Jump to content

Scopes

Members
  • Content Count

    792
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Scopes


  1. 20 hours ago, ficklegreendice said:

    It's funny, I didn't give a dry fart about 1st Ed epic unless I got to borrow a raider

    But with the prequel factions I'm all for it.

    Is it because those battles are more like videogames than actual narrative?

    Is it because I can throw down EVEN MOAR ARCS!?!?

    who's to say? 

    I'm going to venture a guess that it's the latter. Just a hunch, though. 


  2. On 5/12/2019 at 8:53 AM, Lyianx said:

    Yeah, you're not wrong. There are plenty of what i call 'loophole hunters' out there trying to twist the wording of the rules to mean something they clearly are not suppose to mean, but try to get it to work a specific way due to wording technicalities. That's why i try to get specific rule reference locations so people have an official thing they can point to that can (usually) end the debate.

    What a name for a rules-interpretation discussion podcast or monthly missive from FFG...


  3. 11 hours ago, Lyianx said:

    As Innese  stated, you are not wrong. But here is the rules reference that you can point to. 

    Rules Reference pg 19. 

    In this case, the timing specified is "After you fully execute a speed 3-5 maneuver". 

     

    Thanks! I should have stated that I read the rules reference before I posted, but some folks like to argue the shade of black, so...


  4. 1 hour ago, SpiderMana said:

    Oof, bringing her just for R5 doesn't even sound bad.

    Yep. I didn't realize how useful she was to the list for the first few games. 

    And in the games where she was the last ship, it was hard to catch her and hit her. The Force Points mechanic makes for a small challenge but can be overcome. He was flying her with Brillian Evasion and R2 Astro plus. 

    Fun games as well. 

     

    @ficklegreendice, I also forgot to mention the synced console upgrade looks to be situational but helped him more often than not. 


  5. On 5/4/2019 at 10:45 PM, ficklegreendice said:

    Idea

    R5_Astromech.png

     

    R5 has problems compared to r2. Requiring an ACTION means you can't stack it with like focus or evade (+/- force) on the same turn, or use a manuever action to gfto

    ...buuuuuuuuut the ARC doesn't exactly have any of that outside a red roll, and it's also got an ***-arc that makes weapon disabled really annoyingly debilitating. Sure, it'll be an unmodded shot but that's better than nothing (unless you're me, in which case it's about the same)

     

    also, 1 agility; 6 hull

    I play against someone who also loves the ARC 170. He uses this astromech. It extends the life of the ship way past what the lifespan of an ARC under fire every round should be. Especially when you couple it with a hull upgrade. We played 6 - 8 games Saturday, me with my list and him with a list VERY similar to the one you described above, just minus the Torrent. Every game was tough because of the ability to repair damage cards. 

    I left Wolffe for the end game only a couple of times, and by far that was one of the worst decisions I made over the course of the games. He was target number one for the remainder of our day. R5 kept him in the game. 


    I was flying Ved Foslo (FCS, Outmaneuver), Vynder(FCS, PT, APT, Trickshot, Config, ASlam), Saber Ace(Predator, HU), and Seyn(Marksmanship, HU). I was dishing damage cards often (particularly Seyn), and needed to with all the repairs occurring on the ARCs.  Having Snips to pass out actions was tough as well. 

    I recommend it. 


  6. What about this? 

    Ved Foslo executes a 3 bank. He focuses--> barrel rolls. Player then boosts via afterburners. 

    Is this legal? We cannot agree. 

     

    I don't think it's legal only because of the wording on afterburners that states "after"...to me that's proximate to removing the maneuver template. Am I wrong? 


  7. 17 hours ago, TheCeilican said:

    Metawing is evil.

    It definitely got us 2.0. Not excited at the idea of where this may lead. More casual for me and less competiive events is my solution.


  8. On 8/11/2014 at 4:09 PM, VanorDM said:

    A 8" ISD and I'll likely get out of the game. A 15" SSD on the other hand is completely laughable. It would look so wrong on the board.

