By nature I'm Team Puzzle but FFGs thundering incompetence means I'm usually on Team Nerf.

Puzzle.

Puzzle.

I assume they are testing the new factions against the current point values. So unless they intend for the new waves to be power creep they may want to wait on the nerfs till March or April.

Calling for nerf a month in just seems counterproductive

15 minutes ago, viedit said:

Depends on "the thing". Those dark couple weeks where Genuis + Trajectory Nym was starting to reach a critical mass of doom I was unable to solve the puzzle. I was definitely on "Team Nerf". If something just has a glaring and abusive mechanic that just completely destroys the ability for most players to enjoy the game it needs to be addressed.

But for a lot of other things...life finds a way.

I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. I can puzzle out a solution personally, while still thinking that it needs to be changed.

Part of it depends on the scope of the problem. If it's a problem with my list being too specialized or not being able to handle certain play styles, it's a puzzle. If a particular ship or combo requires that lists be built specifically to counter it, or else it's practically guaranteed to win, then it's definitely nerfworthy.

1 hour ago, BlodVargarna said:

Puzzle rises, and nerf to meet it.

Uh oh, looks like Snoke is SuBvErTiNg ExPeCtAtIoNs again I see, by teasing some great conflict/reveal/narrative change but chickening out and somehow simultaneously disregarding all previous plot points. XD

36 minutes ago, InterceptorMad said:

Puzzle 90% of the time, Nerf 10%

Username checks out!

Throw the Nerfherders in a Salarac Pit!

2 hours ago, Boom Owl said:

After you see something for the first few times do you assume it should be point adjusted up or nerfed because its good or feels difficult to play against? Or do you try to solve the puzzle?

If your both...are you more one than the other?

Hammers and saws. Use the right tool for the right job.
Sometimes the problem is point cost, and so raising or lowering points is appropriate.
Sometimes an ability or combo is unbalanced, and raising the cost just makes it unbalanced and expensive. May as well just ban the card at that point.

Usually I try to solve the puzzle, or "go around it". (Which is kinda the same thing) I used to be against changing abilities and points, but that ship sailed with 2.0.

56 minutes ago, InterceptorMad said:

Puzzle 90% of the time, Nerf 10%

I mean, I never really fully bought this whole "if something is powerful, just 'git gud' and learn to beat it." I mean, I was a successful 1.0 competitive player by most measures. When you see a dominant list, it's often not hard to find ways to counter and beat it. The problem, though, is that a lot of the times the counter to beat it will lose to other elements of the meta. So then you just start praying to the match-up gods. A better solution sometimes is to adjust the problematically dominant list, so that it's power is constrained in such a way that counter-building and counter-playing it won't necessitate severely handicapping yourself in the general meta.

Though, I realize the Rock-Paper-Scissors dynamic of X-Wing is part of the puzzle, and it's always been a part of X-Wing and 2.0 hasn't done anything that can change that. Nevertheless, if the scissors are less sharp and the rocks less tough and the paper less thick, well it creates more opportunities for aspects other than list match-up to influence the outcome of games.

[excuse the double-post]

[excuse the double-post]

Team Edward? Waitwaitwait no... Ravenclaw.

Team Balance ~ I want to always have the option to play any ship at any time. Even at this early point in 2.0, you already see ships being passed by for stronger efficiency and power ships/lists etc. So a little nerf and buff.

I have more jumpmaster builds now its bad than ever before. I think that puts me under Puzzle.

Team Puzzle unless it gets WAY too bad, but that hasn't happened at all for me since pre-nerf Genius. That was too much for me, and I played post-3JM5K.

1 hour ago, JJ48 said:

I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. I can puzzle out a solution personally, while still thinking that it needs to be changed.

Part of it depends on the scope of the problem. If it's a problem with my list being too specialized or not being able to handle certain play styles, it's a puzzle. If a particular ship or combo requires that lists be built specifically to counter it, or else it's practically guaranteed to win, then it's definitely nerfworthy.

This. It is entirely dependent on the problem.

Puzzle.

Generally i only call for a nerf if its a stars-aligning sort of thing or a tailored list to counter it. If its just flying a certain way, doesnt need a nerf usually.

I end up being team nerf more often than I'd like. Not that I go and demand nerfs online, just that I think something is unreasonably unbeatable. I can be a poor sport, which is something I've been trying to improve. When I can't defeat something after two or three tries, I often assume the deck is stacked against me.

In fairness I suppose, many times the deck is in fact stacked against me, due to whatever my own list is. I don't mind people saying the game was lost in the listbuilding phase. However, I'm not a tremendous fan of listbuilding as part of the "puzzle". My problem arises when people say "oh, if you want to beat Boba you need Sloane. Or Quadjumpers. Or..." Like, I want any ship to be able to beat any other ship with sufficient skill and it's an indicator of bad game design when we're completely overhauling lists to include one or two things just to tech against one or two other things. When listbuilding becomes a meta choice (building lists specifically to counter other meta lists) rather than just building what's good, it bugs me.

So I'd like to be team puzzle but sometimes the "fly one or two meta lists" tactics that some members of team puzzle resort to leave me stranded in no-man's land, and I end up quietly supporting team nerf.

I like to solve puzzles and come up with ways to beat something strong, if the best thing I can come up with to beat that strong thing is itself that's when I start seeing a problem, because a mono-meta is no fun for me. I like to have options or list building isn't a lot of fun and there's only one puzzle to solve that has one or a very few solutions. Beyond nerfs though there's nothing wrong with talking about point adjustments, there was no way ffg could possibly get it perfectly balanced on the first try, some points will go up and some will go down and that's a good thing for the game. Do I have opinions on where I think some adjustments will be made? Yes. Am I calling for total nerfs to ships or huge point increases? No. Second edition hasn't really warranted that so far in my opinion.

I really, truly do not understand the antipathy towards nerfs. Especially now that it simply means a price increase. If something is too good for its cost, it should be less good or cost more. If something costs too much for what it does, it should be made cheaper. I understand the desire to think your way around a problem but the proper solution for poor game balance is better game balance.

Obviously the trick is deciding whether any given card or card combo is actually too good for its cost or not. There is always going to be a correct answer to that question but good luck getting everyone to agree on it.

I'm just flummoxed by the number of people that argue immediately:

• It's not winning any tournaments
• It's not unbeatable
• I played "X" against it and I didn't have any problems
• Git gud!
• etc.

None of those have anything to do with whether a card is too cheap.

See I don't see this new way that points can go up or down as "nerfs".

For me to nerf something in a game is to change how it works/acts in the game. Which they are trying to get away from more and more now.

And thinking back to 1.0, my 90/10 split for puzzle/nerf fits, as one pilot or one list in a game needing one of it's components to be changed/reworded is still pretty rare compared to how many pilots and upgrades we had in 1.0.

5 hours ago, Ignithas said:

I am team buff.

You run all pilots naked

Look, team nerf is fine, but it doesn't really do anything. Our whining eventually makes a difference as it reaches the developers, but man is it annoying! And we have to put up with that whining for a looong time! I usually try to puzzle it out, but I admit I give FFG the benefit of the doubt way longer than I should sometimes.