2 minutes ago, svelok said:

You have correctly identified why parking-brake Han is bad for the game.

I get where your coming from. We're just not going to agree on that point.

If you are building a list and all you bring to the table is 3 bodies and some mods, its a bad list problem, not a Han problem. You gotta have something that makes you list stand out, or a lot more bodies.

54 minutes ago, kris40k said:

I get where your coming from. We're just not going to agree on that point.

If you are building a list and all you bring to the table is 3 bodies and some mods, its a bad list problem, not a Han problem. You gotta have something that makes you list stand out, or a lot more bodies.

This actually explains a lot. IMO, three ship lists should be able to come in a variety of forms, but at their simplest, that can be maneuverability and higher Init.

Your belief in need for a gimmick for those kinds of lists to be respectable probably explains why you don’t mind Fat Han (and I tend to think results have proven that wrong to some extent, though more in hyperspace). There’s nothing wrong with that philosophy, but that goes back to Boom Owls post above, in which case you are correct, people of those different philosophies won’t agree.

1 hour ago, kris40k said:

What else does your proposed list do? Does it Stress? Strain? Tractor? Ionize? Remove obstacles? Create obstacles? What is your list's shtick and how can you leverage it to debilitate the one major threat on the board while a 2 attack A-Wing buzzes around it trying to hand it Focus tokens while not getting exploded?

If the only thing your list brings to the table is 3 3-die arcs and some mods, you lost the fight at the list building stage.

Im assuming you take some damage while taking the A-wing off the board to score some initial points, or it does some damage to you. I'm looking at things that are roughly the same cost as 150ish points of Fat Han, which is often 3x3 dice ships that night have some nice minor abilities, but rarely something like double mods combined with the maneuverability to keep up with Fat Han.

Unless you're saying it's fair to put 200 points against Fat Han and assume his wingman does nothing at all.

9 hours ago, AlexW said:

Lists that narrow the meta by forcing players to bring options “A” or “B,” even if A and B are very strong counters, are generally really bad for the game.

The hope for 2.0 was always that counters didn’t rely heavily on list building.

This is why I violently hated Tripsilon unlike anything since peak Dengaroo.

@kris40k I appreciate the notion of bringing in unusual or underused options. I love weird, I love jank. However some things close off as many options as they open. And though I’m a profligate seismic Striker player, I am wary that this Han may close off many options.

6 hours ago, kris40k said:

I get where your coming from. We're just not going to agree on that point.

If you are building a list and all you bring to the table is 3 bodies and some mods, its a bad list problem, not a Han problem. You gotta have something that makes you list stand out, or a lot more bodies.

That is objectively untrue for Hyperspace. There are several people bringing XXY or tripleT70s or 2ARCs+1Delta or 1ARC+2Deltas . They are all ships without anything special. The Jedis can double mod, and so can some T70s, but that's about it.

If you don't think that this is desirable for the game then there is no way that we'll agree.

We Xwing players, tcgplayer website Magic players, Street Fighter players reacting to the first "Play to Win" memorandum have finally come to realize we were all duped. Abusing the crap out of a game and trying to get it to its highest level of brokenness/powerfulness-in-"something-more" in the sake of winning more leads to a bad game. Not a good game. Variation of open list choices, ability to counterplea through skill (not list, not Luke-gunner shift) is what makes games more interesting. NOT the 1.0 Fat Han do everything abuse everything with ALL of the hallmarks of everything that was bad with 1.0. Want more evidence, look at modern starcraft 2.

1 hour ago, GreenDragoon said:

That is objectively untrue for Hyperspace. There are several people bringing XXY or tripleT70s or 2ARCs+1Delta or 1ARC+2Deltas . They are all ships without anything special. The Jedis can double mod, and so can some T70s, but that's about it.

If you don't think that this is desirable for the game then there is no way that we'll agree.

This example here, shows why kris' idea that lists need to be nutty degenerates is nonsensical and bad for the game.

8 hours ago, kris40k said:

I get where your coming from. We're just not going to agree on that point.

If you are building a list and all you bring to the table is 3 bodies and some mods, its a bad list problem, not a Han problem. You gotta have something that makes you list stand out, or a lot more bodies.

Nerf the utter bejeezus outta this combo. Its not even the matter of it doing well. It just makes the game unfun and dull. Maybe even consider completely rewriting some cards. Most of these cards are nutty busted for one ship, Kanan, Luke, they have NO possibility of being fair in 2ship lists.

1 hour ago, Flybywiresystem said:

Don't  worry You have been crying enough, so FFG is going to nerf that ship yet again.

