X wing 2.5 Change Part 1 - Changes to List Building

[@FrederickApollyon]

I fucking hate 2.5. Pretty much everything about it seems like they're dumbing down the game for the sake of "the mystical wider audiece" they'll never fkin get because normies won't invest in overpriced plastic with borderline scummy upgrade cards practices, even though entry point for X-wing is easier than into something like Warhammer where you have to buy more models and paint them yourself on top of it. Just no. Squad builder now restricts you more than before because if you really wanted to have your Kylo Ren with Hate + Primed Thrusters and Adv. Proton Torpedoes you simply had to make cuts on other ships. NOW YOU SIMPLY CAN'T DO IT. Because that gives you 18/16 upgrade points. So it's more irritating to balance specific ships now because you're not balancing around the whole list - you're forced to make cuts on each specific ship by default. The range 0 attacks make completely no sense and basically are there for pure RNG because you can't even modify them (and we know from other games that RNG's there for the noobs to feel better about themselves). The inconsistency on bumps makes flying in a coherent manner more dangerous than beneficial and blocking is basically gone as a valid strategy. So no thanks. I'll be playing 2.0 instead of this brain fart that AMG made just to prove they're doing something with the game.

[@kaibe5241]

I just did, brand new, and it's hardly overpriced. Found it actually to be quite good. Too much doom and gloom, and cetainly not how a community should react if they actually want new players.

[@FrederickApollyon]

@@kaibe5241 it's your choice man. The fact stands that we're left with way less build diversity (it's honestly baffling how much we've lost in this regard), irregular bump rules that actually discourage formation flying for some ungodly reason and range 0 attacks that nobody asked for. Oh and a lot of erratas to print for existing stuff that a lot of people already invested time and money in. Change in general isn't necessarily bad, but restraining player's choice is always the wrong direction. And that's what they did. It can also turn off new players because the game ends more shallow than before and thus less interesting. As for their pricing - do tell me how toy soldier-sized pieces of plastic aren't overpriced currently. Of course Warhammer is overpriced way more but the fact others are worse doesn't make it good. That being said - I'm glad you entered the hobby and I wish you a lot of fun with it. Should you find anything puzzling or even wish for someone to help you theory crafting your lists there's a guy called wazat on the x-wing 2.0 wiki that's a living encyclopedia and gladly helps anyone new. Sure did give me some great lists ideas when I was starting out.

[@lelouchbritannia5394]

Honestly I've been looking over this and frankly it seems like they broke the game. All these changes they claim were to make it easier for new players but if it is confusing for veteran players what hope do new players have. On top of that I can understand the scenarios and trying to make the game less all out warfare, but that seems to work better for Armada where ships arent flying all over the map at break neck speed, where as with x-wing ships are all over the place and objectives just seem to add an annoying aspect. Not only do you have to keep your ships alive, but you have to do that while also trying to meet a set of objectives. Just seems like more work and less fun. Getting back to list building, I find the requirement of no less that 3 ships to be a slap in the face to us large ship fliers. This whole setup removes the fun element of making your own play style as it seems they are telling us we have to play their way and diversity is illegal. I'll give it a chance no less, but honestly if it becomes too annoying I don't see 3.0 lasting very long (yes I'm calling it 3.0 because they pretty much tried to reinvent the wheel here)

[@lelouchbritannia5394]

Just a side note, I try to be optimistic, but this has kinda tanked. I was actually explaining the new rules to my friend who is just wanting to get into x-wing and was picking out what he wants to buy and after seeing what it is now... he was upset. I'm also upset that this also makes epic flatline until/if they figure out the system for huge ships.

[@nchamp1991]

I agree, I was looking forward to flying the razor crest and any new ships but not at this cost of upending all the gameplay and listbuilding that I’ve done and spent my money on. It was a little weird changing from 1.0 to 2.0 and felt like they just wanted to get my money all over again for the same things however that change actually fixed a lot of the gameplay issues that I was having. And really streamlined list building. But to me, this new stuff is just garbage. I feel like this is going to turn into a dungeons and dragons 3.5 pathfinder kind of thing where they keep coming out with new versions but a lot of folks still just play the older version.

[@kaibe5241]

I just started playing, I've found list building to be excellent, easy, and intuitive.

[@tedgovostis7351]

These changes are objectively awful for a strategy game.I really wish Asmodee had left FFG in charge. AMG simply can't handle the task.

