|
That’s what gets me about the MoV changes: they already had a case study of it being not a great way to run tournaments.
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 09:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 03:44 |
|
|
I was thinking about getting back into X-Wing after being burnt out on it since 2017 and uhhhhhh what the gently caress is happening
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2021 04:16
|
|
|
AMG is pulling on threads and unraveling the whole loving ruleset.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2021 04:23
|
|
|
Next March it’ll be two years since I’ve last played X-Wing in person and my tournament ships are still in their case. Beginning to think that they are trapped in there…forever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2021 00:53
|
|
|
I played at my first post lockdown tournament a few weeks ago. Soontir, Ciena, Vader.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2021 02:33
|
|
|
Locally since we've become sort of disenfranchised with standard play thanks to AMG's tomfoolery we've been playing a lot of Aces High. Best way to not think about random initiative is to make it a non-factor. Turns out homing missiles are surprisingly strong. Since you get a point for first damage on a ship people are more likely to gamble on the 4 dice attack. Even if they just take the 1 damage that's still a point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2021 20:12
|
|
|
Y'all seen this?    Kuil, aside from the error in the text, seems shockingly busted unless they will cost him so high as to make him unplayable, while Greef Karga might just put Gleb out to pasture.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2021 17:51
|
|
|
what a great time to stop playing, hoo boy
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2021 18:05
|
|
|
Should include "Add 1 faceup damage card to this ship each time the player who owns this card says "I have spoken" when taking this action" to Kuiil.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2021 18:51
|
|
|
These fan expansions are so silly hahaha
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2021 20:58
|
|
|
Tevery Best posted:Y'all seen this? Hmm. Kuiil needs something actually bad to happen on a blank die, even if it's just 'for each blank die, remove one crit result, or if there are no remaining crit results, one hit result' before processing the hits and crits and eyeballs. As it is, there's no risk to using it beyond just not having it work as well as it might. For example, maybe your face-up damage cards are all Pilot damage cards, not Ship damage cards. Oh well. Peli has an actual risk to it. Migs is very conditional. Greef seems fine, if pretty low-powered. TheCenturion fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Dec 8, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2021 21:15
|
|
|
What the hell is Geef even good for? Kuiil needs some downside or at least be 25 points
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2021 21:16
|
|
|
Raged posted:What the hell is Geef even good for? Well, you can coordinate ships that are allied as opposed to friendly, and potentially give them a free target lock. I don't play Scum, and I've never actually seen Allied come into play, but hey.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2021 21:20
|
|
|
So far allied is only for epic games with more than 1 player on a side, but (did I imagine this?) they said they're thinking about allowing some cross-faction play with the ships from other factions as allied rather than friendly
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2021 21:25
|
|
|
Napoleon Nelson posted:So far allied is only for epic games with more than 1 player on a side, but (did I imagine this?) they said they're thinking about allowing some cross-faction play with the ships from other factions as allied rather than friendly I kind of figured Allied was to start introducing some multiplayer variants or something, maybe. So good job on trying to introduce some new play style. Kuiil is still very powerful, and needs to be cost very high, as presented. VERY high. That said, he's a bit of a waste of an action unless you're already pretty heavily damaged.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2021 21:35
|
|
|
Raged posted:What the hell is Geef even good for? Geef is still action economy. The first part about allied ships is only good for Epic (so far), but Coordinate + Free Lock is pretty solid. Kuiil is hilarious. What the hell are they thinking? Imagine putting that fucker on a YV666 and rolling eight dice with every action.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2021 21:35
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:Imagine putting that fucker on a YV666 and rolling eight dice with every action.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2021 22:15
|
|
|
Yeah by the time youre really getting much value out of it your ship is already on fire. People saying theres no downside to the card are forgetting that the downside is you need to be almost dead for it to even do anything. Like wow i repaired 1 card and got 3 focus tokens and died anyway.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2021 23:33
|
|
|
I just bought myself back into the game, glad to see everything is proceeding normally
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 00:53
|
|
|
"normally".
