5 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

Oh wait one: too much use of after you fully execute without the bumping another ship clause.

But, fully execute doesn't need a bumping clause, because that's what fully execute means.

'A ship fully executes a maneuver if it does not overlap a ship.' (rrg, p14)

Epic play

1 hour ago, President Jyrgunkarrd said:

Pilot Skill is much worse in 2.0 than it was in 1.0. For all of the griping about how VI was a necessary upgrade if your pilot could take it (and yes, it was), we're now stuck in the much worse alternative universe where VI doesn't exist and so the only viable ace small ship options have Initiative 6. Cool. I can either play with rookie swarms or I can play with a tiny number of aces who see play over and over and over because if you don't use those specific aces you'll never get a single round of shooting thanks to arc dodging. Yay.

1.0 killed itself with the JumpMaster fiasco and never recovered regardless of how many nerfs were later cranked out, and good riddance really, but 2.0 feels like a huge missed opportunity thanks to the decision that only Initiative 6 matters (kind of ironic given that the reason for tightening the range was to cut out the 'dead space' between PS 1 and 9. Except the 'dead space' actually mattered quite a lot due to the presence of VI...).

Well rebel Beef has has I3 and 4, quad phantoms is all I4 and 4-LOM and Unkar Plutt are I3 and 2. I think there are pilots below I5 that can still be relevant.

I used to, and probably still do, use high Initiave as a crutch, my first ever tournament list was Fenn, Guri, Old Teroch Each with Crackshot and a ten point bid, becuase I felt I needed to move last and shoot first, the. I got my are handed to me by some "Crappy" I3 RZ2-A wings.

My next tournament list was four I5 Scum Ships T.Bane. Nym, Kavil, Serrissu and no bid. I did better with that list than my Higher Initiave list.

Recently I've been practising with an I1 scum Control list (ion and tractor cannon Scyks, Quadjumpers and a G1-A with 000 for stress/Jam action.

I've been doing pretty well with all I1s, and predict my list will get cheaper following the point upgrade while alot of I6 and I5 pilots will go up in price (something that couldn't happen in X-Wing 1.0)

TLDR, It's not too bad atm and points adjustments should make it even more balanced going forward.

1.0 rewarded good flying much more than 2.0

Not always, of course (things like fat han for example definitely didn't), but overall dice variance was less impactful before so you were less prone to cold dice while outmanouvering your opponents

2 hours ago, Sunitsa said:

1.0 rewarded good flying much more than 2.0

Not always, of course (things like fat han for example definitely didn't), but overall dice variance was less impactful before so you were less prone to cold dice while outmanouvering your opponents

Good flying being rewarded more does mean higher initiave ships ought to cost a lot more as it is easier to fly well with more board information.

As well as denying your opponent the information of where you are going to be.

1. The hope of future variety for beloved ships. 2e can make weak ships playable with points adjustments, but a friend of mine really loves A-Wings, but hates that there's only two limited pilots. With the way that Aces/Veterans packs came out, you'd potentially see new options and pilots. New options and tricks are sometimes as important as being more playable in a tournament-sense.

2. It was a lot easier to tell if an opponent's list was legal, and you didn't have to remember what your bid was. Just count. Adjustable points are worth the trade-off, but it's worth acknowledging the trade-offs are there.

3. Epic existed.

4. The terminology of a "free action." I liked that there was a sense of your normal action in the perform action step, but other sources would be referred to as "free actions." Now, something like Pattern Analyzer will just say "perform one action." I've met folks unsure of whether this allows linked actions to be performed off of that one action (you can--only Advanced Sensors has a restriction on that). I wish the old "free action" or a new "bonus action" terminology was used.

4.b. This is a 2e quibble, more than something 1e got right: there should have been a better generic term for 'drop or launch' as well as a distinction between a normal 'device-placement-verb' and a bonus 'device-placement-verb.' Essentially, rewrite everything which has ever confused anyone about Deathfire.

//

But is this all true? We're at Wave 4 of 2e (mostly). At this point in 1e's history, the VT-49 and YT-2400 weren't out yet, Scum hadn't even been announced yet, and there was no Imperial Raider (so only one faction had any Epic ships). Interceptors and X-Wings had gotten extra ships from the GR-75 and Imp Aces, and Rebel Aces were on the way but not yet out.

Packaging. I understand having the standardized packaging, but there is no elegant way to open a second edition small ship box.

1 hour ago, Sunitsa said:

1.0 rewarded good flying much more than 2.0 

I know you've been through this discussion several times. I agree with you that in an individual game and an individual list, it can be the case that 1.0 rewarded it more. But not if we look at the game in its last two years as a whole.
If I understand you correctly, the hyper dice modification of 1.0 means that a good position gave reliable results, while 2.0 means you can get an amazing position and still end up without any result from it. I don't think that this is wrong by itself. But I think that this can't be expanded to mean 1.0 rewarded good flying much more than 2.0 because the other side of that hyper dice modification coin was that good flying ended up without any result from it. The prime examples are of course Soontir with autothrusters, token stack and palp. But there was also Miranda and other regen monsters, and of course all the 360° turrets that simply didn't care about their maneuvers.

