Redline and Boba are too expensive...

Second edition and the split into Hyperspace and Extended has done more damage to the community than people are willing to accept, and dismissing others concerns over the format you prefer for whatever reason is deeply unhelpful.

Aces are far too cheap and FFG is simply stroking the egos of all the players that make decisions with perfect board knowledge and call it skill.

2 hours ago, RStan said:

Before 2nd Ed was fully released, he was reported to be a pilot of the TIE Defender. Bullet dodged?

I remember that. That would be horrifying. Like Tavson, but with an even better ability, in a TIE Defender.

4 hours ago, Dasharr said:

Valen Rudor's pilot ability is incredibly potent and would be broken on a better ship.

I miss him in a TAP, like he was in 1E.

1 hour ago, gamblertuba said:

Aces are far too cheap and FFG is simply stroking the egos of all the players that make decisions with perfect board knowledge and call it skill.

As opposed to just taking a 4-6 ship efficiency jousting list and then running at your opponent and then K-turning? K-turns that are now often white because of Leia? Yeah, right. Nothing stops people from taking Soontir, QD, or Poe with a 15 point bid. Why don't you and win every game, if moving last was such a massive advantage?

As for myself:

Reinforce needs to go back to being able to reduce damage to zero. It was hardly the only thing that made Auzitucks good, and without repositioning Ghosts and Decimators just get mulched. I'd never take either ship while there are lists like 5Ys running around. You can still flank the ship, and you can jam the token off.

TIE Advanced should have had an evade action, and its linked action should have been focus into red TL.

4 hours ago, Dasharr said:

I'm in no hurry for 2.0 epic because 1.0 epic was slow and boring.

2 hours ago, InterceptorMad said:

Epic is so boring it hurts.

Epic as a 300-point slug-n-slog to the last ship is boring.

Epic needs to be about missions and scenarios. That is it's strength.

1 hour ago, Darth Meanie said:

Epic as a 300-point slug-n-slog to the last ship is boring.

Epic needs to be about missions and scenarios. That is it's strength.

Except if you can get people who want to play missions, you can do a normal size mission game that takes up half the space and likely less than half the time.

Like, you'd never have gotten Epic going up here in Vancouver back when I played, because the go-to X-wing spots are small stores with relatively small playing areas, and we met up on Thursdays and only had about three hours of gaming.

Epic sounds great...as the occasional "Let's get together Saturday for something different" thing, but I think it's too logistically intensive to be the main "thing" in the community.

TLDR: Given a choice between two to three regular games or four-fifths of an Epic game, I'll take the former any day.

Faction-locking yourself, identifying as a faction, faction loyalty: these are all ridiculous and the only reason why you should ever do that is money. But 'list archetypes' and 'ship archetypes' can be found in most factions, so just play what you enjoy.

Another one: 5. Ships. Is. Not. A. Swarm. That's a miniswarm, you 1e wave9-14 2ship meta buffoons.

This thread should be in off-topic!

I have another one:

The current hype around RZ2-Awings, especially 5 Awings, will lead to many disappointments. It is not as easy and lots of people will waste their money because the beginning can be frustrating. And there are not as many of them around as the hype lets you think, specifically 5 Awings which are not some kind of meta-monster because of how few people are actually playing it. FortressAA, FalconAA, XXAA, and XAAA are much more frequently seen.

The comparison to 5 Yions is interesting because that list is not as difficult to play and also currently hyped over the top.

I have more fun with the Escalation mode than regular game !

1 hour ago, clockworkspider said:

Epic sounds great...as the occasional "Let's get together Saturday for something different" thing, but I think it's too logistically intensive to be the main "thing" in the community.

TLDR: Given a choice between two to three regular games or four-fifths of an Epic game, I'll take the former any day.

Yes, epic seemed to me like it added the worst parts of Armada to X-Wing without adding the good parts.

IMO there are exactly three good things about epic. One is that it looks nice on the table when you're used to only having a handful of ships at once. The second is feeling a little bit better about buying huge ships for a few cards because at least they're getting played once. The third good thing is when the game finally ends.

6 hours ago, RStan said:

Before 2nd Ed was fully released, he was reported to be a pilot of the TIE Defender. Bullet dodged?

"Invincible" is a strong word, but Valen on a Defender would be pretty close to invincible, and we don't need anything like those late 1.0 point fortresses in the game.

Oh, and another one:

The first edition from maybe wave 8, maybe wave 10, attracted and brought in people who liked the 360 turret passive mod combowing.

These are the same people who now dislike Hyperspace and 2.0 in general.

Pineapple is good on pizza.

Hyperspace is a luck based shitshow.

Ion cannons are good enough to be primary weapons.

Skull squadron fangs need a 3 point reduction.

7 hours ago, gamblertuba said:

Aces are far too cheap and FFG is simply stroking the egos of all the players that make decisions with perfect board knowledge and call it skill.

Amen.

2 hours ago, Captain Lackwit said:

Ion cannons are good enough to be primary weapons.

But probably not good enough to pay 5 points for if you already have a 3 primary weapon.

2 hours ago, Sunitsa said:

Hyperspace is a luck based shitshow.

Have you tried not jousting? I know it worked with Dash in 1.0, but charging your opponents head on actually has consequences in 2.0, especially hyperspace.

Here’s mine, and I think it’s only unpopular here:

more variance != less skill

Mitigating risk is one of skills required to succeed in 2.0. Having to make choices like whether to get out of arc or focus/tl up and try to kill the guy is what makes x wing interesting. This can be frustrating at times, when you do everything correctly and yet you still blank out, but passive mods aren’t the solution. You don’t get punished as harshly for making wrong decisions.

This all seems like commonsense, but if there’s one thing these forums lack it’s that.

Oh another one.

90% of the time, when someone says a ship/list/card is broken or op, it's because they just lost to it and that loss was nearly always their fault for bad decisions or flying. But sure, run to "but nerf it!" because you just flew your ships right at something and died.

14 minutes ago, Mattman7306 said:

Here’s mine, and I think it’s only unpopular here:

more variance != less skill

Mitigating risk is one of skills required to succeed in 2.0. Having to make choices like whether to get out of arc or focus/tl up and try to kill the guy is what makes x wing interesting. This can be frustrating at times, when you do everything correctly and yet you still blank out, but passive mods aren’t the solution. You don’t get punished as harshly for making wrong decisions.

This all seems like commonsense, but if there’s one thing these forums lack it’s that.

It's not unpopular, it's just incorrect. All increasing variance does is make it more possible to lose with good tactics and win with bad tactics and mistakes.