Jump to content

MalusCalibur

Members
  • Content Count

    476
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    MalusCalibur got a reaction from ClassicalMoser in Discuss Nantex article in this thread.   
    There is no reason to expect the Nantex to have two Talent slots. You have to make a choice about what to do with it, either using your Tractor tokens aggressively (with Ensnare) with a penalty for failing to pass it off (-1 agility), or defensively (with Gravitic Deflection), with compensation for the reduced agility in the form of the reroll. There's no meaningful decision to make if you can just have both, or either of them for 'free' (in opportunity terms) as well as another bonus with another Talent.
    If those abilities were meant to be as much a part of the ship as the Pinpoint Tractor Array itself is, they'd have been Configuration cards like the Delta-7B/CLT are.
  2. Like
    MalusCalibur got a reaction from theBitterFig in Discuss Nantex article in this thread.   
    What logic is that, though? Because the Nantex really isn't like the A-Wing - or indeed any other ship. It already has a lot of unusual shenanigans that are going to let it hit harder or move in unexpected ways (such as still being able to tractor-reposition off a bump). I don't believe it needs the added flexibility of two Talents, especially when the two unique ones are clearly designed to be so diametrically opposed as to be a decision between them rather than just being able to 'have it all'.

     
    We don't know that, though. Granted it's likely, given the cards shown, but no guarantees. Perhaps it has an additional Modification slot to help keep it customizable? Or perhaps it doesn't need to be?

     
    But the Nantex is definitely a 'weird outlier' - almost the definition of it given how unusual it is. And the Fang sees plenty of play and plenty of different setups despite only having minimal upgrade slots. I don't think we can use that as evidence in the Nantex's case.

    More than anything else, I just really hope that the Nantex only has one Talent slot - as I've said, that way there are actual decisions to be made when building it, rather than just being able to take everything.
  3. Like
    MalusCalibur got a reaction from JJ48 in Discuss Nantex article in this thread.   
    What logic is that, though? Because the Nantex really isn't like the A-Wing - or indeed any other ship. It already has a lot of unusual shenanigans that are going to let it hit harder or move in unexpected ways (such as still being able to tractor-reposition off a bump). I don't believe it needs the added flexibility of two Talents, especially when the two unique ones are clearly designed to be so diametrically opposed as to be a decision between them rather than just being able to 'have it all'.

     
    We don't know that, though. Granted it's likely, given the cards shown, but no guarantees. Perhaps it has an additional Modification slot to help keep it customizable? Or perhaps it doesn't need to be?

     
    But the Nantex is definitely a 'weird outlier' - almost the definition of it given how unusual it is. And the Fang sees plenty of play and plenty of different setups despite only having minimal upgrade slots. I don't think we can use that as evidence in the Nantex's case.

