I agree that it is a good thing that the basic ships still are competitive. But i consider it a very bad thing that it's 30 of 39 ships total in finals. And i also think it is bad that most of those are just plain Rookies and Academy Ties.

And to be honest if i was FFG this would alarm me. Because why would they release more and more ships with tons of options if the things to use in tournaments can be bought 99% in the starter box. This is not healthy for a game.

And again, you are looking at only the top 8 out of how many squads? How many at Worlds? 80? 100? I forget. Again, from the sounds of it, the top 16 or top 32 would give you the diversity you desire. And really, look at the diversity of ships used. There were no exact mirrors in the top 8. THAT is a good sign. Sure, they used a lot of the basic ideas, of more ships are better, but there is nothing wrong in the top 8.

And I'm sorry, it is just about impossible to design for the kind of diversity you want. I think we can all agree that there are some ships that aren't ideal right now. But that is fine, as playtesting can only do so much. But, I think FFG has shown an ability to make some ships more useful, as indicated by the Aces pack. I'm sure the movie ships will all get more love. But there are very, very few ships that I would consider outright bad. Sure, some are better in more casual games, but not all ships should be designed with the meta in mind.

"Complexity" does not equal good. Adding complexity because you feel there is some fault in the design of the game is ludicrous. The game is fine. As a dice game, yes there will be a lot of luck involved. There is no way you can fix this basic issue. The only way you can fix this is by removing the dice from the equation. I think you are looking for a competitive game that FFG is not willing to make, or support.

Escalation is a fun format. Epic is an unknown quantity. Based on past experiences, I imagine there will be additional rules (theres your complexity if you want). We also do not know how the Capital ships will work. Multiple places to damage, and some way to mitigate the "fishtail" effect such large bases would present in the Flightpath system indicates they will work much differently than we have now.

In the end, the TIE Swarm is still a powerful squad. No where as dominant as it once was (and even, I think people manage to learn how to fight it). And I imagine it will always have a place in the "competitive" game, which is fine. But to say that it is still strong is bad for the game is just insane.

Then i dont have any problem if swarms are and stay competitive. I play them myself pretty often. But that's also why i exactly know that they are not a good list, but the best. The only real option that recently came out that is also competitive is the B-Wing, perhaps also the Bombers. But since wave 1 not much has changed, they brought Homing missiles, 360 degrees weapons, assault missiles. But none of them are really the solution against swarms.

The rest you talk about here is balancing the game. Yes i agree that some ships and a lot of the named pilots are pretty worthless competitively. As we can also see it in tournaments. 3/4 of the sips in top 8 are 2 ship types. If you don't agree that this is not good for the game, i can't help you my friend

And i also think that it's possible to balance the game better than it is right now without changing the cards and costs. And this would not only make sense for the competitive scene, but also for just casual gaming. Because even for casual gaming it would be more interesting if more ships and pilots would be good choices. Adding more rules would be a way to make this happen, but would make the game little more complex of course. I wouldn't mind if this made the game better. And i trust FFG that they could do this pretty well if they just wanted!

And no... The game is not just fine, it is fun to play, but i think people have pointed out some issues. Luck doesn't need to be "patched out" , but it is necessary to give players more options to get advantages by outplaying, outplanning, outthinking and outmanoeuvering his enemy. That's what i want, not to have no dice luck at all implied

I would love to look at the top 16 if I could. So again, we have to look at the Top 8. But we also have to realize how limited that info is, compared to the whole field. Honestly, the Top 16, where they made the cut, is where I think you can get the best info about the state of the "meta". 2 swarm squads made it into the top 8. That is hardly dominant. And again, you will never see the desired variety, especially as more ships get made.

And I'm not seeing the lack of diversity you are. To be quite frank, I have no idea how you are interpreting the data. Yes, there are 2 Swarm squads. But I'm seeing different TIE's used. Again, there are no squads that are the same in the Top 8. You may see the 2 Swarm the same, but I don't. I would imagine there is a big difference between using Dark Curse vs Backstabber, and that your "swarm" has 2 different pilot skils. And again, 2 4 X-wing squads, but Luke vs Biggs & Wedge is vastly different.

I wish they could've taped all the top 8 matches. I do know, in the matches I did see, that while luck did play a factor, it didn't play as big as a roll as you seem to be implying as a problem in this game. Hell, in the finals, the luck balanced out between the two players. And really, I recall one mistake that was made, that I think cost Dallas the game. So, yes, there was some luck for both players, in the end, I think skill won out.

Next year, when we hopefully have 4-8 more ships in the mix, I don't see how you can make the same claims if X ships don't have a showing. I'm pleased with the diversity of the top 8. I really wanted to see how a good player used a naked Y-wing.