[@thebitterfig9903]

I've been getting less doom and gloom playing with the points... but one thing FFG certainly did much better was communications and running an actual f'ing website and forum.

[@SteveSpikes]

I totally agree. Fantasy Flight was a transparent company with an awesome forums page. AMG does everything behind closed doors. Everything was great with the 200 points that FFG implemented. I'm shaking my head at the new points. The old adage comes to mind: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." I guess we'll accept it once we play with the new points.

[@Squiggypie]

@@SteveSpikes "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." YES! Why do they keep changing things? The more they keep rocking the boat like this, the more people are going to fall off!

[@SteveSpikes]

Don't get me wrong, I like some of the changes AMG made to the gameplay: obstacles can do "bad things" for one example. I can't abide by changing the points that we've been using since the change from 1.0 to 2.0. I guess time will tell.

[@herculesmwp7983]

I’m a big “if it’s not broken, don’t fix it” type of person. I’m not a huge fan already

[@ToaKopaka-qs6xq]

They have introduced too many levers, now they won't be able to tell if a pilot isn't competitive because the pilot costs too much, the upgrade slots stink, or because the upgrade points allocated to that pilot are too low

[@chrisfields8077]

Why? Have they not learned that these massive changes just drive people away? 2.0 drove some of my friends away, these current changes are driving away the rest of my friends and the local community is pretty much dead now.

[@jyrlan2596]

Can confirm this as well. I'm loading my stuff into storage this weekend. Other hobbies can have my money now

[@ThunderStruck115]

Are they trying to make generic pilots worthless? If so, mission accomplished. Also, why the fuck can't I put crew on a generic U Wing, but I can on a Rebel Tie? That makes no sense

[@OpinionatedFanboy]

They are. They have constricted list building greatly

[@Ty-yy7zr]

I'm not printing out the errataed delta b pilots. It's easy enough to put the delta b configuration on a standard Aethersprite, then reference the delta b pilot costs. It is pointless and unnecessary work.

[@lukedewitt4903]

Thanks Dion for everything you do!

[@ToaKopaka-qs6xq]

The number of loadout points and the loadout slots for each ship seem arbitrary and confusing. I don't like AMG using loadout slots and points for balancing. Ships should be more consistent between pilots. Also, only 3 x wing pilots are even able to take proton torpedoes...

[@lelouchbritannia5394]

Very true. Reviewing the list some ships aren't worth taking because better either cost the same or the load out points are better. This new system really makes certain generics pointless even as filler ships. Only reason to take them is low initiative, even then not much point as most only took low initiative ships because of the cheap cost.

[@joshtucci468]

Dion, you and me think alike! Those three pilots where my first thoughts with the new points 😂

[@bernardojimenez2138]

Im confused whether these are good or bad... Will have to try, but 0 range attack appears so bad

[@rctankgo]

Thanks Dion. The new points version I think is the worst off all changes. There are a lot of nonsense in this configuration, such as cost of generic pilots and upgrades that one ship can have in one version, but with other pilot doesnt have it.

[@jccloud7]

I know GSP is generally supportive of AMG and may dismiss a lot of people who dislike this as "oh, this always happens, haters will hate". But surely you have to agree that the comments in the article are absolute BS? - "Before, when the game had no scenario play, it was very difficult for new players to understand what they were trying to accomplish while looking at the game." Because "kill all of their ships before yours die" is hard to understand? - "While we may have added more steps and more things to look at in the points reference documents, we (and our incredible play testers!) feel this new system has actually simplified squad building to a large degree, when looked at in conjunction with the changes to the core rules." By providing each individual pilot with their own set of upgrades, loadout points and incredibly unwieldy squad values? No one in their right mind is going to be able to assess if a squad is legal without 3 charts in front of them. Furthermore, they've gone back to the 1.0 days of loading ships with as many upgrades as possible. I thought we all agreed that was bad? How is that new player friendly when they look at a veritable deck of cards across the table, or try to remember triggers across 7 upgrades? Mando alone, who loads of people will try, has 10 slots and 28 points to spend. Great way to get into things(!) What a mess.