I am pretty sure that we won't see the most iconic ship of Star Wars on any tournament table in late summer or f  all.

Mission accomplished!

 Now you ca  n  go back watching the Episode 9 trailer.

Great point, thank you for your contribution. I'm sure you will be a great addition to the community and will have a great time!

2 hours ago, Flybywiresystem said:

I am pretty sure that we won't see the most iconic ship of Star Wars on any tournament table in late summer or fall.

TIE Fighters are getting nerfed into oblivion? Why?!

Hey, guys...

I'm not saying that Intert Fat Han doesn't need some kind of fix... (It doesn't even play the same game), but I will argue that in principle, a large base ship is generally going to be at least a third, usually more than half of your list points....

That said, if FFg said they wanted to make "everything viable", then those people who enjoy super combo 2-ship lists HAVE to have something to use that at least somewhat competitive.

If nothing else, the FALCON is in the game, and with an I6 in the roster to boot, and should probably be able to to do more in competition than just blow up like a Resistance Bomber.

Summary: I'm in favor of super-combo crew cards and gunners and other upgrades that help large base turrets pull their weight in a list, barring anything that breaks the fundamentals of the game on multiple levels.

-A turret with perfect rotation knowledge? Fine by itself.

-A large base that can boost at I6? Fine as long as it's the only one.

-Regen shield if your damaged and maybe flip a crit? Fine.

-Stress removal +soft mods for 14ish points? Okay.

-hard stopping one or twice a game with perfect knowledge? Okay.

-conditional double rerolls? Okkayyyy......

-all of them at once?! Nope. Don't kill the ship or cards, just limit the mass of chaos that is the list above.

18 hours ago, Boom Owl said:

Ok so...there are a couple quick items people need to decide for themselves if its what they want to be available from a single ship in 2.0 X-Wing:

This is my disconnect with any nerf talk. I'm not deciding for myself. I either roll with what's out there or I quit playing. So, uh, I guess i do decide for myself.

31 minutes ago, Bucknife said:

just limit the mass of chaos that is the list above.

In my book all it really requires is this:

• Make Luke Gunner 32+ Points Again ( There is no reason for this to be 24 pts or to exist competitively )
• Fix the Kanan Dampener Rule Interaction on the Official Forum Post or Remove the Illicit

That leaves Han with tons of extremely powerful combo tools, specifically ( i6, white big boost, infinite rerolls, and infinite Regen ).

Possible that R2D2 Crew should scale in cost for Han but they worded that entire card wrong to begin with by not making it charge based so I dont know what they can really do there.

Myth : Han was available from the beginning and no one figured it out until now.
Reality : Inert Fat Han was made widely known by an official ruling on March 21st. Before that, the interaction was up to debate and a negative ruling would threaten the build.

Myth : No one saw Fat Han coming until the UK System Open on April 13th/14th 2019.
Reality : It had been played and discussed at least at around Krayt Cup, March 2nd 2019.

Myth : Han has 8 positions to end up in.
Reality : Han has 63 potential positions: stop+3boosts are 4, 3 red maneuvers, 14 maneuvers, plus 3 boost choices after each of these 14. So, 4+3+14+3*14 = 63. Obviously several will be blocked on each turn and many overlap due to the large base. But the 8 positions are only true once you know his maneuver . You can use Sense, Informant or Cassian to learn about his chosen maneuver, and then you can maybe block 4-5 of the 8 by blocking 1 well enough.

Myth : People are riled up and claim he's overpowered or He isn't overpowered because I beat him or Han is the underdog in this meta or He is 144pts, he should be that good.
Reality : It does not matter whether the Han build is too strong or not, and that means it doesn't matter whether you can and did beat him. What matters is that Han brings back several widely disliked characteristics of the first edition all at once , such as unlimited regeneration (R2-D2), full information maneuver change at i6 (inertial dampeners), 360° turrets (LukeGunner), large base white boost (engine upgrade), and that his win condition is to run for time as points fortress (144pts) after scoring some points.

Myth : Han is not an NPE because he is not overpowered.
Reality : Performance and NPE are not linked. See this recent post about NPEs for further explanation.

3 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

Myth : Han was available from the beginning and no one figured it out until now.
Reality : Inert Fat Han was made widely known by an official ruling on March 21st. Before that, the interaction was up to debate and a negative ruling would threaten the build.

Myth : No one saw Fat Han coming until the UK System Open on April 13th/14th 2019.
Reality : It had been played and discussed at least at around Krayt Cup, March 2nd 2019.

