I looked into returning to X-Wing about a year ago (prior to 2.0 announcement), it was browsing the FAQ and seeing all the errata that sealed the deal, and convinced me not to return. Having printed components be innacurate really increases the barrier of entry (and re-entry).

While the other argument is that restriction/banning/points changes are *also* changes not visible on the printed components, the decision to favour these approaches is generally because it's easier to check a list's legality, and a list is generally built in an environment with ready reference to all information (and no time constraints). In the case of X-wing, where points changes are directly built into the app, anyone building a list will automatically have their list's legality checked as they build, and that information, unlike card errata, doesn't need to be referenced on the fly.

One last, argument here is that a card like Luke Gunner might capture exactly what the devs/designers wanted a Luke Gunner to feel like. Maybe it makes for a great quick-build, an exciting falcon vs 4 ties scenario from the movies, etc. The card *can* be designed for something other than competitive play, and be priced out of the latter while still being a useful piece of cardboard to have.

Just to keep score: 29 people have replied in this thread. 27 of them are against the OP, 2 of them agree with the OP.

4 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:

Or you are just a sad troll, repeating one thing, over and over, even though, no one really cares.

3 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:

Or you are just a sad troll  , repeating one thing, over and over, even though, no one really cares. We got it the first time. Hungry for reactions, or you are just bored? This low effort shÍtposts only undermine 1 person, and that person ain't me.

Eh, he still is one of the xwing-"famous" content providers whose opinion is widely recognized and respected. He has a lot of undermining to do.

2 minutes ago, SOTL said:

Hmm.. Sure buddy.

1 minute ago, GreenDragoon said:

Eh, he still is one of the xwing-"famous" content providers whose opinion is widely recognized and respected. He has a lot of undermining to do.

Don't you think that makes this whole ordeal a bit sadder? Like a LOT sadder?

And you know. If I was trying to troll people, I wouldn't engage people like you in actual discussion, like we have done in this thread. I think that proves that my "trolling" is at best just a trapping, and not the actual message.

My opinion may not be popular (it isn't), but I do genuinely believe it... That's why I am arguing for it. And the point is not to get reactions on my posts. It's not the best tactic for that.

And I kinda can't take the criticism of making the forum a worse place seriously, when people like him, do the things they do. Continually posting here, with no substance at all. That is trolling. I'm just making a point. He is a bully. I'm an ***. And he is X-Wing famous. I'm suddenly not sure that I am literally everything that is wrong with this hobby.

So all this kinda falls apart. I am not out for outrage, I am not out for reactions, I'm out for actual discussion, which this thread provides btw.

But as the 27-2 score proves there is no 'discussion' happening here, there is just a lecture. A one-way monologue of opinion masquerading as facts with no information permitted to flow back the other way.

Quote

...it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury
Signifying nothing
- Macbeth

2 minutes ago, SOTL said:

But as the 27-2 score proves there is no 'discussion' happening here, there is just a lecture. A one-way monologue of opinion masquerading as facts with no information permitted to flow back the other way.

In what universe does "discussion" mean "agreement"?

There are opposing point of views. We talk about them. Also, nobody claims facts. This is a discussion about theory, design and preferances... not facts.

So you kinda don't make sense.

Wait, what just happened? This has been a lively discourse, not a hate-parade. I actually don't disagree with Commander Kaine, I'm just not as polarized. I know the internet can be devoid of reason, but this discussion has absolutely been reasonable and several posters have made valid points. When Kaine said he was "honestly curious" about my last point (and I checked - it's not been specifically stated in the way I presented the concept) I took that as him actually being honestly curious - not as him looking to bash me for an idea. And, quite honestly, he's not wrong about errata being a better option in certain circumstances - I simply haven't found anything in the game at this stage that warrants that type of attention (correcting a rule that's not functioning on a fundamental level), though the Devs did with the elimination of stress from the Slave 1 title (I believe). So, it IS in practice right now, which has also been stated multiple times.

So, everyone's made their point and it's been good, but now it's devolving into the usual $#!+show. Lol. Let's stay on track, if possible.

One thing I really like about 2.0 is that FFG at least has several options for repairing damaging cards. Their forethought in this regard should be commended. The fact that we even have this thread discussing it is a testament to their desire to create a long-lasting game.

1 hour ago, Commander Kaine said:

And  you know. If I was trying to troll people, I wouldn't engage peopl  e like you in actual  discussion, like we have done in this thread.

I wondered about that. We haven‘t had such a reasonable discussion before, especially considering that we still disagree for the most part.

I don‘t expect you to refreain from those little jabs („people like you“), but it was a nice change.