Is FFG going to do anything about this?

[Ken at Sunrise 2,064]

Power Creep is not when they produce cards that are strictly better than cards that are never played.

​Power Creep is when they produce cards that are so good they redefine what is worth playing.

 

I realize that Power Creep is defined as above.  But only within the context of what minis to field.  Some have, not so subtlety suggested, that true power creep is a marketing device to get one to continue buying the latest thing.

 

In X-Wing we do have ships continually being out-classed by not having the latest upgrade to compete against the latest release.  What should that be called?  I'm not saying keeping older ships valid isn't good.  Of course it's good, even great.  But the level of power in current released ships and upgrades requiring older ships to be buffed, nudged and rebuffed and fixed, etc. to stay competitive could be considered a form of power creep.  Sure we are using the older ships but with new upgrades.  But since these are cards not actual figures are we saying they don't count as power creep?

 

Wouldn't the release of the B-Wing be defined as Power Creep when compared to the X-Wing?  At least until you purchase the next upgrade?

[ficklegreendice 34,359]

ner, the release of the B-wing would be defined as "Finally, we have something on the Tie Fighter's level" when compared to the X-wing

 

 

old ships need new upgrades because they, for the most part, suck and FFG apparently doesn't like errataing stat-profiles for balance

 

this thread is actually the perfect example of it. The scout is fine, the fringer is overpriced and the smuggler is just a failure in every respect

[FTS Gecko 23,148]

Kihraxzs can't go slow and they can't evade (or BR). Which imho is pretty much the part that makes them lousy.

 

They can't boost either.  You can, however, take five of them at 100 points.  And they can both turn very sharply and reposition very effectively.  Or even full stop if you use their illicit slot.

 

< unabashed Kihraxz lover.

[Darkcloak 1,283]

I think I know what this thread needs...

 

 

[Ken at Sunrise 2,064]

ner, the release of the B-wing would be defined as "Finally, we have something on the Tie Fighter's level" when compared to the X-wing

 

 

old ships need new upgrades because they, for the most part, suck and FFG apparently doesn't like errataing stat-profiles for balance

 

this thread is actually the perfect example of it. The scout is fine, the fringer is overpriced and the smuggler is just a failure in every respect

 

I thought the Outer Rim Smuggler was a thing after it first came out?

[FTS Gecko 23,148]

 

ner, the release of the B-wing would be defined as "Finally, we have something on the Tie Fighter's level" when compared to the X-wing

 

 

old ships need new upgrades because they, for the most part, suck and FFG apparently doesn't like errataing stat-profiles for balance

 

this thread is actually the perfect example of it. The scout is fine, the fringer is overpriced and the smuggler is just a failure in every respect

 

I thought the Outer Rim Smuggler was a thing after it first came out?

 

It was.  Anti Pursuit Laser BlockORS if I recall correctly... but Contracted Scouts with Intelligence Agents will likely do that a lot better as well...

[Rodafowa 2,483]

The problem isn't that the ORS is too expensive, it's the fast that all of the Jumpmaster 5000s are underpriced by alot (IMO by about 5 points). If you think I'm wrong, just compare the Scout to an T-70 X-wing (Red Squadron Vet.), the X-wing costs one point MORE than the Scout.

When comparing the WSF to the CS the cost should have been around 32 for the CS (one less shield for three additional upgrade slots).

I'm going to have to disagree with your police work there, Lou.

Making comparisons to ships that are a) wildly overcosted and never see play and b) aren't even in the same faction is a really godawful way of determining whether a new ship is appropriately costed.