Myth : Han has 8 positions to end up in.
Reality : Han has 63 potential positions: stop+3boosts are 4, 3 red maneuvers, 14 maneuvers, plus 3 boost choices after each of these 14. So, 4+3+14+3*14 = 63. Obviously several will be blocked on each turn and many overlap due to the large base. But the 8 positions are only true once you know his maneuver . You can use Sense, Informant or Cassian to learn about his chosen maneuver, and then you can maybe block 4-5 of the 8 by blocking 1 well enough.

Myth : People are riled up and claim he's overpowered or He isn't overpowered because I beat him or Han is the underdog in this meta or He is 144pts, he should be that good.
Reality : It does not matter whether the Han build is too strong or not, and that means it doesn't matter whether you can and did beat him. What matters is that Han brings back several widely disliked characteristics of the first edition all at once , such as unlimited regeneration (R2-D2), full information maneuver change at i6 (inertial dampeners), 360° turrets (LukeGunner), large base white boost (engine upgrade), and that his win condition is to run for time as points fortress (144pts) after scoring some points.

Myth : Han is not an NPE because he is not overpowered.
Reality : Performance and NPE are not linked. See this recent post about NPEs for further explanation.

SMASHING THAT LIKE/THANK YOU BUTTON!

On 4/18/2019 at 4:50 PM, Boom Owl said:

🐈

13 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

Myth : Han was available from the beginning and no one figured it out until now.
Reality : Inert Fat Han was made widely known by an official ruling on March 21st. Before that, the interaction was up to debate and a negative ruling would threaten the build. 

On top of this, some number of folks probably went with the 1e ruling on Kanan and Inertial Dampeners. In 1e, Kanan couldn't remove the stress from ID. He could remove a stress if you'd been stressed when starting the whole process, but the ID stress only came after Kanan's opportunity to trigger, and there wasn't really much of a reason to suspect there'd be a change.

19 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

Myth  : No one saw Fat Han coming until the UK System Open on April 13th/14th 2019.
Reality : It had been played and discussed at least at around Krayt Cup, March 2nd 2019. 

Just to expand on this great post, it also took 2nd place at the previous system open at Adepticon.

1 hour ago, Boom Owl said:

In my book all it really requires is this:

• Make Luke Gunner 32+ Points Again ( There is no reason for this to be 24 pts or to exist competitively )
• Fix the Kanan Dampener Rule Interaction on the Official Forum Post or Remove the Illicit

That leaves Han with tons of extremely powerful combo tools, specifically ( i6, white big boost, infinite rerolls, and infinite Regen ).

Possible that R2D2 Crew should scale in cost for Han but they worded that entire card wrong to begin with by not making it charge based so I dont know what they can really do there.

Another option...

... something FFG hasn't shown any inclination to do...

... and maybe has even resolved against doing...

... create a Banlist.

Ban Kanan on Han, and ID becomes a cute trick with a large in-game drawback. Ban ID, and Kanan becomes an interesting alternative to Engine Upgrade (take Stealth Device with all Han's rerolls?). Falcon having an illicit is thematic and cute, so I don't necessarily want to eliminate it entirely.

There will no doubt be other nasty combos which show up in the future, and being able to just ban out one piece of them would be a nice balance tool.

24 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

... full information maneuver change at i6 (inertial dampeners),...

I'd say even that might have beeen acceptable, except that it's a maneuver change at I6 with no meaningful consequences .

I think the biggest thing about this build is the way it highlights several flaws all at once. Several of the cards involved should work differently by Second Edition's own design philosophy, but instead were released with wording that really needs an errata, but will more likely just get a points change.

Inertial Dampeners either should have required charges in addition to a shield (maybe during setup placing as many charges as you have shields?) or should have had text preventing shield regeneration with it attached.

Han either should have been charge-based or else had restrictions on which dice he could modify.

R2-D2 should have been charge-based.

15 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

Ban Kanan on Han, and ID becomes a cute trick with a large in-game drawback. Ban ID, and Kanan becomes an interesting alternative to Engine Upgrade (take Stealth Device with all Han's rerolls?). Falcon having an illicit is thematic and cute, so I don't necessarily want to eliminate it entirely.

There will no doubt be other nasty combos which show up in the future, and being able to just ban out one piece of them would be a nice balance tool.

Reverting the Kanan and ID interaction by FFG I don't think is enough (Ban Kanan on Han). ID isn't a "cute trick" on Han when he has R2D2 crew. He can still continue to stop as he desires, he'll just be stressed. That does stop the boosting after the 0 stop or actions in general after the stop, but because of R2D2 crew, he still has infinite stop decision at i6. Still a points increase likely necessary for R2D2 crew or no illicit for Rebel YT. I just don't see FFG fully banning cards for a specific interaction to occur, more likely points increase on Han, R2D2 crew, and/or reverting Kanan and ID interaction.

