22 hours ago, Firebird TMK said:

I've been playing Rebels since the early days of 1.0. Never been the best player, but I've had fun. Even in later 1.0 with all the abusive builds around.

FFG sold 2.0 as the solution for the problems of 1.0. More balance, they said. Fewer abusive combos, they said. Less token stacking, dice modifications and other shenanigans, they said. So I bought into it. And I've tried to play in that spirit. Minimum upgrades. Emphasis on maneuvering. Etc.

I believe FFG has not delivered what it promised. Abusive combos, token stacking and excessive dice modification are still prevalent. And factions are WAY out of balance. Result: almost every game I've played has been a negative play experience. Even when I've ended up winning.

I've considered looking for, or trying to come up with, the most abusive, WAAC Rebel list I could find. One highly likely to produce NPEs. But I don't want to play that way. Didn't play that way in 1.0 either.

So, Rebel players, is it worth continuing to play before the upcoming "rebalance"?

Your own team mate, Brian, has done some amazing things with 3 B-Wings and Biggs. Took Dale Cromwell, one of the best players in the world to a nail biter of a game that could have ended either way about 5-6 times.

Heck, I took a crappy Rebel list that included Luke Gunner (the most expensive upgrade and not very good) to Mynock just to win a bounty and still went 4-2. Rebels are just stuck on Wedge is their problem.

22 hours ago, Firebird TMK said:

I've been playing Rebels since the early days of 1.0. Never been the best player, but I've had fun. Even in later 1.0 with all the abusive builds around.

FFG sold 2.0 as the solution for the problems of 1.0. More balance, they said. Fewer abusive combos, they said. Less token stacking, dice modifications and other shenanigans, they said. So I bought into it. And I've tried to play in that spirit. Minimum upgrades. Emphasis on maneuvering. Etc.

I believe FFG has not delivered what it promised. Abusive combos, token stacking and excessive dice modification are still prevalent. And factions are WAY out of balance. Result: almost every game I've played has been a negative play experience. Even when I've ended up winning.

I've considered looking for, or trying to come up with, the most abusive, WAAC Rebel list I could find. One highly likely to produce NPEs. But I don't want to play that way. Didn't play that way in 1.0 either.

So, Rebel players, is it worth continuing to play before the upcoming "rebalance"?

I'm playing exclusively Rebel since 2.0 came out, 30 games or more. It's a ton of fun.

Playing only rebels in 2.0. Was hard until I found right combination of pilots, tried things like double U-wings and stuff. Win rate was around 50%. Once I found list that fits my play stile and stopped doing stupid mistakes like putting Wedge into all the enemy arcs at the same time, I started winning and consistently beating bomber spam and other top lists.

You have to find the list for you, and you have to unlearn your 1.0 prejudices.

I think Rebels are sort of dull but not bad. I dont want to fly Selflessness B-Wings with Biggs, but its a quite good list.

Trick question: if a rebalance does not fix the desired items / ships / etc... do you stop playing for another 3 months? What if it boosts other factions instead, like lowering the cost of the Jumpmaster, for example?

Best to enjoy the game as is and unlearn / relearn new tricks. Just a thought.

6 hours ago, ficklegreendice said:

I mean, I would not disagree that scum are stronger, but these examples don't serve any purpose

Wedge v Fenn is a ridiculous points difference. Rau HAS to be better, he's 16(!) points more!

As for Dutch and Kavil...they're not even remotely similar. That's a support pilot v a combat pilot. You're better off comparing Norra to kavil

Kavil probably wins but FAR moreso due to gunner Han than anything

Scum is strong imo far more so because of guys like palob or boba and upgrades like gunner Han, things they uniquely possess

I think it’s fair to say that gunner Han, Boba, and Palob will be getting a points adjusment. I wouldn’t be surprised to see gunner Han bump up to 8 or 10 points, Palob’s probably going to end up around 42 pts, and Boba will probably push closer to 85.

