Inspired by topic about missed opportunities I think we can talk about one opportunity that was truly missed - a chance to introduce switching initiative.

Since the early days of X-Wing initiative is one of the most important things in X-Wing - it can determine the outcome of the matches and strategies. It is no coincidence that "initiative bid" is one of the most important aspects when it comes to list building.
Having said that, current rules in regards to initiative are very frustrating and didn't change from X-Wing 1.0 - the player with lower points list get to pick who gets initiative, and in case of a tie a roll decides, then initiative stays with THE SAME player for the WHOLE game.
I cannot tell enough how frustrating is the fact that initiative in X-Wing is unswitchable and stays with the same player the whole game. In some cases, aces vs aces match up for example, having initiative is huge handicap, magnified by invariable initiative, also in situation where both players trimmed down their lists and have equal initiative bids player losing initiative roll also, in practice, lost all his unused points that went into initiative bid.
Thus I don't understand why FFg didn't introduce switching initiative in X-Wing, especially given the fact that it was already introduced in their other miniatures game, Runewars. In Runewars switching initiative is great solution that prevent either player from being screwed by single roll on initiative or losing bid at the list construction step, so even before game begun.

Dear FFG do we have to wait for 3.0 for this change?

6 minutes ago, Embir82 said:

Thus I don't understand why FFg didn't introduce switching initiative in X-Wing, especially given the fact that it was already introduced in their other miniatures game, Runewars. In Runewars switching initiative is great solution that prevent either player from being screwed by single roll on initiative or losing bid at the list construction step, so even before game begun.

Dear FFG do we have to wait for 3.0 for this change?

I agree, and switching initiative is one of my favorite improvements that Runewars has over X-wing (first edition). However, the developers did say that they tried it, and it didn't work so well for X-wing. I don't recall if they got into specifics on why they didn't feel it fits X-wing. Just be aware that it was on their radar, it was tested, and it didn't make it through to the full edition.

I do think that it could make for an interesting aspect of some alternate format.

Here is the nice thing:

The 2.0 Rules Reference is a living document. So things like initiative and even how certain tokens function (how ion works, reinforce, etc.) can be updated and changed a lot easier. There are no pesky and diverse reference cards to track down, etc.

Interesting to hear they tested it. What if initiative only swapped if you had the same number of squad points? Idk. That way ppl can still take bids and have it matter.

They said that they tried this and it added too much complexity for too little gain. With other 2.0 changes player order is much less valuable than it used to be in 1.0.

37 minutes ago, HolySorcerer said:

They said that they tried this and it added too much complexity for too little gain. With other 2.0 changes player order is much less valuable than it used to be in 1.0.

Actually, I think it is much more important. With the initiative scale being cut back it is far more likely that both sides are going to have ships at the same initiative value and who is first player is much more likely to make a big difference.

Now, with them encouraging squads of equal initiative, if both players bring such a squad at the same value, (a not unlikely occurrence) whoever chooses first player will have a massive advantage.

21 minutes ago, Forgottenlore said:

Actually, I think it is much more important. With the initiative scale being cut back it is far more likely that both sides are going to have ships at the same initiative value and who is first player is much more likely to make a big difference.

Now, with them encouraging squads of equal initiative, if both players bring such a squad at the same value, (a not unlikely occurrence) whoever chooses first player will have a massive advantage.

Eh, if first player is important to your squad you can bid for it, if it isn't you can buy more stuff. It sounds like you're coming from the point of view of high initiative arc dodgers, who really want to move last, but not all squads want that. A TIE swarm would rather move first vs a lot of lists, as would barrage bombers, but neither really care all that much.

Personally, I'm glad I don't have to take alternating first player into account when planning a move or two in advance.

Tracking alternating player order would give me a headache. No Thanks.

15 minutes ago, gadwag said:

Tracking alternating player order would give me a headache. No Thanks.

It isn't that hard. Multiple other FFG and non-ffg games do this, you just have a token that marks who is currently first.

Yeah, the game literally comes with an Initiative/Player Order token (the big X-Wing one, which no one actually uses), and it would be simple to add "pass the token" in the End Phase.