Really? people think a tie swarm is the best? wanna know how to beat a tie swarm? in theory,you out fly it, get behind it and hit. then run around as they swing to hit you and your other ships can hit them from behind. do not allow your squadron to stay grouped together like the swarms need to for howl runner. take howl out first from behind her. then the academy pilots are sitting ducks. and if you are behind them they can't fire back at you howl runner or back stabber or dark curse will be behind the academy pilots. as the ap's move first and fire last. ap's are fodder for the named pilots and a swarm uses them greatly for that reason. so that the named pilots are sure to survive. you can not take on a swarm head to head. you will lose unless he is really bad at rolling dice ( like I am) so there you have it. I will be play testing this when i get my other tie's in. and yes i think it has a lot more to do with skill than with luck. yes i acknowledge that there is a luck factor ( being on the bad side of the luck factor.) but i also believe that there is more skill involved than with luck. I play against a bwing and two hawks on a regular basis and have lost three out of four times to it cause the b-wing gets to shoot first at ps 12 and the hawks are slippery enough to evade you for awhile. if you focus on the b-wing you will lose ships fast. the b-wing with elusiveness is awesome. can not think of the namd pilots that it works well with though. so with enough skill and a little luck you can defeat a tie swarm. are they the Best out there? I do not think that we can confidently state that yet with just two worlds down in the books. they are good. but i don't think they are the best. i do not think any squad that people play are the best even if they win 99% of their games. they just play better. ie: better skills in planning and flying. reading the game oard better deducing what thier opponent will do. all these things factor in and imo. give a lot of depth to the game without the need for complex harder to follow rules that try to take the luck factor out. if they do revise the rules and make it much more complicated i will throw my x-wing stuff away and never play it again. is the game perfect? NO! but i like the way it is now and i know we will see more diversity in the top 8 soon enough with out having to rewrite rules. i like playing in tournaments ( i have yet to even make the top 16 in any tour) I missed worlds but figured i didnt need to go since i can not seem to find a regular tournament in Indianapolis, Indiana. where i could win a reigional. so i will keep playing locally for fun as i perfect my squads, and practice my flying. ( and hopefully get my dice to like me. ) I love playing the top ranked players as it teaches me so much more than just playing other casual gamers. i am not rebuking any thought or idea just stating my opinion.

the more ships you ahve the better your chances.. that screams luck to me, not skill..

I would argue that it screams statistical probability.

I'm interested to see exactly what happens with the X-wing meta and tournament scene. Clearly this game has a ton of cinematic or theme options that are lots of fun and will always have significant appeal to the majority of players.

As for the meta, if you show up at a tourney with a decked out heroes list chances are you'll find yourself floating home. And I think that's ok because the people that have a strong desire to play at the ultra competitive level of a game are typically more concerned with their Win/Loss record as opposed to how many named pilots they have.

The meta is somewhat narrow but not problematically at this point. Hopefully some new additions can mix it up some but for now at least there are multiple options.

I would love to look at the top 16 if I could. So again, we have to look at the Top 8. But we also have to realize how limited that info is, compared to the whole field. Honestly, the Top 16, where they made the cut, is where I think you can get the best info about the state of the "meta". 2 swarm squads made it into the top 8. That is hardly dominant. And again, you will never see the desired variety, especially as more ships get made.

To be honest as a lot of people got cut from the top 16 which were scored 4-1.. I would like to see everything that did better than 3-2. As a lot of the time these people were cut due to who they faced not due to how well they did.

It's worth noting also that since the advent of the internet forum information on things like this has become easier to come by. I have seen many of times meta shifting due to who wins at tournament. If someone wins with a swarm, then people who are competitive will naturally gravitate towards it as a way to win. This then means that next tournament a larger number of the competitive players are running a swarm, so ofc swarms do better, they are being used by more serious players.. And this causes feedback. What comes in the top 8 does not represent correctly what the state of the game balance is, just what the state of the game balance has been decided to be by the people attending.

It seems to me that most upgrades might be overpriced, considering how few were used.

It seems to me that most upgrades might be overpriced, considering how few were used.

no, just that they took the relevant ones only, which is why you do not see as many upgrades being played

just because you can put everything on one ship, doesnt mean you should

It was the chicken and the cow.

To me there are some obvious observations

1- the more ship the better. As many have said, more dice to roll is > upgrades. Swarm tactics is still very efficient if you practice how to move them first.

2- lots of ships are not up to par. I wouldn't be surprised if no y-wing was used at all by the top 16. Same for the lambda.

The biggest issue to me is #1 as it affect the core of the gameplay. Having rookie Pilotes everywhere, being stronger than real good pilote is an issue. Also the fact that upgrades are still not up to be better than adding another cheap ship to the table.

