6 hours ago, Sunitsa said:

1.0  rewarded good flying much more than 2.0 

Wait wat. Every good list in 1.0 was about perfect information, full 360 degree coverage, and stacks of actionless dice mods, all of which make where you land completely irrelevant.

13 minutes ago, Vontoothskie said:

token    and ability spam was less  rid  iculou  s  .  

Obviously and demonstrably false on this point.

45 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 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.

I to miss the Light Scyk, light Sunny Bounder was a good ship and a light Scyk swarm could work much better than the Z95's.

However Z95's gained red barrel roll and better dial while the Scyk dial lost some green/blue.

Then the Mining Guild TIE was released which put the final nail in the coffin of a Light Scyk configuration returning to X-Wing.

1 hour 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 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.

You never lost any option at a kitchen table. Why would you follow the restrictions of competitive play while outside of competitive play?

3 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

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.

^This.

I miss the way events were organised/named lol

I miss the influx of Legends ships and pilots. But honestly apart from that...can't think of much.

1 hour ago, Vontoothskie said:

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

Uhhh... Those "later waves" comprise 80% of 1.0's lifespan. That's not a glowing endorsement.

... Okay, in fairness, for all the nightmares it ultimately spawned, when it was first released Wave 7 was something of a renaissance for X-wing. The phantom nerf coupled with TLT* chasing Fat turrets out of the metagame led to a very open playing field. And then Wave 8 and the raider happened. So that's closer to half the game's lifespan. With a glaring dark age in part of it.

*For all the justly deserved flak tlt gets, quad Y-wings was actually a pretty engaging game, and it killed the existing bogeyman of Fat Han

2 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

You never lost any option at a kitchen table. Why would you follow the restrictions of competitive play while outside of competitive play?

Yes, I did lose options. Why would I buy a game if I just wanted to make the whole thing up myself?

"DIY" is a BS reply just because someone wants to play without the end goal of winning tournaments. Having things officially from FFG matters.

A. I'm paying for the game too, so my wants are just as legitimate even if I never go to tourney.

B. Official elements make it a lot easier for a DIYer to have a valid starting point for the things they might want to expand on. By "following the restrictions of competitive play while outside of competitive play," I know that I am starting from a point of decently balanced game design when I write a scenario.

C. When strangers get together at a FLGS for casual play, they are likely to stick to official material only, unless they really trust a stranger to make up balanced game materials. They are going to "follow the restrictions of competitive play while outside of competitive play" because they are in a public arena and will likely stick with known, codified rules and components.

D. Not everyone has the time, creativity, or desire to DIY. So for that person, when the official component is dropped, it is lost.

E. DIY ships and upgrades are not supported in Apps, Listbuilders, and all the other things that make the game more convenient. So retconning Light Scyks into my Epic lists is a lot more of a PIA than you think.

F. Failing the advent of narrative Epic, my DIY time is spent on missions and scenarios, not ships, pilots and upgrades. I would prefer to have those elements of the game already in existence from FFG. First, because of balance. Second, because they exist in a listbuilder somewhere. And third, because those are the components I spent money on to play the game.

18 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

And  why would I buy a game if I just wanted to make the  whole thing up myself? 

Because all you want is a tiny -1hull, blue banks change on Scyks. You have not only the starting point (B), but a huge amount of content (A). Plus you want something that was already there in 1.0, so no need for creativity (D).

If you can't convince others to give it a shot, or if it's too bothersome... well that's where I leave because that's pretty far down the line from your original point. I don't know why I even bother with you.

48 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

Yes  , I did lose options. Why would  I buy a game  if I just wanted to make the whole thing up myself? 

I mean, to be fair you picked one of the very small number of non-cancerous things that were dropped in transition. Overall there's MUCH more content than the end of 1.0 less than a year into 2.0.

46 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

Because all you want is a tiny -1hull, blue banks change on Scyks.

No, that's what you are now claiming is all I want.

Quote

because that's pretty far down the line from your original point.

Yep. You done a pretty fair job of distilling my original point down into something that makes me look petty.

Quote

I don't know why I even bother with you.

Ah well. Next time someone complains a specific ship or pilot is not doing well in tournaments, just tell them to stop whining and fly the ships that DO win. Tournament data from Hyperspace trials shows there are plenty of them; no point in being a cry baby just because it's not the one they want.

Overall, I think 2.0 is significantly better than 1.0, and I wouldn't go back to 1.0 at all. That being said, one thing that I think 1.0 did much better than 2.0 is making Illicit slots actually mean something. As it stands now, we Scum primaries (I'm looking at you @Da_Brown_Bomber , as you've noted a few times you're full-on S&V) don't really have the same "I'm going to do something that totally messes with your clever strategies" toolbox, which was kind of the point of playing Scum. Other than that, I think everything 2.0 offers is a rich improvement to the game.

Potentially unpopular opinion- 2.0 went the wrong way with pilot skill/initiative. They should have made it a LARGER spread, not a thinner one.

