Jump to content
xanderf

Game changes you DID want from v1 that aren't in v2

Recommended Posts

the 1 thing i really would have liked is a change of dice, just look at all the other SW FFG games, they all have different colored dice for different things. Imagine X-wing using Imperial assault style dice, or even Legion dice. Suddenly you can make each ship's attack different. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Icelom said:

forward move into just normal barrel roll does almost the same thing but you don't end with a stress.

do just pretend they did but only put it on ships with barrel roll actions.

I think he means move forward movement and then rotate 90 degrees at the end of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/6/2018 at 4:11 AM, Meade said:

3. 3D play, It's not hard to do! I think if they had gone the extra mile to do some minimalistic effect or counter to keep track of the z axis it would just crank up the beard-stroker nature of the game up a notch. And have a more realistic space combat feel. The predecessor to xwing, Wings of glory has a system for this. Instead, we have more proliferation of actions and now force charges. Could go wrong IMO.

I don't know.
In the old flight sim tridimensionality didn't really have any strong effect on combat.
While in a WWII dogfight it would give a strong advantage to gain speed, attack or defend, in space there is no up or down, neither gravity to affect your ship speed. All that matters is distance, relative speed, maneuverability, and projectile speed.
Also, Star Wars tends to have its battles on a flat layout. Most of the time a single layer (Naboo, Scarif, Hoth, Endor, Starkiller). Some times in multiple layers (Coruscant). It almost never involves a big mess of ships going in really disparate vectors and directions. The 2D gameplay of this game isn't really that much flawed considering that.

Edited by Azrapse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Azrapse said:

I don't know.
In the old flight sim tridimensionality didn't really have any strong effect on combat.
While in a WWII dogfight it would give a strong advantage to gain speed, attack or defend, in space there is no up or down, neither gravity to affect your ship speed. All that matters is distance, relative speed, maneuverability, and projectile speed.
Also, Star Wars tends to have its battles on a flat layout. Most of the time a single layer (Naboo, Scarif, Hoth, Endor, Starkiller). Some times in multiple layers (Coruscant). It almost never involves a big mess of ships going in really disparate vectors and directions. The 2D gameplay of this game isn't really that much flawed considering that.

Pretty fair points you have there. I partially disagree about maneuvering in space, sure you don't have altitude but on the other hand Star Wars IS a hybrid of space physics and WW2 dogfight physics to begin with. It gives an opportunity to make maneuvers like the K-turn, S-loops a little more interesting (if they have the ability to go up or down a level of z-axis)... after all these are adaptations of maneuvers in an earthbound dogfight and not what would happen in space. Of course in space it would be trivial to change the orientation of your ship while continuously moving in whatever vector you had been... 

I still think 3D play is cool. I've done a few little experiments myself and you can easily represent z axis by the number of pegs on a ship. It actually decreases the amount of complexity due to bumping, although you do need to deal with what occurs when a ship is 'on top' of another, usually just by having a flat marker for the ship underneath and removing the model. It's another way to make positioning and maneuvering important and introduce complexity via that route rather than going the route of cards and the inevitable OP combos. That being said, i still think xwing is a cool game the way it is and 2.0 looks fantastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ObiWonka said:

I believe they said that. I don't believe it's actually that hard.

Planning three turns in advance and having to juggle alternating initiative adds a lot of overhead.  What do we get for this overhead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, HolySorcerer said:

Planning three turns in advance and having to juggle alternating initiative adds a lot of overhead.  What do we get for this overhead?

How is planning three turns in advance different than current X-Wing? Can passing a single initiative token back and forth be considered "juggling"*?

What we get? Not getting screwed in a matchup because of a single die rolled at the beginning of the game.

*"to keep (several objects, as balls, plates, tenpins, or knives) in continuous motion in the air simultaneously by tossing and catching." No, it can't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ObiWonka said:

How is planning three turns in advance different than current X-Wing? Can passing a single initiative token back and forth be considered "juggling"*?

What we get? Not getting screwed in a matchup because of a single die rolled at the beginning of the game.

*"to keep (several objects, as balls, plates, tenpins, or knives) in continuous motion in the air simultaneously by tossing and catching." No, it can't.

You still have to plan in advance, but with alternating initiative your plans become much more complex.  Move order is huge and preplanned in xwing, that isnt the case in heroscape. 

If you want to know more about why they rejected the idea then you should ask the devs.  From what we've seen in 2.0 the initiative will be less important than in 1.0, so give it a chance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, ObiWonka said:

How is planning three turns in advance different than current X-Wing? Can passing a single initiative token back and forth be considered "juggling"*?

What we get? Not getting screwed in a matchup because of a single die rolled at the beginning of the game.

*"to keep (several objects, as balls, plates, tenpins, or knives) in continuous motion in the air simultaneously by tossing and catching." No, it can't.

if your list is screwed if it does not get to pick initiative then you need a bigger initiative bid.... how many points is that worth to your list? (this is a part of the game)

What they said is with different pilot skill (2.0 initiative) it was very complex to trade the starting play chip back and forth and little gain, there is allot to pre-plan in x-wing between all the ships with different pilot skills (2.0 initiative) that having it swap every turn just made that very frustrating and they and their playtesters were often even forgetting to swap it because many games it did not matter at all until a game it did.

