Jump to content
Commander Kaine

2.0 is kind of a mess

Recommended Posts

You're receiving a lot of backlash for stating some unpleasant facts. 2.0 is not what many people wanted it to be and it failed on some basic levels, like card templating. (Also terrible terrible tie reaper and saw conversion with wrong card templates, wordings)  What will make or break 2.0 is how often ffg is willing to update the costs. If it's once a month or two, then this can turn out great and we can get healthy everchanging emviroment. If it's half a year or sth like that... then this will be like errata, not using full potential of patches. I'm hyped for 2.0 for many reasons  (mainly turret change)but it won't be a lot betterthan 1.0 initially. 

Edited by Zura

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:

How about you guys actually read what I write. 

 

Whenever I post something, people come here attacking me personally for not at all controversial posts. I didn't write about game balance, I didn't write about the GAME... I wrote about the company making the games, and the quality of the product. 

As in actual quality, like changing stuff around without checking everything (Genius), making mistakes in wording, etc. 

 

Listen. If you don't like me, don't read the post. 

If you disagree with me, say that, and tell me why

If you gonna sass me, you are getting sassed back. 

 

Don't come here complaining that my style is atrocious, when you people can't engage normally. If you don't think I am worthy, that's fine... Go away. If you still comment however, don't be surprised when you get stuff like this. Childish comments deserve childish responses.

 

There is ample proof on these forums that I CAN engage in normal discussion with people. You don't have to if you don't want to, just don't complain if I play along. 

rock_band.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the most important difference between first and second edition is that they’re doing life cycle management here. They’ll still screw up occasionally, I’m sure, but now they’ve built in relief valves they can use in a more targeted manner. Points costs for ships are part of this, for sure, and slots, but they’ve also built in more flexibility around firing arcs and quadrants, as well as being able to tune the meta via upgrade costs. The easiest example is homing missiles, which are (probably?) way too good at 3 points, but can always go way up if no one is playing low HP ships like interceptors or aethersprites. 

Plus, the game definitely has more interesting design space when you can put in things like Graz the hunter, whereas first edition was really running low on new content that didn’t ludicrously powercreep or DOA.

tl;dr: second edition has more tools and will avoid the lowest lows of first edition, even though it may not hit as high as we would like. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, PenguinBonaparte said:

Perhaps I'm wrong, hard to tell, but if this were a writing class I'd say to work on the tone. Seems like a lot of people are, fairly or unfairly, interpreting your comments in a similar way and so if you want them to be read differently maybe try a different strategy.

He is using the tone to get a response. That’s why he already got banned once. Whining about the FREE, EARLY 2.0 material in wave 14 being imperfect is just about the most asinine, useless activity I can imagine.

Edited by TasteTheRainbow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, player2422845 said:

I don't see that. Don't forget board game cannot go beyond alpha testing.

 

Pricing is meant to change with meta game, so not very relevant point.

Yeah, there is point that can be upgraded. I will go with xwing because it is my favourite game besides all its weaknesses. Thanks the almighty that I was too poor to buy warhammer before "age of sigmar".

Fair. 

Yeah, I barely dodged that bullet. I still have some unpainted skeletons lying around somewhere, but never went further than the starter set. 

2 minutes ago, PenguinBonaparte said:

Perhaps I'm wrong, hard to tell, but if this were a writing class I'd say to work on the tone. Seems like a lot of people are, fairly or unfairly, interpreting your comments in a similar way and so if you want them to be read differently maybe try a different strategy.

I'm not sure it can be helped. Even if I write something down, word by word, clear as day, people will often ignore it if it fits their narrative. Case in point, I wrote that I love the idea of the changes that were done to the game. Do you think it made a difference? 

1 minute ago, TasteTheRainbow said:

He is using the tone to get a response. That’s why he already got banned once.

I got banned because of the ridiculous profanity filter. But nice assumptions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OP is valid.

From what I'm seeing, we've got pre-release errata. So... point cost isn't the end-all, be-all to balancing the game. Obviously. 

And what I have never understood is why the changing of point costs on a card is somehow different than errata of card text. 

 

I mean, if FFG was actually committed to game balance, the ability to tweak text (and fix text errors and inconsistencies) would be pretty useful, too, wouldn't you say? 

We're already putting up with cards lacking point cost information and upgrade slots, because we're admitting that they're subject to change at any time. Why do we have game effect text on the cards at all? We already have to memorize the changes in the errata (in 1.0, even, and demonstrably that's not changing in 2.0), so FFG should have just eliminated the card text entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Commander Kaine said:

Starting with Advanced Sensors, which was changed recently, the game is filled with things that look... weird.