THE INQUISITOR IS 2 PTS CHEAPER THAN A KNAVE SQUADRON ZOMG HE SHOULD BE 32 POINTS

Edited March 14, 2016 by Rodafowa

[FatherTurin 1,782]

I actually think it's something they are doing really well with scum: making the generic large ships an interesting and viable choice over the aces. The aces are good, the genetics are good, and between them they offer different things to different lists. Also, don't forget that without an unhinged astromech, a stressed Jumpmaster turns into Derek Zoolander. A PtL Jumpmaster just became the most predictable ship in the game. It may go different speeds or turn instead of bank, but that sucker is going straight or left. It could potentially make the ship super easy to block or arc dodge (especially important if you are packing AT or its Dengar)

Edit:

Step 1: stressbot

Step 2: block

Step 3: ???

Step 4: profit

Edited March 14, 2016 by FatherTurin

[SEApocalypse 4,439]

 

 

But to be fair - the Kihrax is about 30 years older then the T-70. Its like you would compare WWII piston engine fighters with modern jet fighters

Wrong argument, since we can play these two ships in the same game.

 

 

It is a wrong argument in more than one regard as the star wars galaxy is using space superiority fighters and interceptors since about 20,000 years. A more fitting analogy would be swords from 1520 and swords from 1550. And even that falls about a few magnitudes short in terms how refined star wars technology is.  ;-)

 

 

Power Creep is not when they produce cards that are strictly better than cards that are never played.

​Power Creep is when they produce cards that are so good they redefine what is worth playing.

 

I realize that Power Creep is defined as above.  But only within the context of what minis to field.  Some have, not so subtlety suggested, that true power creep is a marketing device to get one to continue buying the latest thing.

 

In X-Wing we do have ships continually being out-classed by not having the latest upgrade to compete against the latest release.  What should that be called?  I'm not saying keeping older ships valid isn't good.  Of course it's good, even great.  But the level of power in current released ships and upgrades requiring older ships to be buffed, nudged and rebuffed and fixed, etc. to stay competitive could be considered a form of power creep.  Sure we are using the older ships but with new upgrades.  But since these are cards not actual figures are we saying they don't count as power creep?

 

Wouldn't the release of the B-Wing be defined as Power Creep when compared to the X-Wing?  At least until you purchase the next upgrade?

 

 

This you call a business model. Not only to sell the new stuff, but as well to keep players interest in the game because the meta constantly changes via balance changes. It is especially vital to keep the list building interesting and whenever cookiecutter lists arise which dominate the game, you are going to break them up with changing the meta. It is simply healthy for the game and for the company. 

Now you could argue if every update needs to come with a model or if a sometimes a deck with cards would not be sufficient to bring the needed changes to the game. It seems that currently people would consider expensive card only expansions even more exploitive than the current model, which splits cost between a new model and development costs for the cards. Personally I would not mind getting an expansion pack with just cards for price of a ace pack. As long as this pack covers my card needs for each wave at least. 

[Kdubb 6,642]

old ships need new upgrades because they, for the most part, suck and FFG apparently doesn't like errataing stat-profiles for balance

 

this thread is actually the perfect example of it. The scout is fine, the fringer is overpriced and the smuggler is just a failure in every respect

The more I look at it, the more I'm convinced this is FFGs business model. Almost each wave it seems they put out at least one ship/upgrade which mildly power creeps to progress purchases along with a ship which is lacking from the get go to promote purchases now and in the future. The Scyk was dead upon arrival. The K-fighter pretty similarly was. But guess what? We all know we are gonna buy that Scum Vets pack when it comes out!

 

For example-

 

Wave 1-

 

Creep: (no creep since just starting)

Lag: X-wing & Tie Adv

 

Additional purchase created: Rebel Transport, Raider, T-70 expansion, TBA (additional T-65 fix rumored, but not confirmed)

 

Wave 2-

Creep: Falcon

Lag: A-wing & Tie int

 

 

Additional purchase created: Reb Aces and Imp Aces, Starviper expansion

 

Wave 3-

Creep: (if any Wave had no creep it is this one)

Lag: HWK-290, Tie Bomber

 

Additional purchase created: K-Wing expansion, Imp Vets, Punishing One/Inquisitor's TIE expansion pack (Guidance Chips), Rebel Aces (although not necessarily need for the B-wing at the time, which oddly could use a revisit now instead)

