Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2016/10/12 19:41:44
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
...What would you do? I don't just mean "What changes would you make to balance X-wing", but if you could throw out everything, and replace them with new, 2nd edition versions, what would you do?
Me, I would (Spoilers if you want to think of your ideas first)
Spoiler:
1) Release "Faction Packs" which would function like Most Wanted, but to an extreme level. Each pack would come with three or four core ships for that faction, and cards, dials and inserts for every ship released to this date (Multiples for generics, and extras for the three core ships). They would also include copies of every generic upgrade card which is usable for the faction (so, Rebels and Scum would get Astromech cards, but Imperials would not). The idea here is to lessen the pain of everything becoming obsolete by providing a one-stop, and affordably priced way to get everything up to date. It would also serve as a faction starter for new players to quickly grab a large amount of cards.
2) Slim down upgrade bloat. There are a lot of upgrade cards which no-one uses, so I would eliminate them and make room for new, superior versions of them (I am thinking of cards like Draw Their Fire, Swarm Tactics, Daredevil, Blaster Turret, etc.). Even some really common upgrades may get the axe- see the section on Turrets for why Autothrusters would disappear, for example. I would also take the opportunity to take a long, hard look at Push the Limit and Veteran Instincts, to decide if more variety is possible without them (and I can always return them later).
3) Following on (2), I would eliminate Auto-include upgrades and obvious patches. Stuff like Chardaan Refit, Imperial Guard Tie, TIE/x7, Integrated Astromech, Extra Munitions, Guidance chips, etc. would all either disappear (Chardaan, I-mech), or be priced up (with the base ships priced down) so that they actually involve a choice, not just "Text that could not fit on the card". For example, TIE Shuttle or BTL-A4 would remain the same, and Heavy Scyk would get cheaper, because they fundamentally alter how a ship plays, while cards such as the TIE/x7 or TIE/d add abilities, and should involve a choice vs the generic version of a ship. Of course, 0-point upgrades will still exist in situations which have high opportunity cost (eg. Elite Talents on the high-PS Generics)
4) Give Modifications a spot on the upgrade bar. Now, there is a nice, simple way to add multiple modification options on highly customized ships (eg. Scum ships).
5) Merge the Astromech and Salvaged Astromech upgrade slots. The only reason that these are separate is that Rebel Astromechs predate the Scum faction, and so the character droids don’t have the “Rebel Only” restriction. Droids from both factions would gain the appropriate restriction.This accomplishes two things. One, it allows new options for the slot to be released any time either faction gets a ship with a droid slot, as opposed to the droughts that often come with such a restricted slot type. The second advantage is that it allows Rebels to grab some of the excellent Scum Generics, because, let’s face it, 90% of the reasons to run a Rebel Generic disappear with Integrated Astromech. Instead, merge the two slots. On the Rebel side, the generic R2 Astromech would probably remain the same or gain the effect of Unhinged Astromech (the R2 generic would gain restrictions preventing it from affecting K-Turns, Sloops and Talon Rolls), as would most of the characters. For Scum, character droids and the R4 units would remain the same. However, the Overclocked R4 would likely take the name of the one of mostly useless R3, R5, or R7 droids. Targeting Astromech and Salvaged Astromech may get cheaper, and may have their names changed like the Overclocked R4. Finally, Unhinged Astromech would get dropped for being too similar to the R2 unit. I’m thinking Targeting->R3, Salvaged->R5, and Overclocked->R7.
6) All ships, excluding the Generic TIE Fighter and Z-95, should have at least 1 non-modification, non-ordinance upgrade slot.
7) Change dials where needed. There are a few ships that really ought to have access to Sloops or Talon rolls, but predate the concept. I would use this opportunity to give the A-wing, E-wing, and TIE Interceptor access to these maneuvers. I would then give the Starviper and E-wing access to green turns. Starviper would probably be tweaked so all of its speed-1 maneuvers are green (making it an excellent knife fighter). I would also change the Jumpmaster so that one side of its dial is actually bad, as opposed to just average-ish.
8) Change how turrets work, both Primary and Secondary. Now, all ships with turrets will receive 1-2 mobile firing arcs (hereafter referred to as “Turret Arcs”). Turret Primaries, and Turret upgrades, may only fire out of a Turret Arc, with Non-turret primaries and other secondary weapons firing out of the main arc. Turret upgrades would add an additional turret arc. This will force turret ships to actually maneuver, while still maintaining more flexibility than other ships. The Shadowcaster, meanwhile, would be unique in that it has a fixed primary arc and a turret arc.
As an example, the Millenium Falcon (And Outrider, and Decimator, etc) would have Turret (2). Therefore, they have two turret arcs, and one primary arc. They may fire their missiles out of their primary arc, and their primary weapon out of either Turret Arc. As an action, they may adjust both turret arcs with the “Rotate Arcs” action. Meanwhile, the Y-wing does not have a Turret Arc (Normally). Both primary weapons and Torpedoes fire out of the primary Arc. When it equips a Turret secondary weapon, it gains a Turret Arc. It may fire the turret out of this arc, but not its primary Arc, unless it equips the BTL-A4 title. Finally, the K-wing has a Primary Arc, Turret Primary Weapon, and Turret Secondary Weapon. When attacking, it may either: A) fire a Torpedo or Missile out of its primary arc, B) Fire is primary Weapon out of either Turret Arc, or C) Fire its Turret Secondary Weapon out of either Turret Arc.