I'm not sure what you mean by this? The errata'ed language seems pretty clean and clear and deliberately limits an extremely powerful effect - how is that bad?

Share this post


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

I'm not sure what you mean by this? The errata'ed language seems pretty clean and clear and deliberately limits an extremely powerful effect - how is that bad?

My problem is that we are already given a card that was errataed, even before the game is released, which makes me think, this product isn't well tested. 

Also:

Extremely powerful effects are fine. There are many powerful effects in the game, just look at many of the crew upgrades. They are AMAZING. 

Advanced sensors (the old effect) is strong, but is also kind of expensive. The worst offender is Vader, clearly (and my suspicion is that it was limited because of him), but even that isn't that much better than what he can already do. It is better, but not WAAY better. 

Now, my THEORY is that Advanced Sensors was created with the old effect, and the game was designed with that effect in mind. Every ship with a system slot was balanced with this capability in mind. Then, they change the effect to a significantly less powerful one, making the upgrade a subpar option for many ships and pilot abilities. (And not a lot of other system slots are great). 

If you have any linked actions, you are almost always better doing that. So Advanced sensor moves from a GREAT upgrade to a SITUATIONAL one. Sometimes you will be able to move in different ways, at the cost of your efficiency. 

Problem is, it is still priced as GREAT upgrade. 

 

Jam is pretty much the same story, IMO. Except it is a core mechanic, not a card, so it's worse. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, TasteTheRainbow said:

He is using the tone to get a response. That’s why he already got banned once. Whining about the FREE, EARLY 2.0 material in wave 14 being imperfect is just about the most asinine, useless activity I can imagine.

No, youre being an agitator.  Many people on this board are in agreement that the idea of 2.0 is great, but the implimentation is terrible.  Who knows if they(we) are the majority of players, but we're at least a sizable minority.

If you cant respond to good faith comments in kind, maybe just dont?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Vontoothskie said:

No, youre being an agitator.  Many people on this board are in agreement that the idea of 2.0 is great, but the implimentation is terrible.  Who knows if they(we) are the majority of players, but we're at least a sizable minority.

If you cant respond to good faith comments in kind, maybe just dont?

There’s a lot of discussion above about the backlash Kaine received for starting this thread.  Kaine has some good points-there may be flaws in the design process.  When you read through the thread, understand that the backlash may be due to the source.  In other words, people are responding to Kaine based in part on his history  on this forum.

He is the guy who has talked about which country’s people he doesn’t like.  He has referred to people who disagree with him as “garbage people,” and he routinely makes absolute claims on issues that are subjective. 

I don’t discount what Kaine says, because he knows the game well enough that even when he’s wrong there’s a kernel of truth there.  Still, I sympathize with posters who react strongly to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Commander Kaine said:

My problem is that we are already given a card that was errataed, even before the game is released, which makes me think, this product isn't well tested. 

Changing the wording seems to be a sign that there was more testing and they corrected an oversight though, which seems to be a good thing? The errata corrects Advanced Sensors 2.0 cards printed for Wave 14, which released in mid/late June, 3 months ahead of 2.0’s release. The cards we have seen in the conversion kit spoilers had the errata’ed wording already so it just seems to be a correction that came too late for Wave 14 release but fell within the normal playtest window for 2.0 proper. 

We disagree about how well priced Advanced Sensors 2.0 is (I think it’s still a bargain on the right ships) but that’s another argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Old Sarge said:

There’s a lot of discussion above about the backlash Kaine received for starting this thread.  Kaine has some good points-there may be flaws in the design process.  When you read through the thread, understand that the backlash may be due to the source.  In other words, people are responding to Kaine based in part on his history  on this forum.

He is the guy who has talked about which country’s people he doesn’t like.  He has referred to people who disagree with him as “garbage people,” and he routinely makes absolute claims on issues that are subjective. 

I don’t discount what Kaine says, because he knows the game well enough that even when he’s wrong there’s a kernel of truth there.  Still, I sympathize with posters who react strongly to him.

I feel like there is some need for clarification. 

I didn't talk about which country's people I don't like, I said I'm happy not to be an american (US), because of the politics happening there right now. I think that most americans would prefer something calmer as well. In that post I've made no judgement on the people at all. (and I specifically mentioned that I am not too happy about my country either, so I feel this is a gross misrepresentation of what I said) 

I didn't refer to people as garbage people because they disagree with me. I commonly say people are either unable or unwilling to participate in the conversation, after they refuse to do so after several attempts. Sometimes I phrase that harsher, but that's the gist of it. 

