Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Darth Meanie

Why Are So Many Ships Broken??

Recommended Posts

But MY ship isn't tearing up the meta!  

 

And agree with TTR, really hard to balance everything.  I've been very impressed with how well they've done so far!  MajorJuggler does a really good job with jousting values but that doesn't take into account dial, etc.  I really wish ALL FFG tournaments were in ListJuggler with stats and lists.  You could very easily see then which ships (on a global scale) needed "help".

 

http://lists.starwarsclubhouse.com/heatmap

Edited by jonnyd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, X-wing is an incredibly difficult game to design.

 

For every new release, they have to make sure the millions of previous build combinations remain balanced while coming up with new, exciting cards that appeal to new and old players.

 

And then after all that, they have to maintain the "health" of the meta (ship diversity). Oh and they have to make sure the game is still fun to play.

 

 

They do very well compared to many other miniatures games that simply don't fix broken units.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well, in ye olden days of wave 1-2 back when the design team had no idea how huge x-wing would be, they kinda didn't give a **** apparently

 

wave 1-2 gave us

 

  • the mathematically inefficient X-wing
  • the poor poor Tie Advance
  • the overpriced A-wing
  • Ordnance in general, prior to scouts, which accounted for the advance and A being so laughably overpriced
  • the fantastically crappy named imperial firespray pilots
  • the release of the Tie Interceptor right alongside the PWT that could trivially murder it

 

just an all-around headscratcher that can be best explained by the team's inexperience that set itself up for A LOT of patch-work over the following waves (some of which failed miserably at first...see Imperial Aces)

 

 

unfortunately, said design seemed to bleed over into later waves, such as with the Special-K being only a point less than the X. Jousters in general now seem to suffer from being mathematically less efficient than high PS aces, due to how badly PS skews engagements, even before you consider how well aces can arcdodge

 

 

the biggest thing currently from what I can tell, though, is palpatine. You can't beat palpatine unless you get on his level, and a lot of ships (especially ye ole jousters) simply aren't capable of doing that

Edited by ficklegreendice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're all old ships.

 

The newer waves are very well balanced, but there are older ships that weren't really. Wave 1 wasn't balanced because the TIE was vastly better the other four ships, something that wasn't discovered until late Wave 3.

 

With two exceptions every "dud" ship is from Wave 4 backwards. The two exceptions are the Scyk and the StarViper. The StarViper was an attempt to create an agile ship that wasn't addicted to PTL and it didn't really work out: it lives in a halfway position between a heavy fighter and an arc dodger that makes it lose to both. The Scyk doesn't have a role: there's nothing it can do another ship can't do better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Between the cries for "fixes" and the fact that almost every ship seems to get 2 releases, it really makes me wonder what happens in X-Wing R&D for each Wave.

It's because people don't understand the meaning of "broken"

Broken actualy means cheese. Something too good for points.

But power-creeper inside each player wants everything to be as good as top-tier.

What's actually improbable. because there can be but one top-PS phantom, Ceptor or Falcon. 

And in a game of PS the rest are a joke :C

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Triple Toilet seats showed how bad the YT generics were.

The /fo slapped the Scyk in the face when it was already down

The Khiraxz showed that even if the X-wing was a point cheaper people still wouldn't take

The advanced couldn't do enough damage because 2 attack ships need to swarm to be effective, 4 ships will never be a swarm. No 2 attack ships should cost more than 15-16 at lowest ps without something like a cannon or turret, 21 was simply way too much.

It's all part of a learning curve. It's not that ships are broken, it's just that other ships offer better options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The /fo slapped the Scyk in the face when it was already down

 

well no, the Scyk slapped itself in the face and fell down

 

and then it saw the Tie Fighter's (ye old Core Set and Wave 1) shadow, got startled, fell down again, stood up too fast, slapped itself in the face again and split its head open on the curb

 

 

by the time the FO came around, there was little left of the Scyk save a slightly smudgy smear of long dried blood

Edited by ficklegreendice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Triple Toilet seats showed how bad the YT generics were.

 

No, the Contract Scout shows what happens when a ship is simultaneously underpriced and overpowered.

 

The Kihraxz showed that even if the X-wing was a point cheaper people still wouldn't take

 

I'm taking 5 to the Yavin Open.

Edited by FTS Gecko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Kihraxz showed that even if the X-wing was a point cheaper people still wouldn't take

 

I'm taking 5 to the Yavin Open.

 

 

Respect.

 

But seriously, it's not a horrible list at all. Despite its jousting efficiency and all that, being able to fit 5 is a serious advantage.

 

I flew it a few times in my local league and it just torches anything you can block.

 

25 health on 2 agility is a ton of health to chew through too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly there aren't that many ships that are truly under powered.the T-65, the Scyk, the Defender and E-Wing are the only ships right now that are truly bad. The Defender will be fixed soon.The T-65 will likely get some love this Dec from the Rogue One pack.

You need to add the StarViper to this. And I don't think the T-65 needs too much anymore. Just maybe a little sumpin sumpin with Rogue One.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You misunderstand: it's not that a lot of ships are "broken" (very few are), it's that a lot of players are prone to hyperbole.