To account for having to waste actions on rotating turrets, there will be a number of upgrades (at least one each of Crew, Astromech and Modification, and possibly EPT) that allow you to perform free rotate actions. There would also be upgrades (perhaps released at a later date) which gave bonuses to any ship which managed to drop both turret arcs on the target. For those of you who have read this far, Autothrusters would disappear, as there will no longer be attacks against targets out of arc.
9) Overhaul Torpedoes/Missiles (and Bombs, I guess). Right now, Torpedoes and Missiles are either near-useless, or nearly broken. To make ordinance more useful for ships that only have one slot, I would eliminate Extra Munitions, and instead give each weapon an ammunition stat. This way, my fancy Acrylic munitions tokens do not suddenly become useless. Your “average” ordinance would feature an ordinance stat of 2, while particularly powerful attacks (such as Advanced Proton Torpedoes) may only have 1. I would also experiment with tweaking cluster missiles, to allow large number of weak attacks depending on how many tokens you spend. Finally, I would make sure that all ordinance has some form of dice modification, either via not spending its target lock/focus, converting a dice roll, or causing extra damage if it does hit. Finally, Deadeye would become a 0-cost card, as you are already paying for a pilot which can take an EPT, and are giving up your EPT slot.
10) Give every ship a generic with access to an EPT. Now, upgrading your generic does more than just let you shoot first- it also adds the option to have Crack Shot, Deadeye’d Torpedoes, or a cheap support EPT. I would pair this with cheap support EPT’s- Draw their Fire drops to a 0pt card, and can take a hit or Crit, Decoy drops to 0pt, Wingman and Bodyguard drop to 1pt, and Bodyguard becomes any-faction. These support talents should hopefully reduce the chances of aces being sniped by torpedoes.
11) Eliminate all abilities that ignore shields. These are just brutal against anything with a good Shield:Hull ratio (B-wings, etc) or have low hull values with decent shields (TIE/v1, E-wing). Stuff that causes extra damage against shielded targets (like Plasma torpedoes) may exist, and things like Proton Bombs may gain similar abilities, but you cannot bypass shields.
12) Reign in abilities that bypass agility. The logic here is similar to #11, as these again hurt specific types of ships more. Bombs would remain similar, except that stuff like proximity mines and connor nets will now hit the pilot with the lowest PS who is under the template. Beyond that, if there is a card that allows you to bypass agility, it should come with a large drawback (eg Feedback array). Auto weapons I would give an extra attack die, but prevent either player from modifying the dice (to eliminate the Ghost/Accuracy Correctors/Autoturret combo).
13) Tweak evade tokens. Currently, evade is only used as part of a token stacking scheme, or on Omega Leader. I would allow evade tokens to cancel one die of your choice, and be usable against bombs.
14) Re-cost everything appropriately. This should go without saying, but I would just like to make sure that it is clear.
Q: What do you call a Dinosaur Handpuppet?
A: A Maniraptor
2016/10/12 20:23:13
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
Your turret mess is way to complex, for turrets follow the HWK-290, lousy primary but it has a turret slot. If you really want to make the turrets a mobile firing arc make the arc 180.
For mechs combining is fine but R2 and Unhinged are rather different, R2 makes a knife fighter while the unhinged makes a hit and run ship.
For ordinance re-costing and more built in dice modification is all they need. Dedicated ordinance ships get more slots and therefore more chances, but keep extra munitions as is or a modification (maybe limiting to 2 ordinance tokens) for surrendering variability or more abilities. (I want my bomber Y's)
2016/10/12 02:55:33
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
1) Decouple firepower and accuracy. The attack vs. defense system worked ok back in the days of wave 1, but later waves have pushed it to extremes that it just doesn't handle well. For example, an a-wing should be very accurate (since it can out-maneuver almost anything) and hit consistently but each hit should do low damage (since it only has a pair of small guns). A b-wing with a HLC should have poor accuracy against evasive targets (since it's so slow and turns so poorly) but do massive damage when it hits (huge gun!). But under the current system you don't get this. The a-wing can't hit anything, and the b-wing has no problem hitting high-agility targets. The better way to do this would be to add a little complexity and have a stat/mechanic for determining if you hit your target at all, and then a separate stat/mechanic for deciding how much damage the hit inflicts.
2) Make high-PS maneuvering actions less binary. Right now if you have a ship with PTL and boost + barrel roll you can fly circles around lower-PS opponents (or same-PS opponents that lost the initiative bid), but your opponent can fly circles around you if they have higher PS. Combined with things like Soontir Fel's token stacking and Palpatine you have situations where a ship is virtually immune to anything you throw at it, until you bring the higher-PS counter and it might as well be a PS 1 generic. And of course mid-PS pilots are worthless, you either bid up to PS 8+ to move second against aces or you take generics. Being PS 7 against Fel is no better than being PS 0. I'm honestly not sure how to accomplish this goal, but it's something that really needs to be done.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2016/10/12 22:33:04
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
1) i like the idea of the mobile turret and honestly i think that all turrets should be like this especially the big ships. brings in the inaccuracy of the gunner trying to bring the turret to bare on the target.
