So I played 1.0 and used the ffq’s and errata’s. When I bought into 2.0 I expected a stream lined rulebook that had been well play tested and learnt from mistakes of 1.0. That isn’t at all what has happened instead we now have another faq and updates scattered here there and everywhere. What’s really brought this to light for me is the dash double shot there are so many rules inconsistencies, yes it is possible but it’s clearly not attended. I feel let down that once again I’ve bought an invalid product, a rulebook which has already seen Errata and cards that have been Faq’d. Also the fact that they have aloud such a mind baffling interaction to be official is unbelievable they had a chance to say no that doesn’t work but it’s ok do what you want. I hope I’m not the only person that feels this way after spending hard earned money on what really is an incomplete product.

Well you might not be alone, but I'm not one to agree with you.

I got into 1.0 late and while I enjoyed the game there were ongoing issues that made the game feel broken. Those issues were driving players away from the game and the locals that I game with were looking forward to a more 'balanced' game of X-Wing that was less "pay to win."

I also had one of my friends participate in a pre-release test run and the game rules had changed from that play test.

The other factor going into 2.0 was that the card values are determined by a gaming app (software) as opposed to a written set of rules, and that implies that FFG is reserving the right to alter the rules and values with their software as need dictates.

The other issue is that even though X-Wing is changing to a 2.0 version the gaming company in charge of the game hasn't changed.

So the tools that we've come to expect from FFG (Rules updates and revisions and ongoing FAQ's) that have worked in the past should be expected.

I'm not shocked or surprised at the need of any FAQ's or Revisions because I'm expecting those publications.

It's still early in the release for 2.0 (for me) and I don't have a set of rules nor the conversion kits, but I'll have my copies soon. I have had a chance to play two official league games (with borrowed kit) and I'm enjoying the game so far. I like the changes that I'm seeing and appreciate the removal of elements that were detracting players from enjoying 1.0.

So for now, I will politely disagree with your premise.

“This miniatures game isn’t perfect. I’m going to play ___________, which is perfect.”

1 hour ago, Space warrior said:

Wow that was long winded

This is actually a relatively short response for me.

1 hour ago, Space warrior said:

. . . you clearly haven’t played enough or know enough about the game to have a(n) educated enough opinion.

It's true that I haven't experienced a ton of game play, but I've studied the rules, interacted with an active crowd and though I lack experience with X-Wing (period) my opinion is actually quite educated on this subject.

But it's also subject to change. That said, I'm still looking forward to many many hours of playing X-Wing 2.0 based on my current understanding of the game.

1 hour ago, Space warrior said:

Wow that was long winded lol you clearly haven’t played enough or know enough about the game to have a educated enough opinion.

Is there any need for that response at all?

It doesn't look at all like you're here to have a discussion. Sounds like you just want an echo chamber with people agreeing with you.

I've got to tell you, you won't find it with me.

I totally disagree with your whole premise.

No exception based ruleset where generic rules are explicitly overridden by card text will ever be free from complexity of interaction.

These sorts of games will always have some degree of FAQ and errata and I don't believe anyone ever promised otherwise.

If you can't see that we have all the ships from first edition, but with a drastic reduction in the amount of complexity and errata from the last days of first edition, I don't know what else to tell you.

With the competitive base this game has, like all games. It will have faqs and erratas if for no other reason than players will do everything possible to skirt around or find holes that are in the rules.I do think Ffg has done a reasonable job trying to keep the errors and other brokenness that were in 1.0 to the lowest they can. But competition is such that new ways to break the game will show up.

4 hours ago, Space warrior said:

So I played 1.0 and used the ffq’s and errata’s. When I bought into 2.0 I expected a stream lined rulebook that had been well play tested and learnt from mistakes of 1.0. That isn’t at all what has happened instead we now have another faq and updates scattered here there and everywhere. What’s really brought this to light for me is the dash double shot there are so many rules inconsistencies, yes it is possible but it’s clearly not attended. I feel let down that once again I’ve bought an invalid product, a rulebook which has already seen Errata and cards that have been Faq’d. Also the fact that they have aloud such a mind baffling interaction to be official is unbelievable they had a chance to say no that doesn’t work but it’s ok do what you want. I hope I’m not the only person that feels this way after spending hard earned money on what really is an incomplete product.