8 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

That is objectively untrue for Hyperspace.

Yes, and as I have said before, I do not find Hyperspace lists fun. The format is boring to me. I am happy though, that others have found enjoyment in it. I stick around in Extended, where we have access to everything and form interesting card combinations, aka ComboWing.

6 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

This example here, shows why kris' idea that lists need to be nutty degenerates is nonsensical and bad for the game.

First, stop using "degenerates", you sound like a **** Nazi*. Secondly, stop exaggerating what I was saying to absurdity. Having something your list does besides show up saying, "I got these cheeseburgers/Focus tokens!" is not bad for the game, its interesting.

Things that can change the shape of the battlefield like Seismics or Rigged Cargo Chutes, apply Stress, Strain, Tractors, etc., all of these things are all fun pieces to bring to the table, and expecting lists to have some sort of trick to them isn't a bad thing, however massed efficiency can be its own thing, as seen by swarms.

5 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

Great point, thank you for your contribution. I'm sure you will be a great addition to the community and will have a great time!

He actually has a bit of a point. I honestly believe that FFG's marketing team would love nothing more than to see Han in the YT-1300 and Luke Gunner on the final table at World's. There were quite a few things in 1E I had issue with (like all) such as TLT's, but when Ghost /Fenn was terrorizing the game, I was torn because the list was so **** thematic using all the pieces from Rebels together in an effective way. It was beautiful to see on the table, but bad overall for the game.

But that's thematic fluff, and while you always need to keep fluff in mind when balancing the game, you can't let completely get off the rails. Luke and Vader need to be able to be shot down by enough generics, for instance.

FatHan here is somewhat in the same boat, a very thematic list but people don't like the card interactions. I don't see the same sort of threat from it however, because there are so many ways of shutting down the threat (remove the obstacles with Seismics, remove his defense with Tractors, etc.) that I don't see it damaging the game in any way. It really just seems that people are against the idea that the list could exist, or ComboWing in general that they are wanting to shut it down. As said by many, the effectiveness of the list, or that it can be beaten, doesn't matter, just that it exists matters to them.

2 hours ago, Bucknife said:

That said, if FFg said they wanted to make "everything viable", then those people who enjoy super combo 2-ship lists HAVE to have something to use that at least somewhat competitive.

Honestly, if there was a RAC + Ace list that I could terrorize the tables with like in 1E, I would probably be doing it right now. Rebels just have the better pieces at the moment for that archtype of Centerpiece + 1.

*yeah, I Poe'd the conversation, bad me, oh well... I'm right

5 minutes ago, kris40k said:

Yes, and as I have said before, I do not find Hyperspace lists fun. The format is boring to me. I am happy though, that others have found enjoyment in it. I stick around in Extended, where we have access to everything and form interesting card combinations, aka Combowing.

Why do you want to play a bad card game instead of a good minis game?

Magic and other good card games involve amassing your combos, uncertainty if your opponent has a counter in hand, and timing. Games are also short, and often have a sideboard mechanic to limit the damage a combo does in a bad matchup.

In X-wing, you just start with the combo and use it whenever you want. If your opponent doesn't have a counter, they're just screwed. How is this a good game? How is this preferred to games where maneuvers are the primary interesting decision?

2 hours ago, Boom Owl said:

In my book all it really requires is this:

• Make Luke Gunner 32+ Points Again ( There is no reason for this to be 24 pts or to exist competitively )
• Fix the Kanan Dampener Rule Interaction on the Official Forum Post or Remove the Illicit

That leaves Han with tons of extremely powerful combo tools, specifically ( i6, white big boost, infinite rerolls, and infinite Regen ).

Possible that R2D2 Crew should scale in cost for Han but they worded that entire card wrong to begin with by not making it charge based so I dont know what they can really do there.

Honestly, I would probably like to see ID and R2-D2 crew changed to charge mechanics. Would remove the damage caused by ID however, leave the Stress.

I've learned to appreciate the charge mechanic on things like Collision Detector, BB-8, etc. By limiting them to 2 charges, you make the timing of their use more important to the shape of the game. Give them too many charges and you may as well make it unlimited, because if you really pay attention, you don't really need to use those things that often in a game to shape the outcome of it. But 1 charge often limits a card too much.

