11 hours ago, Vykk Draygo said:

So I came here expecting to see massive discussions on this topic. I’ve heard there will be point balances twice a year and only some ships and upgrades will be allowed, it sounds more like rotation to me. First points balances and “Hyperspace” legal ships and upgrades coming in January. Anyone else hearing this? Thoughts and discussions?

It seems like FFG have gone too far in the other direction with 2.0. We got some OP stuff in 1.0, and it needed to be addressed, but a limited format just sounds dull to me.

I guess X-Wing will be balanced when the only ship available is the Academy TIE. ?

4 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

The design of this game has always been about top table meta, IMHO. It's why there is no narrative play and why Epic is AWOL.

That used to only hurt casuals who were looking for non-standard play ideas.

Now it might affect "casual tournamenters" who want to fly whatever they like competitively.

If the 'casual tournamenters' go away though, this affects everybody:

- themselves as they play less/ give up altogether

- everybody else taking part in tournaments as they become smaller and the really small ones might get canceled

- FFG, as people who play less also likely buy less, but they might recover this loss if the new format pushes top players to buy more.

4 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

The design of this game has always been about top table meta, IMHO. It's why there is no narrative play and why Epic is AWOL.

That used to only hurt casuals who were looking for non-standard play ideas.

Now it might affect "casual tournamenters" who want to fly whatever they like competitively.

Don’t condescend “casual tournamenteers” for flying what they want to fly. It’s better than caving to the meta just because you think you’ll have a better chance of winning. Flying >>> List building. That’s key to 2.0.

5 minutes ago, Koing907 said:

I guess X-Wing will be balanced when the only ship available is the Academy TIE. ?

...and all X-Wing players will be happy with a decision FFG makes when... no I can't finish that sentence

People underestimate what a huge chunk of tournament attendance is made up of casuals. These are the players that are funding OP at the store level with their entrance fees, not the tiny number of hardcore tournament grinders trying to become x-wing famous or whatever.

I have to admit, I'm surprised by this. I thought that a banlist wouldn't be neccesary now that we have adjustable points costs?

Seems very weird.

Of course, it wouldn't be the first time Alex misspoke and everyone overreacted. So this might never actually happen.

6 minutes ago, LordBlades said:

If the 'casual tournamenters' go away though, this affects everybody:

- themselves as they play less/ give up altogether

- everybody else taking part in tournaments as they become smaller and the really small ones might get canceled

- FFG, as people who play less also likely buy less, but they might recover this loss if the new format pushes top players to buy more.

True, but maybe FFG doesn't think that will be the case?

10 minutes ago, LordBlades said:

The rotating format might cause some serious balance issues.

In a full edition format, they can do iterations: release something new, adjust points, see how the dust settles, rinse and repeat.

In a rotating format however, they need to select balanced subsets of each faction every X months, and they need to get it right the first time, since unless they keep a very long time between rotating ships, there will be little room for iterations.

So. . . (tinfoil hat time)

What if this is a way to begin reducing produced stock each season?

Seriously, with 7 full factions of ships, that is a crap-ton of SKUs to keep printed and stocked all them time.

Now, if FFG only has 4-5 ships x 7 factions that are the hotness, and they can not only rotate tournament lists, but they can also rotate which molds are on-line.

1 minute ago, Darth Meanie said:

So. . . (tinfoil hat time)

What if this is a way to begin reducing produced stock each season?

Seriously, with 7 full factions of ships, that is a crap-ton of SKUs to keep printed and stocked all them time.

Now, if FFG only has 4-5 ships x 7 factions that are the hotness, and they can not only rotate tournament lists, but they can also rotate which molds are on-line.

Don't get me wrong, I totally see why FFG would do that from a business standpoint, as it allows them to push sales of whatever they feel like, especially when coupled with the app.

I'm doubting whether it bring more good than harm to the game, but from a business standpoint it might be a good call.

5 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

True, but maybe FFG doesn't think that will be the case?

So. . . (tinfoil hat time)

What if this is a way to begin reducing produced stock each season?

Seriously, with 7 full factions of ships, that is a crap-ton of SKUs to keep printed and stocked all them time.

Now, if FFG only has 4-5 ships x 7 factions that are the hotness, and they can not only rotate tournament lists, but they can also rotate which molds are on-line.

Unfortunately with the track record of product availability that we have had from FFG in the past, I hope your not actually hoping to find stock in a store of what the new(old) hotness is. Have we all forgotten the supply issues? K wings anyone? Y wings? Go way back, anybody here remember when you couldn’t buy new waves because they were sold out immediately (Interceptor &A wing). If something old is brought back into rotation it will surprise me greatly if said ship is available. Time will tell, but I know where I’d pay cash if we were betting.

27 minutes ago, SpiderMana said:

Flying >>> List building. That’s key to 2.0.