1-100 would have worked great. I think they got scared off the idea since they were upping numbers and adding complexity in so many other areas that they felt they needed to make things simpler where they could. But by widening the spread, it would have given another spot for variety for named pilots. Also, it would add incentive to fly generics as that would be one of the places you could guarantee movement at the same pilot skill and easier coordinated flying.

You could have even kept in things like VI and adaptability in the game as going up by 2-5 ps/init would be much more of a meta play against the few pilots you’d beat out at that range instead of “I have to play this if I’m ps 7 or 8 to compete with better options”.

2.0 does seem to have taken another unfortunate complexity step at least in some cases, and I do think that does have a negative impact, although likely minimal.

Other than those two things, 2.0 wins out pretty much in every other way. Needing to split into 2+ tournament formats kind of stinks, but would have been necessary in 1.0 as well. I also personally am not very fond of the expansion into 7 factions (especially the prequels), but I accept I’m in the minority there.

46 minutes ago, Ablazoned said:

I mean, to be fair you picked one of the very small number of non-cancerous things that were dropped in transition. Overall there's MUCH more content than the end of 1.0 less than a year into 2.0.

Well, actually I picked ship variants as something I missed from 1.0.

Then I was told that didn't matter because tournament data supports good ship diversity without titles.

Then I said that tournament data doesn't reflect my world because I'm casual.

Then I was told that as it turns out what I want doesn't matter cuz I could just make up **** up on my own.

Then I argued why DIY wasn't an acceptable counter argument IMHO.

Then I was hand-waved as irrelevant and cantankerous for being unable to DIY a Light Scyk.

Weird.

4 minutes ago, Kdubb said:

Potentially unpopular opinion- 2.0 went the wrong way with pilot skill/initiative. They should have made it a LARGER spread, not a thinner one.

1-100 would have worked great.

OMFG.

Playing XWM would have been like standing at the deli counter:

42? 42?? 42???

OK. 43? 43?? 43???

Oh wait!! I had a 41!!!

But we're on 44!!!!!

I fell asleep at 27. . .

Maybe I agree with the prize support thing. Outside of that...2.0 is strictly better in every way. And I'm a critical critic @$$ lol.

44 minutes ago, feltipern1 said:

Overall, I think 2.0 is significantly better than 1.0, and I wouldn't go back to 1.0 at all. That being said, one thing that I think 1.0 did much better than 2.0 is making Illicit slots actually mean something. As it stands now, we Scum primaries (I'm looking at you @Da_Brown_Bomber , as you've noted a few times you're full-on S&V) don't really have the same "I'm going to do something that totally messes with your clever strategies" toolbox, which was kind of the point of playing Scum. Other than that, I think everything 2.0 offers is a rich improvement to the game.

Scum illicits are good and bad. rigged cargo chute is really strong, some of the others are a bit meh... theyre still looking for a home on the right ship. cybernetics is interesting, cloaking device too... i actually like deadman's switch... its just id rather spend those 2pts somewhere else.

A lot of the nonrecurring charge-based dial cheat upgrades seem really overpriced, both in cybernetics and in republic Astros

Just gotta give em time to iron out the costs I guess

1 hour ago, feltipern1 said:

As it stands now, we Scum primaries don't really have the same "I'm going to do something that totally messes with your clever strategies"

All right, but apart from the Palob, the 4-L0M (Pilot), Seevor, Quadjumpers, Ketsu, Old Teroch, Latts Razzi (pilot), Moral Eval, Emon, Torkil Mux, 4-L0M (crew), Zuckuss (crew), Boba (crew), Tobias Beckett, Asajj Ventress, and the Shadow Caster title, what disruption abilities does scum really have?!

3 minutes ago, Ablazoned said:

All right, but apart from the Palob, the 4-L0M (Pilot), Seevor, Quadjumpers, Ketsu, Old Teroch, Latts Razzi (pilot), Moral Eval, Emon, Torkil Mux, 4-L0M (crew), Zuckuss (crew), Boba (crew), Tobias Beckett, Asajj Ventress, and the Shadow Caster title, what disruption abilities does scum really have?!

SCURRG with upcoming delayed fuses

But also Emon as well

11 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

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 don't think 1.0 was perfect. In fact, some degree of changes were pretty much needed (and some actually happened: Palpatine for example was late, but still welcome).

At one point Soontir could safely engage at r3 and be sure to fully evade a 3 dice maximized attack thanks to evade, autothruster and Palpatine and it was silly since it basically gifted him a free turn, assuming the player wasn't a cactus and was able to engage like that.

Still, despite many design mistakes, the game felt way more rewarding to good players than now, and it was particulary true when two players of similar high skill faced each other.