 

Wave 4-

Creep: Tie Phantom

Lag: Tie Defender, E-wing

 

 

Additional purchase created: Imp Vets, TBA (E-wing fix)

 

Wave 5-

Creep: VT-49, Dash

 

Wave 6-

Creep: IG-2000

Lag: Scyk and Starviper

 

Additional purchases created: TBA

 

Wave 7-

Creep: K-wing

Lag: Tie Punisher, K-fighter

 

Additional purchases created: Punishing One/Inquisitor's TIE expansion pack (Guidance Chips), TBA

 

Wave 8-

 

Creep: Punishing One???

Lag: Inquisitor's TIE, Mist Hunter???

 

 

 

Whether this is intentional or not, who knows. But FFG certainly doesn't mind capitalizing on their errors.

[SEApocalypse 4,439]

I want to empathise that this is not inherently bad. Discovery can be a very rewarding experience for player and allowing them to find ways to make a good card bad or even just recognizing bad cards and using good cards instead is a positive and fun experience for players. This design choice is even made by companies which give the means to update your game for free. Imbalances can be a deliberate design choice and increase the depth of a game, especially when you combine them with a ever changing meta, If everyone is playing scissor than playing rock is op.

(And btw, rock, paper, scissor is a horrible way to balance anything … just saying.))

[MajorJuggler 7,752]

Hindsight is 20/20, but that doesn't mean you will get it right in the future.

 

Math is hard.

 

Balancing the game is harder.

 

Mild power creep (intentionally or not) has the side effect of promoting sales to stay competitively viable.

 

Long term consistent power creep will eventually convince me to give up on the game.

Edited March 14, 2016 by MajorJuggler

[InterceptorMad 1,920]

Maybe if they do a TFA Falcon set they'll release something that helps it.

 

Maybe a title that only works on non-unique YT-1300s (if we got say a PS3 one in the new set). Gives you the missing slots. 'Combat Retrofit' or something.

[Ken at Sunrise 2,064]

 

 

ner, the release of the B-wing would be defined as "Finally, we have something on the Tie Fighter's level" when compared to the X-wing

 

 

old ships need new upgrades because they, for the most part, suck and FFG apparently doesn't like errataing stat-profiles for balance

 

this thread is actually the perfect example of it. The scout is fine, the fringer is overpriced and the smuggler is just a failure in every respect

 

I thought the Outer Rim Smuggler was a thing after it first came out?

 

 

It was.  Anti Pursuit Laser BlockORS if I recall correctly... but Contracted Scouts with Intelligence Agents will likely do that a lot better as well...

 

 

So then they didn't "suck" from the on set.  They "suck" because newer ships they produced cards/ships that are strictly better than the cards/ships that are not currently being played and because they produced cards/ships that are so good they redefined what is worth playing.

 

i.e.

Power Creep is not when they produce cards that are strictly better than cards that are never played.

​Power Creep is when they produce cards that are so good they redefine what is worth playing.

[Vorpal Sword 14,685]

(silly things)

That's a brutal summary, but I think it's pretty fair. Your instances of power creep are fairly questionable (did the Falcon dominate tables in Wave 2? Uh, okay, but how about Wave 3?) and neglect to consider the mathematical effect of point-fortressing prior to changes to MOV. There's the Phantom, of course, but that prompted the game's most noticeable errata to date, and the balance change didn't cost anyone anything.

Of course, your instances of lag are a lot clearer. But if anything, that's a sign that FFG has gone out of their way (too far out of their way, in a number of cases) to avoid power creep.

The designers and developers aren't perfect by any measure, but I don't think they deserve to be accused of deliberately sabotaging the game.

[Hobojebus 11,341]

Now GW they do that remember flyers horribly difficult to kill because they didn't release units with AA at the same time so you had nonsense like the necrons flying circus for years.

