19 minutes ago, AgentoftheEmpire said:

What the actual **** are you talking about? 2.0 is great and has fixed some fundamental problems with 1.0. I am getting a feeling that now when people complain about something being OP, they are doing two things. 1) failing to see the counter plays to a particular list. 2) falling into a particular list's trap. If you fly predictably and into a list's inherent trap, you deserve to lose. Also, I don't know what everyone is smoking with regards to two dice primaries. They can be pretty potent in the right squad (see: any TIE swarm) especially since reinforce doesn't completely shut down attacks anymore. I will grant that somethings seem a bit powerful, but they are not broken like some of the cancer from 1.0 and can be easily fixed with points adjustments.

So much this.

Locally the only whining i have been hearing about something being OP 9/10 of the time it was because it was done wrong. Such as complaining that a launched Proxy Mine is too strong for being unavoidable and so easy to land...wait proxy mine? yeah i said that right..proxy mine...proxy mine....read the card better and you solve that problem.

54 minutes ago, Vontoothskie said:

no, I did want 2.0.

I called for it as early as 2016. I even made posts about what I hoped 2.0 would look like and how I thought things should be changed

According to your profile the only post you made in 2016 was a complaint about the Upsilon. Good job staying on brand I guess.

1 hour ago, Vontoothskie said:

I do not like that the 1.0 customers who invested the most (Epic Players) got cut out of 2.0.

Proof? There had been no word that Epic has been discontinued. There is evidence to the contrary.

42 minutes ago, Cgriffith said:

No.

That’s literally what you’re suggesting.

If you mean green tokens, say green tokens.

28 minutes ago, SpiderMana said:

That’s literally what you’re suggesting.

If you mean green tokens, say green tokens.

Wow. Touché no wonder I don’t respond on here a lot. Carry on.

3 hours ago, Vineheart01 said:

So much this.

Locally the only whining i have been hearing about something being OP 9/10 of the time it was because it was done wrong. Such as complaining that a launched Proxy Mine is too strong for being unavoidable and so easy to land...wait proxy mine? yeah i said that right..proxy mine...proxy mine....read the card better and you solve that problem.

What are they misreading?

29 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

What are they misreading?

you cant launch a mine.
Least right now you cant, except the tugboat guy literally nobody uses. And hes just a 1fwd

4 minutes ago, Vineheart01 said:

you cant launch a mine.
Least right now you cant, except the tugboat guy literally nobody uses. And hes just a 1fwd

Ah. Literally the only time I've encountered Proximity Mines so far has been going against that particular Quadjumper, and that's how I lost my TIE Strikers. I was hoping maybe he'd played it wrong.

5 hours ago, SabineKey said:

@JJ48 I’m not sure I really understand how the Scum don’t fit in the game for you. Do you mind elaborating on specifics?

Mainly, it comes down to several assumptions I had made about where Second Edition was going, and noticing some cards or lists not fitting those assumptions. The majority of those cards or lists are Scum, or at least came up primarily in Scum discussions.

Assumption 1: Free actions and free tokens were to be severely reigned in. Most bonus actions were to go the way of Linked Actions (controlling which two actions you can use) or would otherwise have some cost for their use.

Then I encountered cards like Palob, who just flat out gives you a better Jam action without it costing an action (or even being prevented by stress), and who gives you a bonus token out of the deal. Also, Jabba, who does a free Reload-for-Illicits up to five times per game. Both of these should have been worded to require an action (Palob could have been given higher initiative, or just let him skip an action, and word his ability, "If you have performed no actions this turn and are not stressed..."). Of course, this very topic also highlights Boba's ability to get more tokens than pretty much everyone else mentioned, at least in the OP's list.

Assumption 2: Lists were to win or lose based on how they were flown rather than in list-building. While it's always possible to build a list that can lose to pretty much anything, no list should require you to build specifically to counter it.

Almost immediately after release, I was seeing posts about stuff like, "This list went 9-0, and the ships are pretty much untouchable unless the opponent is flying X!" Some of them may have been empty boasts, sure, but enough of them seemed legit to be worrisome. All such lists that I saw were Scum.

Assumption 3: Lists were to be more about what pilots you chose than about what combos you brought. In general, ships should be chosen then upgrades to enhance them rather than picking your upgrade combos and trying to see which ships can field them.

In general, this is what I see with Imperials and Rebels. Most of the topics I've read for them have been about specific ships, and where they fit or don't fit in lists, whether they're over/undercosted, etc. While I've seen one or two such topics for Scum, I tend to see more Scum topics listing certain powerful combos, and speculating which ships they work best on. I get that there's some, "this upgrade looks interesting; I want to try it!" going on, but overall, it seems like Scum emphasize upgrades far more than the ships.

Now, this all is just based on my assumptions (which were likely too hopeful on my part) as well as my own observations (which may be skewed by small sample size and skipping over topics that don't seem interesting at the time). However, it just feels to me as if Rebels and Imperials are trying to play one game, and Scum are playing their own. Whether they're more powerful or not is debatable, and to me, doesn't matter in the slightest. It's just irritating feeling like we're playing completely different games.