[@iangray3137]

I think the thought is that it makes a clear line of thinking for someone approaching the game for the first time to follow. With a dogfight, the player needs to know how best to create a favorable engagement for their squad over the other players squad. That is not the most clear thing for people without much knowledge of the game, so an objective gives a clear cut "you should be doing this". What I think that line of reasoning discounts however is that to be successful you still need to approach an objective in a way that makes sense for your squad, and objective or not that will only come with game experience over time. As far as squad building goes - I think once community apps catch up it will be easier to build a squad, it just seems like we are loosing some options in the new format. Giving players (especially new ones) discrete decisions to make that don't impact each other as much makes the creation of a whole squad simpler. First you a few ships/pilots you like that add up to 20, then you put toys on those ships that you like. Each individual ship's upgrade do not affect the viability of other ships in the list (though now that I'm typing it out it occurs to me that the calculation now becomes swapping in and out a whole new ship build for +/- 1 squad point is a whole other level of complication for advanced squad building). That actually removes an aspect of the game I always liked, discovering which tradeoffs to make and when to make them. Also loosing the ability to fly a really lean ace or a heavily laden generic with lots of toys takes away a lot of options. If you want to fly Biggs you are flying with 12 upgrade points period. No adjustments up or down to fit your playstyle. I'm a fan of cheap named pilots with lots of toys, so loosing many of those options makes me sad. Definitely a different direction than I would have taken, but I see the logic behind their choices. I'll give it all a try before digging in to an opinion too much though.

[@OpinionatedFanboy]

They have essentially restricted squad building. I sometimes like to fly more leaner ships. Not in this format

[@Squiggypie]

I completely agree. What's so hard to understand a dogfight? And I don't want to hear "oh, well new players don't understand how best to win a dogfight!" Yes, that's because they're new. This is a skill-intensive game, and outwitting your opponent is a skill that takes practice to master. It's part of the game. Heck, it's one of the best parts of the game. And now? I just don't know, man.

[@MagnusMoerkoereJohannesen]

I picked up my very first game of 2.0 about a month ago, having never even seen a game of, let alone played, X-Wing before. I guarantee you, figuring out how to dogfight is even easier than scratching your nose. Not only that, it was so intuitive, that I managed to win both of my engagements. These changes are dumb as all hell, and ruin what I enjoyed about the game in the first place.

[@asurk533]

I've got pretty mixed feelings. I wouldn't mind if you could pay an extra 1 point of ships for 10 more loadout points on a certain ship. You can't do nearly as much fun things on some of the smaller ships anymore. Oh look, I've got a talent slot, rocket, or comms slot... Aaaaaand 3 points to burn. Woo? Most of the generics must have done really well in the playtesting because they are almost always the same or higher costed than a named pilot with an ability, higher pilot skill and more loadout points. Unless you are REQUIRED to have all your ships at the same pilot skill I really struggle as to why you would ever pick some of the generics now. Case and point baron of the empire and inquisitor in the TIE V1. Same pilot skill, only inquisitor has force. In the new system both are 5 points for the ship and baron gets 3 upgrade points and inquisitor gets 5? I see very little reason to take a baron over a force sensitive inquisitor. or a jedi over mace windu on a delta 7. And the list goes on and on. Time will tell, but this new system feels MORE restrictive than the last.

[@nchamp1991]

Completely agree, no longer can I have a tie phantom with Juke and Stealth Device…

[@johnphillips3703]

Good thing they cant stop me from doing whatever I want in my home game. I'll just use the last update to the app for points and just forgo the new ships

[@Squiggypie]

I agree with you, but the problem is that without support, the old ways of playing the game will either and die, like a plant without water. Unless you have a really dedicated group of friends, it will eventually become impossible to enjoy the game like it was when it was at its best, because everyone else will eventually settle for less. We've seen it before. We're here now to see it again.

[@johnphillips3703]

@@Squiggypie that's the cool thing about home games. Me and my friends can use older older points lists and rules. AMG cant do anything to stop me from enjoying the game I paid for

[@BespokeFoil]

Launch bay already has an update out, not perfect but amazing for how quick it was

[@lloydpowell5683]