     

     

     

    Again a 1-1.5 foot long SSD is just not going to look correct on the table, not next to a ISD... Unless FFG completely destroys any sense of scale with those.

    How propheic...

     

    Also, necro'd

     


  9. 32 minutes ago, svelok said:

    This card I made five months ago is relevant again...

    m4l6vQq.png

     I HATED playing against Dengar pilots in 1.0, but this is freaking hillarious. Well done. 


  10. 8 hours ago, Jike said:

    True, but I don't think the way to fix that particular issue is to break something else.

    I agree; I was just noting that an even more advanced fighter is capable of being played in a 4 ship list, which personally adds to my frustration with the game. And as a result, they'll have to patch the Phantom in order to correct and rebalance. I just find the whole idea odd. 

    I enjoy a measure of realism in wargaming. I don't really get to enjoy that in this case (with XWM given how some ships get priced), but that's why I mostly play casually, at home, in scenario type games now that 2.0 is out. 1.0 was fun enough, and I still mostly play 1.0 since I've got waaay too much of that stuff, but I no longer like to play competitively that often.  

    For the competitive side: I know; fluff< gameplay. Yech. Makes competitive less appealing to me, though. But that's just me. Everyone enjoys their favorite version of the game. That's a good thing. 


  11. 2 hours ago, ayedubbleyoo said:

    I've always thought this is a strange thing about X-Wing... seems 90% of discussion is about lists and maybe 10% is about tactics and ideas about flying. 

    There are one or two articles about things like rock placement and turn zero, but not much talk about it on the forum and in the community. A few of the podcasts have started up theory episodes, which is great.

    Has anyone noticed this, or it bothered them? And what are your questions about strategy?

    Well, this IS the XWM forum.

     

    You didn't think 2.0 would change that, did you? Really? 


  12. 11 hours ago, ImperialAce95 said:

    Cloaking rules are fine. Sigmas should keep their talents. Juke is not a problem and should not have gone up. Making a unique point system for increased cards (pilot or upgrade), or for upgrades on certain chassis is stupid - FFG already has too many scaling point systems for cards, it's getting too hard to keep track. The problem here is that the 4 Phantom list is still too efficient for its points - even though the list is about skill and positioning, which is what the devs want X-Wing to be about.

    Here's what I think the optimal solution should have been - the Phantom generics should have been limited from the start. *** for Imdaars, ** for Sigmas. When I first saw the CIS vulture generics that were also limited, I immediately thought "This should have been designed for other ships. Why wasn't it?". If generic pilots and some upgrades were limited we wouldn't be having this conversation. (Should have also been the case for Barrage Rockets, Veteran Turret Gunner, maybe rebel Y-Wings, etc. But that's another thread.)

    Now, I don't think every generic should be limited - some are meant to be spammed, like regular TIE fighters; some ships are meant to be limited by their price. Making some generics limited would create more faction identity - within a certain faction, said faction has limited access to a certain chassis. TIE Phantoms were very expensive and rare because of their cloaking tech. Limiting generics could also encourage players to be more creative with listbuilding instead of spamming the most cost effective/efficient thing. I always liked TIE Salad lists. Heck, if this was the case Phantom prices could come DOWN.

    But we don't live in a perfect world, so what's the solution? Unfortunately, I think the only way this will be fixed is to raise prices on phantoms - it's the chassis that is the problem same as the Punisher (which is still good). Now, this might make some people angry, but FFG can't make everything perfectly balanced and happy. On the bright side, I'd rather pay a lot for a well-designed ship than peanuts for a poorly-designed one (see the TIE Aggressor).

    However, there's another solution that could work. FFG could errata the card, making them limited. This could REALLY make some people mad, but would be good for the game in the long term. And these possible upcoming card packs could be a way for them to re-release the corrected cards. Just tossing the idea out there.

     

    TL;DR - Phantoms are the Problem, not Juke. Generics should go up. X-Wing 3.0 when (sarcasm)

    Excellent points. Well said. 

×
×
  • Create New...