Apparently.

And you're going to fly what FFG tells you to, because "Star Wars" is just the way they get you to make your first purchase. Too bad you liked certain ships based on story.

Flying >>> List Building is just another way they've sucked all the Star Warsy flavor out of this game, because then it doesn't matter who/what is in your list.

26 minutes ago, SpiderMana said:

Don’t condescend “casual tournamenteers” for flying what they want to fly. It’s better than caving to the meta just because you think you’ll have a better chance of winning. Flying >>> List building. That’s key to 2.0.

You do have a better chance of winning if you have a better squad, and even if flying > list building good ships still beat bad ships when both are flown equally well.

29 minutes ago, SpiderMana said:

Don’t condescend “casual tournamenteers” for flying what they want to fly. It’s better than caving to the meta just because you think you’ll have a better chance of winning. Flying >>> List building. That’s key to 2.0.

"Don't condescend this group of people" says the person, who condescendingly suggests their way is better.

In every competitive board and videogame I've ever paid attention to this same general debate rages forever. Meta vs Homebrew, the eternal battle between what is objectively better versus the ethical rightness of individuality.

Also, in most of my (admittedly unscientific) experience, the people who manage to win with a homebrew are celebrated far more than the people who win with a meta list. The risk is greater, but so is the reward. I only have to point to Biophysical's success with Double Defenders however long ago that was as a fantastic example of this.

As far as flying vs list building, that is a false dichotomy. You need both elements to succeed: a well built list coupled with excellent table skills. Many players focus on the flying part, and fly a meta list because that half of the equation is done for them and they can focus on their playing skill.

17 minutes ago, LordBlades said:

You do have a better chance of winning if you have a better squad, and even if flying > list building good ships still beat bad ships when both are flown equally well.

That seems like a 1.0 mentality. The power gap was supposed to have been significantly narrowed with 2.0. There are bad lists, mostly those with too many points in the wrong upgrades, but there shouldn't be good ships and bad ships anymore.

2 minutes ago, Tvboy said:

That seems like a 1.0 mentality. The power gap was supposed to have been significantly narrowed with 2.0. There are bad lists, mostly those with too many points in the wrong upgrades, but there shouldn't be good ships and bad ships anymore.

Shouldn't be? Possibly. Unfortunately there certainly are bad ships. Take Scum large ships for example: Lancer, Jm5k and YV-666 are just bad. I have yet to make or se a list that includes one of those and isn't immediately made significantly better by replacing it with a Firespray or a Falcon.

Even Alex Davy said on the Coruscant stream that large ships are in a bad place right now.

16 minutes ago, Tvboy said:

That seems like a 1.0 mentality. The power gap was supposed to have been significantly narrowed with 2.0. There are bad lists, mostly those with too many points in the wrong upgrades, but there shouldn't be good ships and bad ships anymore.

While the former might be true. . .

9 minutes ago, LordBlades said:

Unfortunately there certainly are bad ships.

. . .the latter never will be. It's an unachieveable goal that this game wastes way too much time and effort trying to rectify.

1 minute ago, LordBlades said:

Shouldn't be? Possibly. Unfortunately there certainly are bad ships. Take Scum large ships for example: Lancer, Jm5k and YV-666 are just bad. I have yet to make or se a list that includes one of those and isn't immediately made significantly better by replacing it with a Firespray or a Falcon.

Even Alex Davy said on the Coruscant stream that large ships are in a bad place right now.

Good point, but none of the core movie ships are bad right now and people are agreeing that FFG is highly unlikely to ban the iconic ships that represent the franchise, so how does this format help those fringe ships which are themselves more likely to be banned then the iconic ships that are doing so well right now? Why not just give those ships the points reductions they need using the stupid app this whole entire relaunch was supposed to be based around?

55 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

Apparently.

And you're going to fly what FFG tells you to, because "Star Wars" is just the way they get you to make your first purchase. Too bad you liked certain ships based on story.

Flying >>> List Building is just another way they've sucked all the Star Warsy flavor out of this game, because then it doesn't matter who/what is in your list.

Darth Meanie, why are you still here? All anyone has heard from you since Second Edition was announced is whining, whinging, and bellyaching. If that’s what I thought about my entertainment, I’d find better entertainment.

Complaining is fine-I do it myself sometimes-but your constant moaning, carping, and nitpicking is past the point of productive conversation. Why do you remain so invested in a game you despise?

I admitted that I had to change certain aspects of my list that were bad. I’m not denying that listbuilding holds any power.

I apologize if my emotional response came across as hippocritically condescending, I just get so tired of people putting objectivity above ethics, to use @Micanthropyre‘s terms.

https://tenor.com/uS98.gif

4 minutes ago, Old Sarge said:

Darth Meanie, why are you still here? All anyone has heard from you since Second Edition was announced is whining, whinging, and bellyaching. If that’s what I thought about my entertainment, I’d find better entertainment.

