Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Super LoFi

Rules update/New Rules

34 posts in this topic

I am fairly new to the FFG community.   I am playing X WING  at the moment and I am enjoying it a lot.  My question is: do you guys think FFG will have an update for positioning?  Like shooting into the rear or side of a ship?  This is the only thing that sort of bothers me about the game…

Thanks in advance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well no one can really say, personally I don't believe they will come up with rule changes, but they have announced that with the new ships there will be rules added, probably only affecting those ships and how they're operated. I don't think they will just add rules to the existing gameplay however without having any direct correlation to new actions or new ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I dont think positioning/flanking is a big factor in this game. The ships without shields have the same armor all the way around, and shields work likewise.

The only adjustment I could see would maybe give the Rebels an Action that allows them to adjust shields 'full front' or 'full rear', adding one shield marker to that aspect and removing it from the opposite (there is precedent for this in the movies). May over-complicate things though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I honestly can't see FFG making such a radical change to the game.  The rules are really simple to play as the game stands, with all the information you need to know right there on the pilot/upgrade cards and ship tokens.  In fact, the only "rule" I can think of that's not somehow represented on the board is the +1 attack die/+1 defense die bonuses for range.

If you toss in extra bonuses to hit/damage based on angle of attack, it's one more thing you need to do every turn, and then you have to argue about which facing of the ship is mostly in your fire arc for damage purposes, etc.

In a "realistic" sense, I don't see much difference in an X-Wing blowing apart a TIE Fighter in one round, regardless of which way its facing.  Sure, the profile of the TIE is huge vs the TIE Advanced, so from the side, it should technically be easier to hit, but the values for Agility, etc are abstracts for the purposes of the dice pool, so you could interpret it in a number of ways.

I think the "critical hit" cards add enough extra "realism" to the ongoing battle to keep it interesting, we don't need to go adding more rules to the basic mechanics of the game.  I've had a great response from first-timers who loved how simple the game was to pick up, despite the intimidating look of it, with the various tokens and cards, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if the maneuver templates will be updated to be specific to a type of ship.  I have always thought that a TIE could turn tighter than an X-Wing, and that an X-Wing could turn tighter than a Y-Wing…

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 The game is an ABSTRACTION. Not a simulation.

Maneuvering was designed to make each ship feel different.  The Y-Wing is slow and sluggish, the X-Wing has lots of movement variety, and the tie fighters can do very nimble turns and fly at higher top speeds.

Its a great design, and the game system is simple and elegant.  Why change it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bsmith13 said:

I wonder if the maneuver templates will be updated to be specific to a type of ship.  I have always thought that a TIE could turn tighter than an X-Wing, and that an X-Wing could turn tighter than a Y-Wing…

The Tie CAN turn tighter than an X-Wing.  If you compare the two dials, you'll see that the Tie can do a sharp "1" turn, where the X-Wing cannot.  Also, many of the tighter turns are green for the Tie, but not for the X-Wing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I think on the Falcon, having front/rear shields would be pretty rad. Especially if you had some sort of upgrade that would allow you to swap them maybe as an action.

For example, let's say the Falcon starts with two front and two rear shield tokens. The falcon has lost both the rear shields due to damage. If a TIE was on your rear, you could use an action to transfer one or both of your front shields to your rear to protect you from taking hull damage if the TIE hits you.

 

Obviously details of this would have to be worked out but I think it could be cool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

magadizer said:

 I think on the Falcon, having front/rear shields would be pretty rad. Especially if you had some sort of upgrade that would allow you to swap them maybe as an action.

For example, let's say the Falcon starts with two front and two rear shield tokens. The falcon has lost both the rear shields due to damage. If a TIE was on your rear, you could use an action to transfer one or both of your front shields to your rear to protect you from taking hull damage if the TIE hits you.

 

Obviously details of this would have to be worked out but I think it could be cool.

This could work as a handy upgrade card for the ship, rather than introducing a new action icon for the printed card.  I'm not a fan of new rules events each time an expansion comes out, as it makes it more bothersome for a newer player to keep it all in mind at once, where it would be just "one more thing" to know for a veteran player.

Having said that, while it's certainly thematic to have Chewie "angle the deflector shields", it's one more thing to potentially slow up the game, and the ship token would also need to have the front/back distinction printed on it, along with a note in the packaging about that rule addition.

It looks like there may be a copilot mechanic, and something to do with mines for Slave I, so we'll see how rulesy and ponderous it becomes.  I'm all for new stuff, but nothing that would upset the pace of the game, which is a breeze, so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 That's what I was thinking of, an action on an upgrade card, rather than a new class of actions.

Surely the Falcon will have pretty much all the action options, right? It at least has to have Barrel roll, target lock, and focus, but evade seems to fit too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

magadizer said:

 That's what I was thinking of, an action on an upgrade card, rather than a new class of actions.

Surely the Falcon will have pretty much all the action options, right? It at least has to have Barrel roll, target lock, and focus, but evade seems to fit too.

It also may be pilot based. No one can make a YT dance like Han, so he'd have all the action options, where a standard freighter jockey might only have  a couple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 looks like falcon will have just target lock and focus, but you can give expert handling for barrel rolls and it will have boost what ever that does…

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I wonder how many different fighter ships will eventually be in this game. I have not read the books but I guess some of the fighters like the next TIE INTERCEPTOR must be from the books unless somehow my beady little eyes missed it in the films. Looks super sharp. I like the simple rules because that keeps the game moving fast like a good dogfight should.