Azeroth wrote:If I were to completely remake x-wing:
1. There would only be ship cards. You would add a separate pilot card. Pilot could be restricted onto which ship they could pilot.
2. Turrets would be locked into one arc each time you move your ship. The would not also have a front arc normally.
3. Munitions would cost much less.
4. Title cards would only be for unique ships from the fluff.
5. Elite pilot talents could only be added to pilots of at least skill 6 or above.
6. The game would have its points redone and scaled to a 200 point level rather than 100.
7. Green dice levels would be increased on ships with lower attack values.
8. Cards that add evades and extra green dice would be more rare.
1) An interesting idea. How would you make it so that pilots could fly new ships that come out? Because if you can't, I don't see much of a difference from the current system, except that you now need to test pilot abilities on multiple ship types.
4) How would you propose handling things like the BTL/A4, or Defender titles, where they represent different models of the same ship, often with lengthy text describing the abilities. Do any alternate model ships lose their modification slot in order to do this?
5) Why? Way I see it, this actually hurts the game. The only high-PS generics we see are guys like Black squadron pilots, who bring an elite talent to make up for their less efficient point cost.
6) Now this is an interesting idea. I can think of a lot of upgrades that are too expensive for their effect, but too powerful to be a point cheaper. Same with high-PS generics.
7) So now A-wings have 4 evade dice, and no-one is hitting each other? Why to Y-wings deserve more agility?
Peregrine wrote:Two things I would do:
1) Decouple firepower and accuracy. The attack vs. defense system worked ok back in the days of wave 1, but later waves have pushed it to extremes that it just doesn't handle well. For example, an a-wing should be very accurate (since it can out-maneuver almost anything) and hit consistently but each hit should do low damage (since it only has a pair of small guns). A b-wing with a HLC should have poor accuracy against evasive targets (since it's so slow and turns so poorly) but do massive damage when it hits (huge gun!). But under the current system you don't get this. The a-wing can't hit anything, and the b-wing has no problem hitting high-agility targets. The better way to do this would be to add a little complexity and have a stat/mechanic for determining if you hit your target at all, and then a separate stat/mechanic for deciding how much damage the hit inflicts.
Would something like Armadas dice work? Red dice as is, and are the main dice for most ships primary weapons, but with some ship getting blue or black dice? Say, stuff like ion cannons, TLT's, A-wings and TIE Advanced's getting blue dice (few actually damaging faces, but make up for it with several extra faces which reduce opponents agility when rolled or something), While Heavy Laser Cannons, and maybe some ships primaries get black dice, which have fewer good faces, but more crits and faces that cause multiple hits when rolled? Make the range 1 bonus that you get to add a die of any colour, while defence dice cancel all the results on a die?
This would also add some interesting variety to secondary weapons- think of turrets. Right now, the TLT is just better than the blaster and dorsal turrets. Imagine how things could be different if the Blaster turret was back (inaccurate but destructive), the Dorsal Turret was red (Balanced mix), and the TLT was Blue (Accurate, but low damage).
2) Make high-PS maneuvering actions less binary. Right now if you have a ship with PTL and boost + barrel roll you can fly circles around lower-PS opponents (or same-PS opponents that lost the initiative bid), but your opponent can fly circles around you if they have higher PS. Combined with things like Soontir Fel's token stacking and Palpatine you have situations where a ship is virtually immune to anything you throw at it, until you bring the higher-PS counter and it might as well be a PS 1 generic. And of course mid-PS pilots are worthless, you either bid up to PS 8+ to move second against aces or you take generics. Being PS 7 against Fel is no better than being PS 0. I'm honestly not sure how to accomplish this goal, but it's something that really needs to be done.
This is sort of why I would consider dropping PTL Veteran Instincts. PTL is what allows most pilots to do their arc-dodging shenanigans, and Vet instincts is fueling the "My number is bigger than yours" issue. Get rid of them, and suddenly some of the more restrictive forms of Action Economy become important, as do having mid-skill pilots with good abilities (Tur Phenir springs to mind).
ChaoticMind wrote:Your turret mess is way to complex, for turrets follow the HWK-290, lousy primary but it has a turret slot. If you really want to make the turrets a mobile firing arc make the arc 180.
1) I hardly think that it is too complex, considering that I am taking a pre-existing mechanic (the mobile firing arc) and tweaking it slightly. Compared to this, I would need a short section of text explaining how to tell how many arcs you have (which could easily be accomplished by adding a "1" or a "2" to the turret primary symbol), A line of text explaining that turret primaries may only fire out of mobile firing arcs, another explaining that turret secondaries add a mobile arc, then an explanation that non-turret primary and secondary weapons may not shoot out of a turret arc. If I felt like writing actual game text, it would probably take only slightly more space than my actual reply.
