3 hours ago, Smikies02 said:

I believe those types of upgrades just end up creating hard counters, which I feel are bad for a game. No one wants to play a 3 round tourny where 1 round you can do almost nothing.

It's not a hard counter; it's an ace who's ability only works against a certain subset of foes.

There is a risk in bringing something that ends up being a named generic pilot.

Also, I think cards could have more risk/benefit leveraged into them. Like this:

Get a sure hit, or flip a card to cripple the ship but do no extra damage in most instances.

3 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

It's not a hard counter; it's an ace who's ability only works against a certain subset of foes.

There is a risk in bringing something that ends up being a named generic pilot.

Also, I think cards could have more risk/benefit leveraged into them. Like this:

Get a sure hit, or flip a card to cripple the ship but do no extra damage in most instances.

So basically Thane Kyrell?

11 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

What if there was a rookie that got a bonus against higher Initiative pilots? Climbing the ranks. . .

Isn't this basically Kaz?

Duplicate post.

13 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

What if there was a Bounty Hunter/Inquisitor that got a bonus against any enemy ship that had a Force Icon?? Let's hunt down the Jedi. . .

This is an idea that I like.

Second Sister: When attacking or defending, if the enemy ship spent a force charge, you may regain one force charge.

Cad Bane: When attacking or defending, if the enemy ship has one or more inactive force charges, you may reroll two dice.

9 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

It's not a hard counter; it's an ace who's ability only works against a certain subset of foes.

There is a risk in bringing something that ends up being a named generic pilot.

Also, I think cards could have more risk/benefit leveraged into them. Like this:

Get a sure hit, or flip a card to cripple the ship but do no extra damage in most instances.

1) This is just Thane's ability but worse.

2) This isn't 'risk/benefit'. No one would ever choose flipping a crit over doing a sure damage. It's almost never a better option. The only time it might be is if there's already the right combination of Hull Breach and Fuel Leak on the ship, but that's so unlikely. The only reason Thane's ability is of any use is because it can trigger on an eye result which means it make sense to do if you don't have a focus token.

9 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

It's not a hard counter; it's an ace who's ability only works against a certain subset of foes.

There is a risk in bringing something that ends up being a named generic pilot.

Also, I think cards could have more risk/benefit leveraged into them. Like this:

Get a sure hit, or flip a card to cripple the ship but do no extra damage in most instances.

A hit is a hit, but a crit could be anything! It could even be a direct hit!

6 hours ago, Flurpy said:

So basically Thane Kyrell?

Same but different?

3 hours ago, Jarval said:

Isn't this basically Kaz?

Same but different?

32 minutes ago, GuacCousteau said:

1) This is just Thane's ability but worse.

2) This isn't 'risk/benefit'. No one would ever choose flipping a crit over doing a sure damage. It's almost never a better option. The only time it might be is if there's already the right combination of Hull Breach and Fuel Leak on the ship, but that's so unlikely. The only reason Thane's ability is of any use is because it can trigger on an eye result which means it make sense to do if you don't have a focus token.

Fine, so it's more risk than benefit.

13 minutes ago, MasterShake2 said:

A hit is a hit, but a crit could be anything! It could even be a direct hit!

But this. I'm kinda surprised that plinking one more hull would be considered more valuable than crippling the ship nearly always. It could also be a stolen action if the player has to now waste a turn repairing a card (again).

In any event, I don't think a Same But Different ability is really an issue, especially if it crossed a faction line. (OK, that doesn't happen with Thane/Kott, but I wanted the ability to be on a 2 attack ship. . .so give it to a Resistance A-Wing??)

HOWEVER. . .

My card was a theoretical success. It's a pilot ability whose utility is very circumstantial, and can't be mathed into a corner. GC is right that a damage could be better, and MS2 is right that with the right card in the stack a significant opportunity might present itself. And if players won't use this card because they can't math their way to victory, well, then, don't complain your bored of "balanced play." Randomly flipping that Fuel Leak is what makes the game exciting!!

Also, it's clear that this game has so many pilots, and I play so little, that I'm a lot out of the loop. So thanks to all for learnin' me somethin'!

@Kleeg005 do you have Tabletop Simulator or VASSAL? both have leagues going on and it's a lot more fun than it sounds lol

also if your playgroup is dead, you get to make a new one - just strongarm your other friends/acquaintances into learning X-Wing

17 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

What if there was a rookie that got a bonus against higher Initiative pilots? Climbing the ranks. . .

That would be Kazuda Xiono.

I promise, some of what you’re looking for already exists.

2 hours ago, GuacCousteau said:

1) This is just Thane's ability but worse.

Not necessarily. For Thane, his target must already have been damaged before the shot occurs.

2 hours ago, GuacCousteau said:

2) This isn't 'risk/benefit'. No one would ever choose flipping a crit over doing a sure damage. It's almost never a better option.

I cannot agree with this. Flipping a direct hit would net the same result, so you don't lose out 5 out of 33 times. But flipping an ion crit, damaged engine, structural damage, or double stress on Kylo, Fenn, Vader, etc. would be devastating. Decimators at the very least would hate it.