[ScottieATF 2,864]

ner, the release of the B-wing would be defined as "Finally, we have something on the Tie Fighter's level" when compared to the X-wing

 

 

old ships need new upgrades because they, for the most part, suck and FFG apparently doesn't like errataing stat-profiles for balance

 

this thread is actually the perfect example of it. The scout is fine, the fringer is overpriced and the smuggler is just a failure in every respect

 

I thought the Outer Rim Smuggler was a thing after it first came out?

 

It was.  Anti Pursuit Laser BlockORS if I recall correctly... but Contracted Scouts with Intelligence Agents will likely do that a lot better as well...

 

So then they didn't "suck" from the on set.  They "suck" because newer ships they produced cards/ships that are strictly better than the cards/ships that are not currently being played and because they produced cards/ships that are so good they redefined what is worth playing.

 

i.e.

Power Creep is not when they produce cards that are strictly better than cards that are never played.

​Power Creep is when they produce cards that are so good they redefine what is worth playing.

The ORS was slightly playable around it's initial release, because it could fulfill a role that was worthwhile, a big body blocker. Nothing came out that usurped that role, the role just ceased to be useful. Additionally slightly playable is not much of a feather in it's cap. It's like saying the pre-Raider Vader is "decent".

It's folly to want FFG to design ships to reach the bar set by ships that already don't see play. We see so many complaints about buying ships solely for upgrades that it just seems nuts that people want FFG to hold ships to the standard of previously released ships, when that standard amounts to collecting dust in a box.

[Ken at Sunrise 2,064]

 

Power Creep is not when they produce cards that are strictly better than cards that are never played.

​Power Creep is when they produce cards that are so good they redefine what is worth playing.

The ORS was slightly playable around it's initial release, because it could fulfill a role that was worthwhile, a big body blocker. Nothing came out that usurped that role, the role just ceased to be useful. Additionally slightly playable is not much of a feather in it's cap. It's like saying the pre-Raider Vader is "decent".

It's folly to want FFG to design ships to reach the bar set by ships that already don't see play. We see so many complaints about buying ships solely for upgrades that it just seems nuts that people want FFG to hold ships to the standard of previously released ships, when that standard amounts to collecting dust in a box.

 

 

 

No disagreement here.  I was just wondering if our definition of Power Creep is either out of context or possibly a bit too narrow for what we are seeing.  We may not see power creep in the traditional definition which may be the correct one, I'm just asking.  We are continually buying upgrades; we justify this by saying it reinvigorate older ships.  To which I say YES, YES, YES, I agree and I'm all for it.  But at the same time if it does not stop this continuous process of upgrading is really no different than Power Creep in reality.

 

Then as MJ said:

 

Long term consistent power creep will eventually convince me to give up on the game.

 

So do you only define power creep if it comes in the way of new units?  And if so what label would you give to constant upgrades required to keep old ships relevant in a game where the power level is increasing via, post maneuver movement, regen shields, out of arc boosts, etc...

 

short version:  I agree with you but what do you call what is going on?

[Kdubb 6,642]

 

(silly things)

That's a brutal summary, but I think it's pretty fair. Your instances of power creep are fairly questionable (did the Falcon dominate tables in Wave 2? Uh, okay, but how about Wave 3?) and neglect to consider the mathematical effect of point-fortressing prior to changes to MOV. There's the Phantom, of course, but that prompted the game's most noticeable errata to date, and the balance change didn't cost anyone anything.

Of course, your instances of lag are a lot clearer. But if anything, that's a sign that FFG has gone out of their way (too far out of their way, in a number of cases) to avoid power creep.

The designers and developers aren't perfect by any measure, but I don't think they deserve to be accused of deliberately sabotaging the game.

 

Maybe going as far as stating it's their business plan was a little harsh. My concluding statement is probably the more clear and proper statement of my thoughts. Intentional? No proper evidence says so. But as you mentioned, their overly cautious approach with some ships is resulting in numerous revisits, and I don't think they are generally upset about this. Having said that, it is much preferred over an alternative of numerous releases of overpowered pilots and ships.