2) If you want a 180 degree turret arc, most ships (with primary turrets) will be able to imitate one. The YT-1300, YT2400, K-wing with secondary turret, and Decimater all would have two turret arcs (because they are modeled with two turrets). The Lancer would be unchanged from its current incarnation. The VCX-100 will be able to shoot at stuff in a 270 degree arc (albeit with different weapons depending on how it is equipped). The Jumpmaster 5000, Y-wing, and HWK-290 are the only ships who cannot imitate a 180 arc. Splitting the Arcs up will lead to some more interesting choices, as it allows the creation of cards and abilities that key off of getting the target in both arcs, or going for interesting arc arrangements (firing exclusively to the side, or front-back) depending on the situation.
3) Going for "Weak Primary, strong turret" is the exact opposite of what I want to accomplish. Making the Fixed weapon as weak as on a HWK just encourages further reliance on the turret (as you no longer care about arc at all).
Q: What do you call a Dinosaur Handpuppet?
A: A Maniraptor
2016/10/13 12:05:05
Subject: Re:If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
I think I'd completely remove points values from the cards, and simply publish price lists, which can be downloaded and printed off. That would make it much easier to rebalance things.
I haven't had an opportunity to try the mobile firing arc yet, but it seems like it might be a better way of doing turrets. I'm not really a fan of 360 arcs, though that might also be because I like to play Imperial Aces.
I might also think about separating (or partially separating) upgrade types, from upgrade capacity. For example, ships might have a size/weight capacity, which would allow them to take multiple small upgrades, such as guidance chips and a targeting computer, instead of one large upgrade like engines or crew. I would allow all Pilots to take EPTs, but perhaps give each EPT a difficulty level. So a PS9 pilot might be able to fit one difficult EPT, or two easier ones, while a PS1 pilot might be limited to just one very easy EPT. It would take a lot of rejiggling and repricing from what we have now, but I think it could work, and it would give ships more options for customisation.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/10/13 12:07:00
0034/10/13 16:32:50
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
I think Carnifex's idea to rejigger the points around 200 point lists makes a lot of sense (probably the easiest way to recost some things appropriately, double the points for most things +/-1 for a lot of others )...
Palpatine should be epic-only, too. And I'm tending to prefer mobile arcs to turrets (though god help us if ordinance can be fired in mobile arcs)
2016/10/13 20:58:33
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
1) turret arcs (select the arc as part of the action phase, but doesn't cost an action), with the Falcon getting up to two, but needing crew to get value out of the 2nd gun
2) A long, hard look at changing Discard card to Disable, with taking an action to Enable the card (Extra munitions would have to be changed or just dumped)
3) Make being stressed hurt more - if you're stressed and picked up additional stress in the same turn (and changing any "if you are not stressed, add a stress", to "add a stress") at the end of the turn you roll an attack die for each extra stress, and take damage IGNORING shields; then remove the extra stress
4) Make it that named pilots cannot take Veteran Insticts
5) Critical hits remove 2 shields; if you have one shield remaining it removes 1 shield and does one damage
6) Make an intermediate "medium" size about 1 1/2 size of a small base; move the K-Wing, Tie Punisher, Mist Hunter, ARC-170 and any other ship that hangs over a small base badly to this size.
7) "Bumping/Blocking" possibly deals damage; if the ship you nudge is small, 1D, medium 2D, large ship 3D, huge ship 4D, epic ship 5D (huge and epic no longer auto-destroying smaller ships)
8) Actually, coming from having first played Wings of War, I'd like to get rid of Bumping/Blocking altogether (but keep the damage rule); but it would require flat tokens for the ships to put down when they overlap
9) Add squadron cards - special flights of 3-4 related ships, often consisting of an Ace + 2 unnamed pilots. As a special group, they get group rules (but they have to be paid for).
10). Offer blocks of upgrade cards that can be purchased seperately from the ships. Say, a block of Elite Talents.
<Edit> Oh, and make it so you can't boost or barrel roll when Ionized.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/10/13 21:04:35
It never ends well
2016/10/13 22:13:38
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
5) Critical hits remove 2 shields; if you have one shield remaining it removes 1 shield and does one damage
This makes shields worse than hull. Hull, there is a risk of getting an inconsequential effect (especially is you are using the old deck), with direct hit being one of the worst ones. Unless you re-did the crit deck to be absolutely brutal, you probably want unshielded ships. If you mae the damage deck that brutal, then crits become huge factors that can swing the game wildly when rolled (making luck a huge factor).
Q: What do you call a Dinosaur Handpuppet?
A: A Maniraptor
2016/10/13 22:22:19
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
1) turret arcs (select the arc as part of the action phase, but doesn't cost an action), with the Falcon getting up to two, but needing crew to get value out of the 2nd gun
3) Make being stressed hurt more - if you're stressed and picked up additional stress in the same turn (and changing any "if you are not stressed, add a stress", to "add a stress") at the end of the turn you roll an attack die for each extra stress, and take damage IGNORING shields; then remove the extra stress
4) Make it that named pilots cannot take Veteran Insticts
6) Make an intermediate "medium" size about 1 1/2 size of a small base; move the K-Wing, Tie Punisher, Mist Hunter, ARC-170 and any other ship that hangs over a small base badly to this size.
9) Add squadron cards - special flights of 3-4 related ships, often consisting of an Ace + 2 unnamed pilots. As a special group, they get group rules (but they have to be paid for).