Oh hey that wacky AMG guy is at it again painting an a wing now, wow, soooo cooool… Too bad these ‘dummies’ keep trying to sell the snake oil knowing they threw away ‘game mechanics’ that perhaps needed some ‘tweaks’ from the original FFG design to their own ‘vague’ reasons for changes. I say ‘vague’ because again, I don’t see devs ‘showing me’ I have devs telling me when I know damn well drawing an 11 on something that we all damn well knows only goes to 10, devs still trying to sell me on, ‘well, it goes to 11’ doesn’t mean their ‘point of consideration’ doesn’t get to ‘dodge’ or ‘avoid’ questioning of legitimate patterns of noticed absurdity. Having said that… This is the ‘hail Mary’ throw, this new ‘game design’, that’ll probably make or break the future of this game. I think a lot of US actually SEE the problems, not just speculation of such prospects like 2 months ago. WE are actually seeing the dismantling of a good ‘game design’ that AMG has ‘aquired/inherited’. The painters explanation of the ‘vague’ future of Xwing is to remind us..if the painter and his friends ideas don’t work too bad cause, ‘we don’t care anyway there’s always something else’ attitude has really annoyed me as far as ‘the painter’ and his friends reasoning behind ‘changes’. Someone else said it best. Paraphrasing…if these snake oil salesmen had TRULY looked at the WHOLE picture for the ‘focus’ of ‘even game play’ for newer players and vets, they would’ve studied EPIC a little bit too but it’s SO obvious that they didn’t AND probably really only have a very NARROW view of what WE actually do when it comes to ‘list building’, makes me really wonder how UNAWARE they really are. I get you can’t satisfy everybody. I get that you can’t tell US everything about your Xwing ‘aquisition’. AMG trying to convince me that missions and objectives and rules changes etc are all for the benefit of US is a load of malarkey. AMG’s quick build rules on 2/22/22 are lousy compared to what we had from FFG. If I made a book, had EVERY faction and it’s chassis and every upgrade available for THAT chassis, WHY would a higher level pilot be allowed more loadouts than another for that chassis? It’s bad enough these ‘inferior’ developers didn’t finish the ALMOST complete FFG rules for ‘structures’ but THEN they springboard OFF of those rules, make changes that PREVIOUSLY made some sense, and tell us to enjoy our s&@t sandwich, there’ll be more changes in the future!???!!! I’m sorry to say to you all, this is a fire sale. They either sell it or it will die, the Assmodee/Disney/AMG overlords have spoken BUT…I still think they got nothing without all of YOU. Don’t let them forget it is all I’m saying. You guys made them the money by buying their product and you playtested their game to help make better game mechanic changes for 2.0. We shouldn’t be going through this again with these whelp devs that dismantle GOOD game mechanics to promote this ‘quick build’ 200 divided by 10/loadout points nonsense. I’m surprised AMG hasn’t realized a 12 year old can actually add and subtract larger numbers than just the number 20. That’s ok, I’m not surprised the coward shut off his comments, thanks ‘bob the painter’ from AMG, starting on those A-wings right now…so helpful Will, thanks for nothing. Peace. (If the dummies had just told us 25% or 20% of our 200pts goes to loadouts AND/OR decrease how many ships you can run, perhaps 6, maybe we wouldn’t be having this ‘point of consideration’ toward list building but I sense something else we’re not being told…)

[@bernardojimenez2138]

Omg, i have tried scenario 2, and it took me almost 3 hours to complete 20 points.. I hope it is only bexause we were learning, yet almost 4 times lengthier than before

[@MegaSilver]

The thing is, you'd probably still want to use the 75 min timer.

[@bernardojimenez2138]

@@MegaSilver of course thats a way to solve it for casual, yet for competitive, ehat is going to happen?

[@irishthump73]

Even with a 12 round limit?

[@resonation6776]

I hope they get this running for Beserk Games' TableTop Simulator.

[@lloydpowell5683]

Asteroids, debris. Ionize everything into obstacles, enjoy! 🤗 Let the Ion wars begin! 2/26/22 update…Test successful!

[@jimmd68]

My brain is exploding! OK, I'm fine now.

[@resonation6776]

3:48 what is the difference between "no" and "banned" for these purposes?

[@thebitterfig9903]

I don't think I hate the structure. I [strike that... I'm uncertain about] what they did with a lot of it. The choices around particularly generics are baffling and incredibly awkward. *edit~ playing around a bit more with the points, I'm not as down as I used to be. Some things are really awkward, and they've certainly killed a few of my darlings, but once there are squad builders updated, once it's easy to sandbox lists, it'll probably feel less strange. I still kinda think generics were overpunished for simply existing, but we'll see.

[@alkalinedivide]

Welp...here we are

[@TheTerribleSwede]

Part 2? Playlist?

[@LudditesRUs]

Seeing the potential lists like you have here makes a lot of sense and is workable from a points perspective. Thanks!

[@Silvavdp]

Keep playing 2.0 guys, screw 2.5 and AMG.