 

I think about how insane Corran Horn would have been if the base price of the E-wing was correct. He may have come in at 2, maybe 3 points cheaper (if we are to use the generics price as a baseline for his cost). It seems FFG heavily undervalued the strength of his pilot ability, which ironically put him about where he should be. This is the benefit of their cautionary approach. It allows for some error in both directions, and they have a clear cut approach in the case they do undervalue a ship.   

[StevenO 2,996]

...

(And btw, rock, paper, scissor is a horrible way to balance anything … just saying.))

 

In many ways I'll agree that RPS is a bad way to balance things but if you throw in Lizard and Spock then I think it can become a fair way to look at things.

 

If RPS is the balance and rock is the primary metagame then the winners likely play paper because they will get more favorable matchups and the scissors that defeat them are more likely to get crushed by the majority.  Of course over time the metagame is going to shift to Paper which now makes Scissors the general winner and things just go around like that.  With RPLSS you throw in other things which will make the shifting metagame less predictable.  With the RPS view and rock on top you'd want to sneak in the squad that beats both Rock and also the Paper than normally beats Rock.

 

Someone asked what it's called when you continually need to purchase new upgrades to keep a ship at the peak of competition:  that is still Power Creep but in a lot of ways it is more like power reassignment.  Having something that is just better than the best is over the top power creep but having something that is situationally better may not really be better but is just as good and happens to capitalize on a ship's weak spot.

 

I suspect that many like to say that Autothrusters in an ESSENTIAL upgrade on ships that run it.  Well, maybe it is when the meta is full of turrets and even R3 attackers but if things switched to close up, in arc knife fighters then those are two points that don't do any good.  This would then lead to fewer ATs which would let the other things creep back in.

[LunarSol 1,334]

Rock/Paper/Scissors balancing is only a problem if every Rock vs Paper encounter is a flawless victory.  If Rock reliably loses to paper, but takes out 70% of Paper's health in the process, the system becomes one of trying to force the best encounters possible in order to come out of the initial engagements with the best remnants to see the battle through.

[Ken at Sunrise 2,064]

 

old ships need new upgrades because they, for the most part, suck and FFG apparently doesn't like errataing stat-profiles for balance

 

this thread is actually the perfect example of it. The scout is fine, the fringer is overpriced and the smuggler is just a failure in every respect

The more I look at it, the more I'm convinced this is FFGs business model. Almost each wave it seems they put out at least one ship/upgrade which mildly power creeps to progress purchases along with a ship which is lacking from the get go to promote purchases now and in the future. The Scyk was dead upon arrival. The K-fighter pretty similarly was. But guess what? We all know we are gonna buy that Scum Vets pack when it comes out!

 

For example-

 

Wave 1-

 

Creep: (no creep since just starting)

Lag: X-wing & Tie Adv

 

Additional purchase created: Rebel Transport, Raider, T-70 expansion, TBA (additional T-65 fix rumored, but not confirmed)

 

Wave 2-

Creep: Falcon

Lag: A-wing & Tie int

 

 

Additional purchase created: Reb Aces and Imp Aces, Starviper expansion

 

Wave 3-

Creep: (if any Wave had no creep it is this one)

Lag: HWK-290, Tie Bomber

 

Additional purchase created: K-Wing expansion, Imp Vets, Punishing One/Inquisitor's TIE expansion pack (Guidance Chips), Rebel Aces (although not necessarily need for the B-wing at the time, which oddly could use a revisit now instead)

 

Wave 4-

Creep: Tie Phantom

Lag: Tie Defender, E-wing

 

 

Additional purchase created: Imp Vets, TBA (E-wing fix)

 

Wave 5-

Creep: VT-49, Dash

 

Wave 6-

Creep: IG-2000

Lag: Scyk and Starviper

 

Additional purchases created: TBA

 

Wave 7-

Creep: K-wing

Lag: Tie Punisher, K-fighter

 

Additional purchases created: Punishing One/Inquisitor's TIE expansion pack (Guidance Chips), TBA

 

Wave 8-

 

Creep: Punishing One???