My absolute claims are peppered with phrases like "I think", "in my opinion" and so on. If after all this, people still react to my statements as if I claimed that I have solid proof of my theories, I have no choice but to think they didn't or couldn't read/understand my post. 

Also, on this note: 

 

 

Me being difficult, however, does not mean I am wrong. 

Me being difficult does not mean you get a free shot at me. 

And if, in response to me being difficult, you are also being difficult... we are not that different.... are we? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sparklelord said:

OP is valid.

From what I'm seeing, we've got pre-release errata. So... point cost isn't the end-all, be-all to balancing the game. Obviously. 

And what I have never understood is why the changing of point costs on a card is somehow different than errata of card text. 

 

I mean, if FFG was actually committed to game balance, the ability to tweak text (and fix text errors and inconsistencies) would be pretty useful, too, wouldn't you say? 

We're already putting up with cards lacking point cost information and upgrade slots, because we're admitting that they're subject to change at any time. Why do we have game effect text on the cards at all? We already have to memorize the changes in the errata (in 1.0, even, and demonstrably that's not changing in 2.0), so FFG should have just eliminated the card text entirely.

tenor.gif?itemid=4674700

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TasteTheRainbow said:

He is using the tone to get a response. That’s why he already got banned once. Whining about the FREE, EARLY 2.0 material in wave 14 being imperfect is just about the most asinine, useless activity I can imagine.

He should do something really awesome like post a lame .gif, right?  I for one think this place could use a little more candor and a little less blind fanaticism. This is THE most popular miniatures game on the planet currently. 2.0 is going to be a commercial success. Clearly FFG is doing a lot of things right. That doesn't mean constructive criticism should be squelched and like the OP or not, his post is pretty darned constructive. Yours on the other hand...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, EastCoast said:

He should do something really awesome like post a lame .gif, right?  I for one think this place could use a little more candor and a little less blind fanaticism. This is THE most popular miniatures game on the planet currently. 2.0 is going to be a commercial success. Clearly FFG is doing a lot of things right. That doesn't mean constructive criticism should be squelched and like the OP or not, his post is pretty darned constructive. Yours on the other hand...

It’s not candor. It’s deliberately slanted whining designed to create drama.

Whining about  meaningless errors in an early-released 2.0 box is not constructive, lol. Every single person playing this game will have a copy of the correct advanced sensors. Nobody will be harmed by it. We just got some free stuff early. 

 

People like him spend their time taking a dump on the work of others to entertain themselves and appear to be something more than they are. You ever have someone raise an eyebrow about the fact that you play minis? Ever see someone think about joining a community then back off because the forums and subs are garbage? Guys like him are exactly why that happens. They dump on anything and anyone not to be helpful, but to make sure other people think they have something to contribute. Because it’s all they’ve got. 

 

And if you think a post equating web-based points with web-based ABILITIES deserves more than an eye roll gif I think you underestimate the average age of our players. They were also not serious with that nonsense. 

Edited by TasteTheRainbow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, TasteTheRainbow said:

People like him spend their time taking a dump on the work of others to entertain themselves and appear to be something more than they are. You ever have someone raise an eyebrow about the fact that you play minis? Ever see someone think about joining a community then back off because the forums and subs are garbage? Guys like him are exactly why that happens. They dump on anything and anyone not to be helpful, but to make sure other people think they have something to contribute. Because it’s all they’ve got.

I think your attitude (and the swarm of others like you) toward a dissenting points of view is far more of a deterrent than somebody who doesn't pretend everything is sunshine and roses. One man's cyanide laced kool-aid is another man's garbage as it were.

Of course some people lack the self awareness to realize they rail against cyber bullying on one part of the forums and actively participate in it on another. Whatever blows your hair back, man. Regardless, I've derailed this thread more than enough already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, TasteTheRainbow said:

It’s not candor. It’s deliberately slanted whining designed to create drama.

Whining about  meaningless errors in an early-released 2.0 box is not constructive, lol. Every single person playing this game will have a copy of the correct advanced sensors. Nobody will be harmed by it. We just got some free stuff early. 

 

People like him spend their time taking a dump on the work of others to entertain themselves and appear to be something more than they are. You ever have someone raise an eyebrow about the fact that you play minis? Ever see someone think about joining a community then back off because the forums and subs are garbage? Guys like him are exactly why that happens. They dump on anything and anyone not to be helpful, but to make sure other people think they have something to contribute. Because it’s all they’ve got. 