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2021 08:07
|
|
|
I played in the PAX Unplugged tournament over the weekend, my first tournament since the last PAX in 2019 and my first games using ROAD. In games 1 and 2 ROAD didn't matter because we didn't have any initiative overlap, so that was a nice warmup. Round 4 was a mirror match, so ROAD was super important. I felt like it really required making the smart moves and I liked not running the risk of being permanently first player. It never felt like the ROAD rolls took too much time either. Don't know if I'm fully a convert, but I don't think it ruins the game and I'm cautiously optimistic about the final ruleset. Good tournament overall and well run.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2021 17:09
|
|
|
My only problem with it is that it should take place before dials, and that seems so obvious to me that I’m convinced that the only reason it takes place afterwards is because the acronym makes a recognisable word. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 06:40
|
|
|
I believe they claimed they've tried it and considered it prone to stalling, with agile ships just chilling and biding their time until the turn comes where they have initiative advantage. I'd still prefer it, probably, but so far I'm glad the games I've played with ROAD weren't a complete shitshow - though admittedly I haven't seen the kinds of matchups that are possibly most impacted by the change.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 12:05
|
|
|
I'd agree that if you're going to do something that randomizes initiative, doing it before dials kinda defeats the point. If you know you're at a disadvantage, you'd just 1 forward or whatever and wait to engage. I still think alternating initiative would be a better option (no rolling every turn, able to plan for future turns, no chance of someone getting lucky and winning 4 rolls in a row), but ROAD is probably the next best thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 14:34
|
|
|
Our local group has tried ROAD since the announcement and it's extremely unfun when it gets down to each player having one or two ships left at the same pilot skill. It causes both players making extremely conservative choices like just bugging out entirely and trying to come back for another pass. Yeah, a good portion of games it won't matter since the pilots are at different PS. But the ones that matter it friggin sucks. Lichtenstein posted:I believe they claimed they've tried it and considered it prone to stalling, with agile ships just chilling and biding their time until the turn comes where they have initiative advantage. tbh statements like this show how little they know about the game and how overconfident they are that their small handful of playtesters is somehow better than thousands of high level players. They kept trying to say "X-wing is currently a tower defense game" in the initial ROAD announcement stream which means they know gently caress all about tower defense games or X-wing. Setting up attacks and approaches is more than just a one turn thing and they should know better.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 15:08
|
|
|
Just wait until there is no real punishment for bumping
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 15:15
|
|
|
6 months ago i was really wanting to get out and play X-Wing and all that. Then this new ROADs thing and all the other dumb poo poo AMG sorta sighed out. Now i have zero interest in playing X-Wing. progress....?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 16:05
|
|
|
LanceKing2200 posted:I'd agree that if you're going to do something that randomizes initiative, doing it before dials kinda defeats the point. If you know you're at a disadvantage, you'd just 1 forward or whatever and wait to engage. I said it before, but I disagree: if you have alternating initiative, that's the most powerful incentive never to take risks and always to play it safe. You know exactly when you will have the advantage and when you will be at a disadvantage, and the split is exactly one to one. Logically, unless your enemy blundered and left themselves exposed in a prime position for you to attack, you will never attack because you risk putting your opponent in a much better position when they have the advantage afterwards. It's almost always better to wait for them to make the mistake and pounce when you are advantaged, so that you maximise your chance of getting a decisive edge out of that one engagement and from there on can either afford to let the enemy chase you to catch up or just destroy what's left with that advantage. Rolling off before dials means that you know when you have the advantage and when you don't, but you don't know for how long you will have it. Do you engage now and hope your luck holds? Do you wait for a better opportunity? What if the enemy gets the better result for the next few turns, can you afford to miss your good chance by turning away to escape for however long? There is an element of uncertainty that means you cannot rely on the next turn's initiative, but means you can still plan for this turn at least, and try to anticipate what you will do if your luck turns. ROAD means you have no idea what will happen and a game can be decided when you randomly bump into the enemy because neither of you prepared for this specific version of the turn resolution sequence. Or maybe you can win that way! But lottery tickets are a lot cheaper, you know, at least in the short run. I still prefer the bid system.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 16:07
|
|
|