Luck for you, as I pointed out above. X-wing has a built-in function to help you ensure the initiative you want. Pay the price if you want the control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/5/2018 at 5:39 PM, ficklegreendice said:

Fingers crossed for defender x7 coming back and for gunboat SLAM functionality! 

I'd be suprised if we see X7 again. Feels like they are getting away from that kind of action play, and TIE/D is accurate to how the ship was meant to work. Hopefully we see a fixed dial, point cost, and maybe a shield or two now that X-Wings and even K fighters have 6 hp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nerfed evade is probably fine on the x7 (post errata x7 with 2.0 evade, mind)

we gotta be careful with these more expensive ships when jousters are coming back to relevancy, especially ones as traditionally stiff as the defender (as opposed to the interceptor or phantom, which can be positioned around blocks of jousters).

without some form of defense, these less maneuverable ships will be diced into oblivion. Basically:

tumblr_n3t09gpqae1twcj5xo7_250.gif

Edited by ficklegreendice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Icelom said:

if your list is screwed if it does not get to pick initiative then you need a bigger initiative bid.... how many points is that worth to your list? (this is a part of the game)

What they said is with different pilot skill (2.0 initiative) it was very complex to trade the starting play chip back and forth and little gain, there is allot to pre-plan in x-wing between all the ships with different pilot skills (2.0 initiative) that having it swap every turn just made that very frustrating and they and their playtesters were often even forgetting to swap it because many games it did not matter at all until a game it did.

Luck for you, as I pointed out above. X-wing has a built-in function to help you ensure the initiative you want. Pay the price if you want the control.

They were doing it wrong. 

I'd agree, just rolling for initiative every turn, trading a chip for instance would slow the game down unnecessarily. 

But PS is not 'fine' in xwing, at least in 1.0. Many people blame it on VI, but the VI wars were just the symptom of a mechanic that is way too polarizing for the game. 

Also it makes me laugh coming from a DEV team that doubled down on unnecessary complexity in the later waves of the game, the worst offender being condition cards. 

I know they compressed the range of PS but it won't solve the problem, just make it more binary. The highest PS ships will be the only ones worth taking, unless swarms are massively more efficient, and in that case, the balance will swing towards swarms. But i haven't seen everything about 2.0 yet maybe there's something I'm missing...

I just think a more elastic PS system that can change depending on arcs and game states, and very clear in the way it's interpreted and applied to the game, would be so beneficial. Especially a bonus for 'tailing'. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2018 at 8:46 PM, HolySorcerer said:

You still have to plan in advance, but with alternating initiative your plans become much more complex.  Move order is huge and preplanned in xwing, that isnt the case in heroscape. 

If you want to know more about why they rejected the idea then you should ask the devs.  From what we've seen in 2.0 the initiative will be less important than in 1.0, so give it a chance. 

Move order is pre-planned in Heroscape as well (setting your turns 1-3 before initiative is decided), though moving the figures themselves is reactionary (no fixed path or endpoint).

And I most certainly will give it a chance, because I'm pretty excited overall about the 2.0 changes. So far initiative seems to be less important in that PS (now initiative) is condensed to 1-6 (with no changes via VI, etc) and actions, esp. double reposition, are much more restrictive (plus there's supposedly increased cost associated with higher-skill 'aces').

Doesn't change the fact that I'm disappointed it didn't make the cut, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2018 at 8:55 PM, Icelom said:

if your list is screwed if it does not get to pick initiative then you need a bigger initiative bid.... how many points is that worth to your list? (this is a part of the game)

Except, as I noted, where both players thought it was worth the same to their lists (say 95 vs 95) but only one of them gets screwed by the roll of one die.

Another benefit, then, is being able to build lists using the full 200 points without RNG consequences.

Edited by ObiWonka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- blank faces on dice.  Replace them with anything, even negative effects.  Blanks are boring.  I guess it's cool that I can reuse my old dice though.

- scenarios.  actually what I'd really like is something like a separate scenario book.  I hate those stupid pamphlets.  e.g. the game Descent has the 'heirs of blood' campaign hardcover book.  It was about $25 CAD.  Failing that, having scenarios built into the app would be pretty great too.  (maybe they're actually doing this?  I haven't been following...)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/4/2018 at 8:09 PM, xanderf said:

Not really 'fixes' or 'broken things' - really just ideas to capture Star Wars theme better