All these elements mean that, overall , 1.0 did not reward good flying as much as 2.0.

I think the only thing 1.0 really had over 2.0 was that there was always something for you to buy for your faction. It may be a very esoteric ship, but at least you had something new.

Now, you pretty much don’t unless you enter the Clone Wars (I wound up doing it, but only because I got a steal on like new product). If you were an avid 1.0 player, 2.0 ceased to exist after wave 2. Including no way to get the new generic card content. No signs on the horizon for new content for the old factions (Resistance transport excepted, but they started with less ships than the FO).

That said, especially since we know epic 2.0 is on the way, I will never again play a 1.0 game. I even have PDFs saved of point values so that if the app/game ever did get end-of-lifed, I could continue to play 2.0.

31 minutes ago, ScummyRebel said:

I think the only thing 1.0 really had over 2.0 was that there was always something for you to buy for your faction. It may be a very esoteric ship, but at least you had something new.

This has nothing to with the merits of 1.0 as a ruleset and everything to do with the fact that it was a new game and had a ton of content to ship as new...

I recently got into the game, got me the Imps, Rebels and Scum conversion sets. Will slowly build my model collection. And I feel overwhelmed by the options and new content to play with.

2nd ed could easily fix the "something new to buy" issue that 1st ed set up for it with the fabled card packs

if FFG wanted to guarantee sales of said packs, all they'd have to do would be to stick new pilots for OT ships in there!

It'd be a nice move and also a fair alternative to having to re-purchase ships for new stuff

6 hours ago, President Jyrgunkarrd said:

Pilot Skill is much worse in 2.0 than it was in 1.0. For all of the griping about how VI was a necessary upgrade if your pilot could take it (and yes, it was), we're now stuck in the much worse alternative universe where VI doesn't exist and so the only viable ace small ship options have Initiative 6. Cool. I can either play with rookie swarms or I can play with a tiny number of aces who see play over and over and over because if you don't use those specific aces you'll never get a single round of shooting thanks to arc dodging. Yay.

1.0 killed itself with the JumpMaster fiasco and never recovered regardless of how many nerfs were later cranked out, and good riddance really, but 2.0 feels like a huge missed opportunity thanks to the decision that only Initiative 6 matters (kind of ironic given that the reason for tightening the range was to cut out the 'dead space' between PS 1 and 9. Except the 'dead space' actually mattered quite a lot due to the presence of VI...).

It isn't the same, though. The amount of repositioning that was allowed in 1.0 was egregious. Addressing that has vastly improved inter-skill pilot play.

Edit - the fact that points can and will be adjusted as the game evolves is the best change, in my opinion.

Also, I agree with you about the JM5k; it was truly a fatal flaw for 1.0.

I miss being able to put the boost action on any ship. Particularly the Shadowcaster. I think there's a way to scale the original Engine Upgrade to account for both ship size and Initiative.

Aside from that, I do kinda miss the Resistance/Rebel and FO/Empire as same factions. I know it doesn't make much sense and now each faction is getting rounded out a bit more, but I loved flying QuickDraw with two Gunboats or Wedge with Poe.

1 hour ago, LUZ_TAK said:

This has nothing to with the merits of 1.0 as a ruleset and everything to do with the fact that it was a new game and had a ton of content to ship as new...

I don’t recall the thread being only about ruleset.

And it wasn’t a “new” game several years later.... it just added new content.

1 hour ago, ficklegreendice said:

2nd ed could easily fix the "something new to buy" issue that 1st ed set up for it with the fabled card packs

if FFG wanted to guarantee sales of said packs, all they'd have to do would be to stick new pilots for OT ships in there!

I would be all over this. I think the challenge they will have is most ships that need more pilots badly are currently only available in conversion kits. Rebel Awing is the obvious example. Empire could use some more interceptor pilots.

13 hours ago, Kieransi said:

Dude, you just cast SUMMON DARTH MEANIE!!!

Fee! Fi!! Fo!!! Fum!!!!

I smell a conversation about First Best Edition!!

13 hours ago, Da_Brown_Bomber said:

What did 1.0 do better than 2.0?

Quote

Your turn. What did 1.0 do better than 2.0?

Ship varieties using the same model.

There were 3 ways to kit out s Scyk, 2 ways to have a TIE Defender, the TIE Shuttle option for the bomber, turning the Y-Wing into a bomb platform, adding crew to the B-Wing as an E2, and the like. Having the ship's variant baked in is great for certain ships (TIE Advanced} but a loss for many others.