Moving first vs moving last isn't strictly "disadvantage vs advantage" it's just being able to plan. Under the logic of "if you move first you're at disadvantage" that means under the bid system whoever has initiative will just be running the entire game and "never attacking unless the opponent makes a mistake". If that were the case then the win rate of having initiative would be so bad that people would just concede if they got outbid. Knowing just means you can plan and use different tactics. Not knowing (ROAD) means that you have to take the option that would be best for moving first or second, which leads to hyper-conservative choices.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 16:19
|
|
|
I really wanna see results of using ROAD when both you and your opponent are using swarms with exactly the same PSes, which is probably the most impact that ROAD can have on a game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 16:48
|
|
|
Floppychop posted:Moving first vs moving last isn't strictly "disadvantage vs advantage" it's just being able to plan. Under the logic of "if you move first you're at disadvantage" that means under the bid system whoever has initiative will just be running the entire game and "never attacking unless the opponent makes a mistake". If that were the case then the win rate of having initiative would be so bad that people would just concede if they got outbid. Obviously. Some lists actively want to be moving and shooting first so that they can set up blocks and force the enemy to spend green tokens before they have a chance to shoot back. That's why I speak of advantage and disadvantage, not first or last mover.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 16:48
|
|
|
Floppychop posted:Under the logic of "if you move first you're at disadvantage" that means under the bid system whoever has initiative will just be running the entire game and "never attacking unless the opponent makes a mistake". If that were the case then the win rate of having initiative would be so bad that people would just concede if they got outbid. That is admittedly the case already, for the kind of lists that really cared for the bid. In pure ace vs ace matchup (where' it's not like a single I6 and I5s so you can get lucky and gun down the Only Dude To Move Last) the bid losers just tended to go with the motions in hopes of the opponent just suffering a brain failure and throwing the game. AMG's attempts to do a de facto X-Wing 3.0 have this weird vibe to them where they correctly identify the most absolutely abysmal tournament experiences, but then go weirdly gung-ho about pretending the whole game is like it, rather than acknowledging there is some space to push it to miserable extremes. It's like they saw Handbrake Han and went "yeah, let's not use upgrade cards anymore, this is not Magic: the Gathering". It's really hard to stay optimistic about what they're doing, but more importantly it's really, really weird. All of their stated forward-looking plans are a complete mess, concerning supposed development time (say, changing their mind wrt pre-match initiative roll they confirmed to GSP themselves and ROAD), but what little they did to the current game - the new points, gas cloud nerf - is completely sane and fine. They simultaneously spent the last year doing absolute jack poo poo, not even bothering to lift a finger to set up a website and dropping the hassle of maintaining a freshly-completed readymade app and are painfully stalling releasing content still developed by FFG and yet they're invested in trying to drop this seismic shock of core changes. The sane explanation would be that they know that for their changes to stick and actually attract a new crowd they'd have to do a proper relaunch (be it actual 3.0 or something akin to the Force Awakens second core set in 1.0), not wanting to be forced to squander the work on their big launch on piecemeal releases, but... it's essentially keeping a game that's already been struggling business-wise for a while dormant and calcifying over Covid, while having Asmodee's Star Wars license expire next year and be up for renegotiation. So would they be working on a big relaunch under the risk that their work might just be snagged away from them (like FFG was just suddenly hosed over by Games Workshop and WotC in the past), or not giving a poo poo under a wait-and-see approach? But then - why rock the boat and alienate half the client base? It's all just so weird, someone please abolish stock exchange, no good ever comes out of it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 17:20
|
|
|
Initiative for the turn should just go to the player that dealt the most damage in the previous turn. Until then, random order for turns.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 18:08
|
|
|
Lichtenstein posted:That is admittedly the case already, for the kind of lists that really cared for the bid. In pure ace vs ace matchup (where' it's not like a single I6 and I5s so you can get lucky and gun down the Only Dude To Move Last) the bid losers just tended to go with the motions in hopes of the opponent just suffering a brain failure and throwing the game. This is how I feel. I think they're doing a great job of targeting The Worst Parts of the game, but their fixes are just so god drat weird. And I've had the same thought, that the game desperately needs a coordinated re-launch to get people back to the tables. I've also wondered if they're using this waning 2.0 period as a way to learn while waiting for that to come together. "We're gonna be relaunching next year anyway, might as well throw everything at the wall and see what sticks."