Is it worth continuing to play in general? Yes

Is it worth continuing to play Rebels? Eh

People will say the faction is not bad and it's just that the other factions are better, but, I'm sorry, if you are the weakest of the available options, you are bad. It's just a question of to what extent. Even then, the problem is less quality and more that the powerful elements of other factions (Scum and Empire) involve the most aggressively unfun things to play against (tugs, stress control, auto-damage, super alphas). So it's an uphill battle, but once you're overcome that and get to the top of the hill, you just see how dumb it was that you even had to climb it. The fact that there are certain ships that I have to alpha off the table just to get to the point where I can play the game doesn't leave me wanting to play the game more and it's that little bit of salt in the wound that you have very little to match it.

Rebels can certainly win, and if you like the game, you should keep playing, but I'm not going to give you a sunshine and roses depiction of Rebels or their spot in the current meta and I'm almost certainly going to play resistance just to tide me over.

Isn't this just a top table problem?

From what I've seen, 99% of games are almost entirely decided by gameplay decisions. Or dice....

Sure, if you want to win a multi regional, 100+ player event, you need a 'meta' squad. But then you're not just ignoring Rebels, you're ignoring 90% of everything.

If you simply want to enjoy the games you play at even a decently competitive level, then you need to put some thought and some practice into what you choose to do that with. This is true of any choice that isn't in that top 10% bracket. ****, that bracket is probably even sub 5%.

While Scum and Empire certainly have things that are easier to just put on the table and fly, Rebels are not short of things that can perform, if you're willing to get down and really figure out what you're doing.

True, you'll struggle, as an average player, if you put them up against that top bracket in a highly competitive setting. But isn't that true of most options across all factions?

Rebels certainly need more consideration than Scum or Empire, but they're not a lost cause unless you're wanting to WAAC. At which point, what does the faction choice really even matter?

From my perspective, I like independent, reactive ships, so Rebels are unattractive to me. Perhaps that is more the issue. Rebels compete via thought and synergy, not by being independently powerful and free in their decision tree.

If you want Rebels to work for you, you have to work for them. The rewards seem to be there for them, the same as they are for more creative squads in other factions.

Otherwise you just say **** it and throw down the monsters that are currently proving themselves to operate well without all the headscratching.

This complaint seems to me to be that Rebels don't currently have a netlist. Which kinda makes me think get a grip and ask yourself why you even play.

And perhaps excuse the rant, I've had beer.

2 hours ago, MasterShake2 said:

Even then, the problem is less quality and more that the powerful elements of other factions (Scum and Empire) involve the most aggressively unfun things to play against (tugs, stress control, auto-damage, super alphas). So it's an uphill battle, but once you're overcome that and get to the top of the hill, you just see how dumb it was that you even had to climb it. The fact that there are certain ships that I have to alpha off the table just to get to the point where I can play the game doesn't leave me wanting to play the game more and it's that little bit of salt in the wound that you have very little to match it.

Rebels can certainly win, and if you like the game, you should keep playing, but I'm not going to give you a sunshine and roses depiction of Rebels or their spot in the current meta and I'm almost certainly going to play resistance just to tide me over.

uh...resistance isn't going to make the unfun things go away...or be any better than rebels

their capabilities are not that different, and the resistance has like two apparently "busted" pilots (poe and rey) which is far less than Rebels sported (before their point costs were revealed)

12 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

uh...resistance isn't going to make the unfun things go away...or be any better than rebels

their capabilities are not that different, and the resistance has like two apparently "busted" pilots (poe and rey) which is far less than Rebels sported (before their point costs were revealed)

It's soemthing to mess around with for a month until January and that's all I'm looking for. Rebels are boring.

Stuff like this is the reason I started playing multiple factions in 1.0 I almost quit the game when Scum was the bottom faction (before Jm5k) and all I had was Scum.

My advice is: if your faction no longer 'feels right' to you, try another faction, it might give you what you need.

5 hours ago, Cuz05 said:

Isn't this just a top table problem?

From what I've seen, 99% of games are almost entirely decided by gameplay decisions. Or dice....

Sure, if you want to win a multi regional, 100+ player event, you need a 'meta' squad. But then you're not just ignoring Rebels, you're ignoring 90% of everything.

If you simply want to enjoy the games you play at even a decently competitive level, then you need to put some thought and some practice into what you choose to do that with. This is true of any choice that isn't in that top 10% bracket. ****, that bracket is probably even sub 5%.