Lag: Inquisitor's TIE, Mist Hunter???

 

 

 

Whether this is intentional or not, who knows. But FFG certainly doesn't mind capitalizing on their errors.

 

 

Well if all that's really true and I'm not terribly excited about S&V anyway then most of the fixes I need will be out with Wave VIII, Imperial Veterans and hopefully a well placed Rebel Veterans.  Then the Empire and Rebellion ships will be good, fixed and ready to go.  I'm okay with just the Inquisitor's TIE lagging if that is true.  It's an early model anyway 

 

Whoo Hoo! 

[Punning Pundit 4,746]

Well, except that for the T-70 vs Khiraxz comparison to be accurate to WSF vs CS, the T-70 would be 3 points less.

Make Contracted Scout a unique. Solved ... no risk of torpedo boat spam.

It's been 8 Waves. I hope do the gods we start to see Torpedo Boat spam lists that are actually _good_.

[serrate 223]

 

Well, except that for the T-70 vs Khiraxz comparison to be accurate to WSF vs CS, the T-70 would be 3 points less.

Make Contracted Scout a unique. Solved ... no risk of torpedo boat spam.

It's been 8 Waves. I hope do the gods we start to see Torpedo Boat spam lists that are actually _good_.

 

 

It's always easy to spot who doesn't spend much time on Vassal.   Every time I see someone dismiss the triple-uboat list with comments like "it's just a 2-attack turret" or "stressbot ftw", it becomes very obvious that not only have they not played against this, they haven't even seen it in action.

 

• The list is PS3, so your stressbot dies before it takes a shot.
• The list often includes Feedback Arrays, so good luck keeping Fel out of range of 3 large base R1 bubbles.
• The list is very likely to get full value out of that ordnance, thanks to agromechs and guidance chips
• The list doesn't care about lack of TL for the torps, thanks to Deadeye.

 

If Torpedo Boats are what you want to see, you're about to be very, very happy. I'm not saying it can't be beat, but it is VERY strong, and more than a little scary. There are some top lists in the meta right now that I think this is likely to erase. 

[Ken at Sunrise 2,064]

Is this list worth taking?

Gamma Squadron Veteran (19)
Deadeye (1)
Extra Munitions (2)
Plasma Torpedoes (3)
Proton Rockets (3)
Proton Rockets (3)
Seismic Charges (2)
Guidance Chips (0)

Gamma Squadron Veteran (19)
Deadeye (1)
Extra Munitions (2)
Plasma Torpedoes (3)
Proton Rockets (3)
Proton Rockets (3)
Seismic Charges (2)
Guidance Chips (0)

Captain Jonus (22)
Deadeye (1)
Extra Munitions (2)
Plasma Torpedoes (3)
Proton Rockets (3)
Proton Rockets (3)
Guidance Chips (0)

Total: 100

View in Yet Another Squad Builder
 
My other idea:
Gamma Squadron Veteran (19)
Deadeye (1)
Extra Munitions (2)
Plasma Torpedoes (3)
Assault Missiles (5)
Proton Rockets (3)
Seismic Charges (2)
Guidance Chips (0)

Gamma Squadron Veteran (19)
Deadeye (1)
Extra Munitions (2)
Plasma Torpedoes (3)
Concussion Missiles (4)
Proton Rockets (3)
Guidance Chips (0)

Captain Jonus (22)
Deadeye (1)
Extra Munitions (2)
Plasma Torpedoes (3)
XX-23 S-Thread Tracers (1)
Proton Rockets (3)
Guidance Chips (0)

Total: 99

View in Yet Another Squad Builder

Edited March 14, 2016 by Ken at Sunrise