[@lloydpowell5683]

Wow was I wrong. I’ve only been studying for 3 hours or so but wow. This happened with heroclix back in 2003. Fire the devs then hire new team and sell sell sell! This will probably be my last purchase for AMG titled XWING products(last FFG designed product). I’m officially calling this a ‘HIT’. As in, a burning, to build back better, and I’m definitely sticking with 2.0 with NEW ‘cutthroat’ rules, ie;obstacles, bump dmg/Rng 0 attacks etc As for the future of tournaments, I can only speculate… Giving high pt loadouts to high initiative ‘limited’ ships, free, and then giving low Pt loadouts to generic ‘non limited ships’, free…backwards? Half the fun for me was taking a generic ship and upgrading it to where it might be comparable to a higher initiative ship, not anymore apparently! Bad bad bad move AMG. I had hopes these gentlemen had truly ‘grasped’ at some really fine points when it came to game mechanics to fix the game better but THIS is truly dumb in my opinion. As game developers go, I’ve lost all respect for AMG’s ‘focus’ to seeing ‘even game play’ vision in this. All I see is a real cheap way to ‘utilize’ the quick build cards and thus, yay, ‘design your own quick build card’ list INSTEAD of allowing the fun game mechanics of list building stifled for ‘even game play’? No. Not from what I’m smelling. I’m hoping for better in the future but I’m definitely selling ALOT of stuff I won’t use ever again and I’ll continue to play what FFG had clearly made from scratch, tried to maintain with fervent passion, only to be sold to the highest bidder at the end. I’m sure the guys at AMG meant well, they seem like passionate gamers, but they failed in my eyes. Way too much overthinking on these points loadout limitations on generic ships. Absolutely pathetic and makes no sense as far as generic vs ‘limited’. Just because I have a Fenn Rau at 6 with a gazillion loadout points but a generic fang gets less than a higher initiative pilot in loadout points???!??!!! AMG, you’ve truly failed us and keep your ‘missions’ and keep your ‘glue to cardboard’ templates if that’s what your gamer brains have concluded to not even update the epic rules with any of the aforementioned nonsense. I wholeheartedly disagree and I’ll assume I’m not alone in this ascertation, good day AMG…I said good day!!! Good luck GSP, I definitely hope you can surf this tsunami out lmao I’m still praying for some typos or changes so far in the future I can’t even conceive…good luck space cowboys…I’ve played 40k with old codex, guess this is the way…love to hear what you gents have to say AFTER Adepticon…BEFORE Adepticon I’ll understand the ‘HUSH’ protocol just like those two joker devs from AMG for past two months, peace.

[@louisxavier22]

game is dead gg no re

[@youhartley]

so I can get in a fender bender with my own ship going 10mph and I might take damage, but I can slam head on into an enemy freighter going 10000mph and I still get an action? no thanks.

[@OpinionatedFanboy]

Wait, that is supposed to be fun and exciting :)

[@kprnospm]

An overreaction to deliberate self bumps and fortressing, maybe, but softening the risks if you bump an enemy because of who got first player. Of course, all the squadmates train wrecking behind you may not be happy...

[@aaronau433]

I'll give 2.5 a fair go and the idea of every ship being tricked out with upgrades is kinda wacky and cool, but I really don't understand why upgrades needed to be separate from squad points and pretty much free for all ships to take up to their arbitrary upgrade coupon limit. There is literally no opportunity cost to consider when equipping upgrades now, so why wouldn't every Academy Pilot get a free Precision Ion Engine just because? (which incidentally is one of the few remaining alter-your-move gimmicks left in the game)

[@tylerttinsley]

So this is kind of a build your own quick build card system. Interesting. I thought quick builds with all the upgrade card text on them were what x-wing 2.0 needed right out of the gate. Hopefully we can see more quick-build lode out cards and a way to make and print your own.

[@Shouty36]

What I need to know is what happens if you don't fill out your Loadout Points. Is there any benefit/punishment? Do they get scored by the enemy team like unused team points?

[@lelouchbritannia5394]

Yes

[@WolfVdME]

Thats Great! But whats a Proton Cannon and what is it coming in ?

[@KniggeWieczorek]

Only in epic play, as it is a hard point upgrade. Comes with the Kraken epic ship...

[@WolfVdME]

@@KniggeWieczorek Under Generaic upgrades in the new points list there is a Proton Cannon two cannon slots, 3 loadout pts cost. Proton Cannon Battery from old HUGE ship points list is 10 pts, and takes a hardpoint and cargo point slot. Your right it could be a mistake though?