3 hours ago, Embir82 said:

that prevent either player from being screwed by single roll on initiative or losing bid at the list construction step, so even before game begun.

The developers have been pretty vocal about X-wing 2.0 being designed in such a way that you do not auto lose during the list building phase. While rotating initiative would have probably become a reality for 1.0 had it continued on, the fact this mechanic is absent in 2.0 pretty much says it’s not needed.

Of course, initiative in X-wing is just a rule defined in a pdf, that could always be changed in the future if it needed to be.

1 hour ago, HolySorcerer said:

It sounds like you're coming from the point of view of high initiative arc dodgers, who really want to move last, but not all squads want that.

No, most others want to shoot first. Also determined by first player.

I don't want first player to alternate, I would have much rather they had reduced its overall impact by expanding the initiative range instead of condensing it. Make fewer ships that have the same initiative value so there is less chance of 1st player being meaningful. The whole point of PS when the game was first developed was to do away with all the problems traditional round structures have. Now they’ve just made the game much more IGoUGo.

1 hour ago, Qark said:

It isn't that hard. Multiple other FFG and non-ffg games do this, you just have a token that marks who is currently first.

The token helps, but it's one more thing to keep track of and I already forget initiative order occasionally, especially in early rounds of casual games. That's not really what I meant by headache, though. In X-Wing you need to plan at least a turn ahead with many ships, especially if you're looking to pull off a bump or whatnot. Switching initiative order makes that considerably more difficult, because the movement order changes each turn.

Dont need alternating. Just an upgrade (mod slot?) with 1 charge.

"At the beginning of planning phase, you may spend 1 charge. If you do, during activation, treat your initiative as 7."

This will counter high initiatives once per game per ship in your squad if you want to pay for it. Maybe 5pts like contraband cybernetics. Gives any ship a chance to shoot Soontir at least once per game if they play it right.

Maybe one person wants a 12pt bid. Maybe another person flying the same squad prefers a 2pt bid and two ships to counter high bidding high init squads.

I know it sounds easy, but you have to remember that the two other alternating initiative games, Rune Wars and Legion, use a set game length that has to be tracked. I other words, if both players forget, you can backtrack pretty easily. If both players forget in X-Wing, that's a much more daunting proposition.

Rather than an alternating initiative I'd much prefer you just have a roll-off each round for it. It's easier to remember than a strict alternating one, and it removes the need to plan several turns ahead, whilst encouraging players to be somewhat flexible in their plans.

1 hour ago, CRCL said:

Rather than an alternating initiative I'd much prefer you just have a roll-off each round for it. It's easier to remember than a strict alternating one, and it removes the need to plan several turns ahead, whilst encouraging players to be somewhat flexible in their plans.

A roll-off would make the game less skill based, which is not something to be desired IMO.

14 minutes ago, LordBlades said:

A roll-off would make the game less skill based, which is not something to be desired IMO.

Not necessarily. Being able to plan for and adapt to a changing situation is a skill in and of itself.

1 hour ago, CRCL said:

Not necessarily. Being able to plan for and adapt to a changing situation is a skill in and of itself.

The way I see it, being able to plan several turns in advance offers one a pretty significant advantage compared to the majority of players, who at best plan one turn in advance.

Rendering planning across multiple turns practically impossible in some scenarios greatly reduces this skill gap.

55 minutes ago, LordBlades said:

The way I see it, being able to plan several turns in advance offers one a pretty significant advantage compared to the majority of players, who at best plan one turn in advance. 

Rendering planning across multiple turns practically impossible in some scenarios greatly reduces this skill gap.

I guess we'll have to just agree to disagree.

Regardless, just sticking with the 1.0 static initiative determined by bids seems a bit lazy. Surely there's a more elegant way to handle tied initiatives.

26 minutes ago, CRCL said:

Regardless, just sticking with the 1.0 static initiative determined by bids seems a bit lazy. Surely there's a more elegant way to handle tied initiatives.

With that I fully agree. Games between arc-dodging aces of equal pilot skill will still be won/lost mainly in squad building.

5 hours ago, wurms said:

Dont need alternating. Just an upgrade (mod slot?) with 1 charge.

