Jump to content

Rain_SP

Members
  • Content Count

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Well, guys, I want to say, that I'm starting to apprehend your point now. Maybe, some things really should be thrown away of the game, as developers realize they were a mistake. I have to admit, that my attitude was such because I've just never played top builds nor against them, but favored some builds that were destroyed by the 'splash'. I just find hard to share your optimism that the game is going to become balanced after this change: for me it seems that we'll face a way more things that will have to be priced out before we'll get rid of distinct tops. And there is always a minor amount of changes that bring concerns even to people sharing your point, not just me - that's also a reason.
  2. I'll rather agree with you point in general. List building is never a random generation for me, too, and I also don't want everything to be the same. Finally, now we'll have to wait and see, how meta will change: if a month after we see more than six (better ten) build types on top of the tournaments (which are likely to be our menu for the next half of a year), we'll be able to say that things are turning around. Otherwise we'll have to admit we're gust circling around. I just do not like things like "Now, all are playing Leia!", or "Then, all do not play Tactical Officer!". It sounds more suitable for some casual format than for the main game mode. If cards become more or less preferable, it's fine. If they go out of play or become auto-inclusive... it's not that fine. And.. yes, I prefer that players are rather encouraged to come up with something new, than forced to.
  3. Eliminating current top builds is a possible way to give people options to come up with something new, that's true. But it's not the only way, and I'm not sure it's the best one. For example, first point change wiped out strong strikers list of the first half-year and enabled lists of turret ships and other durable ships such as Rebel beef. If those lists were enabled while lists being in use at that time not wiped out, wouldn't it have given people more options that they finally received? Another side effect of the eliminating top builds strategy is that if currently too strong build is raised up by all it's meaningful elements, both ships and upgrades, all other players who tended to use them, even not in that very build that is directly hit, are forced to stop using them because of their overprice. If all key components of the targeted build would go up just 1-2 pts, so that it still can be assembled, just having to discard some of its secondary features, or, maybe, to downgrade some pilots (so it would be weakened rather that eliminated), collateral damage will be not that big. This way, not-targeted builds, sharing some cards with builds that are to be nerfed, would have just few of their cards up 1-2 pts, that's can be handled, especially, if some others of their cards are down a bit. If overpowered builds are just weakened, and, simultaneously, new options are provided, I see it as a sufficient fix. But as top builds are tend to be completely wiped out, so that their total price is raised to 220-230 pts to completely prevent them from being fielded, a lot of their elements are going up by 5-6 pts, which ruins many others, not-targeted lists. Finally, I'd like to ask game designers to make changes more subtle and accurate: for example, if something plays too good, it must go up, but not to the point where it completely stops playing, like scum Han gunner, and if something doesn't play at all, it shouldn't become as cheap as it's auto-included as Leia. I totally agree, that current rebel meta was completely formed by the first points change, as it consisted of downpriced ships and upgrades, while no viable alternative was provided. But I'm not sure it's the best way to be. That's why I propose to make it 7 for three certain ships with 'free evade' ship ability (and expanding this list as more such ship types appear) and return it to 4 for all others
  4. But now juke is stapled to Phantoms and Defenders, and Trickshot is stapled to Rebel/Scam Han. Those ships are always fielded with those upgrades, and nothing else uses them. As the upgrades still give those ships too much power, they continually go up, up and up. At some points, the ships they were stapled to will deny them. Then they’ll be completely out. After all, I never suggested to make anything ubiquitous and auto-inclusive: it’s another bad side that I mentioned. Evade is generally defensive action, comparing with focus that’s both applied for attack and defense. For ships with free evade Juke gives a highly effective offensive instrument, that really annoys people, while for others it provides rather backup opportunity that lets them more free to take evades if they need to repel incoming fire, still leaving them minor offensive advantage. However Juke’s cost dictated by ‘free evade’ ships makes it far too expensive for a backup stuff. Sometimes yes, sometimes not. For example, after the first points update, how many TIE Punishers you’ve seen fielded, and how many HVK’s? Those ships are likely to be pushed out of meta. Would you name it balance? Before the first points update, there were some overpowered builds that occupied top lines and had to be nerfed. What we had just now? 4 Phantoms and Rebel Beef are everywhere, then, fat Han and Imp. Aces. So, do you say it became more balanced? It’s not obvious. ‘Heavy bomber’ ships denied Trajectory Simulator and generally go without any bomb loadout. Do you think that’s how things should be? Some of the fixes are good, while some are like smashes of a hummer. Such changes look rather emergency actions that fine tuning, and usually seem to rather brake that fix. Finally, they seem to be usually based on high performance of a single certain build with minor attention to other. That's what mostly disappoints me.
  5. Two days ago I've sent an e-mail to FFG with my opinion on the current point update strategy, but comrades suggest me to re-post it here to attract necessary attention. Here it is (excuse me for longreed): What's your opinion on the proposal? Just in case, I mentioned there only few changes that bothered me and realize it's not a complete list of misfixed upgrades and ships for general points reduction. Two main points I'd like to have discussed are: 1) general change in points update strategy (adding opportunities rather than eliminating current top builds) 2) how to deal with Juke and Trickshot
×
×
  • Create New...