Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by xanderf

  1. Have to say, I do sort of miss the scenarios, and particularly the linked campaigns. Those really increased the immersiveness of the game a LOT. The linked campaigns, especially, reminded me a lot of the old LucasArts X-Wing/TIE Fighter games - in that you felt the missions mattered more, and got more invested in your squad and its story. That was really cool.
  2. What's weird is that there really is no need for that to have been true. One of the nice things about games with point systems like this one - it's theoretically very easy to set a 'handicap' so both players end up with an equal challenge. If teaching a net-new gamer, once they get to the list-building stage, I usually build to only around 150 myself (usually a VSD + Raider or Gozer + some squads) and let them build to 300. As they start winning games, I'll bring up my own point target to more equal levels, just with a goal of keeping the matches a challenge - but winnable - for both of us.
  3. Yeah, I tend to build for 2nd player, so I start with objectives. Usually I pick an objective I want to try out, and then build a list for it. Then work out which other two objectives pair the best with it to give my opponent a pile of bad choices, at which point you iterate on the overall list to take advantage of those two objectives as well (hopefully without damaging too badly the objective you started with). This has been made a bit easier by the RitR objectives!
  4. xanderf

    Quick builds

    Haven't posted in this forum a lot LATELY (mostly Armada these days), but...Quick Build is absolutely going to be 90% of my X-Wing play. For "casual players" (which I hope FFG realizes is the vast majority of their market, by probably 10 to 1 - I mean, look at all the Target sales of merely core sets)...the 'quick build' format provides everything you need to level up the game from 'naked ships rolling dice at each other' to the more complex mechanics...without having to really invest any thought into planning it. While at the SAME time...sort of teasing that idea of what's possible..."could I just swap out this for that?"...that can create a life-long die-hard X-Wing fan out of thin air. But either way - fanatic converted or not - the 'quick build' format makes it a game that is playable out of the box(es).
  5. Good point, and there isn't really any other way to get more. So you need multiple Nantex to even be *able* to tractor a large ship, anyway...
  6. Am I just missing something, or does the Nantex expansion not come with sufficient tractor tokens to tractor a 'large'-base ship?
  7. Ah, I see what you mean - you aren't aligning the maneuver template to the front/back/middle of the ship's base, but the other way around - rather aligning the ship's centerline hashmark to the front/back/center of the template. Yeah, I guess I can see how folks could get that wrong - on small bases, it basically doesn't make a difference because the maneuver template width is the same as the ship centerline hashmark to its base edge. On larger bases, that's not true.
  8. Wait, what's the deal with medium-base barrel rolls and talon rolls that is unusual??
  9. xanderf