10). Offer blocks of upgrade cards that can be purchased seperately from the ships. Say, a block of Elite Talents.
<Edit> Oh, and make it so you can't boost or barrel roll when Ionized.
i like these ideas. i reckon the inability for Aces to have VI would even the field out a lot. and i fully agree with the 1 1/2 base. the ARC should be on that intermittent base size accounting for it being a larger than normal fighter.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/10/13 22:24:36
All blocking VI on Aces would do would be reduce the number of viable Aces.
Perhaps straight up alternate activation with PS being used in a different way, or straight up abandoned and superior piloting being represented in a different way altogether.
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
I played with the Shadowcaster last night. Having to use your action to move the mobile arc really makes it hard for the ship to use any other action unless you are at PS9. Any PS below 8 and you get dodged all the time by nimbler small bases. So if turrets can move their arc as part of the movement, sure, but if it is an action, it really bites into your action economy. It's almost worthless to have another arc, because you will rarely have reliable dice modification unless you purchased it, and then we come back to fat turret ships... but less efficient ones. Yay.
Trying to find the perfect balance of content for that "refresh set" the OP mentioned is going to be a tricky bit.
And this might be my abhorrence of 40K rearing its ugly head, but if we decouple firepower from accuracy, it has to be in a single die roll, especially if games go up to 200 pts. I like the various colour die, and Armada does have the "Accuracy" symbol on its die, no? You could use those to lower the number of green die your opponent gets to roll, or something.
GamesWorkshop wrote: And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids!
2016/10/14 01:09:12
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
Mathieu Raymond wrote: I played with the Shadowcaster last night. Having to use your action to move the mobile arc really makes it hard for the ship to use any other action unless you are at PS9. Any PS below 8 and you get dodged all the time by nimbler small bases. So if turrets can move their arc as part of the movement, sure, but if it is an action, it really bites into your action economy. It's almost worthless to have another arc, because you will rarely have reliable dice modification unless you purchased it, and then we come back to fat turret ships... but less efficient ones. Yay.
i had the same problem when i used the Shadow the other day (third game of playing scum). IMHO the Gyroscopic Targeting basically needs to be mandatory so it frees up doing a different action (assuming you've done 3, 4 or 5 speed).
I'll remain on topic here, although I agree with you about Gyroscoping Targeting and a groupmate's statement that large base = EU as mandatory. Moving on...
I love, love, love the idea of squadron cards. Most of the fiction revolves around units like Rogue, Corona, Black, Green squadrons and their esprit de corps.
And I'll go to the mat with one radical idea, just to have it out in the open: make EPTs for mid-tier pilots (the generic or below PS8 ones, say) and take it away from PS8-9 pilots. Their pilot ability would be their EPT, in a sense.It would make those mid-tier pilots more enticing.
GamesWorkshop wrote: And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids!
2016/10/14 15:58:15
Subject: Re:If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
Do something about the 'Attack' stat. it was okay to start with but as others have noted its a bit all or nothing and doesn't really address accuracy vs hitting power
Dump PTL or make the downside harsher, maybe no actions next turn, as it seems a bit daft fluffwise that some pilots can constantly Push
Maybe change any post dial movement to the Combat Phase as an alternative to shooting, meaning aces can still arc dodge but its going to cost them their shot, might make the whole PS game a bit more fun
Rejigger Stress a bit, maybe losing red/green dice (minimum 1) at the start of a turn related amount of stress you have at the start of a turn, would need a lot of tuning to not become a bit broke but at the moment Stress is not enough of a drawback (apart from BMST)
Revise all Turrets to work like the Lancer Arc
Make a defensvse version of Target Lock that allows you to reroll all your Green, it might be a bit strong but if PTL is force-choked in might work
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/10/14 16:02:45
"AND YET YOU ACT AS IF THERE IS SOME IDEAL ORDER IN THE WORLD, AS IF THERE IS SOME...SOME RIGHTNESS IN THE UNIVERSE BY WHICH IT MAY BE JUDGED."
2016/10/14 21:26:15
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
Thinking about the multicolour dice thing- this would actually be a very interesting way to make torpedoes and Missiles useful. Most ships would have red dice, so making ordinance use either blue or Black dice would put it into a roll of something you bring to deal with specific targets, even if you run another secondary.
Say, a B-wing brings a heavy laser cannon, giving it access to both red and black dice. Fearing difficulties with high-agility targets, its owner slaps on some flechette torpedoes (which we will say have blue attack dice).
Q: What do you call a Dinosaur Handpuppet?
A: A Maniraptor
2016/10/15 01:40:56
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
Biggest change would probably be to decouple accuracy from damage on torps and missiles. I think missiles/torps should do constant damage, the only question should be whether or not they hit.
CoALabaer wrote: Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
2016/10/15 04:00:30
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
It could, but only to a degree. Having different dice colors offers some power vs. accuracy tradeoffs but it still leaves accuracy and firepower pretty strongly coupled. Once you pick a color of dice the only way to increase firepower is to increase the number of dice rolled, which also makes you more likely to hit at all. The way to fix the problem is to separate accuracy and damage entirely: first you see if you hit at all, and then you figure out how much damage you do.