To me there might be some balance issue that may need to be looked into. Possibly raisin the cost of rookies pilots, or release pilot upgrade cards that either lower the cost of current better Pilotes to make them relevant again. Not ideal I know since this people having to buy new cards to make their current pilot worth it and it would be a huge undertaking by FFG to fix so I doubt they ever do it.

I had mentioned earlier either in this thread or another that one idea might be to use the pilot skill level to adjust some values. For instance if you are a higher level pilot shooting at a lower level maybe increase his attack value by 1 and if a lower is firing at a higher then the higher gets an extra evade roll. This would require only a new rule, no changes in anything else.

I like the fact that it is not about super cheesy characters with over powering special combos. The fact that it is not suggests that playing has a bigger effect on the result than cheesy lust building. And these by necessity are all comer lists. To me this actually represents good balance. Even if some ships don't figure in tournaments, that doesn't mean they have no value, there are other ways to play this game than 1v1 100pts winner take all. So if this game can have a reasonablly balanced tournament, which lets face it is a minority of people playing this game and be a fun game for the masses then they did pewetty well. Star wars name might attract us in but good game play keeps us comming back.

I feel like many of the things people are 'Learning' from worlds are fallacies. I am no expert, but this is just general gaming principles.

1) More ships = better. If you are just now learning this... This has been true since Wave 1. That being said, it is not the end-all be-all of X-Wing. Plenty of lists do just fine with fewer ships. Have you all forgotten that the Nationals runner-up was Wedge/Biggs/Luke? More ships does generally help, especially players of lower skill, because there is more room for error. If I play 4 Xs and lose 1 early on, I can recover to some degree because I had some to spare. Whereas if I play 3 ships and lose one early, it is very difficult to recover since I may now be horribly outnumbered. The real lesson there is to know what your list can take and pilot accordingly.

2) Luck is a huge factor. To quote Obi-Wan "In my experience, there is no such thing as luck". How many times have you heard someone talk about how unlucky they were right after they made a calculated risk and it went sour? Hint: if this happens to you it is not because of your luck; you took a risk and you paid for it. I have played so many games where someone hangs Dark Curse or somesuch out there and then complains about how unlucky they are when he dies to only a couple or X-Wings. Yes, it was unlikely/improbable that 2 rookies would kill him immediately, but you took the risk. If you weren't willing to lose him, then you should not have risked him. This is where people get confused - while it was improbable that it would happen that way, they took the risk. Sometimes you take risks and they pay off, others they don't. Winning/losing is more about knowing when to take risks and when not to than how the dice come out. I'm not necessarily saying luck is a non-factor, since at some level you are rolling dice and hoping for the best, but the best players tend to be able to overcome bad luck (or even better not really seem to have bad luck) because of the calculated risks they take.

3) There are only X Competitive ships - Wow, what a fallacy. Would you feel better if I told you I watched Hothie beat the eventual World Champ using 2 Firesprays and a TIE in the swiss? It was a close match, but it cracks me up to see so many people bemoaning the Firespray not being in Top 8. The Academy Pilot and Rookie Pilot are cost-effective and very balanced fighters, that is why you see them the most. They are the Space Marines of X-Wing. They are relatively cheap (or in the academy's case, the cheapest) and bring a lot to the table. Both are decently maneuverable, pack a decent punch, and can take some fire without dying immediately in most cases. Is it any wonder that these ships comprise at least some part of every list in the top 8? Compare these to the other possible ships. The other ships have associated drawbacks in one of those 4 major categories. That means when you take the alternatives, you are not guaranteed to have a 'jack of all trades' ship, which can cost you games. That being said, there is nothing necessarily wrong with the other ships, but there is risk involved with taking them over the vanilla filler, and most people entering an 'all comers' tournament want to limit the risk. This is expected in any game. The base-line units will be 'safer' since they are just that, the universal middle ground. That does not mean they are 'better' than the other ships, just that they lack, relatively speaking, the risk that a less balanced ship might bring.

2- lots of ships are not up to par. I wouldn't be surprised if no y-wing was used at all by the top 16. Same for the lambda.

You are aware that one of the Top 8 lists was XXBYY right? What will it take for the 'Y-Wing Stinks' posts to disappear?