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 18:16
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:I've also wondered if they're using this waning 2.0 period as a way to learn while waiting for that to come together. "We're gonna be relaunching next year anyway, might as well throw everything at the wall and see what sticks." And that would be great if they actually said 'Hey, we're doing some concept testing for new ideas that we may or may not put into X-Wing 3.0, so here's random idea number 5: ROAD. And while we're at it, here's random idea number 6: any pilot can use a native Force token (i.e. not one from a crew or another card) to lower the difficulty of any maneuver. Let us know what you think. Toodles!'
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 18:24
|
|
|
TheCenturion posted:And that would be great if they actually said 'Hey, we're doing some concept testing for new ideas that we may or may not put into X-Wing 3.0, so here's random idea number 5: ROAD. And while we're at it, here's random idea number 6: any pilot can use a native Force token (i.e. not one from a crew or another card) to lower the difficulty of any maneuver. Let us know what you think. Toodles!' Sure, but I'm not sure they're even capable of that. AMG's communication is complete dogshit. I won't even attempt to pretend otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 18:26
|
|
|
I don't think X-Wing 3.0 is coming and I don't think this is testing or probing for ideas. Note how they have announced a ton of changes (ROAD included) as set in stone, coming soon, this will definitely not change. If they're testing, they're doing it internally. The game does not need a coordinated relaunch, it needs new releases. There has not been a new ship since Fury of the First Order and the Resistance Y-Wings in September. Beyond that, the nearest release is only cards, beyond that there will be the Gauntlet and the Mando ship, none of these have a release date yet, AFAIK. Other than FO and Resistance, no faction has received new models since November 2020 (which, I believe, was still under FFG). AMG has had this game for what, a year now? And they still haven't put up an actual website for X-Wing; as it stands, you'd be excused for thinking they only release Crisis Protocol. Speaking of that, it gets regular releases! Every time I go to AMG's website (which, I'll admit, happens very rarely, since what would be the point?), there's something new (I think, my memory was never perfect). When X-Wing got new content (FotFO and the Ys), there was no word of that there. They act like they have no clue what they're doing, like they have no idea how to design for X-Wing, and it feels to me they're hoping they can reshape the game into something less competitive and more experience-generating (which, again, correct me if I'm wrong, seems to be the case with Crisis Protocol) because they'd find designing for that a lot easier. Right now, the game is fun and involves skill and planning. I fear AMG will turn it into glorified merchandise for the latest Disney product.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2021 01:12
|
|
|
Are Marvel Crisis Protocol players this doom and gloom about their game? I don't know AMG's track record, so I don't know if this is all actually warranted.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2021 01:36
|
|
|
Making the game less competitive will kill it. I know I’ve only just come back after years, but the life of 1.0 was entirely in competitive and league play, despite the silly meta problems.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2021 01:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 03:44 |
|
|
AndyElusive posted:Are Marvel Crisis Protocol players this doom and gloom about their game? Nah not from what I've seen as Crisis Protocol is their baby. The whole issue is that it was just that, their game and more specifically the singular game that the studio was focused on, and suddenly they got three more dumped onto them. It feels fairly obvious that they just don't have the resources to manage this and Asmodee was just making a typical out of touch "we don't know how things actually work on the floor" management move. It's simultaneously understandable and frustrating that they've been dragging rear end in the year that they've had X-Wing, Armada and Legion but the question is how is a small studio that suddenly had their workload quadrupled juggle all those plates correctly? I don't think it's so much doom and gloom as just being realistic. It looks like, currently, their answer is try to maintain a sort of stasis with the three Star Wars games while moving forward with Marvel.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2021 02:04
|
|