Armada avoids this problem by removing the defense roll entirely. There's no awkward problem of needing to add more dice (and therefore more damage) just to have a chance of hitting at all because (almost) every attack hits, the only question is how much damage you can do. There's no Armada equivalent to Soontir Fel ignoring everything short of a 4-dice HLC and making 2-dice a-wings useless.
This is sort of why I would consider dropping PTL Veteran Instincts. PTL is what allows most pilots to do their arc-dodging shenanigans, and Vet instincts is fueling the "My number is bigger than yours" issue. Get rid of them, and suddenly some of the more restrictive forms of Action Economy become important, as do having mid-skill pilots with good abilities (Tur Phenir springs to mind).
Unfortunately both of those cards are kind of necessary.
Cutting VI doesn't open up space for mid-PS ships, it just removes some of the mid-PS options from the game entirely. Vader/Poe/etc don't need VI to be viable, they just out-PS you by default. So if you have a PS 7 ship you have two options: take VI to get PS 9 and have a chance, or take something other than VI and not have a viable ship. Taking away the VI option doesn't make the alternative work, it just means that nobody takes that ship anymore. Jake, Whisper, etc, all cease to exist if you take away VI.
Cutting PTL is a big problem for ships with a diverse action bar. Focus is the default "main" action for a reason, so having a lot of options on your action bar is only really important if you have the ability to take a focus action AND one of your other actions. If you take away the ability to use a good action bar, stack defensive tokens to stay alive, etc, you heavily skew the game in favor of powerful jousting ships that are content to line up, take a focus every turn, and roll better dice than you. You'd have to replace PTL with a close equivalent, and that doesn't really accomplish anything.
Mathieu Raymond wrote: And I'll go to the mat with one radical idea, just to have it out in the open: make EPTs for mid-tier pilots (the generic or below PS8 ones, say) and take it away from PS8-9 pilots. Their pilot ability would be their EPT, in a sense.It would make those mid-tier pilots more enticing.
Sorry, but this is a really bad idea. Customizing your pilot is a big part of the game, and people want to take those awesome high-end pilots. If you take away EPTs on unique pilots you're going to have a lot of people unhappy that Luke Skywalker/Darth Vader/etc can't take an upgrade that some random meatshield pilot can use.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2016/10/15 11:32:27
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
Cap Pilot skill at 9 regardless of upgrades. Opens up other options for maxed pilots, and gives mid tier pilots the ability to use VI to catch up.
Also, I would remove EP from pilots that already have an ability. Why does an elite pilot with an elite ability get another elite ability? Possibly raise EP costs, and definitely make it available to generic pilots only.
Also a fan of ship cards being for ships, and separate pilot cards, but don't know how to make it work. Maybe have ships with modifiers to pilot skill to showcase it's maneuverability, or lack thereof?
All the worlds a joke and the people merely punchlines
2016/10/16 15:40:02
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
I'm a bit leery of having pilot cards and ship cards, as it's got the potential to get out of hand. Oh I know I just used a slippery slope fallacy, but I don't want this to become a cards game. And I am keenly aware that it would still be less real estate overall than a full game of 40k, but still, smaller play area the better.
GamesWorkshop wrote: And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids!
2016/10/16 02:55:15
Subject: Re:If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
hmm, i have some ideas however they are more a more radical kind of remake:
1. Munitions: need to remake them with extra munitions built in, not one-shot. Develop a system that is separate from the dice system (more akin to bombs, and the ion system where you take an 'effect' if hit) where you rely more on your agility/countermeasures to dodge... (and different munitions are easier/harder to dodge) if you successfully dodge, you evade all damage but if you fail, you take auto-damage. Rework the target lock system so it's not as much at the mercy of the PS system.
Munitions then becomes a separate game entirely than laser-fighting, where ships are making decisions on which ship to target lock or not, doing electronic-warfare type stuff, and deciding where and when to lay down a shield against incoming missiles in the form of evade tokens and countermeasures.
2. Tweak the dice system to allow for face-to-face rolls. When two ships are in each others arc, attacking one ship will trigger that ship a chance to attack back and they both do so in one roll. I have a few vague ideas how this could work but in general i think face-to-face rolls are the best for those edge-of-your-seat type moments in games. It's a little difficult to work this in with X-wing's present dice system however. if elegantly done, this could cause the game to move even faster than normally. Another way of thinking about this: ships decide to respond with fire or dodge when fired upon.
3. introduce 3-D. It is actually a very simple tweak to introduce three levels of 'elevation' to the game. Moving and firing one way or the other simply subtracts from either the range band or the movement template respectively. Then you only need to work a solution into the components of the game, a simple solution to start is just by adding and removing the plastic sticks on the stands to represent separate levels. Introducing this literally adds a whole other 'dimension' of complexity, and may solve some issues the game has in it's 2D form such as bumping.
4. Mobile firing arcs: been mentioned. The turret system is a either broken, or completely boring and mundane in the game.