 

Also, very few are willing to try something different in a competitive environment.

 

Edit:  Rodafowa explained it much better than I did.

 

 

The competitive meta is always defined and shaped by the most powerful ships.

Not every ship can be the most powerful.

Ergo, people describe every ship that's not in the very top tier as "broken".

Edited by FTS Gecko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, X-wing is an incredibly difficult game to design.

Eh, not really. All games are difficult to design to a degree, but this is a game where all the ships use identical attacks with identical dice results. Everything is shooting, everything uses the same red and green dice with the same likelihood of success per die roll. They all use identical movement templates, share classes of base sizes, etc.

 

Compare this to a WW2 game that has infantry that have to shoot and engage in hand to hand, enter and exit buildings, interact with terrain and other units. Has armored vehicles that have to drive, interact with terrain and other units, then shoot and be shot at, and X-Wing is fairly simplistic.Compare it to 40K, which is a mess because it has to have all the same things as above, but then try to figure out how to balance armies that are significantly different in how they approach the game (some armies prefer close combat, some prefer ranged combat), it's like trying to balance a game of medieval knights vs WW2 Wermacht, lol.

 

X-Wing is fairly well done. But in terms of game design, it's not "incredibly difficult".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this 'broken' thing is being overplayed. I don't see a massive amount of ships being called for a boost. We just see way too many threads, but they tend to be about the same stuff over and over..

VandorDM nails the list IMO. Those ships (minus I think Corran - but even he could do with some options and variety) are the ones in need of help. Poor poor M3a is plain terrible. T65 has the world's biggest identity crises. Space superiority fighter it is not. The Defender and Ewing aren't bad ships as such, just ineffecient. The Defender fix we are getting is a great one IMO. Gives the ship enough but doesn't IMO make it overpowered. It just makes it worth its points.

On the basis that the TIE/D is already being fixed, actually I'd swap that out for the Stsrviper. Another good ship but horrendously costed for what it offers and terrible outside of a single titled Guri or Xizor.

They havent fixed a ship that didn't need it IMO. You could argue the B wing stuff in Aces and the future heroes pack but I'd counter they just add variety and options rather than any inherent extra power.

Edited by kopmcginty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Compare this to a WW2 game...

Those games are harder to balance, but they also have Much larger rule books. Flames of War or 40k have rule books that are several hundred pages vs X-Wings 24 pages.

 

X-Wing is fairly well done. But in terms of game design, it's not "incredibly difficult".

Ideal balance is incredibly difficult, perhaps even impossible. But one thing X-Wing has that makes it significantly more complex than 40k, FoW or even Warmahoards is the number of configurations any given ship has.

In 40k, any given unit may have what 4-6 different upgrades? I think the Tau may be the worse with the Crisis suits, they have 6-8 or so. But most units have fairly limited options. X-Wing on the other hand, how many different possible configurations of just the X-Wing are there?

Then every time they release a new expansion they have to consider how an upgrade from there is going to interact with all the existing options for every ship that can take that new upgrade.

Edited by VanorDM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not easy to balance and future-proof at the same time. They do alright.

 

 

At least partly, they purposely aim their balance low - because it's better to release something underpowered and fix it later, than release something overpowered and blow up the game.

 

All of the above. It's hard to do, and they deliberately aim low, and lots of people yelling about fixes doesn't necessarily mean things need to be fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well some people are to quick to cast aside an entire ships + all of it's pilots a bit to quick.

 

Then you have to define what's broken and what isn't. I don't think many will say that the tie interceptor needs a fix or is broken but look at the compeditive scene. It's 90% sontir 9% Jax and then 1% not sontir or jax pilots. So is the intreceptor fine?, with all those pilots never seing use?
Then shouldn't the e-wing also be just fine since pretty much only corran sees play?, kinda the same situation as the interceptor.

Then there is the fact that some ships are just relics of an older era that ended at wave 4 with the defender and e wing being pretty poorly designed and overpriced. From wave 5 forward it turned more to an arms race where 1-2 upgrades or pilots would change the meta ever wave.

There is also the fact that the dev team only backwards fix by adding new expanions. There isn't a new version of older pilots or upgrades just new ones to "fix" the old. The exception being Poe Dameron in the new force awakens heroes pack where we se a new version of the same pilot in the same ship. This could happen to alot of old pilots like garven dreis for example, we will have to see.

With this packwards patching of holes the ship will eventually sink and with more and more ships/pilots added more and more will be put at the bottom and don't see much play since there are better options for the same points. Back when there was 2-3 waves out you only had so many options, now u almost have too many options.

Ordnance is quite telling on how ffg fixes things. By wave 3-4 they should really have looked at ordnance like the classic ptoron torpedo and said: okey this isn't good enough I think we have to rewrite how toprs/missles will work in the game. They didn't so instead they tried 3 times to fix it with weapons failsave, extra munition and finally guidence chips. The thing is that the Y-wing will never carry torpedoes unless it receives another fix cause the ordnance wasn't that great with to start with. If they keep this patching system eventually we will need a x-wint 2.0. But don't get me wrong the game is still pretty balanced and there is alot of builds out there but the cracks are starting to show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...