Was just reading this: https://stayontheleader.blogspot.com/2020/11/theres-too-many-of-them-why-generic.html?m=1

I'm just spitballing here:
My thought was what if there was a multiple copy ship tax? Meaning, maybe after the first two ships of a given type are bought, then a 3rd ship may cost +2 points, a 4th +3 points, etc. or something like that.

Or maybe just have it so you can only have 2 of the same type of ship with the same initiative value with the exception of unique pilots not counting against this limit.

The idea would be to mitigate efficiency spam and encourage more variety of ships in lists as well as a backdoor buff to the higher cost ships...

The problem is when you kill a ship, do get the +4 or +0 for score?

Easier way is just a rules ref saying all pilots have a max of three per list. This would limit any generic pilot to three in a list. To get more of that ship you have to go the next costed generic or else named pilots (or to really play hardball, limit the chassis itself). So no more FOcho, no more 7 scyks, or 4 auzitucks, or RAC and 4 aggressors, etc.

I would do that limit for all non config upgrades as well, since things like spamming ion turrets and concussion bombs, etc. is what ruins the game. Those weapons are cool in the game, and then spam ruins the fun. Limit everything to max of 3. They have dot limiters on certain generic ships and upgrades, and really it should have been done on every card, but too late for that so put a hard cap in rules ref now.

Will have to see what AMG has in store for Xwing. I dont think we will hear much on there end til close to summer.

The other thing my friend and I have been doing is playing at 150pts. I like the tough decisions it forces during list building. It makes for a faster, arguably less cluttered game as well IMO.

I like the idea of limiting the chassis - I feel like 4 would be the right number and still allow for some thematic stuff like a TIE fighter squadron.

I don't know what to say about the upgrades - I feel like if they're ruining the game then maybe they should just be more expensive. Tough call.

The main issue with it is, it helps aces and hurts swarms. I hate swarms, but love aces and I think for fairness you need to balance the cost in the chassis itself.

I am tired of the Swarm meta, but there was a time when the game was called acewing for a reason.

The problem for AMG to avoid will be Twin laser turret vs Autothrusters power creep. It killed 1.0.

Lol I like generic efficiency lists. Others like acewing.

Doesn't seem to matter which is in vogue it seems. A year ago everyone was fussing about 7b jedi aces with r2 units.

I don't know the answer to this problem but I guess both list versions should be equally viable no?

I disagree with this idea. Points and dots are perfectly good ways to deal with this.

4 hours ago, ForrestGrump said:

Lol I like generic efficiency lists. Others like acewing.

Doesn't seem to matter which is in vogue it seems. A year ago everyone was fussing about 7b jedi aces with r2 units.

I don't know the answer to this problem but I guess both list versions should be equally viable no?

Yes, both need to be viable or the game will get stale. I am also an ace player, but refused to join an ace tourney (3 ship max, no generics) because playing 7 games of ace vs ace does not sound fun, and list building is completely different when you know its all aces. Bids are more important, Sense is probably autoinclude because one block may win you the game, and things like autoblasters and Hotshot co-pilot are money in the bank vs low health, token stacking aces.

I love the idea of a 3 (or even 4) pilot hardcap because then ships can be costed correctly without worrying about the plus 1 threshold. Like going from 41pts to 40pts or even 39pts for ships like Kimogilas. If you can only bring 3 no matter what, then costs can get lowered without "Is 5 Kimos, Xwings, etc. too much?" always lingering. Same for upgrades. If something like Homing missile spam prevents them from going down to 4 or 3pts, and they dont see hardly any play at 5pts, then a hard cap of 3 max can fix that. Lower them to 3 or 4pts, dont have to worry abour spam, and now lists that just want one or two will take them because they are costed appropriately. No more worrying about lists with like 6 predator and crackshot if hardcap is 3 each.

Still have to consider droid swarms and tie swarms.

They both archtypes AND staples and should be included

You can still have droid and tie swarms with a pilot hardcap of 3. What it does, is keep the trade fed at 20pts, but actually increases a droid swarm cost (incrementally, the more you get because you are going for either init1s with abilities, or higher init droids). So you get the incrementally priced like some people like, and the trade fed droid is not always the victim of price adjustments, and could even go down to 19pts (knowing only 3 per list, not spamming 8).

Lets take the six droids, plus two hyena list for instance. Still six init 1 droids, two init1 hyenas. Cost is +5 increase. Again, you could lower the trade feds to 19, and even Hails to 20, and that 5pt increase is gone, all while controlling trade fed spam from a 19pt cost. Its just so much easier to control the power curve by having a hardcap with pilots (not the chassis):

Trade Federation Drone (20)

Trade Federation Drone (20)
XX-23 S-Thread Tracers (2)

Trade Federation Drone (20)
XX-23 S-Thread Tracers (2)

Haor Chall Prototype (21)
Discord Missiles (4)

Haor Chall Prototype (21)
Discord Missiles (4)

DFS-311 (23)

Techno Union Bomber (25)
Concussion Missiles (6)

Techno Union Bomber (25)
Concussion Missiles (6)
Total: 199

Tie Fighters, same thing, you can get 3 academies, and mix of other ties, so the the Tie Swarm is still alive and well. The academies could even get dropped to 20-21pts without the worry of OP spam Tie Swarms. It gets the cost for that pilot correct because there is no spam worry.

1 hour ago, wurms said:

You can still have droid and tie swarms with a pilot hardcap of 3.

What's the argument for a pilot cap of 3 instead of 2?

Wouldn't a pilot cap of 2 be even better? You could still build swarms and it would allow for finer tuning of points costs as mentioned before.

22 minutes ago, Dicewarrior said:

What's the argument for a pilot cap of 3 instead of 2?

Wouldn't a pilot cap of 2 be even better? You could still build swarms and it would allow for finer tuning of points costs as mentioned before.

I just feel its too limiting? 3 or 4 feels better and less restrictive in terms of list building while still gaining control of power curve. Really, I would personally love hard cap of 4 for small, 3 for medium, and 2 for large bases. That way even Ghosts and Decimators could break that 67pt threshold. Its obvious patrol leaders are not worth 67pts, but we dont want 3 Decimators/Ghosts on the mat, so there they sit.

But to just be a generalized cap for all bases, I think 3 is good. Also, cards like Bombardment Drones already have 3 dots printed on the card (Dont think there is anything with 4?), so it makes sense with whats established currently.