I also prefer the old "loosey goosey" barrel roll as opposed to lining up in 3 set positions.

I have tossed a few 2.0 stands into my 1.0 games (to make the Reaper medium base, for example}, and I really miss having the ship's stats on the base.

It also sucks that Epic players have had to wait forever for their version of the game.

Overall though, 2.0 added a lot of cool elements into play, and seems to be getting a lot more creativity added to design. I'm really hoping that Epic takes the game in Bold New Directions, and gives players who want something more than 200v200 pit fights a milieu in which to play.

1 hour ago, ScummyRebel said:

I don’t recall the thread being only about ruleset.

And it wasn’t a “new” game several years later.... it just added new content.

If it isn't a ruleset thread, what is it about? How people had more excitment about the game? How 5 to 7 years ago you enjoyed yourself more?

A proper question this thread brings is: did 1.0 had a faster rate (ships+options/time) of new content than 2.0?

1 hour ago, Darth Meanie said:

There were 3 ways to kit out s Scyk, 2 ways to have a TIE Defender, the TIE Shuttle option for the bomber, turning the Y-Wing into a bomb platform, adding crew to the B-Wing as an E2, and the like. Having the ship's variant baked in is great for certain ships (TIE Advanced} but a loss for many others.

The Scyks are now all heavy, yes. Same with your other examples: all Defenders have access to a cannon and the "x7 title". Y-wings all have now bombs and torpedoes. But how many light scyks were played? How many without a title? This argument of yours boils down to the same that many made about extended vs hyperspace when they highlighted the larger pilot pool as benefit of extended - only to be duped by the actual data, which showed that more different pilots were used in hyperspace! Similarly, you did not lose actual competitive options, only ones on paper.

Adding crew to B-wings and Bombers, or adding a bonus attack to a defender, looks much more like a (very reasonable) balancing choice than anything else.

7 hours ago, player2072913 said:

But, fully execute doesn't need a bumping clause, because that's what fully execute means.

'A ship fully executes a maneuver if it does not overlap a ship.' (rrg, p14)

Sorry I typoed I meant hitting a rock.

53 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

The Scyks are now all heavy, yes. Same with your other examples: all Defenders have access to a cannon and the "x7 title". Y-wings all have now bombs and torpedoes. But how many light scyks were played? How many without a title? This argument of yours boils down to the same that many made about extended vs hyperspace when they highlighted the larger pilot pool as benefit of extended - only to be duped by the actual data, which showed that more different pilots were used in hyperspace! Similarly, you did not lose actual competitive options, only ones on paper.

Adding crew to B-wings and Bombers, or adding a bonus attack to a defender, looks much more like a (very reasonable) balancing choice than anything else.

Well, I could care less about the data set that is supported by tournament play, since at my dining room table I flew Light Scyks. Which means I miss the "on paper" option.

Which actually brings me to a point that I hope 2.0 fixes: that this whole **** game stops revolving around what Elite X-Wing Players bring to a convention.

11 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

Well, I could care less about the data set that is supported by tournament play, since at my dining room table I flew Light Scyks.

Which actually brings me to a point that I hope 2.0 fixes: that this whole **** game stops revolving around what Elite X-Wing Players bring to a convention.

I suspect that epic 2.0 will do this. At least, I hope it does. This is based on the Legion expansion “downed AT-ST” which is either an overpriced piece of terrain for competitive play, OR it’s a narrative campaign (albeit two part missions) for Casuals. And I really like that side of things - hoping to see it cross over into x-wing.

3 minutes ago, ScummyRebel said:

I suspect that epic 2.0 will do this. At least, I hope it does. This is based on the Legion expansion “downed AT-ST” which is either an overpriced piece of terrain for competitive play, OR it’s a narrative campaign (albeit two part missions) for Casuals. And I really like that side of things - hoping to see it cross over into x-wing.

A campaign box based around a baby space station would be sooooooo sweet.

9 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

A campaign box based around a baby space station would be sooooooo sweet.

Oh yeah that would be really cool. Especially if it was formatted such you could run it in any of the three eras and call it good.

I'd say everything was better in 1.0 except medium bases and the OP things in later waves.

Cards had points on them, no irritating ap required, art was better, game design was more straight forward, token and ability spam was less ridiculous. it was just a better game

I'd say everything was better in 1.0 except medium bases and the OP things in later waves.

Cards had points on them, no irritating ap required, art was better, game design was more straight forward, token and ability spam was less ridiculous. it was just a better game

I'd say everything was better in 1.0 except medium bases and the OP things in later waves.

Cards had points on them, no irritating ap required, art was better, game design was more straight forward, token and ability spam was less ridiculous. it was just a better game