banned from Starbucks posted:

Maybe its just me but ive already mostly lost interest in squad building. I think they went too far with making upgrades mediocre/bad. Like i've played wave 3-4 already where everyone just ran efficient generics, (the 3B 2A wave) it wasnt that interesting. Theres gotta be some kinda middle ground between this and Expertise/K2/Dengar

guts and bolts posted:

You're not crazy and I sure am in this area! The X-Wing night at Atomic Empire is Tuesday and everyone's usually gaming by around 6pm. They're in the midst of finishing their last 1.0 store league, which has produced some hilarious results because people do not like 1.0 and want to play 2.0, so they are therefore intentionally losing games so that they may be mathematically eliminated from the league while not being That Guy who just shows up, forfeits, and then fucks off to play Monopoly (or in this case 2.0).

What this means in actuality is that 2.0 games are extremely common. There's usually about ten or so people playing on a given night, but I expect that number to rise as 2.0 becomes genuinely available - lots of people are currently interested in the product, but have no means of acquiring it yet.

guts and bolts posted:

I get that, but that's why I was saying that X-Wing 2.0 isn't "a new book that came out for your existence army that updates the rules." The foundations of the game have changed, and a lot of stuff is straight up completely different. It isn't a codex or whatever for your space marines - it is a new game, albeit a "sequel" in most every sense of that word.

Arquinsiel posted:

It's FFG treating it as a boardgame when it's really not. It's the same kind of problem that WotC had with their wargame offerings because they tried to market them with the CCG model. The mapping isn't a direct one and some people will pitch a fit over it.

ConfusedUs posted:

:reasonable things:

Cobbsprite posted:

Don't try to make sense of entitled whiny pissbabies. They are unmanageable, and they like being that way.

Best thing to do with people who bitch about how FFG is handling the new version is to ignore them. They're just making noise.

canyoneer posted:

Cobbsprite posted:

Don't try to make sense of entitled whiny pissbabies. They are unmanageable, and they like being that way.

Best thing to do with people who bitch about how FFG is handling the new version is to ignore them. They're just making noise.

ConfusedUs posted:

I see words like "problem," but every time someone elaborates I get questionable assertions like "cash-grab" and "unethical."

I ask because this is literally the most painless edition conversion I've ever seen for any product of any kind, anywhere.
a) The new edition was sorely needed, rules-wise
b) I can re-use every ship in my fleet, except the epic ones
c) I have heaps of new content to explore with that stuff.
d) I can expect continued support for this game that I dearly love, for the foreseeable future

There's no realistic way for FFG to provide any of those without charging for them. Other than the fact that, gasp, FFG wants to earn back their investment into the development of the product as well as create future revenue streams, what "problems" are there?

Please enlighten me, because I sure can't see them.

alg posted:

I'm surprised more people aren't talking about the app still not being out and not having seen any evidence of it besides mockups

EnjoiThePureTrip posted:

I mean.. it was useable on demo tablets at GenCon.

E: Maybe I’m making this up? I know I saw people around tablets at the X-Wing demo tables. And I swear I read online that they had the app to demo, because my friend and I were kicking ourselves for not stopping to check because of the line. HOWEVER, my attempts to find where someone said they demoed it haven’t come up with anything so now I’m not sure.

alg posted:

I'm surprised more people aren't talking about the app still not being out and not having seen any evidence of it besides mockups

Funzo posted:

I played around with the app at Gen Con too. Walked right past it Sunday afternoon, and there was nobody else around so I just screwed around for a few minutes to build a ~175 point Dash.

ConfusedUs posted:

I see words like "problem," but every time someone elaborates I get questionable assertions like "cash-grab" and "unethical."

I ask because this is literally the most painless edition conversion I've ever seen for any product of any kind, anywhere.
a) The new edition was sorely needed, rules-wise
b) I can re-use every ship in my fleet, except the epic ones
c) I have heaps of new content to explore with that stuff.
d) I can expect continued support for this game that I dearly love, for the foreseeable future

There's no realistic way for FFG to provide any of those without charging for them. Other than the fact that, gasp, FFG wants to earn back their investment into the development of the product as well as create future revenue streams, what "problems" are there?

Please enlighten me, because I sure can't see them.

The Gate posted:

That's kinda hilarious, actually. I don't have any 2.0 stuff just yet, but maybe I can manage to proxy enough stuff that it will work.

alg posted:

Last time I played in an AE league they had a horrific system. Like you got matched up with someone and just hoped they showed up. It was a giant waste of time for someone who doesn't live right next to the store, which is in an odd area.

