Heres a funny idea that I had ppl lose their mind for suggesting in a previous thread.

Remove cards and put all information on the app, and at tournaments require players to print 2 copies of their list.

Games Workshop did this with Armybuilder, and I have seen a few warmachine/hordes builders that follow the same standard.

With all information on the app they could tone down whatever has a crazy op interaction with another card without having to overcost the card into oblivion.

But it worked for 2 big tabletop companies so surely it won’t work here(I eagerly await the overreacting post that claims I want X-Wing to become a video game)

25 minutes ago, DakkaDakka12 said:

Heres a funny idea that I had ppl lose their mind for suggesting in a previous thread.

Remove cards and put all information on the app, and at tournaments require players to print 2 copies of their list.

Games Workshop did this with Armybuilder, and I have seen a few warmachine/hordes builders that follow the same standard.

With all information on the app they could tone down whatever has a crazy op interaction with another card without having to overcost the card into oblivion.

But it worked for 2 big tabletop companies so surely it won’t work here(I eagerly await the overreacting post that claims I want X-Wing to become a video game)

That would require FFG to make an app that doesn't suck ***.

After playing a few games with and against the Resistance bomber, I’m also starting to have concerns that the devs are starting to backslide. Dropping a mine on someone after you maneuver, attacking twice with a 270 arc. It’s not game breaking stuff, but it feels a little too familiar.

10 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

Just stop.

Fine.

It wasn't a very productive post.

Nevertheless, it gets my gall rising when 3 months in, someone suggests that after burning the game to the ground that all of this was for naught. And that 3.0 will be the actual fix.

Buried in there is the truth as I see it. Hyperspace, as a limited pool of ships around which the "meta" is based is what this game needs. Having this pool be small and artificially curated means that the rest of the game (Extended and true casual) can finally be let off the hook as perfect versions of play, and maybe even get a little weedy in terms of creativity or imperfect ideas. It will also mean that "my ship isn't in the meta" just means it's not it's turn, not that it is inherently flawed.

I do still hate the new packaging, though.

5 hours ago, Vontoothskie said:

please take youre own advice

*your, and I urge you to do the same

7 hours ago, Vontoothskie said:

please take youre own advice

I did. I've said my piece on the topic, too often even.

If a local community is too stupid to play both formats and a player falsely believes he has to commit 100% to one format - well, then that local community sucks.

Only few complaints are legitimate, and they are drowned out by all whining about problems that have nothing to do with FFG. FFG is not responsible for anyones social skills, friendliness or ability to communicate.

Speaking of which, I missed your post because you're still the proud owner of longest member of my ignore list.

13 hours ago, JasonCole said:

You are made of lies. The new packaging is very aesthetically pleasing. Old solid clamshell blisters are garbage. All hail our new consumerist overlords!

Taste is purely subjective.

I, e.g. like the clean aesthetics of the new tokens, but feel the packages themselves are too plain, not very "star-warsy". To each their own, no need to be so aggressive.

But, one of the problems I have with the new package is, that once opened, it is destroyed, you only can have the ship and the base+pin there. With the old clamshell you could have the model, 2 pegs, base, all inserts for every pilot and the assembled dial stored in one place.

6 hours ago, Tvboy said:

After playing a few games with and against the Resistance bomber, I’m also starting to have concerns that the devs are starting to backslide. Dropping a mine on someone after you maneuver, attacking twice with a 270 arc. It’s not game breaking stuff, but it feels a little too familiar.

Perhaps superficially familiar

The fact that the Res bomber a.) Can't reposition natively, b.) Has LOW initiative on Edon, c.) Edon can only have mines detonate during his activation, where bombs can still be dodged (see his low Initiative), d.) has a piddly two die turret instead of 3 dice that ignore range bonsuses, e.) still has a 90 degree dead zone in his rear where the bomb comes from OR 180+ degrees if he's set up like a firespray, d.) has no defensive mods nor regen...

Yeah, superficial similarities at the very worst

Ffg learned a lot from 1st Ed; just culling the 360 turret bull is objective proof enough. Plus, the base redesign opened up design space for things such as Graz's ability

I personally think they could've gone FURTHER, but we haven't even got our first balance patch yet

On 12/29/2018 at 9:39 PM, Slugrage said:

Wait. Just to clarify here, are you (the OP) suggesting that Kylo Ren TIE Silencer with Supernatural Reflexes, and Snoke in an Upsilon is too powerful at 163 of your 200 points? Or am I misreading how you're setting up the combination. If I'm totally wrong here, what's the complete squad list that you feel is out of control? (Yes, it's late and I'm tired and probably not seeing the obvious here...)

Starkiller Base Pilot (56)
Supreme Leader Snoke (13)

Kylo Ren (82)
Supernatural Reflexes (12)

Total: 163

View in Yet Another Squad Builder 2.0

Add primed thrusters to Kylo and Phasma to the Upsi. Also, I sometimes see the "get an action on taking damage" Upsi pilot. It's your whole list, but Kylo is untouchable when flown competently. The Upsi is much more resilient than it looks.

The pre move reposition with perfect knowledge needs to cost an extra 40 or so IMO.

I didn't intend for this to be a 2.0 already sucks thread. IMO 2.0 is great. Hyperspace is great. There are just a few things that I felt were problematic in v1 that are slipping into v2. I was curious what others thought.

