Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
NukeWash

Changes I Would Like to See

Recommended Posts

Hey all! Below is a list of items that I think would drastically improve the core experience of X-Wing, by further encouraging better maneuvering and offense being greater than defense. I would like to see intelligent, aggressive play encouraged by the game, AND I would like to see more games go to elimination rather than time. Please share your thoughts!

1) Make "Target Lock" Requirement Ordnance Scale with Initiative.
----Example: Proton Torps are totally worth it on Wedge, but probably not on a generic B-Wing. P-Torps being 8/8/10/12/12/12 would see them getting a lot more use. Expand this idea to all "Target Lock" munitions

2) "Reveal Dial," and other Pre-Movement Upgrades Scale with Initiative.
----Example: Advanced Sensors is totally worth it on Guri, but probably not on a generic B-Wing. Adv. Sensors being 4/4/6/8/10/10 would see them getting a lot more use. Expand this idea to all Pre-Movement upgrades

3) Gas Clouds have Penalty for Over-Lapping.
----There are currently no penalties for over-lapping a Gas Cloud, despite them offering a significant defensive bonus. Everyone has their own idea on this, but I'd like to see Gas Clouds give a Weapons Disabled token if over-lapped.

4) Implement Errata and FAQ Into the Rulebook, Noting Revision Number as you do so.
**----**There's no reason to have a bunch of separate rules documents. Condensing all rules to one document is not outrageously hard to do, nor is it that hard to consistently word the rules for ease of use and understanding.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The above four are pretty simple and I think easy to explain/argue for. The below are a little bit further out there, but I do think they would benefit the game....

I will preface these statements by saying that I am an aggressive player and I enjoy skirmishing. However, I currently see little reason to play X-Wing aggressively in a competitive setting.

A) Raise Ship Minimum to 3.
----Throughout the history of this game, two ship lists have either been extremely janky and weak, or degenerate. Miranda/Nym, Ghost/Fenn, Handbrake-Han/Jake, etc. I think that these lists are at odds with the core experience of X-Wing, and preclude a fun experience for at least one of the players.

B) After Round 1, ALL Ships within Range 1 of a Board Edge during the "End Phase" Take One Damage.
----This drastically reduces the effective combat area and further encourages players to close and engage each other. This prevents players from, "crab-walking," up a Board Edge or otherwise actively avoiding engagement. It also still allows for players to place a ship within Range 1 of a Board Edge to gain positional advantage, but at the cost of damage.

C) Update the Definition of, "Fortressing."
----Any time two or more friendly ships are at Range 0 and do not move for two consecutive phases, they are immediately destroyed.

Thanks for reading!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, NukeWash said:

1) Make "Target Lock" Requirement Ordnance Scale with Initiative.

Passive Sensors does enough to mitigate this in my eyes. Missiles going down overall is the more necessary thing, but Protons should probably never come down in price. 

47 minutes ago, NukeWash said:

2) "Reveal Dial," and other Pre-Movement Upgrades Scale with Initiative.

They're already moving in this direction. Advance Sensors appears to be an oversight.

47 minutes ago, NukeWash said:

3) Gas Clouds have Penalty for Over-Lapping.

This is basically universal opinion at this point.

47 minutes ago, NukeWash said:

4) Implement Errata and FAQ Into the Rulebook, Noting Revision Number as you do so.

You mean the RRG? This is already done. Once you hit even a casually competetive level, you should basically never have any reason to refer to the rulebook.

47 minutes ago, NukeWash said:

A) Raise Ship Minimum to 3.

Hard pass. This limits squadbuilding too much. 2 ship lists have been nothing close to the boogeyman now that their are fewer hyper efficient upgrades in the pool and this role would make it exceptionally difficult to run something like double decimators.

47 minutes ago, NukeWash said:

B) After Round 1, ALL Ships within Range 1 of a Board Edge during the "End Phase" Take One Damage.

Harder pass. This is an inelegant solution that effectively just shrinks the game board. Running up the sides is an important tactical option for lists that can't afford to joust.

47 minutes ago, NukeWash said:

C) Update the Definition of, "Fortressing."
----Any time two or more friendly ships are at Range 0 and do not move for two consecutive phases, they are immediately destroyed.

Even harder pass. If you really want to cut down on fortressing, give TOs more flexibility to make judgements as to what qualifies as fortressing. The more you try to make fortressing an explicit term, the more difficult you make all other instances to enforce. Two defenders K-Turning back and forth, or phantoms turtling in a corner. Both of these would not be considered fortressing by your standard, but are functionally the same as two upsilons front-to-front.

Edited by hargleblarg
autocorrect

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Can't stand trying to read it thoroughly--the text is to messed up.  I did see a few things.

Ordnance Price Scaling.  Naw.  The complexity added by scaling doesn't justify the minor benefits, particularly now that Passive Sensors is in the game.

The movement tricks stuff?  Probably not really needed.  Here's the major thing about initiative scaling: if nearly every upgrade scales with initiative, then initiative scaling is utterly pointless.  It would be far better to increase the price of higher initiative pilots directly, and let the upgrades have a flat cost.  Simple.  Easier to remember.

//

A big nope on the changes to stuff like the board edge and list requirements and stuff.

//

1 hour ago, hargleblarg said:

They're already moving in this direction. Advance Sensors appears to be an oversight.

Advanced Sensors is kind of a good example, IMHO, of one under-discussed part of initiative scaling.  Initiative scaling isn't just about the price for things on high-initiative pilots, but about the price on low-initiative pilots.  Mostly, Advanced Sensors doesn't need to be cheaper on low-initiative pilots.  I'm somewhat sympathetic to B-Wing users, since Advanced Sensors B-Wings are super fun.  But shuttles like the Lambda and Upsilon, ships like the U-Wing, would get a lot of power from cheap Advanced Sensors.  Selfishly, I'd enjoy them being cheaper, because I enjoy a decent number of ships like this, but in terms of balance, I really don't think it'd be a good idea.

I don't think it's an oversight that AdvS doesn't scale with initiative, because it's a strong example of a card which seems well priced for the most extreme cases--the Omicron Group Pilot and Petty Officer Thanisson on the one hand, and Guri on the other.

Edited by theBitterFig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On fortressing: this is already handled in the tournament regulations.  More TO’s just need to enforce it.

If it’s not a tournament setting, ask your opponent to stop and if they don’t, just scoop and find another game.  Even if there aren’t any other opponents around, just going home will be less frustrating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Changes I would like to see:



IDK about TL ordinance scaling, passive Sensors handles this for some ships, and everything doesn't need to be good on everything.

For Bs specifically I'd much rather see a flat cannon discounts ( with corresponding chassis increases ) to push more thematic builds like HLC/Tractor (or any of about 20 other ways to make them more thematic, but that's one of the simplest)

I totally agree on Advanced Sensor scaling though. I'd love generic ships with advanced sensors at a reasonable price but as-is they are unusable due to being priced for high-initiative. 

Edited by prauxim

Share this post


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

Mostly, Advanced Sensors doesn't need to be cheaper on low-initiative pilots.  I'm somewhat sympathetic to B-Wing users, since Advanced Sensors B-Wings are super fun.  But shuttles like the Lambda and Upsilon, ships like the U-Wing, would get a lot of power from cheap Advanced Sensors. 

That's a fair point, AS isn't just for movement and there are too many potential multipliers on these large support ships with multiple crew slots. 

I do really wish there was a viable way to get it on generic SV/B-wings cheaper. These ships are a blast to fly with AS and don't have nearly the potential for abuse as the support ships.

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...