    More than anything else, I just really hope that the Nantex only has one Talent slot - as I've said, that way there are actual decisions to be made when building it, rather than just being able to take everything.
  4. Like
    MalusCalibur got a reaction from Archangelspiv in Discuss Nantex article in this thread.   
    There is no reason to expect the Nantex to have two Talent slots. You have to make a choice about what to do with it, either using your Tractor tokens aggressively (with Ensnare) with a penalty for failing to pass it off (-1 agility), or defensively (with Gravitic Deflection), with compensation for the reduced agility in the form of the reroll. There's no meaningful decision to make if you can just have both, or either of them for 'free' (in opportunity terms) as well as another bonus with another Talent.
    If those abilities were meant to be as much a part of the ship as the Pinpoint Tractor Array itself is, they'd have been Configuration cards like the Delta-7B/CLT are.
  5. Like
    MalusCalibur got a reaction from theBitterFig in Discuss Nantex article in this thread.   
    There is no reason to expect the Nantex to have two Talent slots. You have to make a choice about what to do with it, either using your Tractor tokens aggressively (with Ensnare) with a penalty for failing to pass it off (-1 agility), or defensively (with Gravitic Deflection), with compensation for the reduced agility in the form of the reroll. There's no meaningful decision to make if you can just have both, or either of them for 'free' (in opportunity terms) as well as another bonus with another Talent.
    If those abilities were meant to be as much a part of the ship as the Pinpoint Tractor Array itself is, they'd have been Configuration cards like the Delta-7B/CLT are.
  6. Like
    MalusCalibur got a reaction from Hiemfire in Discuss Nantex article in this thread.   
    There is no reason to expect the Nantex to have two Talent slots. You have to make a choice about what to do with it, either using your Tractor tokens aggressively (with Ensnare) with a penalty for failing to pass it off (-1 agility), or defensively (with Gravitic Deflection), with compensation for the reduced agility in the form of the reroll. There's no meaningful decision to make if you can just have both, or either of them for 'free' (in opportunity terms) as well as another bonus with another Talent.
    If those abilities were meant to be as much a part of the ship as the Pinpoint Tractor Array itself is, they'd have been Configuration cards like the Delta-7B/CLT are.
  7. Like
    MalusCalibur reacted to Mep in Pulling the Strings (Nantex article up)   
    I get that if you have to explain the joke, it may not be funny, but it has nothing to do with what you think it does. Worker insects are genetically female but are asexual. Period, nothing more to read into that. If you do, you bring your own bias. The complicated part of the joke refers to parthenogenesis which can be stressed induced and is rather complicated.
    You choose to read into my statement something that simply does not exist there. The statement was about fictional insects and their biology. Really does have absolutely nothing to do with humans. You brought that to this topic, not me, and you are the one that decided to flaunt those attitudes here. You really do need to stop this.
  8. Like
    MalusCalibur reacted to Kehl_Aecea in Wave 6 and the Q1 Pilot, Device and Obstacle packs   
    What if "Rush" allows the player to use a 2 straight for a boost instead?
  9. Like
    MalusCalibur reacted to Jo Jo in Pulling the Strings (Nantex article up)   
    It's 2019. You know you can't make a joke about ****ing anything. 
  10. Like
    MalusCalibur reacted to Quack Shot in Scum Hotshots and Aces   
    I feel like FFG can never win because players will never be satisfied. Even if it’s the exact solution they asked for.
  11. Like
    MalusCalibur reacted to Ryfterek in @FFG Please lock this thread.   
    Like, in not carrying around a firearm by your side wherever you go just in case a fellow Man turns out to be such a threat to you you'd opt to kill them?
  12. Like
    MalusCalibur reacted to Tvboy in @FFG Please lock this thread.   
    Even when I already posted a photo of the aftermath of an accidental discharge and that they do happen and can be devastating to flesh and property, the pro-gun crowd will always frame the argument as being about homegrown heroes thwarting the mass shooter or register robber, even though it's way more often that simple arguments turn into shootouts because someone happened to have a gun on them and didn't have either the training, restraint, or sobriety to keep it in their pants. 
  13. Like
    MalusCalibur reacted to Tvboy in @FFG Please lock this thread.   
    And people also shouldn't lock their keys in their car and shouldn't use their birthday as their pin number and should make diversified investments and should always take their car into the shop when the check engine light turns on, but people are dumb by nature and don't always do the the things they should do even when they've done it a million times and have been drilled and trained and lectured, they still make mistakes. But none of those other examples involve literally having a primed explosive+shrapnel strapped to your body. You wanna literally play with guns, that might be your God-given right, but it's my right to ask that you not do it around me. 
    26 States require absolutely zero training for a person to be eligible for a concealed carry license, including the state that I live in, and there are people carrying hidden guns that have no idea what they're doing but probably have a huge chip on their shoulder and are basically ticking idiot time bombs. Guns attract and escalate violence, they don't deter it. Glad to hear that FFG has made the right choice on this one and people like @JJ48's friends will hopefully be asked to leave their guns outside the store, or they can follow JJ48's example and just play at home with their guns (hopefully in a safe and responsible manner for their own sake). But whether people like it or not, this is the ruling FFG has made.  
  14. Like
    MalusCalibur reacted to BCooper85 in @FFG Please lock this thread.   
    You guys are going around in circles.
    I'm from the UK so think the idea of people 'legally' carrying a firearm is ridiculous so agree with Pundit and Meanie here.
    But, you guys aren't gonna change each others minds conversing on a forum about plastic spaceships. At this point you're all pissing in the wind. The whole argument is infinitely bigger than bringing a weapon to your FLGS.
  15. Like
    MalusCalibur got a reaction from Greebwahn in Aces Over   
    I really don't believe Dengar (or the JM5k in general) is worth taking, even now. The novelty of having all three In6 pilots is nice, but it wears off quickly when you realize that Dengar is largely dead weight who will struggle to keep arc on anything because of how atrociously the ship manages stress. Just about anything else would be a better use of the 68pts spent on him - Teroch, Talonbane, Kavil - ****, you can even get a Dorsal/VTG Lok Revenant for the equivalent of Dengars' *base* price!
  16. Like
    MalusCalibur got a reaction from Ryuneke in Aces Over   
    I really don't believe Dengar (or the JM5k in general) is worth taking, even now. The novelty of having all three In6 pilots is nice, but it wears off quickly when you realize that Dengar is largely dead weight who will struggle to keep arc on anything because of how atrociously the ship manages stress. Just about anything else would be a better use of the 68pts spent on him - Teroch, Talonbane, Kavil - ****, you can even get a Dorsal/VTG Lok Revenant for the equivalent of Dengars' *base* price!
  17. Like
    MalusCalibur got a reaction from Rojek in What new points changes were most surprising?   
    Inertial Dampeners is the biggest surprise to me. Outside of that one abusive combination with R2-D2 crew on the Falcon allowing practically infinite use, it was trash even at 1pt because of all the drawbacks: the self-damage requirement, time limitation (if you don't use it before your shields are shot down, it can't be used at all), and stress penalty.
    Given that FFG took the thematic Illicit slot from the Rebel Falcon, ID was unlikely to ever see use again - costed the way it has been, it's now utterly worthless. Quite why they didn't just make it a 1 non-recurring charge (without the shield loss) in the first place I'll never know.