I like epic boardgames, have all expansions to Arkham Horror for example and many other games but it sure was fun to open X-WING and play, only missed a rule or so. I got 2 core, 2 TIE, 1 TIE ADVANCED, 1 Y and 1 X. Looking forward to other expansions.

Just got Leviathans in today and although it will be fun the rules are quite a bit more. For example , six or more areas on all four sides to keep track of etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I think Tie Interceptors are in Return of the Jedi.

 

Getting back to the thread topic:

I think the rules already include a simple yet efficient way of accounting for positioning.  It's all about firing arcs.  Keeping your enemy inside of them, and keeping your own ships out of them.  So maneuvering is really vastly more important than what upgrades and pilots you picked.

It could be cool to see a ship with shield toggling in a star wars game because it was a feature of the old x-wing pc games that we all know and love.  But I think this game has its own unique mechanics and you wont see them change drastically.  Probably the biggest evolutions to be introduced in subsequent releases will be new action cards (like this new "boosters" action on the falcon and A-Wing).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drakson said:

TIE INTERCEPTOR must be from the books unless somehow my beady little eyes missed it in the films. 

TIE interceptor is in the Battle of Endor in Return of the Jedi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if any of these 'new rules' include unique ships/characters.  Anybody else notice the number tags for the MF is a single number (20 I think it is)?  Implying that you can only take one.  Also if Luke can be a named gunner on the MF, how could you also take him as a pilot in another ship?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drakson said:

 I wonder how many different fighter ships will eventually be in this game. I have not read the books but I guess some of the fighters like the next TIE INTERCEPTOR must be from the books unless somehow my beady little eyes missed it in the films. Looks super sharp. I like the simple rules because that keeps the game moving fast like a good dogfight should.

I like epic boardgames, have all expansions to Arkham Horror for example and many other games but it sure was fun to open X-WING and play, only missed a rule or so. I got 2 core, 2 TIE, 1 TIE ADVANCED, 1 Y and 1 X. Looking forward to other expansions.

Just got Leviathans in today and although it will be fun the rules are quite a bit more. For example , six or more areas on all four sides to keep track of etc.

Drakson said:

 I wonder how many different fighter ships will eventually be in this game. I have not read the books but I guess some of the fighters like the next TIE INTERCEPTOR must be from the books unless somehow my beady little eyes missed it in the films. Looks super sharp. I like the simple rules because that keeps the game moving fast like a good dogfight should.

Your beady little eyes have indeed missed the TIE Interceptor, which is all over the place in Return of the Jedi.  Most obviously is when Lando realizes that the attack on the Death Star II is indeed, a trap, and says "fighters, coming in" as he flies towards the Imperial Fleet.  There are a bunch of TIE Interceptors lighting up his canopy with green laser fire.

Every ship we know of so far, from the Core Set and both expansion waves, has appeared in the movies in some capacity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The game definately needs a rule for tailing an enemy ship as this is the most crucial position for any flying craft in any game or film or real-life.  A simple re-roll of a failed hit would suffice to give a bit of an advantage for maneuvering into a good position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Major Mishap said:

The game definately needs a rule for tailing an enemy ship as this is the most crucial position for any flying craft in any game or film or real-life.  A simple re-roll of a failed hit would suffice to give a bit of an advantage for maneuvering into a good position.

I don't know that it needs any more advantage.  The current advantage of being able to fire while not having to defend seems pretty useful, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daveydavedave said:

 I think Tie Interceptors are in Return of the Jedi.

 

Getting back to the thread topic:

I think the rules already include a simple yet efficient way of accounting for positioning.  It's all about firing arcs.  Keeping your enemy inside of them, and keeping your own ships out of them.  So maneuvering is really vastly more important than what upgrades and pilots you picked.

It could be cool to see a ship with shield toggling in a star wars game because it was a feature of the old x-wing pc games that we all know and love.  But I think this game has its own unique mechanics and you wont see them change drastically.  Probably the biggest evolutions to be introduced in subsequent releases will be new action cards (like this new "boosters" action on the falcon and A-Wing).

 

TIE Interceptors are definitely in ROTJ.

 

I agree about the importance of maneuvering. I played the basic introductory rules again with my daughter last night to begin teaching her the game. I was impressed by how much maneuvering mattered once you strip away the distraction of the complexities of the game mechanics and look at the pure dogfight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Major Mishap said:

The game definately needs a rule for tailing an enemy ship as this is the most crucial position for any flying craft in any game or film or real-life.  A simple re-roll of a failed hit would suffice to give a bit of an advantage for maneuvering into a good position.

The "rule" is already provided for in the game; if you're a TIE Fighter tailing an X-Wing, you have the advantage because the X-Wing cannot fire back at you while you stay out of its fire arc.  Additionally, you can, as a TIE, make use of barrel rolls if you move second in that scenario, to ensure that the X-Wing will have a harder time slipping away.

Also, as the X-Wing, you can use Expert Handling to do the same thing.

I think all of this works well as an abstract of "real life" because in real life, much like this game, you'd have no idea whether your target is going to suddenly bolt left or right, and guessing wrong will allow them to get away and possibly turn the tables.

From the Empire, Mauler and Backstabber I believe both work quite well in this scenario, and Wedge sort of works the same way by taking away an opponent's Evade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the fact this game is designed to give the feel of a fast and furious dogfight, I would also have to fall on the side of keeping the rules simple.

As far as positioning advantage goes, others have already mentioned the advantage of getting outside of your opponent's firing arc,  Add to that the advantage for being at close range with standard weapons (+1 attack die) and the defense advantage for putting yourself at long range against standard weapons (+1 defense die) and I think you have the perfect mix of simplicity and realism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0