    Quick builds

    Well that's sort of baked into the precision, no? I mean, building to a list of 8 'threat' vs 200 pts...each 'threat' level accounts for 25 pts roughly before it bumps up to the next one. That's a lot of variance!
  10. ...random note that I sort of wish the official app would support this, as it's trivial enough to do given the stated objectives of the thing, and could be AMAZING for the game community if it allowed for casual pairings with handicaps (IE., higher-ranked player flying their preferred 200pt squad, with lower-ranked player...based on some formula derived from the ELO ranking...given XX number of points more to work with, or maybe just starting with XX points scored as the match starts - the goal, as with the concept of handicaps in sporting events, being to give players of an otherwise-notable difference in skill/experience an opportunity to play against each other with an equal challenge).
  11. Yup, have the core set. And honestly, I'm far more of an Armada player these days. I had a HUUUUUGE X-Wing 1.0 collection I've sold off, so I'm only really dabbling in 2.0 (mostly because it's got two of my favorite factions in the setting) - I rather expect like 90% of any game I play of X-Wing these days will just be using the threat levels and pre-build cards. So the question is mostly academic, but on the occasion I hit up a local tournament or something, I don't want to be missing an obviously useful combo.
  12. Given I'm really ONLY buying Sep and Republic ships presently - is there anything critical to a good Republic list that I'm otherwise missing? Say, a Force upgrade only available in some other expansion that is super good on the Republic Jedi pilots?
  13. Kind of not a fan of that one, as I think FFG sort of mis-factioned it. I mean, I get WHY they did it, but it was certainly never seen on-screen working with the Separatists. Given my main faction is Republic, does it come with any upgrades particularly needed/important for Republic lists?
  14. Not looking to acquire a collection that allows for EVERY possible good Sep list to work, but just to have a few options to counter my mostly-Republic collection for casual play. Currently I have 4 Vulture droids (1x Servants of Strike + 2x Vulture expansion), and sort of feel like I need 6 of them to really provide the Seps a fair variety of options. Given the price is roughly comparable - going with another copy of 'Servants of Strife' certainly gets me the most other stuff, however at this point most of the cards in it I have in RIDICULOUS numbers of duplicates, and I don't really fancy another Belbullab-2 anyway...or am I missing something, here, and the real value IS in this pack? The alternative pair of standalone Vulture expansions gets me just the two ships I "need"*, and as near as I can tell the only real difference in upgrades included is the standalone expansion bringing buzz droids that the combo set lacks (of course, those are partially restricted, anyway, meaning I surely don't need 4 of them)... * Or, I mean, do I? Am I over-thinking things, and 4 Vultures is really enough to knock together a few options? Currently I've also got one Belbullab-2 (of course) and a pair of Hyenas.
  15. Same - for me, it was the reserve hangar deck. I can see situations I might want 4 of them...but honestly 3 is probably more reasonable and a better list. The counts seem fair.
  16. I think Munificent vs Acclamator makes for the more interesting core set, myself. Basically agree on Vulture and V-19s as the most likely squads in it. Hopefully a different color than the existing squads - perhaps a soft blue and more sandy-sort-of-tan?
  17. It definitely has the advantage of being more Imperial-looking art vs the obviously traitor-sourced SW-7s. (Although I can't help but feel the SW-7s work a lot better when you roll those 4 blue accs. I mean, I get that WBT can technically help with reds, too, although 'rolling too many accs with red dice'...let's just say that's not a frequent problem. Gut feeling is that WBT should probably have been cheaper...)
  18. Ummm...isn't the point of 10 Hammerhead corvettes that you are able to do 50 pts of ramming damage direct to the enemy hulls, bypassing shields and defense tokens and everything? Add one copy of Garel's Honor in there, just for kicks. Although usually people go with 8x ET CR90b, just because of the ability to double-ram on certain turns - and that the higher base speed makes it a lot easier to arrange the rams in the first place. Less hull, of course (assuming you are trying to keep one hull alive on each ship so you don't intentionally lose any of your own, the 10x Hammerhead gets 40 damage out while the 8x CR90 only gets out 24 damage - still 24 is enough to kill an SSD and the CR90s can do it in two turns, while it takes the Hammerheads 4 turns to get out their 40).
  19. But then it has no other defense tokens. Agate (Commander) can take any non-scatter defense token, so "needs" (to the extent we ever NEED more defense tokens in any given expansion šŸ™„ ) one copy of each non-scatter defense token. The fan shows exactly that - one copy of each non-scatter defense token plus 4 more 'salvo' defense tokens (for 5 total of them). While the cards in the fan are usually incomplete to hide certain upgrades from being spoiled, I don't think we've yet seen a release where the command dials and defense tokens weren't exactly what was needed by the ship and its upgrades, and nothing more or less...
  20. Judging by the defense tokens in its spread - exactly enough for its commander +4 more copies of 'Salvo', and no other defense tokens at all...it's a compelling argument that it really does just have 4 copies of 'salvo'. (Which we don't know what it does beyond acting at least a bit like a ship-based 'Counter'-keyword squadron. For all we know it lets you halve the incoming damage, move 1 pt to an adjacent hull zone, AND letting you return fire out that arc, up to your battery armament or total damage taken on that hull zone, whichever is lowest.)
  21. I guess the dial size on the base wasn't so obvious it was large vs medium - the base size differences aren't especially massive, after all, and perspective can play tricks with that. The question came more from the surprisingly price difference - the Onager at $60, but the Starhawk is at $80. If $80 was the new target for a 'large' accounting for the passage of time and trade wars and whatnot, it would make sense for the Onager to be a medium for being so much cheaper. (Obviously not a particularly strong rule, but a hint at one anyway)
  22. Given those are already showing up in X-Wing (Naboo N-1 and Sith Infiltrator), and the rest at least probable, it would be a bit of a surprise if they didn't appear in Armada, too.
  23. Question - do we know for sure that it IS a 'large' base, and not 'medium'? Like - has that been confirmed anywhere?
  24. I don't exactly have a horse in this race, but you have to admit - from receiving the application to deadline only 12 days, some of which includes the US 4th of July holidays and events? That really isn't very much time, no. I can easily see why some stores might have been caught a bit off-guard at how short the window was.
  • Create New...