5. Introduce a 'dogfighting' mechanic that allows ships in the right position to re-direct onto another ships tail. I think xwing is missing that cinematic element of fighters chasing each other around and attacking from the vulnerable rear. It need to be more than a card or an ability on one pilot out there, to be able to change or adjust your maneuver when you are directly behind an enemy fighter... after all when you are behind you can directly see what maneuver they are taking and follow! This, combined with the tweaks to allow for face-to-face rolls, may seriously cause people to reconsider straight up jousting in games and go for more unconventional approach vectors. It might also allow for a new tactical dimension, where you have to choose as an attacker whether or not to stay on an enemy ships tail- or lose that advantage....rather than just taking the most advantageous shot against the weakest enemy that won't get a chance to fire back.
6. Shield/ energy redirect mechanics, possibly using a second dial, or just tokens to show where the ship is directing energy. Would add another dimension to tactics in the game and allow all ships access to that tactic, whereas it is limited now to certain unique upgrade cards.
2016/10/17 00:01:44
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
Been thinking about how alternating activation would work in X-wing. Problem is, if it is a true alt activation, then we would see the problem with aces be transferred to swarms (Activate Academy Pilots first to buy time while your opponents mid-priced ships activate, then activate your more valuable fighters). So now if your opponent has more ships than you, you can't respond, as opposed to higher pilot skill.
What I think might work, however, is to go for a more free-form activation system, where the player with the initiative activates a fighter of their choice. Then, the second player activates any number of fighters, but, once the total pilot skill of all fighters activated equals or exceeds the Pilot skill of Player ones fighter, then it becomes player 1's turn to activate any number of fighters. Player 2 will activate fighters once the Pilot Skill of all of Player 1's activated fighters (including those activated on previous steps) exceeds the total pilot skill of player 2's activated fighters. This continues until all the fighters belonging to one player have been activated, after which their opponent activates their remaining fighters in any order.
For example:
Player 1 activates a Red Squadron Pilot (PS4).
Player 2 may now activate. They choose to activate an obsidian squadron pilot (PS3)
Player 2 still has a lower TPS than Player 1, so activates again. They choose to activate a Gamma Squadron Veteran (PS 5). They now have a TPS of 8, so initiative switches.
This would add a benefit to mid-PS pilots, as it is cheaper to upgrade to a PS4 Red Squadron Pilot then to add another PS2 Rookie. Meanwhile, you force the activation of more of your opponents list by activating your PS4, making it easier to save an ace for last. Meanwhile, guys like Blue Ace benefit, because now it can be arranged that they get to activate later.
PS would, of course, still determine the order of shooting.
Q: What do you call a Dinosaur Handpuppet?
A: A Maniraptor
2016/10/17 05:45:56
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
Mathieu Raymond wrote: I'm a bit leery of having pilot cards and ship cards, as it's got the potential to get out of hand. Oh I know I just used a slippery slope fallacy, but I don't want this to become a cards game. And I am keenly aware that it would still be less real estate overall than a full game of 40k, but still, smaller play area the better.
Having seen the mess that has happened with Star Trek attack wing, doing separate ship and pilot cards is a baaaaad idea.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Meade wrote: hmm, i have some ideas however they are more a more radical kind of remake:
3. introduce 3-D. It is actually a very simple tweak to introduce three levels of 'elevation' to the game. Moving and firing one way or the other simply subtracts from either the range band or the movement template respectively. Then you only need to work a solution into the components of the game, a simple solution to start is just by adding and removing the plastic sticks on the stands to represent separate levels. Introducing this literally adds a whole other 'dimension' of complexity, and may solve some issues the game has in it's 2D form such as bumping.
Wings of War handles this, it wouldn't be too difficult to add to X-Wing (perhaps as optional). Using WoW rules in X-Wing, you would add two red maneuvers - climb and dive. They would be similar to the U-turn move - ship moves forward some distance and either goes up one height band or down one height band (A Y-wing might have a Climb of 3 [slow, drawn out climb] and a Dive of 2 [moderate dive speed], for example - an A-Wing might have a Climb of 1 [fast, short climb] and Dive of 3 [speedy dive]). Lowest band is 2 (if you're fighting in-atmosphere or on the Death Star surface) and Highest is 10 (or maybe more). Every 2 range band difference would increase the firing range by one (Short -> Medium -> Long -> Out of Range).
5. Introduce a 'dogfighting' mechanic that allows ships in the right position to re-direct onto another ships tail. I think xwing is missing that cinematic element of fighters chasing each other around and attacking from the vulnerable rear. It need to be more than a card or an ability on one pilot out there, to be able to change or adjust your maneuver when you are directly behind an enemy fighter... after all when you are behind you can directly see what maneuver they are taking and follow! This, combined with the tweaks to allow for face-to-face rolls, may seriously cause people to reconsider straight up jousting in games and go for more unconventional approach vectors. It might also allow for a new tactical dimension, where you have to choose as an attacker whether or not to stay on an enemy ships tail- or lose that advantage....rather than just taking the most advantageous shot against the weakest enemy that won't get a chance to fire back.
The "simplest" rule might be that after dials have been selected, but just before you move a ship in someone's rear arc (at the start of the turn), the owner of the ship being followed has to announce if they are going "right/straight/left"*; the ship that is following can change the direction of the dial (after showing the original move) to match the followed ships. You can't change speed so it's possible to over or undershoot the leading ship, but the following ship would at least have the advantage of knowing which direction to go. It would probably be wise to have "following" tokens to put by ships, sort of like target locks.