On 12/30/2018 at 2:12 AM, DakkaDakka12 said:

Heres a funny idea that I had ppl lose their mind for suggesting in a previous thread.

Remove cards and put all information on the app, and at tournaments require players to print 2 copies of their list.

Games Workshop did this with Armybuilder, and I have seen a few warmachine/hordes builders that follow the same standard.

With all information on the app they could tone down whatever has a crazy op interaction with another card without having to overcost the card into oblivion.

But it worked for 2 big tabletop companies so surely it won’t work here(I eagerly await the overreacting post that claims I want X-Wing to become a video game)

Then I’d have to print out a new list every time I tweak my jank or make a new casual list (of which I have a lot).

Though I guess it would same me endless sorting and searching of cards every time I switch which lists I bring.

2 hours ago, RittsMJ said:

. There are just a few things that I felt were problematic in v1 that are slipping into v2. I was curious what others thought.

This might be an unfortunate inveitablility since, as I said, i don't think ffg went far enough with the revamp (def should've incorporated some Armada stuff like range dice and objectives)

There's only so much design space open, even with the base revamp, before we start sliding back into potential first Ed mechanics for lack of alternative

ATM, however, we're not quite there yet. I do wish just about everything were more action dependent (such as howlie/Jonus/Drea only working "when focused"), but the closest we got is fanatic being a sorta/not really expertise

1 hour ago, ficklegreendice said:

This might be an unfortunate inveitablility since, as I said, i don't think ffg went far enough with the revamp (def should've incorporated some Armada stuff like range dice and objectives)

There's only so much design space open, even with the base revamp, before we start sliding back into potential first Ed mechanics for lack of alternative

ATM, however, we're not quite there yet. I do wish just about everything were more action dependent (such as howlie/Jonus/Drea only working "when focused"), but the closest we got is fanatic being a sorta/not really expertise

Armada has its own problems. There is a reason why it isn't as popular as X-wing and it is not because X-wing came out first. Back in the announcement of Armada there was a buzzword talking point that was used by the marketing teem and adopted by many enthusiastic fans and that was refinement , and it couldn't have been a more inept choice of word if they tried (seriously innovation would have been more fitting).

The game often last twice as long as am average game of X-wing. Which would be understandable as the play area is twice as large but the game is limited to 6 turns. Imagine playing X-wing with a limit of 6 turns. Armada also had their own versions of TLTs/Jumpmasters in the form of Flotillas. Activation count was needed so much in the meta that these cheap support ships became the most valuable ship in the fleet and the big capital ships, the very draw of Armada, were only played if you didn't care if you won and odds are you were going to lose. Also the design of squadrons, FFG didn't' leave them with much design room as they were just one card and to upgrade them would be to get a whole different card (and only aces had defense). Granted they were not the focus but the balance between them has always been a precarious one. Either they were a complete waste of points and never taken, or they were so dominating that you would flood your list with flotillas to get the most squadron commands out there.

If there ever was a Star Wars game that FFG made in need of a 2nd edition, Armada is that game! However X-wing is the more popular game therefore it gets more attention and development than Armada. Not to say Armada doesn't have its qualities, the defense tokens were a nice choice, the scale is great, and the base tiles keeping track of activation's is great. The objective system is rather intricate in the game (wish campaign did more with the type of missions). But it has a lot of missed opportunities, hyperspace for squadrons, planetary invasions, being able to discard Ozzel when he fails and get a bonus for it (not to mention your best Vader impersonation). I would be interested if they did Armada 2nd edition, but X-wing should not become like Armada.

10 minutes ago, Marinealver said:

The game often last twice as long as am average game of X-wing. Which would be understandable as the play area is twice as large but the game is limited to 6 turns. Imagine playing X-wing with a limit of 6 turns. Armada also had their own versions of TLTs/Jumpmasters in the form of Flotillas. Activation count was needed so much in the meta that these cheap support ships became the most valuable ship in the fleet and the big capital ships, the very draw of Armada, were only played if you didn't care if you won and odds are you were going to lose. Also the design of squadrons, FFG didn't' leave them with much design room as they were just one card and to upgrade them would be to get a whole different card (and only aces had defense). Granted they were not the focus but the balance between them has always been a precarious one. Either they were a complete waste of points and never taken, or they were so dominating that you would flood your list with flotillas to get the most squadron commands out there.

Geeze, this is all extremely wrong.

7 minutes ago, svelok said:

Geeze, this is all extremely wrong.

You forgot to use the last meme

but yeah what was wrong with what I said? Oh you didn't agree with it and Armada is a refined game of X-wing, except for it isn't.

so yeah everything being subjective lets talk about what is not subjective.

• Armada has less players than X-wing, therefore the less popular game.
• An average game of Armada take way longer than your typical game of X-wing
• Armada gets less development than X-wing.

You cannot argue against those points as data and statistics can easily be obtained to back these points up. So saying that X-wing 2.0 should have been closer to Armada, I would say don't throw caution to the wind here. Armada is not a shining beacon of tabletop success, that doesn't make it a bad game. It is just Armada has its own problems, we can go on forever on what those problems are but there is a whole forum for that else where.