"At the beginning of planning phase, you may spend 1 charge. If you do, during activation, treat your initiative as 7."

This will counter high initiatives once per game per ship in your squad if you want to pay for it. Maybe 5pts like contraband cybernetics. Gives any ship a chance to shoot Soontir at least once per game if they play it right.

Maybe one person wants a 12pt bid. Maybe another person flying the same squad prefers a 2pt bid and two ships to counter high bidding high init squads.

I disagree, if you create an anti-I6 card like the one that you are talking about no one will ever fly soontir without the same upgrade on him. It would be an auto include card on I6 pilots and so only a way to waste points that you could use elsewhere.

Would you realy even only think to fly soontir or vader (even worst) if you know that you could easely lose the initiative toward an I6 or 7 "mister no one"?

The time of Veteran instinct is over.

5 hours ago, CRCL said:

Rather than an alternating initiative I'd much prefer you just have a roll-off each round for it. It's easier to remember than a strict alternating one, and it removes the need to plan several turns ahead, whilst encouraging players to be somewhat flexible in their plans.

It works in games using a D6 system, and though I've never played Runewars, I wonder how it would work in X-Wing. If this were the case, how would you see it working: does each player roll an Attack Die, highest result wins?

That said, forcing people to think several turns ahead is one of the things I quite like about games like X-Wing and the now-defunct GW games Battlefleet Gotchic and Aeronautica Imperialis - you can't just improvise on the spot so reliably as you can in, for example, Warhammer 40k where positioning and overall strategy mean very little and the number of dice rolled is key.

30 minutes ago, Manolox said:

The time of Veteran instinct is over.

Veteran Instincts is dead, long live Veteran Instincts!

11 hours ago, Parakitor said:

However, the developers did say that they tried it, and it didn't work so well for X-wing.

11 hours ago, HolySorcerer said:

They said that they tried this and it added too much complexity for too little gain.

This is just complete and utter bull. I've played a few games of X-Wing with passing initiative and it works perfectly fine. The only "complexity" is thinking two turns in advance... which is the entire point of X-Wing anyway.

10 hours ago, Forgottenlore said:

Now, with them encouraging squads of equal initiative, if both players bring such a squad at the same value, (a not unlikely occurrence) whoever chooses first player will have a massive advantage.

Any time 1/200 points = massive advantage, you have a problem on your hands.

9 hours ago, gadwag said:

Tracking alternating player order would give me a headache. No Thanks.

Have you tried it?

8 hours ago, kris40k said:

Yeah, the game literally comes with an Initiative/Player Order token (the big X-Wing one, which no one actually uses), and it would be simple to add "pass the token" in the End Phase.

Exactly. Thanks for the useless token. And it's literally one line that would need to be added to the rules.

52 minutes ago, LordBlades said:

With that I fully agree. Games between arc-dodging aces of equal pilot skill will still be won/lost mainly in squad building.

This is what I've started saying. Winning because of a 1-point difference in your bid isn't winning by playing X-Wing, it's just another form of "winning in the list-building phase".

I think flipping Initiative is probably a gameplay improvement but I can also see that it became too complicated to implement.

At a competitive level in particular I think the changing initiative would become TOO important as players take turns trying to block each other, or to arc dodge or whatever. You'll get a lot of games that are all about dancing initiative rather than locking that state down and just playing a game.

I can see the merit in switching initiative, but I feel the game has enough flexibility to permit you to win whether you're going first or second. I've omitted the idea of a points bid completely. My high initiative ships hunt lower initiative ships and a high initiative target gets ganged up on by several ships to cover wider arcs. I rather like that the condensed init values make the playing field a bit more level. I feel this actually eliminates the need fo alternating game initiatives (ugh, I miss the term Pilot Skill - now we're using "initiative" in two contexts).

That said, I wouldn't mind alternating game initiatives. It's not a deal breaker by any means, but I have to wonder if its addition would truly be worth it. Is it possible the desire for this addition is based on a 1.0 mentality where games could be won or lost based on initiative? I really don't feel that's the case anymore. Obviously, time will tell and the real testing time starts this Thursday!