Complaining is fine-I do it myself sometimes-but your constant moaning, carping, and nitpicking is past the point of productive conversation. Why do you remain so invested in a game you despise?

While I rarely agree with things that Meanie says, this is unnecessary.

4 minutes ago, SpiderMana said:

I admitted that I had to change certain aspects of my list that were bad. I’m not denying that listbuilding holds any power.

I apologize if my emotional response came across as hippocritically condescending, I just get so tired of people putting objectivity above ethics, to use @Micanthropyre‘s terms.

https://tenor.com/uS98.gif

That is fair! It happens a lot. Either a player comes in and complains that their homebrew list gets wrecked by "all these WAAC meta players" which launches a massive overreaction from the meta players side, or a meta player gets really pissed that some random jank completely counters their meta list and the homebrew crew overreacts back.

There isn't really a right or wrong way to play, but it's wrong to complain that other people aren't playing the same way you are.

6 minutes ago, Micanthropyre said:

While I rarely agree with things that Meanie says, this is unnecessary.

That is fair! It happens a lot. Either a player comes in and complains that their homebrew list gets wrecked by "all these WAAC meta players" which launches a massive overreaction from the meta players side, or a meta player gets really pissed that some random jank completely counters their meta list and the homebrew crew overreacts back.

There isn't really a right or wrong way to play, but it's wrong to complain that other people aren't playing the same way you are.

Nah, I try not to complain about the meta. It exists, and I see it as a challenge to overcome. And I don’t generally complain about people playing the meta, I just don’t feel like I can play that way myself.

1 hour ago, Vykk Draygo said:

Unfortunately with the track record of product availability that we have had from FFG in the past, I hope your not actually hoping to find stock in a store of what the new(old) hotness is. Have we all forgotten the supply issues? K wings anyone? Y wings? Go way back, anybody here remember when you couldn’t buy new waves because they were sold out immediately (Interceptor &A wing). If something old is brought back into rotation it will surprise me greatly if said ship is available. Time will tell, but I know where I’d pay cash if we were betting.

****, I'm biting my nails over waiting to buy the Rebel Conversion kit. I couldn't afford everything out of the gate, and have had to prioritize purchases.

2 hours ago, Old Sarge said:

Darth Meanie, why are you still here? All anyone has heard from you since Second Edition was announced is whining, whinging, and bellyaching. If that’s what I thought about my entertainment, I’d find better entertainment.

Complaining is fine-I do it myself sometimes-but your constant moaning, carping, and nitpicking is past the point of productive conversation. Why do you remain so invested in a game you despise?

Because I don't despise the game and do still play it, albeit at 1.0.

If FFG is moving some types of tournament play into curated micro selections of ships, this would seem to be moving the game even more away from anything based on Star Wars and purely into tournament meta management.

I felt this was an issue in 1.0, and seems like it will be an even more visible issue in 2.0.

45 minutes ago, imprezagoatee said:

LOL at that first line.

To your other points, I agree. And I would also add, why do we need ban lists at all if we have adjustable points? I kinda thought the whole point (very lame pun intended) of having adjustable points is so we DON'T need a ban list. In 1e people were asking for TLT and other bans constantly, when a 1-3 point increase (depending who you asked) would have made a huge difference, and still let them be playable.

On on adjustment schedule I sorta get only adjusting the points twice a year, and like that it will be a fixed schedule so we know when it's coming, but I'd prefer more frequent, smaller updates (I'm assuming of course at only twice a year there will be a LOT of changes every time).

Exactly, if they keep more of an eye on balance from now on, and adjust points a few times per year, there is no need for a ban list.

Not even under the cloak of a themed event.

Themed tournaments would be fine, as long as the main format is extended.

I also think that a rather large portion of the community would just drop X-Wing on that occasion.

Think about it this way. Some players weren’t even that keen on 2nd and the cost of it. And now This on top? I don’t think this is a good plan

1 hour ago, SpiderMana said:

Nah, I try not to complain about the meta. It exists, and I see it as a challenge to overcome. And I don’t generally complain about people playing the meta, I just don’t feel like I can play that way myself.

I’m pretty much the same way. I’ll fly what I like, which sometimes intersects with the meta, but often doesn’t.

2 hours ago, LordBlades said:

Don't get me wrong, I totally see why FFG would do that from a business standpoint, as it allows them to push sales of whatever they feel like, especially when coupled with the app.

I'm doubting whether it bring more good than harm to the game, but from a business standpoint it might be a good call.

Except i can’t believe that, since some people even here seem not to keen on the idea. And pushing sales for a very small group while losing other customers is hardly reasonable even from a business standpoint.

Maybe they dropped this on us to see the reaction.

i hope it is enough to make them reconsider.