Also, if you flew it tandem with Thane, you would know if you wanted to spend that hit to expose since Thane gets to go through the defenders pockets and look at the crits.

9 minutes ago, 5050Saint said:

Not necessarily. For Thane, his target must already have been damaged before the shot occurs.

...how do you read this ability working, exactly? I mean, as written, I'm not sure it does because at the point in the attack sequence where this triggers, there are no hits in play, so I assumed it was supposed to be a "before dealing damage" thing, thus, exclusively worse Thane as it still requires target be damaged beforehand. If it triggers after you deal damage and, somehow, the hit is still in play to be cancelled, then cancelling the hit wouldn't reduce damage, so why does is the cancelling hit part even on the card? If the text is supposed to be deal damage, then flip card, there is no choice, you'd always do it because it costs you nothing.

1 hour ago, ClassicalMoser said:

That would be Kazuda Xiono.

I promise, some of what you’re looking for already exists.

Fair enough. Or at least a version of it. Kaz is "I'm Damaged" dependent; a variant might not be.

And I think that just because it's a variant doesn't mean it's not worth putting on a pilot somewhere, especially in an alternate faction.

I also have the idea of an IN 2 that chooses a defender and then fires at that defender's IN. His attacking IN would change every turn based on his target. Move first, shoot firster.

43 minutes ago, MasterShake2 said:

...how do you read this ability working, exactly? I mean, as written, I'm not sure it does because at the point in the attack sequence where this triggers, there are no hits in play, so I assumed it was supposed to be a "before dealing damage" thing, thus, exclusively worse Thane as it still requires target be damaged beforehand. If it triggers after you deal damage and, somehow, the hit is still in play to be cancelled, then cancelling the hit wouldn't reduce damage, so why does is the cancelling hit part even on the card? If the text is supposed to be deal damage, then flip card, there is no choice, you'd always do it because it costs you nothing.

Yeah, I kinda banged this out last night to demonstrate a point; a refinement of timing windows might be in order.

As in, if she gets 2 hits on a ship with no damage, can she turn that combo into a single critical.

Still, if y'all are having a debate about whether this pilot's ability is worth it, I think I've mostly succeeded.

1 hour ago, MasterShake2 said:

...how do you read this ability working, exactly? I mean, as written, I'm not sure it does because at the point in the attack sequence where this triggers, there are no hits in play, so I assumed it was supposed to be a "before dealing damage" thing, thus, exclusively worse Thane as it still requires target be damaged beforehand. If it triggers after you deal damage and, somehow, the hit is still in play to be cancelled, then cancelling the hit wouldn't reduce damage, so why does is the cancelling hit part even on the card? If the text is supposed to be deal damage, then flip card, there is no choice, you'd always do it because it costs you nothing.

I wasn't operating under the same assumption you had about timing, but you are right. The cancel would need to come before the "deal damage" part. My brain was stuck on the "after you perform an attack that hits" part.

42 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

Kaz is "I'm Damaged" dependent

He's more "I'm not damaged" dependent, actually. He gets less relevant as he gets more damaged

i.e. when he has 2 damage cards, he's good against I3+. When he has 4 damage cards, he's still good against I5+.

On 2/18/2020 at 6:51 PM, Darth Meanie said:

On 2/18/2020 at 8:41 PM, JBFancourt said:

Ovaries

Same. My 4 year old drew almost this exact picture on her whiteboard tonight, I kid you not.

On 2/19/2020 at 8:08 AM, Kieransi said:

@Kleeg005 do you have Tabletop Simulator or VASSAL? both have leagues going on and it's a lot more fun than it sounds lol

also if your playgroup is dead, you get to make a new one - just strongarm your other friends/acquaintances into learning X-Wing

Hrrrrrm.... I mean, yes? Those are certainly valid options, TTS and VASSAL. But a big part of what makes X-Wing so excellent is the physicality of the game. There are a lot of video games out there, after all. And I just don't very often play them, even the ones I like.

And to your second point, heh. Yeah, most of my friends already play (just less frequently than I would like). The one who don't have their reasons - which are frequently around two years old and prone to tantrums. Which, not coincidentally, is the main reason that my regular groups are shriveling. I'm working on getting new blood into the shops, but it ain't easy. But that's another topic which has been addressed elsewhere. I thank you for your thoughts and suggestions!

On 2/18/2020 at 6:37 PM, Darth Meanie said:

I think the game needs to emphasize these types of decision making processes more. Ships and upgrades should stop being universally good or bad based on dice-leveling probabilities. Players should have to ferret out whether a pilot or upgrade will be worth taking depending upon what they expect to see or not see on the battlefield.

I do like the idea of more trade-offs, but what I think of the last bit depends on what you mean. If you mean that people should consider how their list deals with swarms, aces, etc. then I agree. If you mean that people should build lists specifically to counter the lists of others in their game group, I absolutely disagree. Matches shouldn't be decided in listbuilding. Win, lose, or draw; agood game should be close.

On 2/18/2020 at 11:45 PM, Darth Meanie said:

It's not a hard counter; it's an ace who's ability only works against a certain subset of foes only a hard counter sometimes .