While Scum and Empire certainly have things that are easier to just put on the table and fly, Rebels are not short of things that can perform, if you're willing to get down and really figure out what you're doing.

True, you'll struggle, as an average player, if you put them up against that top bracket in a highly competitive setting. But isn't that true of most options across all factions?

Rebels certainly need more consideration than Scum or Empire, but they're not a lost cause unless you're wanting to WAAC. At which point, what does the faction choice really even matter?

From my perspective, I like independent, reactive ships, so Rebels are unattractive to me. Perhaps that is more the issue. Rebels compete via thought and synergy, not by being independently powerful and free in their decision tree.

If you want Rebels to work for you, you have to work for them. The rewards seem to be there for them, the same as they are for more creative squads in other factions.

Otherwise you just say **** it and throw down the monsters that are currently proving themselves to operate well without all the headscratching.

This complaint seems to me to be that Rebels don't currently have a netlist. Which kinda makes me think get a grip and ask yourself why you even play.

And perhaps excuse the rant, I've had beer.

The complaint is that there's a substantial and notable faction imbalance which is definitely showing through in the competitive standings. The assumption that high level competitiveness doesn't influence casual play is fundamentally flawed. Even if you're just joe schmo tossing together a list for casual night, it would be really hard to not see how powerful some of the scum and imperial elements are compared to the Rebels and even when they're not net listing, Rebels will have to deal with these elements and it's just an uphill battle. Then there's also the classic "cheese" factor where some elements become so toxic to a casual game that they're frowned upon and in turn create a toxic community.

TL:DR the faction is not alright(tm), it is provably weaker than it's contemporaries in key areas that affect all aspects of play and skilled maneuvering will only go so far to overcome it.

1 hour ago, MasterShake2 said:

The complaint is that there's a substantial and notable faction imbalance which is definitely showing through in the competitive standings. The assumption that high level competitiveness doesn't influence casual play is fundamentally flawed. Even if you're just joe schmo tossing together a list for casual night, it would be really hard to not see how powerful some of the scum and imperial elements are compared to the Rebels and even when they're not net listing, Rebels will have to deal with these elements and it's just an uphill battle. Then there's also the classic "cheese" factor where some elements become so toxic to a casual game that they're frowned upon and in turn create a toxic community.



TL:DR the faction is not alright(tm), it is provably weaker than it's contemporaries in key areas that affect all aspects of play and skilled maneuvering will only go so far to overcome it.

Until I see Lando and ARC Norra everywhere instead of Wedge and Thane, I'm not necessarily convinced that Empire and Scum are definitively better than Rebels. I honestly don't think people have played either of those ships long enough to realize how stupid they can truly be - mostly because Boba and Redline/Whisper are much more obvious.

Aus nats list that went 6-0. Seems you can do well with rebels if you don’t suck

(30) AP-5
Points 30

(42) Jan Ors
(12) Moldy Crow
(1) Trick Shot
Points 55

(52) Wedge Antilles
(1) Trick Shot
(0) Servomotor S-foils
Points 53

(62) Luke Skywalker
(0) Servomotor S-foils
Points 62

Total points: 200

This list is straigh on point, less upgrades, more ships, you can fit lots of good ships in rebel list, if you forgo loading them with upgrades (Moldy crow is too cheap and need fixing too)

1 hour ago, Dreadai said:

Aus nats list that went 6-0. Seems you can do well with rebels if you don’t suck

(30) AP-5
Points 30

(42) Jan Ors
(12) Moldy Crow
(1) Trick Shot
Points 55

(52) Wedge Antilles
(1) Trick Shot
(0) Servomotor S-foils
Points 53

(62) Luke Skywalker
(0) Servomotor S-foils
Points 62

Total points: 200

Scum and Empire players: "No. That's not true. That's impossible!!!!!"

From a design design standpoint if I were making 2.0 with the ability to adjust point costs... I would start 2.0 off with Rebels being slightly over costed and correct during the first point adjustments. Get the player base to try new things, but not lose rebel only players.