2) Luck is a huge factor. To quote Obi-Wan "In my experience, there is no such thing as luck". How many times have you heard someone talk about how unlucky they were right after they made a calculated risk and it went sour? Hint: if this happens to you it is not because of your luck; you took a risk and you paid for it. I have played so many games where someone hangs Dark Curse or somesuch out there and then complains about how unlucky they are when he dies to only a couple or X-Wings. Yes, it was unlikely/improbable that 2 rookies would kill him immediately, but you took the risk. If you weren't willing to lose him, then you should not have risked him. This is where people get confused - while it was improbable that it would happen that way, they took the risk. Sometimes you take risks and they pay off, others they don't. Winning/losing is more about knowing when to take risks and when not to than how the dice come out. I'm not necessarily saying luck is a non-factor, since at some level you are rolling dice and hoping for the best, but the best players tend to be able to overcome bad luck (or even better not really seem to have bad luck) because of the calculated risks they take.

Some good stuff here. It got me thinking about something interesting and relevant. I have faced someone running Turr Phenir 3 times. In each of those matches I managed to 1-shot him in each of those matches. Now was there some luck involved between both my dice and my opponents dice? Yes, certainly. But you also have to take into account that Turr (and the Interceptors in general) are extremely fragile and at their point cost they can be meaty targets. Now you can howl bad luck all day when your Interceptor gets 1-shot but that's part of the risk you assume when you use it.

And on a side note Hida, the use of the Y-wings in that Top 8 list was very atypical (no turret) and not a good representation of how that ship is used probably 95% of the time. They were evidently used well in that specific list but that seems to be one of the biggest outliers of everything in the top 8.

Some good stuff here. It got me thinking about something interesting and relevant. I have faced someone running Turr Phenir 3 times. In each of those matches I managed to 1-shot him in each of those matches. Now was there some luck involved between both my dice and my opponents dice? Yes, certainly. But you also have to take into account that Turr (and the Interceptors in general) are extremely fragile and at their point cost they can be meaty targets. Now you can howl bad luck all day when your Interceptor gets 1-shot but that's part of the risk you assume when you use it.

And that's the thing, Interceptors are risky. They are not bad, I think they are definitely worth their points. I've had games where they have pulled back wins from a situation where they are outnumbered 3-1. But one bad dice roll can spell the end for them. And with the way tournaments are scored a lot of players don't want to risk that on a ship that is a 1/3 of their force.

Remember the sample sizes here!

One more round would have changed the top 8 significantly I would guess. Looking at nationals + regionals + finals top 16 is probably the best real look you can get, and even that will skew as wave 3 was available late in the season.

Overall, as a community, I think we can all get better at tournament reporting. There is very little out there to begin with and this forum is the "mother-ship" forum and often doesn't have the best info. That's sad.

The number of times my interceptor has taken down 2-3 ships is still, ever so slightly, more than the number of times they get one shot. They will get one shot'd, they are also one of the only small ships in the game that can take down 2-3 ships by itself.

Remember the sample sizes here!

One more round would have changed the top 8 significantly I would guess. Looking at nationals + regionals + finals top 16 is probably the best real look you can get, and even that will skew as wave 3 was available late in the season.

Overall, as a community, I think we can all get better at tournament reporting. There is very little out there to begin with and this forum is the "mother-ship" forum and often doesn't have the best info. That's sad.

The number of times my interceptor has taken down 2-3 ships is still, ever so slightly, more than the number of times they get one shot. They will get one shot'd, they are also one of the only small ships in the game that can take down 2-3 ships by itself.

It's really tough to say. Another round would've changed some of the top 16, but we really can't predict that. That said, I have seen another HSF and a double Firespray squad reported as to have made the cut. I would like to see the other 6 squads of the top 16 to get a better feel of the field.

Remember the sample sizes here!

I agree, you can't really base a lot of lessions on 8 people. There's just not much you can trully learn from so little data.

Look at the top 16, or lists that went better then 3-2 in all the tourny's run since wave 3 came out, and then you can actually start to draw some concussions.

Also as was pointed out up a bit, some of the stuff people have 'learned' from the top 8 at worlds, is stuff that was already known.

The idea that the Tie Swarm is a good list and does well in tourny's is not exactly new. We've known that for some time. But that doesn't mean they're the best list, unless you define best as the list that is most often seen in the top 16... Not saying that's an unfair way to judge, but you are still limiting yourself to a given type of gameplay which not everyone is involved with.

Neil Howard (Top 8)

Captain Jonus + Squad Leader + Seismic Charge

Scimitar Squadron + Cluster Missiles + Concussion Missiles

Scimitar Squadron + Advanced Proton Tropedoes + Proton Tropedoes

Academy Pilot

Academy Pilot

just watching the top8 playoff with bomber list vs tie swarm.

interesting choice to go with that mix of secondary weapons, esp. proton torps.

i like the 2 academy pilots in this list as they r gr8 blockers while the bombers support from behind.

I would have expected him to use at least one assault missile in his squad.

I love having 1-2 Academy blockers in any list. But with them, I find Assault Missiles aren't the most ideal ordinance choice.