Jump to content

MrParsons

Members
  • Content Count

    83
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About MrParsons

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

299 profile views
  1. I've found nothing better than saying "s-foils" out loud before revealing the dial. The downside is that I say "s-foils" when I have ship which doesn't have "s-foils". Got a friend who could never remember predator in 1.0. We conditioned him to say "attack with predator" whenever deciding who to attack. This confused opponents when he didn't have predator on a ship but he never missed the reroll when it was relevant.
  2. I'd offer a different approach to this. Wait until you've played a few games to work out how you enjoy flying. Do you like moving lots of ships around? Do you like flying in formation? Do you like dodging arcs? Do you like rolling slowly towards your opponent and launching an alpha strike? Do you like rolling lots of dice? Do you like turrets? Do you like bombs? etc etc Only then do you decide on a faction.
  3. I fail to understand why there is any confusion here. When Krassis performs his front arc special attack from the rear arc I don't see anyone saying it's no longer a special attack. So why make up rules that it's no longer a front arc attack. There is no point referring to the rules reference or the faq as there is nothing in the rules reference or the faq that explains how this is intended to work. All we can do is read what is on the cards and play it the way it is written. A front arc special attack is a front arc special attack. It doesn't matter if it's performed out of the rear or it's performed with me standing on one leg with a a sock on each ear singing a Wizard's Staff Has Got a Knob On The End. If the card doesn't say "change it be a rear arc attack" then it's not a rear arc attack.
  4. I think it's more the case of defending FFG against unsubstantiated claims. We don't know if it is locked away in the core set or if is isn't. The information currently is that it's available from 2 places. There may be more, there may not. Maybe there will be, maybe there won't. No it's not. You're making assumptions. Not reading anybody stating this as fact. If someone has then that someone is wrong as (yes you've guessed it) we don't know yet. See previous comments.
  5. The TIE swarm loses horribly. There are 2 conclusions from this. FFG will have made a big mistake Your assumptions are wrong and FFG won't have made a big mistake
  6. Whilst I agree that a firing arc doesn't go beyond range three your statement in mathematically inaccurate. An arc can have sides of infinite length. It would also have a curve at the end of infinite length. Plus an infinite area inside.
  7. This ^^^^ Plus everything else Aaron Foss said. I think that all future posts from folk complaining should just get the above response sent to them.
  8. "I want to play with the new stuff" "Well then buy some new stuff" "But it'll cost me money as I've got all this old stuff. Some other game made by someone else lets me play with new stuff for some money but it's cheaper and it's better" "Well then keep playing with the old stuff" "But I want to play with the new stuff" "Well then buy some new stuff" "But it'll cost me money as I've got all this old stuff. Some other game made by someone else lets me play with new stuff for some money but it's cheaper and it's better" sigh...
  9. Why does someone who has many 1.0 ships have a legitimate grievance? In what way are they being penalised? They get to the same choice as anyone else. Pay to upgrade ships or don't pay to upgrade ships. It could be argued that the player with a small collection has to pay more per ship as they won't get to use every card in a conversion kit. The player with a large collection will get to use every card in a conversion kit. A great big bundle of stuff in a box is better for the huge collection than the small collection. Unless you're suggesting that the player with lots of ships is somehow entitled to a much bigger discount than the player with a small number of ships. And that's just ridiculous.
  10. Well I've just preordered 2 conversion kits plus a core set for the huge price of £77.92 here in the uk. The best price I can find for the force awakens core set is £28.45. So I could have bought 2.74 force awakens core sets for the same price.
  11. You don't have to do that. 1.0 isn't changing. That game is still available. You can play that when you wish. People (individuals and clubs) can still run 1.0 tournaments. If you want to play 2.0 (which is a different game) then you should have to buy into it. If you want to play in 2.0 tournaments then you need to buy the 2.0 game. You can either buy it all at once for a huge discount or buy it in smaller bits. Your choice. And with a collectable game, you most definitely have to keep spending to be competitive. That is the whole business model of collectable games. We've all been doing that for years with 1.0 If you want a game that you can buy once and never have to spend money to remain competitive then x-wing isn't for you.
  12. I really don't understand the negativity about conversion kits. There's a new game coming out in six months time. It's a collectable game about star wars. Just like that first collectable game about star wars it's going to be expensive to buy everything (that's what collectable games are like). But, you don't have to buy everything in the new game. You can get a huge bulk discount if you bought the first game. If you don't want to take the huge bulk discount that's on offer at release you can wait to buy smaller upgrades from folk off the internet.
  13. I've given this some more thought. I still think that my 4 points are valid. Here are my suggestions for dealing with them Roll half agility (rounded down) green dice to defend against bomb damage Enhanced autothrusters than can convert an extra blank to an eye Enemy ships in your firing arc cannot boost or barrel roll Free Stealth Device or Stealth Device doesn't get removed when you get hit How much all of that costs or how it's delivered is a different matter.
  14. As I see it the original point of the Interceptor was a nippy little bugger that could zip around and out manoeuvre the enemy. Not getting shot was part of the point. Then if you did get shot you had as many, if not more, green dice than your opponent had red dice. The enemy had to block you / focus fire in order to take you down. That game doesn't exist any more. Bombs, many turrets, better manoeuvrability of enemies, and more red dice have taken that game away. So if we want the original point of Interceptors to be viable again then they need A way to defend against bombs A better way than the existing (autothrusters) to defend against multiple turrets Better manoeuvrability or a way to reduce enemy manoeuvrability More green dice or a way to reduce enemy red dice That's a lot of stuff. No idea where to start. I don't think that giving them more hull / shields is the way to go. They lose their identity. Maybe an extra point hull at most.
×
×
  • Create New...