Particularly irritating is that the cards I feel are problems are mostly problems at a very fundamental level, which can't be fixed without full errata. If Captain Jonus and Generic Bombers is too strong, you can: 1) Make Jonus more expensive if it's primarily his ability breaking things. 2) Make Generic Bombers more expensive if they're too maneuverable for the price. 3) Make munitions more expensive if they give too much bang for the buck. 4) Some combination thereof. The problem is strictly one of balance, not fundamental incompatibility.

If Palob's Jamming + Token is to be fixed, it requires an errata.

In summary, Second Edition has just been a bit of a letdown so far for me. I started collecting X-Wing long before I started playing, and by the time I did start playing, I didn't really like it because everyone was just using ridiculous combos instead of actually flying the ships. When Second Edition was announced, I was ecstatic because I thought that finally it would be the kind of game I'd always wanted it to be. My first Rebel vs Imperial game of Second Editions seemed to confirm that, and I enjoyed X-Wing for the first time in a long time, even though I lost pretty soundly. The next week, when I played against Scum, though, it was suddenly First Edition all over again.

5 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

Also, Jabba, who does a free Reload-for-Illicits up to five times per game.

Jabba is not a good card

16 minutes ago, gadwag said:

Jabba is not a good card

Relevant...how?

EDIT: Sorry, that was rather rude of me. But as I've stated numerous times, my concern isn't primarily with the cards being overpowered, per se.

@JJ48 thank you for sharing. I don't agree with your conclusions, but I at least can understand where you are coming from.

I just learned Sabine in the attack shuttle is also able to do this, premaneuver barrel roll, link to an evade, clear the stress with a green maneuver, then take a focus during normal perform action step. So you can add her to the list.

7 hours ago, JJ48 said:

Mainly, it comes down to several assumptions I had made about where Second Edition was going, and noticing some cards or lists not fitting those assumptions. The majority of those cards or lists are Scum, or at least came up primarily in Scum discussions.

Assumption 1: Free actions and free tokens were to be severely reigned in. Most bonus actions were to go the way of Linked Actions (controlling which two actions you can use) or would otherwise have some cost for their use.

Then I encountered cards like Palob, who just flat out gives you a better Jam action without it costing an action (or even being prevented by stress), and who gives you a bonus token out of the deal. Also, Jabba, who does a free Reload-for-Illicits up to five times per game. Both of these should have been worded to require an action (Palob could have been given higher initiative, or just let him skip an action, and word his ability, "If you have performed no actions this turn and are not stressed..."). Of course, this very topic also highlights Boba's ability to get more tokens than pretty much everyone else mentioned, at least in the OP's list.

Assumption 2: Lists were to win or lose based on how they were flown rather than in list-building. While it's always possible to build a list that can lose to pretty much anything, no list should require you to build specifically to counter it.

Almost immediately after release, I was seeing posts about stuff like, "This list went 9-0, and the ships are pretty much untouchable unless the opponent is flying X!" Some of them may have been empty boasts, sure, but enough of them seemed legit to be worrisome. All such lists that I saw were Scum.

Assumption 3: Lists were to be more about what pilots you chose than about what combos you brought. In general, ships should be chosen then upgrades to enhance them rather than picking your upgrade combos and trying to see which ships can field them.

In general, this is what I see with Imperials and Rebels. Most of the topics I've read for them have been about specific ships, and where they fit or don't fit in lists, whether they're over/undercosted, etc. While I've seen one or two such topics for Scum, I tend to see more Scum topics listing certain powerful combos, and speculating which ships they work best on. I get that there's some, "this upgrade looks interesting; I want to try it!" going on, but overall, it seems like Scum emphasize upgrades far more than the ships.

Now, this all is just based on my assumptions (which were likely too hopeful on my part) as well as my own observations (which may be skewed by small sample size and skipping over topics that don't seem interesting at the time). However, it just feels to me as if Rebels and Imperials are trying to play one game, and Scum are playing their own. Whether they're more powerful or not is debatable, and to me, doesn't matter in the slightest. It's just irritating feeling like we're playing completely different games.

Particularly irritating is that the cards I feel are problems are mostly problems at a very fundamental level, which can't be fixed without full errata. If Captain Jonus and Generic Bombers is too strong, you can: 1) Make Jonus more expensive if it's primarily his ability breaking things. 2) Make Generic Bombers more expensive if they're too maneuverable for the price. 3) Make munitions more expensive if they give too much bang for the buck. 4) Some combination thereof. The problem is strictly one of balance, not fundamental incompatibility.

If Palob's Jamming + Token is to be fixed, it requires an errata.

In summary, Second Edition has just been a bit of a letdown so far for me. I started collecting X-Wing long before I started playing, and by the time I did start playing, I didn't really like it because everyone was just using ridiculous combos instead of actually flying the ships. When Second Edition was announced, I was ecstatic because I thought that finally it would be the kind of game I'd always wanted it to be. My first Rebel vs Imperial game of Second Editions seemed to confirm that, and I enjoyed X-Wing for the first time in a long time, even though I lost pretty soundly. The next week, when I played against Scum, though, it was suddenly First Edition all over again.