I'm not sure why they went with unlimited R2-D2 crew, except that they wanted to make it different than the astromech version and thematic and kind of goofed on the implementation.

As far as Luke, they can keep him expensive, he's unique, and should be playable. Having 360 turret on the board doesn't break the game until it starts doubletapping or throwing massive amounts of dice. Having multiple turrets can be an issue, so keeping it unique isn't game breaking.

37 minutes ago, RStan said:

Reverting the Kanan and ID interaction by FFG I don't think is enough (Ban Kanan on Han). ID isn't a "cute trick" on Han when he has R2D2 crew. He can still continue to stop as he desires, he'll just be stressed. That does stop the boosting after the 0 stop or actions in general after the stop, but because of R2D2 crew, he still has infinite stop decision at i6. Still a points increase likely necessary for R2D2 crew or no illicit for Rebel YT. I just don't see FFG fully banning cards for a specific interaction to occur, more likely points increase on Han, R2D2 crew, and/or reverting Kanan and ID interaction.

Maybe. My first thought is that the stress would be sufficient. And while R2-D2 can get more shields, ID still has a cost in terms of shields, making it a bit easier to put hull damage on Han.

Entirely possible it wouldn't be enough.

59 minutes ago, kris40k said:

I stick     around in Extended, where we have access to everything and form interesting c  ard combinations, aka ComboWing.

... ok. So your answer to BoomOwl's question (quoted below) is a resounding yes.

Then there is honestly no point for me in talking to you about this topic.

21 hours ago, Boom Owl said:

If  all of these things combined into one ship are your id  ea of what makes interesting 2nd Edition X-Wing Gameplay I can't and won't attempt to convince you otherwise. 

2 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

Myth : Han was available from the beginning and no one figured it out until now.
Reality : Inert Fat Han was made widely known by an official ruling on March 21st. Before that, the interaction was up to debate and a negative ruling would threaten the build.

Myth : No one saw Fat Han coming until the UK System Open on April 13th/14th 2019.
Reality : It had been played and discussed at least at around Krayt Cup, March 2nd 2019.

Myth : Han has 8 positions to end up in.
Reality : Han has 63 potential positions: stop+3boosts are 4, 3 red maneuvers, 14 maneuvers, plus 3 boost choices after each of these 14. So, 4+3+14+3*14 = 63. Obviously several will be blocked on each turn and many overlap due to the large base. But the 8 positions are only true once you know his maneuver . You can use Sense, Informant or Cassian to learn about his chosen maneuver, and then you can maybe block 4-5 of the 8 by blocking 1 well enough.

Myth : People are riled up and claim he's overpowered or He isn't overpowered because I beat him or Han is the underdog in this meta or He is 144pts, he should be that good.
Reality : It does not matter whether the Han build is too strong or not, and that means it doesn't matter whether you can and did beat him. What matters is that Han brings back several widely disliked characteristics of the first edition all at once , such as unlimited regeneration (R2-D2), full information maneuver change at i6 (inertial dampeners), 360° turrets (LukeGunner), large base white boost (engine upgrade), and that his win condition is to run for time as points fortress (144pts) after scoring some points.

Myth : Han is not an NPE because he is not overpowered.
Reality : Performance and NPE are not linked. See this recent post about NPEs for further explanation.

1. Fat Han has always been available. People just thought that one 140ish points ship wasn't able to win tournaments anymore. There were large threads about him right here, on this board. Better play "Slim Han", or don't play the Falcon at all. That's what most people said. Kudos to the guy who finally brought Fat Han to a large tournament and won, while most people were still playing 4 Sigmas or Lieutenant Tavson.

2. Yes, it had been played there. Let's check the results. Rank 44 with 3 wins? Am I reading this correctly? How could an OP ship perform so.... average? It should have won, since it's amazingly overpowered (and sky is falling).

3. Wow, are you really counting all the possible positions now? Oh my goodness... this is ridiculous. But okay, let's play that game. How about the Phantom? It can decloak into 3 possible directions and then use its full dial and after that it could still barrel roll (or boost via upgrade). Have you ever counted all these end positions? 3 ways of decloaking x 17 maneuvers on the dial... that's 51 positions and we have not even started counting the barrell rolls and boost for all these options yet. So what? Does it mean, that it's even more OP and NPE than the Falcon?

4. Disliked characteristics.. like an iconic ship being good actually? Who says it's disliked? You and your 10 buddies, who have started this cry-over-an-iconic-ship thread?

5. Oh nice.. this link is a definition about NPEs.... written by you? Really? Maybe you should link someone else, not yourself and your buddies. Somebody neutral with a great standing would be much better.