  • Breakout of to-hit from damage.  This would have allowed, for example, torpedoes that are more difficult to hit with...but do a lot of damage; or missiles that hit very easily, but do very little damage.  1st edition touched on the second part of that a LITTLE with...well, cannons, of all things - the ion or flechette with 'roll x dice, if this hits cancel all dice and do y effect with 1 damage'.  Odd choice for a cannon, anyway.  But the first part never really appeared at all, either way.
  • Less variety of speed choices.  Every single ship in the game has a 2-forward.  Practically everything (maybe all of it?) has 2-banks and 3-banks, with just the color differing.  A 4-bank maneuver would have done a lot to introduce new options for higher speed units that are more difficult to maneuver at slower speeds.
  • "Switch your deflector shields on -- double front!"  I mean, seriously, one of the earliest lines going into the FIRST major space battle in the franchise...and we still have no corresponding ability.  Sort of addressed by 'reinforce', although the X-Wing cannot use that action, so...???
  • Still annoyed that there is no flag on which ships have hyperdrive, and which don't.  It's a small thing, but makes a big difference for scenario play, for those into that, speaking of which...
  • Have we all played 'Armada'?  Some of us?  "Objectives"??  I mean, of everything for X-Wing 2.0 to pass on...SOMETHING OTHER THAN DEATHMATCH AND DEATHMATCH ONLY would have been, I dunno, super awesome.  SOME kind of objectives.  Heck, even if you keep it in the FPS video game flavor and it's just capture-the-flag or team-rabbit or king-of-the-hill or whatever.  Just...something other than always-deathmatch, all-the-time, as part of the core rules.

Anyway, minor nits to pick.  Overall, 2nd edition does look like an epic improvement on this, but...

Well, heck, it took us six years before the X-Wings got "Lock S-Foils into attack position!" so I guess an equal amount of time before 'shields double front' may be expected...  ?

Are these 1st edition rules or just things that there was no possible way they could have put in 1st edition but could have in 2.0?

  1. The one weapon to really do that was the TLT, unfortunately its consistency made up more for the fact its maximum damage was capped.
  2. I actually want more just to keep the flight profiles open. I am upset they don't have 4 speed banks. Turns can stay capped at 3.
  3. In 1st edition they didn't have the quadrant markers on all bases so reinforce on a ship without 180 aux would have been ridiculous. But now 2.0 yes Y-wings should have reinforce, especially if their shield coverage is reduced.
  4. This bothers me more in Armada than it does in X-wing (already poured gas on that fire so n need to go over to Armada Forums). X-wing being in a smaller scale you don't need hyperspace mechanic. Unless they added the Star Destroyer in X-wing Epic 2.0;)
  5. Objectives could be nice (also gives me something to do with all the mission tokens from 1st edition). However I am a huge proponent for keep it simple stupid. However for stuff like the new store league they could include some objective markers in the store kits and a seasonal mission for the day while keeping the top tier competitive stuff elimination as that is the easiest objective to balance out through all 5 (or seven) factions.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Multiple dice types.

I'd love to have seen different colours of dice (similar to Armada) to represent different types of weapons. This could have been in the format of:

  • Ion Dice - Multiple 'Ion' symbols, a small number of Hits and no Crits.
  • Torpedo Dice - High variance, more Blank faces (4?) but the rest of the faces would have double results in a mix of Hits, Crits and Focuses. 
  • Missile Dice - An extra Hit but no Focus results - they are guided after all.
  • Force Dice - Can be used for attack or defence and only includes Focus or Blank results

This is just off the top of my head, and I'm not saying they should all be implemented, but I think there would have been a lot of possibilities

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I would have liked to see them change how movement works. Instead of the old moving front to rear on the template and thus making larger bases move further on the same move as a small base ship. Easy to fix by having movement go from front of the base, to the front of the base. Simply place your movement guide as normal, then use the 1- straight (or 2 straight if you are moving 1 straight) and place it at the end of your move template, remove the move template and place the front guides of your ship against the 1-straight template. All ships move the same distance now, regardless of base size. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of things I wanted made it, like Medium Bases. There are a lot of little things I might have liked to have seen that didn't happen that have been brought up here, but the big one for me is the first one mentioned: To-Hit Rolls.

I don't think it would have overly complicated the game, but it would have opened up huge new design space. The missile and torpedo thing is one example, but there are many others, and I think it would have smoothed out the binary nature of direct attack vs defense which I think can be pretty punishing sometimes depending on your luck.

That said, I'm not judging Second Edition on the lack of that already. A whole slew of balance changes are already set to offset some of the same concerns, so it may be less necessary in Second Edition to begin with.

The other thing I wanted in Second Edition that didn't happen was character art on the pilot cards. This one is more of a pet peeve, but it just bugs me that the pilot cards just have random artwork of the ships. This is a miniatures game. I don't need a picture of the ship, that's what the miniature is for! ? The one place I think this actually does sort of matter in the gameplay, is that it makes it harder for me to keep track of who's who, outside of the big names or ones I'm personally familiar with. It was only recently I realized how much this mattered, when I found out that a name I heard a lot on the forums was actually this EU character my friends and I were joking about when we stumbled on their picture. I even had their card, but it was meaningless to me when it was just associated with a generic ship battle artwork.

I know there are some character artwork pilot cards as rewards, even still, but it's only a partial solution. It's something I just wish Second Edition did differently from the beginning.

Edited by Jokubas

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.


×
×
  • Create New...