I would also point out that while Miranda was without any reason pretty much left untouched since her release and was definitely one of the biggest 1.0 issue, true 360° arcs stopped being relevant way earlier. Fat Han was incredibly bad and Decifel was only slightly better, but once they were gone, Dash, TLT, Jumpmasters and even Dengar were all ships where manouvers mattered despite having turrets

1.0 had seen some incredibly ****** design choices even once it would have been ok to assume devs learnt their lesson (who the **** greenlighted Lowhrick or the whole reinforce mechanic for example) and other stuff was sold knowing it was broken just because 2.0 was under devolpment so they stopped caring (ISB slicer for example...) and it needed to be reworked, but in this forum it's living through an undeserved damnatio memoriae while the current xwing still have some pretty big glaring issue and it's costantly being praised. All while the same people who ****** up 1.0 are still in charge of devolpment...

In this forum it seems I'm the black swan, but I can tell you my feelings are shared by a pretty big part of our national comunity here. And I'm not speaking about disgruntled old players who can't win anymore because they broke their toys, I'm speaking about the very people who are winning tournament after tournament: the game has become much more variance prone and this is a huge step on the wrong direction. I play with plastic ships because I love to outplay my opponent in a game of wits and weighted gambles, not because I want to outroll him

When it comes to outplaying, variance was still a problem in 1st Ed (******* regen ships are invincible with lucky greens) AND flying mattered far FAR infinetly less thanks to the utter bull of turrets

Even disregarding all the design space they opened up, turrets basically made 2nd edition necessary by themselves

12 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

... Dash, TLT, Jumpmasters and even Dengar were all ships where manouvers mattered despite having turrets.

Oh, I'm sorry, you were being serious?

I mean, I guess Dengar's dial mattered in that the player needed to correctly determine whether it was time to do a green move and get your fifty thousand automatic actions, or use that oh-so-tricky white sloop and "only" get two modified attacks plus an extra action. And I guess Dash had to decide which of the straight-4 or hard-3 took him further away from the enemy and then decide whether he wanted 1 or 2 Focus tokens to go with his free reroll on every shot he made or took that turn.

But that's not even close to what people want when they say maneuvers should matter. Ships should have to be factoring in how they get a shot, how they avoid getting shot at, and how they get their actions. For a lot of 1.0 ships the only thing that mattered was how they avoided getting shot at; they got a shot just be virtue of existing, and got their actions just by revealing a dial -- if they needed to do anything at all (looking at you, Quickdraw). This is why Luke Gunner has been met with near-universal loathing.

22 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

In this forum it seems I'm the black swan, but I can tell you my feelings are shared by a pretty big part of our national comunity here. And I'm not speaking about disgruntled old players who can't win anymore because they broke their toys, I'm speaking about the very people who are winning tournament after tournament: the game has become much more variance prone and this is a huge step on the wrong direction. I play with plastic ships because I love to outplay my opponent in a game of wits and weighted gambles, not because I want to outroll him

Now this is something I can relate to; it has been a bit of a culture shock going back to old school X-wing after being spoiled by 1st Edition. But this is old school X-wing, pretty close to how 1st Edition was before it jumped the shark. And 1st Edition's passive mods getting so out of control that missing even a single die on an attack was considered deeply unlucky was a big part of what powered that jump.

Hold my interest.

It's tough for me because 1.0 was such an unbearable **** show at the end of its life that it is difficult to parse how much hate I'm bringing forward, demanding redemption that hasn't quite yet arrived, vs the experience I'm actually having compared to (say) wave 7~. 'At least the game is fun now' goes quite a long ways, and yet there are just niggling little things...

I miss the cornucopia of upgrade options that made list building a complex little Lego affair. Yes, it is very true that this very cornucopia was among the causes of 1.0's demise because so much stuff was ridiculously imbalanced... and yet it was also fun to just theorycraft about really effective synergies. Now that element of the game is gone.

I do like the design principle behind just baking obvious synergies right into the hulls of ships, because that makes the game more accessible and get rid of a lot of auto-pick nonsense... and yet somehow I feel a bit bored by it. I don't know why it seems like it is any more fun to pick Soontir and then equip him with Pushing the Limit rather than just having that ability baked-in (albeit in a lesser form)... but somehow it does.

So much about 1.0 was bad. Turrets were bad. Palpatine was bad. Feedback Arrays were bad. The JumpMaster fiasco is, I'm pretty sure, the most embarrassing failure I've seen a major TT company make with a competitive tournament scene (how it went on for over a year really beggars belief). And yet I miss a lot about it, and no small part of that is paradoxically tied-up with the bad stuff (turrets were horrible, and yet learning how to fight them was an engaging problem solving exercise. Palpatine was a truly horrific thing to have in a supposedly skill based game, and yet that made it all the more sweet & satisfying to airlock him with Boba - knowing just how much pain with one move you inflicted against the opposing list. Having most of my minis become obsolete because of how poorly they fared against the JumpMaster alpha nearly made me quite TT gaming entirely, and yet that ship becoming such an antagonistic force in the world made it wonderful to cheer against every list that used it and creating genuine moments of celebration when a JumpMaster's dice just went cold and someone beat it.

2.0 doesn't have any of the above. Which is good, in theory, because that means it is a better game. But it also means that it just doesn't have the sense of excitement / frustration (can you really have one without the other?) that 1.0 did.