It's broadly true.

But you've got to look at AGOT 2nd Ed relaunch, where they were supposed to fix things that were wrong in 1st Edition but only made them worse. FFG are pretty awful at this sort of thing.

X-Wing chat always emphasises list building, I guess because it's easier to talk about and most people like that sort of thing.

I think my expectations were always a bit too idealistic to be honest, especially in the competitive game the objective of a lot of people is to find the most 'broken' combinations as quickly as possible. My objective is to fly ships I enjoy the look of or form a thematic squad.

I flew against the multi-token and reroll Boba Fett and it did feel a little unfair that he doesn't need to follow the normal rules of action steps and avoiding being blocked etc.

Perhaps it's a mindset thing, in the majority of games I go in thinking my opponent has a much better list than me, partly because list building isn't really something I naturally enjoy. And for all the great things about 2.0, it's not going to fix that.

Evade is No longer a Green shield token, but a dice mod. Token stacking is not the same in 2.0

There is clear global consensus among the players that 2nd edition is vastly improved from 1.0. You can't reasonable argue with this.

Of course, there are players who don't like the 2.0. That is regrettable, but unavoidable, since nothing will ever please everybody.

It seems that the biggest problems are having those players, who had some super clear vision of how they want the 2nd Edition to work, and the reality has not fully satisfied their vision.

FFG never said that there will be no card combos anymore. There will always be card combos as long as there are customizable upgrade cards. (And X-Wing would be quite a dull game without them.)

But the weight has clearly shifted from building the strongest ship into the actual gameplay and piloting.

All the biggest problems and excesses of 1.0 were addressed.

7 minutes ago, baranidlo said:

But the weight has clearly shifted from building the strongest ship into the actual gameplay and piloting.

^^^

List building is still fun, because gamers still enjoy competition and jank. But flying a decent list well against a strong/meta list flown mediocrely actually stands a chance, now. And that’s all a lot of us really wanted from 2.0.

I’m relatively new to X-Wing, but I could never bring myself to fly meta lists, because I want to fly the ships/pilots I want to fly. But that put me at a disadvantage in 1e, and it didn’t feel like I lost tournament games because I was a worse player so much as because their lists held an inate advantage over mine.

I’m so psyched to get back into local competitive play using what I legitimately want to fly. Not just what I think has the best chance.

18 hours ago, Cgriffith said:

All FFG needs to do is make a rule (amendment) so to speak, where the maximum circle tokens allowed per ship, per round is two (green tokens) That would eliminate a lot of the early token stacking. With Boba (Debri Gambit, Han Gunner, Perspective Copilot) hijinx as an example.

Terrible. Whisper easily gets 3 green circle tokens per round. Why ruin her?

pretty much the only people ive heard complaining about 2.0 were used to something in 1.0 that is no more and simply refuse to accept change.

Had a local guy get pissed that evade changed and wouldnt touch the game. We talked him into playing a few games anyway. Guess who didnt quit....

Then of course you got the guy complaining he cant nym/miranda anymore, both because miranda is useless garbage and nym is no longer rebel. Dude that combo was so broken it NEEDED to go away....learn to play the game by playing the game not by finding some broken stack that cant possibly lose almost regardless of your dice or positioning.

Resistance Han crew is the new super-stacker (evades equal to enemy ships in range 0-1) but even that doesn't feel that busted because of the limitations on the evade tokens and the fact that Resistance has only one-agility ships with crew (I'm assuming bomber has only 1). (Actually, do any factions have three-agility ships with crew? Phantom is the first thing to come to mind but that's not always on).

Nope i dont think anything has more than 2agi with crew.

And yeah, its not that great. Basically on the Falcon that just means he WILL dodge 1 hit from each of those ships, not reduce the damage by 1 to a potential 2 depending on his own agi. Heck he could very well just roll hot and not even need the token lol

5 minutes ago, Ixidor said:

Resistance Han crew is the new super-stacker (evades equal to enemy ships in range 0-1) but even that doesn't feel that busted because of the limitations on the evade tokens and the fact that Resistance has only one-agility ships with crew (I'm assuming bomber has only 1). (Actually, do any factions have three-agility ships with crew? Phantom is the first thing to come to mind but that's not always on).

A quick check says no. All cap out at 2 naturally, though the Phantom can cloak for more.

8 minutes ago, Ixidor said:

Resistance Han crew is the new super-stacker (evades equal to enemy ships in range 0-1) but even that doesn't feel that busted because of the limitations on the evade tokens and the fact that Resistance has only one-agility ships with crew (I'm assuming bomber has only 1). (Actually, do any factions have three-agility ships with crew? Phantom is the first thing to come to mind but that's not always on).

Gunner Finn does make it a little bit better, but only protects against attacks coming from the front arc.