Do not discount the creativity that comes from working within strict guidelines. Some of the coolest innovations come from restrictions.

Needing to play with the stuff that is already in the box does NOT need to stifle creativity. In many ways it actually PROMOTES it as one looks for new or different ways to apply the thing they have and can use. Allow the box to be any size and allow anything to get thrown in and you may actually be LIMITING creativity by adding something new to be used once before you go and add something else.

Saying that FFG NEEDS to add new types of dice just to promote "creativity" is completely false.

I know if I hear "it's time to get creative!" I'm actually thinking of a situation with limited resources instead of one where new resources can just be thrown in to solve the problem.

I definitely agree with the idea of packaging any new dice with the ship that they apply to.

I also think that the aim of additional dice should primarily be granularity, to allow some more differentiation between 2 and 3, not to create super 3+ ships (on the most part).

I would actually be inclined to introduce 4 new dice:

- Accurate - slightly increases chance to hit

- Heavy - increases damage (more crits and/or fewer multiple hits)

- Agile - slightly increases evade chance

- Shielded - reduces damage (evades crits and/or fewer multiple evades)

On the latter two, it's worth noting that Evade doesn't mean the ship isn't hit. It means the ship doesn't take any damage. We're psychologically influenced by the fact that it's Agility dice that affects whether a ship is hit, but Agility could easily represent heavy armour as well as pure mobility. In game purposes, there is no difference between a Hit that does no damage, and a shot that misses. It's the equivalent of the old D&D armour class, wrapping two functions up into one.

There's also scope for a new die symbol here (there's never a rule that I can't "improve" by adding more rules!): a shield symbol, which counts as an Evade as long as the ship has at least 1 shield token. This represents a ship that is particularly heavily or effectively shielded. However, this does introduce complications in terms of combinations (e.g. very potent when combined with R2F2) and is probably a bridge too far as a result.

I tend to side with the "No" crowd on the new dice issue.

We play on a 3x3 board. (For a reason - to keep the action tight and fast paced)
We (currently) have no capital ships.

To me, the heart and soul of the game is dogfighting.... I don't see how big bang dice and 4-5 bank/turns do anything but screw up this dynamic.

For those of you worried about the game getting stale, consider that "Chess" as we know it today has used the same 6 pieces and rules since the middle ages.... just a thought.

Purple = Monkey, Monkey, Rabit, Rabit, Banna, Turttle. Becoming a 8 sided dice with only 6 sides.

I think you mean Banana. Cool stuff.

I really like this idea. This game needs more dice badly. Alongside with crash test monkeys as crew cards.

I tend to side with the "No" crowd on the new dice issue.

We play on a 3x3 board. (For a reason - to keep the action tight and fast paced)

We (currently) have no capital ships.

To me, the heart and soul of the game is dogfighting.... I don't see how big bang dice and 4-5 bank/turns do anything but screw up this dynamic.

For those of you worried about the game getting stale, consider that "Chess" as we know it today has used the same 6 pieces and rules since the middle ages.... just a thought.

I think you misunderstand the reason for new dice (or one common reason, at least). It's not to create big bang dice, it's about putting something in place that allows more granularity between 2 and 3 dice. At the moment an X-Wing is Agility 2; a TIE fighter is Agility 3. Agility 4 would almost certainly be broken and Agility 1 is worthless a lot of the time. You're left with all ships being one of 2 scores. Adding in an extra die that was slightly better than a normal die would potentially increase your design options from 2 to 6: 0+1, 1, 2, 1+1, 3, 2+1 (normal dice + special die)

There is nothing in this that screws up the dog-fighting dynamic, in fact it increases it by allowing much more variety and differentiation in ship types, allowing players to customise their playing preferences even further and therefore allowing even more nuance to game play to suit individual's styles.

the ships were designed the way they were for a reason, new dice are unnecessary

what i am reading for five pages is several people who understand the dynamic and are figuring it out....the others that post here are afraid.

like games with the same 6 pieces used for centuries?....hey thats great chess nerd....go play chess and stay out of my X wing threads. this thread is for people who know how to playtest, are self motivated to work things out in thier own minds without the approval of the general public.

i am hoping that maybe just maybe a game developer with some sence in his head will look this over and utilize it for the good of the game.

the rest of the haters can barrel roll off into space for all i care.

the ships were designed the way they were for a reason, new dice are unnecessary

Totally agree. Not necessary to play game as is. But what new dice can do is expand the options for play, so that after a year or two of playing the game is still fresh, exciting and unpredictable. But nothing here is suggesting they're mandatory, nor that they replace anything existing. Think of new dice as sat navs, digital radios, go-faster stripes, spoilers and turbo-chargers. You can buy a car without those things and it'll go fine, while other people like to customise their experience and get more enjoyment as a result.