I'm having much more fun with 2.0 than I was with 1.0, even as a (former) mostly rebel player.

Remember before the 2.0 launch when we were all worrying about Wedge not costing enough or Luke gunner breaking the game?

On 11/23/2018 at 1:26 PM, MalusCalibur said:

Whatever 2.0's faults may be, it doesn't even come close to the flaming wreckage that was the latter days of Nym/Miranda/Ghost/Fenn et al. I was as cynical and grumpy as one can be by that point, and had my fair share of reservations/concerns about 2.0 - but so far every 2.0 game I've played has been won or lost on gameplay decisions, not listbuilding ones or faction choice, and no game has ever felt hopeless or a waste of time by the first engagement, as so many were at the end of 1.0.

If you are seriously asking if you should even bother to play the game when your faction is perhaps slightly under the power curve overall, then the answer is no, you shouldn't - because if you're going to have that kind of reaction to a negligible difference in 'competitiveness', perhaps X-Wing isn't a game you're suited to playing in the first place.

Slightly is a good joke though. Have you taken a look at that new list juggler replacement site? We are not that far into the meta and you see nearly no one playing Rebels, and those who do, even with the few passable lists they do have are not exactly doing great.

On 11/23/2018 at 6:13 PM, LordVogl said:

Good grief. Rebels are NOT BAD by any stretch of the imagination. All these Rebel ships are buth fun AND good.

Supernatural Luke (really stands out with a proton torp)

ARC Norra

Lt. Blount

Hera with Saw crew

Han Solo: starting with crew R2 and Lone Wolf. Flavor to you like.

Lando Calrissian: start with Nien Numb crew.

Miranda with Barrage rockets and proton bomb

Shethepedes! AP-5! Fenn Rau!

Sabine

I'm sure there is more. 2e is only 3 months old.

Of those you list, Sabine and Luke are the only ones that are actually competitive. You forget Wedge, who also is playable.

Some of those you do list are indeed horribly overcosted or have subpar equipments options.

It is fair to say that rebels have less 'super-efficient' options at the moment.

They can be good in the hands of a competent player. Obviously.

Rebels simply have less 'super-efficient'(undercosted?) options like Redline and Boba/marauder/Han-gunner etc.

I play mostly rebels *because* of this. Fun times. IMO.

16 hours ago, Dreadai said:

Aus nats list that went 6-0. Seems you can do well with rebels if you don’t suck

(30) AP-5
Points 30

(42) Jan Ors
(12) Moldy Crow
(1) Trick Shot
Points 55

(52) Wedge Antilles
(1) Trick Shot
(0) Servomotor S-foils
Points 53

(62) Luke Skywalker
(0) Servomotor S-foils
Points 62

Total points: 200

hmmm. This list looks ok, but I think i prefer torps...

4 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

hmmm. This list looks ok, but I think i prefer torps...

I think the fact that it is three double modded 3 dice attacks, one of which is bumped to 4 all firing at i6 or 7 makes it pretty strong. I’m going to give it a go this week!

6 hours ago, Dreadai said:

I think the fact that it is three double modded 3 dice attacks, one of which is bumped to 4 all firing at i6 or 7 makes it pretty strong. I’m going to give it a go this week!

How is that list all firing at i6 or 7? Not seeing it?

21 hours ago, ForceM said:

Slightly is a good joke though. Have you taken a look at that new list juggler replacement site? We are not that far into the meta and you see nearly no one playing Rebels, and those who do, even with the few passable lists they do have are not exactly doing great.

So because the faction isn't getting used as much at the very top of 'competitive' X-Wing, said faction is such unplayable garbage that everyone who plays them just shouldn't bother until the points adjustment? Because that's what the OP is suggesting, and it's ludicrous.
I despise those list-gathering sites for that reason - people see certain lists doing well and just copy them, taking the information there as gospel despite the fact that not every game one plays is going to be the creatively starved 'meta' of tournament play. Personally I couldn't care less what some tryhard on the other side of the world is doing in a tournament. I'll build my own lists and make my own conclusions, and thus far in 2.0 nothing is an auto-loss against anything else, so experimentation should be encouraged rather than just parroting 'the meta' as an excuse not to try.