Arquinsiel posted:

It's FFG treating it as a boardgame when it's really not. It's the same kind of problem that WotC had with their wargame offerings because they tried to market them with the CCG model. The mapping isn't a direct one and some people will pitch a fit over it.

guts and bolts posted:

I don't know enough about miniatures games leagues to know how to do it any better. "Next week you're supposed to play <person>" seemed intuitive, but I guess it blows if they just never show up.

guts and bolts posted:

The most obviously parallel is a video game, though. Calling it "Second Edition" is probably the sticking point here, since that's not entirely what 2.0 is - it is more like "X-Wing 2: Electric Boogaloo" than it is strictly a rules update. And while it sure would have been great if the foundation of X-Wing was so strong as to obviate the need for ever revisiting that foundation, that obviously isn't the case. While I appreciate your devil's advocacy, I'm having a difficult time picturing what the expectation was going to be. Don't new codexes (codices?) or rulebooks in other miniatures games, uh, also cost money? Was the expectation that 2.0 would be a completely free update? If so, how would one account for the cost in man-hours and production value for doing this incredibly comprehensive, nuts and bolts overhaul? It really seems the core of the problem, such as it is, is "I don't want to spend more money on X-Wing." In which case, that's fine. Play 1.0, or don't. But I'm curious to see what the actual reasoning is behind calling 2.0 anything like an unethical cash-grab beyond "I don't want to spend more money on X-Wing." There does not appear to be any.

Raged posted:

Does anyone have a link to a list of how many generic pilots are in the kits? My google foo is failing me.

Acebuckeye13 posted:

I'm not really getting the positive comparison with 40k.

Acebuckeye13 posted:

I'm not really getting the positive comparison with 40K. Speaking personally, the change from 7th to 8th was a welcome one in which I only had to get the new Guard Codex to be able to bring every one of my models into a fight. In comparison, I've already spent significantly more getting the 2.0 core set and Rebel conversion box, and I still can't use all my models or lists I routinely used in first edition (i.e. four Y-Wings).

I dunno, maybe it's because I haven't been able to play competitively much for most of the past year or so, and haven't been burned out on 1.0. Or maybe it's because I place a lot more value in my head on the models over the cardboard, and the idea that I can't use a significant percentage of my models bothers me, especially when I've only ever played Rebels and this has never been an issue previously.

Like, I get why most of you are excited for 2.0 and don't mind the associated costs, but it does still suck in a lot of ways.

hoiyes posted:

I think I'm going to miss all the passive 1.0 mods. I flew a generic swarm and even with focuses just had a few rounds when I lined up for the kill box and just rolled poo poo blanks. I'd love to see another focus on both the red dice and green, to really make actions and manoeuvres count and take some swingyness out.

ConfusedUs posted:

I think the biggest missed opportunity in second edition was the dice. I wish they had decoupled damage from accuracy somehow.

I don't miss the crazy passive mods where everything was max damage all the time. If they were to go that route, I'd rather they just not use dice at all.

ConfusedUs posted:

I think the biggest missed opportunity in second edition was the dice. I wish they had decoupled damage from accuracy somehow.

Admiral Joeslop posted:

I've always thought the dice are a weak point. I don't know how to change things but relying on randomness could lead to non-fun. I've definitely had multiple matches with me or the opponent getting frustrated because of randomness.

Some Numbers posted:

Holy crap yes.

Arquinsiel posted:

Stuff

ConfusedUs posted:

Probably the single biggest, but rarely-discussed, aspect of high-level play is risk management.

In early 1.0 and now in 2.0, you have to plan for both the best and worst case scenario, dice-wise. Ask: I move in to attack here, what happens if my dice blank? How do I recover from that? Can I recover from that?

guts and bolts posted:

Aces are consequently harder to fly now and very, very pricey. Fail an action? Too bad. Want free information measuring for fake target locks? Nope. Dozens of un-fun token stacking upgrades and pilot abilities to make sure your Soontir Fel has a 0.00086% chance of taking damage? Gone.

Gumdrop Larry posted:

I'm not sure what the best solution would be with dice since obviously, in terms of game design in general, randomization ain't the greatest thing when it comes to answering the question of "does the thing I want to do work or not." However, in X-Wing I've consistently found one of the more frustrating things inevitability of certain setups. It used to be OG Palpatine aces and the inability to push any kind of meaningful damage through due to their maneuverability and easy choices that felt like you were a super good pilot when you flew them even though it was all kind of auto pilot. Following that it was the meta shift into more tanky builds and damage absorption/redistribution, with a healthy dose of bombs and other unavoidable damage sources. In any game if you create a system of randomization people will make every effort possible to eliminate it if you give them the opportunity to do so. It's a delicate balance because you never want people walking away from games truthfully saying they lost it to a bunch of bad dice rolls, but you don't want builds that are so consistent in terms of absorbing or producing damage that they rise to the top as a distinct "best" build.

I suppose it's a flaw with the general design of both X-Wing and wargames in general. In an ideal world you wouldn't be rolling anything and the numbers would be static, but that would require a very different game structure that would be significantly harder to balance or even simply conceptualize in the first place.

In short dice are bad but a necessary evil to make games of this nature more interesting.

The Gate posted:

Bad dice will lose you the game, but it's generally rare that that's the actual cause you lost.