Either way is fine.

If we don't agree with you we're haters?
That word pops up so often when ignorant kids want to do something stupid, am I to believe it is any different here?

Look bub, we UNDERSTAND the changes you are suggesting. We're saying it's fixing what isn't broken.
The game is fast and loose, and was meant to be so.

I have even said in another "change the dice" related thread that you people that want these changes should be allowed to do so, provided at tournament play, there be a separation of those use core rules and those who want to use expanded dice and templates.

The man isn't trying to hold you back.

By the way...

... a game developer with some sence in his head ...

'sense' was the word you were looking for.

Sincerely,

Your favorite 275lb, 6', former Marine, Chess Nerd.

thanks for your service.

sincerely,

your favorite 44 year old ignorant kid.

but the tone of your post makes you a hater....sorry.

Okay RedFive back in brainstorm mode. this is a theory and has not been put to practice or play test yet. this is the THREAD for R&D on this item, so...lets talk.

....

so what do ya think?

Your original post wanted us to talk, and asked what we thought.

We gave you our honest opinions,

Nothing about what was said in my response was hateful, or even disrespectful.

In my opinion, a view shared by many, the game is fine as is, and doesn't need to be over-complicated.

It is quick to learn, easy to play, hard to master, and due to the current dice rules, and player skill variations, is often surprising in it's results.

In the understanding that there are consumers like yourself who desire more, I have conceded that there is nothing wrong with expanding the rules. My only caveat is that tournament play needs to have a separation of the core rules and these expanded rules.

Just because you want some change doesn't mean we all want it.

For some reason you saw my response as an attack and started in with name calling.

I'm baffled by this but will respond in kind.

I'f you'd like to continue in this manner, you will find me adversarial.

You tell me how you want to proceed.

did you just barrel roll off into space?

i would like to keep this convo about dice, not you and me.

you have expressed your opinion and it has been noted.

Does this mean everyone has just taken 1 stress?

bingo!

LOL!

try not to push the limit and stick to the subject at hand!

stay on target...

almost there

almost there...

Let me take this back a little bit.

The dice idea is not about dice.

The game is great exactly how it is right now with wave 3. (some ships kinda lackluster but overall its great)
The die idea is brought about by the worry of introducing 4 atk and 4 evade die ships.

The die idea was discussed as a way to continue introducing new ships to the game and stay balanced with the current meta and keep every ship differentiated without a massive power creep that most feel a base 4 atk ships or 4 evade ships will create.

If FFG can create a wave 4, wave 5, wave 6 with 4 new star fighters each that keeps every ship useful and competitive without invalidating older ships. Then that's great. Many people don't see that happening without SOME type of expansion. Wave 3 itself had to use a gimmick support idea for 2 ships that left them largely lackluster. Just look at worlds. The tie advanced, a wing, tie interceptor, firespray, lambda, hwk, didn't have a single ship represented in the top 8 builds each of which were different types of builds (except two slightly different tie swarm variants). I am not saying everyone of those ships are bad. I am simply stating you cant add 18 new ships to the game (they originally said they would like to make at least 30 ships) under the same guidelines and keep each of them useful and balanced. The die idea is simply an easy way to differentiate power levels between 1-2-3 and keep the rules and game easy to play and simple. Also personally I feel crits and the damage deck are underutilized in this game.

Ps. Also this is not about the defender either. I agree there is a place for that ship under the current meta. Like for example a 3/3/3/3 ship, but where do you go from there? What about the Assault Gunboat, Missile Gunboat, Outrider (yt-2000), or whatever 18 new ships they create. You are going to have a lot of overlap under the current design. Sure they can add a tractor beam upgrade, Proton rockets, and ion rockets but at some point you are simply creating the same ship with a new modification and this will invalidate older ships.

Let me take this back a little bit.

The dice idea is not about dice.

The game is great exactly how it is right now with wave 3. (some ships kinda lackluster but overall its great)

The die idea is brought about by the worry of introducing 4 atk and 4 evade die ships.

The die idea was discussed as a way to continue introducing new ships to the game and stay balanced with the current meta and keep every ship differentiated without a massive power creep that most feel a base 4 atk ships or 4 evade ships will create.

If FFG can create a wave 4, wave 5, wave 6 with 4 new star fighters each that keeps every ship useful and competitive without invalidating older ships. Then that's great. Many people don't see that happening without SOME type of expansion. Wave 3 itself had to use a gimmick support idea for 2 ships that left them largely lackluster. Just look at worlds. The tie advanced, a wing, tie interceptor, firespray, lambda, hwk, didn't have a single ship represented in the top 8 builds each of which were different types of builds (except two slightly different tie swarm variants). I am not saying everyone of those ships are bad. I am simply stating you cant add 18 new ships to the game (they originally said they would like to make at least 30 ships) under the same guidelines and keep each of them useful and balanced. The die idea is simply an easy way to differentiate power levels between 1-2-3 and keep the rules and game easy to play and simple. Also personally I feel crits and the damage deck are underutilized in this game.

this.