Fixed.

32 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

I do like the idea of more trade-offs, but what I think of the last bit depends on what you mean. If you mean that people should consider how their list deals with swarms, aces, etc. then I agree. If you mean that people should build lists specifically to counter the lists of others in their game group, I absolutely disagree. Matches shouldn't be decided in listbuilding. Win, lose, or draw; agood game should be close.

And environments. These need to start becoming the norm to increase the depth of the game in listbuilding and strategy.

Quote

It's not a hard counter; it's an ace who's ability only works against a certain subset of foes only a hard counter sometimes .

Fixed.

I think you are making a mountain out of mole hill.

Having 1 ace in a list that works better when a certain foe is on the table is not a hard counter if balanced by cost or opportunity. You don't lose if it shows up. But maybe you now have a Target of Priority. Which I believe is a thing already, if you play well.

Taking such a pilot is a risk for the listbuilder as well--if that is not part of what you are facing, then the pilot is less useful than an ace, and probably just a high IN generic.

XWM doesn't allow a sideboard. If you commit to an anti-Rebel pilot, there is only a 1 in 7 chance that works. I'm going to be guessing that most tournament players are not going to bother unless the meta is so screwed up that Rebels are everywhere.

Speaking of sideboards, anti-color strategies haven't killed MTG, either.

These pilots will probably be most fun for the casual and narrative crowd.

Also, I'm going to say that each faction should probably only get 1 "anti-faction" pilot, which would prevent players from making the 4 Pilot Anti-Rebel list.

However, even with that limitation in place, that's 36 new design spaces that need some love.

Lastly, Agent Kallus has not made the Galactic Empire the most feared faction in the game. And he can do what I am talking about to ANYONE.

4 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

Having 1 ace in a list that works better when a certain foe is on the table is not a hard counter if balanced by cost or opportunity. You don't lose if it shows up. But maybe you now have a Target of Priority. Which I believe is a thing already, if you play well.

Taking such a pilot is a risk for the listbuilder as well--if that is not part of what you are facing, then the pilot is less useful than an ace, and probably just a high IN generic.

The problem is, if the bonus is really as minor as you say, why not just use a different Ace who is more well-rounded? And if instead the bonus is good enough to justify taking him over other options, how can you say it's not a hard counter?

4 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

Speaking of sideboards, anti-color strategies haven't killed MTG, either.

I don't play MtG, but given the fact that most of the conversations I overhear about it are discussing things like decks that can win on the first turn with the proper draw or how great Control decks are, I personally want it as far from debelopers' minds as possible when they're designing games I play.

3 hours ago, JJ48 said:

The problem is, if the bonus is really as minor as you say, why not just a different Ace who is more well-rounded? And if instead the bonus is good enough to justify taking him over other options, how can you say it's not a hard counter?

I don't play MtG, but given the fact that most of the conversations I overhear about it are discussing things like decks that can win on the first turn with the proper draw or how great Control decks are, I personally want it as far from debelopers' minds as possible when they're designing games I play.

You are saying that a pilot who is not good enough to take all of the time isn't worth taking any of the time. Which can actually apply to any pilot in the game. These choices aren't B&W, or at least shouldn't be for a well designed card or clever listbuilding.

It's this every-time-or-never attitude is what leads to a stale meta.

As far as meta Magic decks go, I doubt any of them are leaning on a one- or two- color crushing strategy.

51 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

You are saying that a pilot who is not good enough to take all of the time isn't worth taking any of the time.

No, I'm saying that a pilot should always have a purpose. A pilot who only has a purpose 1/7 of the time is horrible design.

54 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

No, I'm saying that a pilot should always have a purpose. A pilot who only has a purpose 1/7 of the time is horrible design.

Well, such a pilot would have a purpose. A purpose that would be most effective 1/7 of the time.

Which does not mean the pilot is useless 6/7 of the time.

It's still a pilot, and a game component. Folks with one-faction friends would love him. Narrative-style players would use him. Campaigns with pilot mortality as a feature would get around to him.

If you only play randomized, tournament-style XWM, you might only find him useful 1/7 of the time. But a lot of people don't play that way, and it's a bit unfair to call something bad game design just because it doesn't fit your playstyle.

And not that I have a horse in this race, but there are already a ton of pilots with effectively blank abilities. Right? Pilots whose abilities proc once in every three or four games. Go ahead a utilize that design space. Give the factions a little more flavor. There's no loss.

3 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

it's a bit unfair to call something bad game design just because it doesn't fit your playstyle.

Agreed. But when something actually is bad game design (such as rock-paper-scissors counters in a game like this) it's perfectly justified.

3 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

Folks with one-faction friends would love him.

To me, this is actually a very strong reason not to do something like this. Who wants to play a game where the opponent has built his list specifically to counter yours? You may argue that both players could do the same thing, but in a case where one person collects multiple factions and his friend only collects one, it sounds like an awfully one-sided sort of fun to me.

3 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

Campaigns with pilot mortality as a feature would get around to him.

Doesn't this hold true of any pilot, though? I don't really see how this is an argument for this particular design.