 

And if you think a post equating web-based points with web-based ABILITIES deserves more than an eye roll gif I think you underestimate the average age of our players. They were also not serious with that nonsense. 

Nice to learn all these things about myself. Apparently,  I am everything wrong with this game. 

But fine, you wanna play that way. FINE.

 

The advanced sensor thing was to highlight that we very much got something that it is untested. I had other points in the OP and since as well. But you know, I guess they don't contribute to your little story about me. Or you didn't read my stuff. Whichever it is, you are proving that you don't argue in good faith, you are trying to paint me in a negative picture to get your point across, and you ignore many things... Like the several posts I made about how i LOVE second edition. Obviously, that was there to pick things apart. 

You see, if you said: 

Kaine is LITERALLY the worst and dumps on everything, because he sometimes says some pretty outlandish things, and his style is personally annoying me, but also appreciates many things about second edition, and from day one he was a staunch supporter of it

Then your way of answering me wouldn't have made you into the hero you painted yourself to be. 

Why, you are just an ordinary guy who comes online, sees someone being completely unreasonable, and tells them how it is. You are actually doing good, here on the forums, by disregarding criticism because YOU personally don't like me, because I am LITERALLY everything wrong about miniature wargaming. 

You see, if you weren't so obsessed with your self righteous crusade, you might notice that you are projecting quite a bit. 

Surprised you may be, I am not the devil, nor I am your stereotypical neckbeard troll from a basement. 

 

 

And if you are interested in why I am doing this, I can tell you. 

 

I criticise a lot of things, because I am a critical person. I criticise everything I care about. I LOVE X-Wing, and I want it to be better. This is why I write the things I write. Not because I hate them, or I hate the world, and I want everyone to suffer, or I wanna get internet points (Do you honestly think if I was trying to be popular for my opinion, this is what I'd do?)... It's because I care. 

 

And you might not agree with me. You might think these problems are not worth it. Fine. I don't really care. But don't act like you know what's going on, because you clearly don't. 

 

I also noticed that most people who rail against me, tend to put me in boxes that I do not fit in, also, they are impossible to cipher from my activities on the forums. I've been alluded to being a nazi, several times, based on my faction preference. 

Maybe, instead of trying to villainize me, like you are clearly doing, try to be constructive. Be the change you want to see in the Forums. Because now, as EastCoast said, you are making them a horrible place.

Not for me, I honestly don't care about you, but for people you want to protect... from me.

w3hUyFC.gif

(For the record, the OP is about how fixing the symptoms won't cure the disease... and it would be foolish to think that EVERY problem in 1.0 was due to their inability to change things after the fact) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Idk, a lot of the problems in 1.0 were very much due to their inability to go back and fix fundamentally broken mechanics (turrets)

Plus all the things we couldn't do without the new bases (bullseye arcs, the half-line that marks the fore and aft, all the clearly defined quadrants for turrets and aux arcs etc.) and the massive balance overhaul of literally every ship and upgrade, whether directly or indirectly through the nerfing of problem mechanics (TIEs vs Reinforce)

I don't doubt we're going to get new problems, but the "disease" as defined here is a collective of human beings. Human beings have the curious capacity to learn from and fix their mistakes, only now we have a theoretically effective template with which to address future issues.

Cautiously optimistic ?

Edited by ficklegreendice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

Idk, a lot of the problems in 1.0 were very much due to their inability to go back and fix fundamentally broken mechanics (turrets)

Plus all the things we couldn't do without the new bases (bullseye arcs, the half-line that marks the fore and aft, all the clearly defined quadrants for turrets and aux arcs etc.) and the massive balance overhaul of literally every ship and upgrade, whether directly or indirectly through the nerfing of problem mechanics (TIEs vs Reinforce)

I don't doubt we're going to get new problems, but the "disease" as defined here is a collective of human beings. Human beings have the curious capacity to learn from and fix their mistakes, only now we have a theoretically effective template with which to address future issues.

Cautiously optimistic ?

Yeah, and I understand this POV. It's reasonable. And I don't think I ever had anything against this. My point wasn't even about any specific problematic mechanics, precisely because of the things you mentioned. 

But things like the willingness to use available tools is something I have to see to believe. It's not like before 2.0 came out, FFG was liberally using every tool they had to make changes in order to make the game healthier. Even if they COULD. 

Or that their playtesting is kinda bad. 

 

I want everything to be good. I'm just not convinced that it will be. 

200.gif

I don't think I am being unreasonable for that. If you are cautiously optimistic, I am just simply cautious. If you lower your expectations enough, you can only be surprised in a good way. That's my motto. 

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...