We all understand what the new dice would do. Not all of us are convinced that it's the only way to prevent potential problems. The fact that they are potential problems and not existing problems means that there's no reason to get worked up about it on either side of the argument.

We all understand what the new dice would do. Not all of us are convinced that it's the only way to prevent potential problems. The fact that they are potential problems and not existing problems means that there's no reason to get worked up about it on either side of the argument.

It kind of is an existing problem although not a massive problem right now. That's why I stated.

"Wave 3 itself had to use a gimmick support idea for 2 ships that left them largely lackluster. Just look at worlds. The tie advanced, a wing, tie interceptor, firespray, lambda, hwk, didn't have a single ship represented in the top 8 builds each of which were different types of builds (except two slightly different tie swarm variants). I am not saying everyone of those ships are bad. I am simply stating you cant add 18 new ships to the game (they originally said they would like to make at least 30 ships) under the same guidelines and keep each of them useful and balanced."

Also saying its not the only way to expand is great if you have other ideas to share we would like to hear them. That's the point of a discussion and partly why the die idea has so much traction. Obviously people feel the idea has merit.

I feel It's far better if they are going to do something like this at some point, to make all the 18 new ships feel different, that they do it when it makes sense for a ship to have it not just wait until the point they really NEED it. That way they can mix it into ships in a natural way rather than Panicking running around in circles and dumping it on every ship in Wave 7. For example it was natural that they put in the alternative arcs when they introduced the Falcon and the Slave, rather than waiting till they needed them to differentiate ships in later waves.

If there is going to be an issue 4 waves down the line it's best to have a solution now.

I feel It's far better if they are going to do something like this at some point, to make all the 18 new ships feel different, that they do it when it makes sense for a ship to have it not just wait until the point they really NEED it. That way they can mix it into ships in a natural way rather than Panicking running around in circles and dumping it on every ship in Wave 7. For example it was natural that they put in the alternative arcs when they introduced the Falcon and the Slave, rather than waiting till they needed them to differentiate ships in later waves.

If there is going to be an issue 4 waves down the line it's best to have a solution now.

i totally agree with this 100%

We were discussing today how fun having 4 or 5 maneuvers could be if handled right. I'm probably going to make some templates and give this a go with the rules we have for Die-Wings. I think having a ship that has no K-Turns or tight turns could be really different and also unlike any ship we currently have, without being overpowered, in fact I think this dial is going to be a pain to play with.

"Wave 3 itself had to use a gimmick support idea for 2 ships that left them largely lackluster. Just look at worlds. The tie advanced, a wing, tie interceptor, firespray, lambda, hwk, didn't have a single ship represented in the top 8 builds each of which were different types of builds (except two slightly different tie swarm variants). I am not saying everyone of those ships are bad. I am simply stating you cant add 18 new ships to the game (they originally said they would like to make at least 30 ships) under the same guidelines and keep each of them useful and balanced."

A new type of die is a gimmick.

As someone who's also playing Attack Wing, I say no. Maybe if you have new dice for specific ships and upgrades, but the swap it in for one roll per turn, even at 5pts, is awful. A lot of people like it but I feel really sleazy using it. There's nothing more frustrating than having some killer maneuver or sequence of actions worked out by knowing all the possibilities, covering yourself enough that they can't take out your ship, and then having that stupid die pop up and kill you before you can shoot. I lost an important match that way against someone who was really just cheesing everything but couldn't really maneuver.

A special intermediary die though does sound interesting, since they're close to tapping out a lot of the action possibilities, but I think limiting it to certain ships is key.

On that topic though, I've been hoping for a gunboat for a long time and was thinking that one way of making that something other than a slower heavier x-wing would be giving it something like ionizing on an un-canceled crit to the hull. That would be fitting, since in the computer games it had two lasers and two ions.

"Wave 3 itself had to use a gimmick support idea for 2 ships that left them largely lackluster. Just look at worlds. The tie advanced, a wing, tie interceptor, firespray, lambda, hwk, didn't have a single ship represented in the top 8 builds each of which were different types of builds (except two slightly different tie swarm variants). I am not saying everyone of those ships are bad. I am simply stating you cant add 18 new ships to the game (they originally said they would like to make at least 30 ships) under the same guidelines and keep each of them useful and balanced."

A new type of die is a gimmick.

I'm sorry other peoples ideas make you confrontational.