* A U-turn would be announced as a "straight", Seignor's Loop and Tallon Roll would be announced as left/right as needed.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/10/17 06:06:55
It never ends well
2016/10/17 16:52:08
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
Mathieu Raymond wrote: I'm a bit leery of having pilot cards and ship cards, as it's got the potential to get out of hand. Oh I know I just used a slippery slope fallacy, but I don't want this to become a cards game.
I think that's a legitimate concern. If we separated pilots and ships then balance issues would inevitably follow. It doesn't follow that the balance issues would be insurmountable, but I think it would certainly make things more complex, and thus more difficult than they currently are, which is already difficult enough. I think that's a very different kind of assertion to the classic slippery slope arguments, such as "If we legalise drugs then what next? Legalise murder?", which is an obvious non-sequitur.
With regards to PTL... I actually feel PTL is an essential part of the game. Before I discovered PTL arc-dodgers, I found x-wing a little boring and stale. As Peregrine said, it's gong to be all jousting, and that's what a lot of my early games were like. PTL added an important dynamic to the game, which allowed fragile (high PS) ships to outmanoeuvre jousters, and as a result turrets became more important. Suddenly the game was rich in strategy and counter strategy.
I feel that PTL might be such as essential cornerstone of the game that it shouldn't be just an EPT. I almost feel like it should be hard-coded into the game as something that all ships can choose to do.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/10/17 16:53:25
2016/10/18 03:38:18
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
Mathieu Raymond wrote: I'm a bit leery of having pilot cards and ship cards, as it's got the potential to get out of hand. Oh I know I just used a slippery slope fallacy, but I don't want this to become a cards game. And I am keenly aware that it would still be less real estate overall than a full game of 40k, but still, smaller play area the better.
Having seen the mess that has happened with Star Trek attack wing, doing separate ship and pilot cards is a baaaaad idea.
Although that might just be due to wiz kids epic lack of playtesting and general poor game design (aside from the engine they were using)
Wings of War handles this, it wouldn't be too difficult to add to X-Wing (perhaps as optional). Using WoW rules in X-Wing, you would add two red maneuvers - climb and dive. They would be similar to the U-turn move - ship moves forward some distance and either goes up one height band or down one height band (A Y-wing might have a Climb of 3 [slow, drawn out climb] and a Dive of 2 [moderate dive speed], for example - an A-Wing might have a Climb of 1 [fast, short climb] and Dive of 3 [speedy dive]). Lowest band is 2 (if you're fighting in-atmosphere or on the Death Star surface) and Highest is 10 (or maybe more). Every 2 range band difference would increase the firing range by one (Short -> Medium -> Long -> Out of Range).
Its a really easy tweak, I've played Wings of War as well a couple of times. You can play it with the normal 'bumping' system, or develop some silhouette tokens or something that preserve the position of the ship while they pass over or under another ship. I would prefer something that feels more like space combat so no differentiation between 'dive' and 'climb'
The "simplest" rule might be that after dials have been selected, but just before you move a ship in someone's rear arc (at the start of the turn), the owner of the ship being followed has to announce if they are going "right/straight/left"*; the ship that is following can change the direction of the dial (after showing the original move) to match the followed ships. You can't change speed so it's possible to over or undershoot the leading ship, but the following ship would at least have the advantage of knowing which direction to go. It would probably be wise to have "following" tokens to put by ships, sort of like target locks.
* A U-turn would be announced as a "straight", Seignor's Loop and Tallon Roll would be announced as left/right as needed.
there are a lot of quasi-mechanics out there already, such as 'stay on target' that let you change your maneuver in some way. I think these are not utilized for being just a little on the weak side and they always take up an important slot or something.
Should be something universal, and i like the idea of having partial information, but not completely knowing the other dial so you can still have some 'gotcha' moments.
The concept of target lock is also very similar, as it represents the pilot targeting another ship on his computer that would also aid him in maneuvering on their tail, so might be good if that dovetailed into it somehow (think of the classic Darth Vader trench scene)
2016/10/18 12:36:14
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
I really like what theyve done so far but i want more.
i would add more jedi pilots and crew.
Maybe alternate win conditions.
Would like a KOTOR Expansion (ebon hawk and bastilla with battle meditation)
More detailed play mats/boards. Maybe like a jedi temple sticking straight up
"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep-seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan -
2016/10/18 15:13:32
Subject: If you were the lead designer for a complete remake of X-wing...
Jedi pilots and crew doesn't really make sense in the GCW era, and there doesn't seem to be more Jedi in the TFA era either. Unless you count old Luke.
Alternate win conditions already exist, they are the scenarios that come with each box you buy. But a big pack à la Corellian Conflict would be nice, though not indicative of a fundamental design change.
KOTOR has, what, 1 big ship and 2 small ships? And now that the TIE striker is incoming, the look is very reminescent of the Sith fighter.
3D play mat is a bad idea. A friend of mine insists on using hunks of resin on pegs instead of flat asteroids, and they always end up slowing play, you shuffle the things around when you bump or pull them out... it might look nice, but it is counterproductive. Especially in a timed match.
GamesWorkshop wrote: And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids!
: 4500pts