Roark is no Palob... Focus him down and he pops like a grape breaking Dash's double tap.

Why does everyone suddenly love the word premise? 😂

4 hours ago, TasteTheRainbow said:

“This miniatures game isn’t perfect. I’m going to play ___________, which is perfect.”

To be fair, this is an excellent way to make your point. Well played.

Hmmmm...

This thread is a perfect example of something being discussed over on this topic...

7 posts, reputation 1 says someone else hasn't played enough or know enough about the game to have an educated opinion?

Sounds like someone had an 0-3 night at their LGS. Haha

1.0 was a dieing game because it had severe flaws at its core (planted in wave 2 with unlimited 'if you can shoot me so do I'-attacks). The game was on its last legs and rightfuĺly so with how these things had spiraled out of control. 2.0 was the only way to survive, only because of how it reworks critically flawed systems. Enabling point changes is a smaller bonus on top of that.
The things that were absolutely necessary were accomplished. Everyrhing could have been handeled more smoothly and conveniently for us, but ultimately 2.0 was the only chance for a doomed game to even have a future.

On 12/5/2018 at 10:28 AM, Space warrior said:

Wow that was long winded lol you clearly haven’t played enough or know enough about the game to have a educated enough opinion

In other words "just in case someone was about to take me seriously, you definitely shouldn't, because I'm just a whiny jerk."

Thanks for clearing that up.

So what I'm getting out of this is that OP doesn't like errata and doesn't like "broken" combos like Dash+Han gunner+Roark.

To address the first, errata is a vital part of this game, and any game where printed cards trump the rule book. Interactions will pop up that were not originally intended, prompting errata to correct them. Happens in games like X-wing or MTG all the time. We need FFG to continue putting out updated errata or there can be no consistency for the game's tournament scene. It'd be left to Tournament Organizers to judge whether or not a combo or interaction should be allowed, resulting in a rapidly dieing competitive scene and a shrinking player base.

Regarding the second issue, combos like this while possibly unintended, don't mean the game is completely broken. The combo that was referenced, while strong, can be killed very easily by taking out a single 5 hp ship. most lists that feature the combo cannot fit a third ship, so we are not talking about a ridiculously durable list here either. I'm not saying the game is perfectly balanced, but it's not the raging dumpster fire some would like to paint it as.

Play-testing cannot catch every possible combo in the game. Once the game is released out into the wild, it goes from having maybe 50-100 people trying to break it, to having thousands to millions of people trying to break it. There will always be interactions that the devs never thought of, but some player will see, and possibly take a tournament with it. Situations like that play back into why we need errata as well. No errata means that the next busted combo can't be dialed back or removed at all. No errata in 1st edition probably would've killed the game as soon as we hit the truly broken original Jumpmaster combo of contracted scout+deadeye+guidance chips+plasma torps+extra munitions+r4 agromech X3, if the game lived long enough to get there at all.

FFG can change the point costs of both pilots and upgrades now, without the need for errata, reprints, or fix packs as we got in 1st edition. Power creep can be curtailed to a degree, and errata can be avoided when point tweaks are all that is needed for re-balancing. As a result, I feel this edition of X-wing has a much better shot of growing the community and player base. If one combo and the fact that errata exists is getting you down, I honestly have no idea why you bothered with getting into 2nd ed. If you played the 1st edition this should all be normal by now. Broken combo's, bomb or turret spamming, heaps of errata'd cards, and overwhelming power-creep were the hallmarks of 1st editions final months.

Oddly enough, with my utter lack of capability and experience I won the December LGS tourney.

Mind you, I was borrowing a team designed by a REALLY capable player and my first game, I was so sleep deprived that my forces were colliding with each-other for at least the first half of the match. But I still pulled of a win on that game.

And there were only three matches for December but I did go 3-0.

So, yeah, I clearly don't know anything about this game.

Next month will be a real test. I'll have my own kit and I'll have to design my own teams. (I have four ready to roll out already and I have them designed to help me learn and solidify my understanding of the rules over the next four months. Basically each team incorporates a more complex application of gaming mechanics).

And I DO finally have eight TIE Fighter (TIE ln) models so I'll finally be able to fly that swarm . . . .

All told, I think I'm more excited about this game than when I started responding to this thread!