    The other big shock was just how hard the Phantom got hit again - the 'Quad Phantom' list needed to be addressed, but it could have been done delicately by increasing the cost of the Sigma Squadron Ace in order to limit the number of Jukes (I'm not sure that needed to go up again either, but that's a seperate discussion) available by virtue of points. Instead it feels like the whole thing got hit with a sledgehammer, and I'm really not convinced the named ones needed to go up any further.

    Overall, the changes feel like heavy-handed responses to the top performing lists, more than carefully considered balance tweaks.
  18. Like
    MalusCalibur got a reaction from Mark Caliber in What new points changes were most surprising?   
    Inertial Dampeners is the biggest surprise to me. Outside of that one abusive combination with R2-D2 crew on the Falcon allowing practically infinite use, it was trash even at 1pt because of all the drawbacks: the self-damage requirement, time limitation (if you don't use it before your shields are shot down, it can't be used at all), and stress penalty.
    Given that FFG took the thematic Illicit slot from the Rebel Falcon, ID was unlikely to ever see use again - costed the way it has been, it's now utterly worthless. Quite why they didn't just make it a 1 non-recurring charge (without the shield loss) in the first place I'll never know.

    The other big shock was just how hard the Phantom got hit again - the 'Quad Phantom' list needed to be addressed, but it could have been done delicately by increasing the cost of the Sigma Squadron Ace in order to limit the number of Jukes (I'm not sure that needed to go up again either, but that's a seperate discussion) available by virtue of points. Instead it feels like the whole thing got hit with a sledgehammer, and I'm really not convinced the named ones needed to go up any further.

    Overall, the changes feel like heavy-handed responses to the top performing lists, more than carefully considered balance tweaks.
  19. Like
    MalusCalibur got a reaction from Rossetti1828 in What new points changes were most surprising?   
    Inertial Dampeners is the biggest surprise to me. Outside of that one abusive combination with R2-D2 crew on the Falcon allowing practically infinite use, it was trash even at 1pt because of all the drawbacks: the self-damage requirement, time limitation (if you don't use it before your shields are shot down, it can't be used at all), and stress penalty.
    Given that FFG took the thematic Illicit slot from the Rebel Falcon, ID was unlikely to ever see use again - costed the way it has been, it's now utterly worthless. Quite why they didn't just make it a 1 non-recurring charge (without the shield loss) in the first place I'll never know.

    The other big shock was just how hard the Phantom got hit again - the 'Quad Phantom' list needed to be addressed, but it could have been done delicately by increasing the cost of the Sigma Squadron Ace in order to limit the number of Jukes (I'm not sure that needed to go up again either, but that's a seperate discussion) available by virtue of points. Instead it feels like the whole thing got hit with a sledgehammer, and I'm really not convinced the named ones needed to go up any further.

    Overall, the changes feel like heavy-handed responses to the top performing lists, more than carefully considered balance tweaks.
  20. Like
    MalusCalibur got a reaction from millertime059 in What new points changes were most surprising?   
    Inertial Dampeners is the biggest surprise to me. Outside of that one abusive combination with R2-D2 crew on the Falcon allowing practically infinite use, it was trash even at 1pt because of all the drawbacks: the self-damage requirement, time limitation (if you don't use it before your shields are shot down, it can't be used at all), and stress penalty.
    Given that FFG took the thematic Illicit slot from the Rebel Falcon, ID was unlikely to ever see use again - costed the way it has been, it's now utterly worthless. Quite why they didn't just make it a 1 non-recurring charge (without the shield loss) in the first place I'll never know.

    The other big shock was just how hard the Phantom got hit again - the 'Quad Phantom' list needed to be addressed, but it could have been done delicately by increasing the cost of the Sigma Squadron Ace in order to limit the number of Jukes (I'm not sure that needed to go up again either, but that's a seperate discussion) available by virtue of points. Instead it feels like the whole thing got hit with a sledgehammer, and I'm really not convinced the named ones needed to go up any further.

    Overall, the changes feel like heavy-handed responses to the top performing lists, more than carefully considered balance tweaks.
  21. Like
    MalusCalibur reacted to Racejoe in What did 1.0 do better than 2.0?   
    Packaging.  I understand having the standardized packaging, but there is no elegant way to open a second edition small ship box.
  22. Like
    MalusCalibur reacted to ScummyRebel in If you could change 1 thing...   
    Asteroids do not concern me, Admiral. I want that ship, and not excuses!
    Ok, moving away from the jokes - this is going to sound dumb, but I’m not sure I would want to change anything. Sure, more metrics means there’s a way to vary a ship more than 4 stat lines, an action bar, and a dial. But it isn’t necessary to change the game state.
    Now, I would really like to see a campaign box set for x-wing. Objectives, missions, new terrain, all of it. Just more ways to play the game. Just like how Legion has multiple different game modes - there’s “standard” which is based off the standard draw deck of game format, there’s ffg operations published online, and there’s a new terrain piece coming out with some specialized linked missions. X-wing could benefit from something like this as another game mode besides standard dogfighting.
    I suspect that epic may ultimately go down this path. If it does, that’s awesome. 
  23. Like
    MalusCalibur reacted to Pink_Viking in When will we see the next points change?   
    None of these lists need an emergency points changes. On the contrary, these changes need to be well thought out and directed. 
    I believe FFG devs are watching tournament results and will react accordingly. 
  24. Like
    MalusCalibur reacted to AceDogbert in Limit hull shield to 33 for tournament   
    I don't see how this would make the game more balanced, only punish players choosing to play a 'heavy' list.
    Such lists are usually trading firepower, agility and initiative for staying power, so hard-capping the amount of health your list has limits the design space for the game. 
    Also, damage cards from destroyed ships get recycled into a new damage deck should a player run out, so there isn't even a problem.
  25. Like
    MalusCalibur reacted to Maui. in N-1 Naboo Starfighter Preview!   
    Man, I really hope they don't increase Juke. It's already only remotely viable on ships that get to evade for free. I'd like to be able to fly a Juking N-1,  but they can't abuse it like Phantoms can so 7 points would be pretty yeesh.
    Here are some ways to fix Juke, which is only a problem in the quad Phantoms list because you can run multiple copies of it on ships with 3 attack dice and free evades:
    Sigma +1 means you can't fit a third Juke into a four Sigmas list Also bumping Imdaar +2 means you can't fit three Jukes into any four Phantom list Drop the price of both generic Phantoms and just take away the Sigma's talent slot Make Juke pay a tax for multiple copies in a list (first one costs 4, second one costs 6, third costs 8, etc) Errata Juke to be unique or 2x limited (note: I know this won't actually happen) There's lots of stuff you could do to fix the problem without breaking Juke for everyone just because of Phantoms.
×
×
  • Create New...