[@maddogtannen69]

Well im so glad I just spent a ton of money updating all my old stuff to 2.0

[@diamend85]

everything is still viable and up to date

[@voidempire2174]

Yup. This is less of a change than 1.0 to 2.0. And it is way way less of a change when considering changes to models and real costs (even if you include ban lists)

[@peternystrom921]

Drama Queen.

[@maddogtannen69]

@@peternystrom921 maybe your speaking to me no clue really my point Mr ignorant is that Just recently i did my upgrades if i would have known i would have waited, if they now release the same shit with the new rules GET IT?

[@tylerttinsley]

Well it looks like aside from some errata and bans all your 2.0 cards, cardboard and dials are current with this release

[@MostlyNotDps]

Is there a drastic difference with the new squad building rules? Like if you compare squads built in the old system to the new, is there an appreciable difference in point costs/what you can use?

[@tylerttinsley]

The balance between spending points on ships and spending points on upgrades is removed. I don’t mind that change.

[@nchamp1991]

So far it seems a lot more limiting. A lot of my favorite squad builds are now incompatible.

[@letsplaywithfriends8697]

This kind of insane rule changings is exactly what made me quit 1.0. I'll stick with 2.0 and the ships I have. Not spending more money on this game.

[@diamend85]

no need to buy new stuff all ships and cards still viable

[@letsplaywithfriends8697]

@@diamend85 No I mean new cool stuff that comes out. I've been begging for the gauntlet fight since 1.0 and with these new insane rules I'm not motivated to buy them now.

[@Squiggypie]

@@letsplaywithfriends8697 me too. The gauntlet fighter was awesome, and I knew it deserved a place next to the fang. But now? I too disillusioned to care. : /

[@eppursimuoveeppursimuove7111]

2.0 live

[@ICYKCBlue]

newbie here, do you have any content on reviewing what ships are good in 2.5 or can you really go with anyship?

[@gollum314]

Gracias por matar a xwing...

[@derekwilliamson2118]

This sounds like trash, not gonna lie

[@Zimzode]

There's a lot of negativity about the new rules, but I'm excited to try them out. X-wing was never perfect and I never expect it to be. Changes don't mean it's worse, just different.

[@derekwilliamson2118]

Idk, it was pretty damn perfect

[@Squiggypie]

If they keep rocking the boat, people are bound to fall off.

[@lelouchbritannia5394]

Unfortunately they have added more confusion to the game, tried to make it like Armada which doesn't work too well with ships all over the place, and much of seems like they are forcing players to lay how AMG wants instead of letting us be creative and imaginative with our game play. Normally changes don't mean it is worse, but in this case they have given us a dumpster fire and told us to have fun.

[@TommyRushing]

What does this mean for all the cards I had to buy to leap into 2.0? Do I now have to buy a new rebels conversion pack?

[@Dis-Emboweled]

Nah, all you have to do is print the new crap at home! 1.5 range rulers!! Whoohoo!!

[@abnercliff9624]

All 2.0 stuff is usable, no extra fee

[@stevehurtz8359]

I am really optimistic.. chance encounter is still a dogfight and I was able to build a list with a docked shuttle on the ghost that is much better then anything I could do in 2.0. Also you can really load up vader.. Dark Lord for life!

[@ShineChromatica]

I'm disappointed in the community seeing so many rude reactions and statements here in the comments and elsewhere. I had thought we had a community of adults, but apparently I was mistaken. Edit: Before someone comes and replies to me with some snappy remark let me expand on this. This whole AMG process has really highlighted to me how quizzically petty, hostile, and frighteningly hateful some in this community can be. It's disappointing and does no good for the community as a whole or for the mental health of those reacting so poorly to these things and those around them. It's a bad look and I am not sure why AMG should feel any eagerness to engage with our community when this is how a vocal part of it treats them. I've seen calls and demands for people to lose their jobs (or worse) and many, many hostile tantrums lashing out at others in the community in frankly disgusting ways. It's embarrassing and it makes me want to step away from the game, not because of these changes at all, but because of this part of the community that has been so eager to expose itself in the midst of this entire changeover and is rubbing its toxic stench all over the rest of the community.

[@JS-mp7fy]

I completely agree re the new rules, at least try them out before hating on them. At the end of the FFG cycle I was being turned off as the game was about super low bids, and hand shake combo builds. It had lost where it had started, a dog fighting game. I was happy when they deleted the bid, here's to hoping they return to the origins of X Wing.

[@ShineChromatica]

@@JS-mp7fy I don't even mind if people don't try out the rules, don't like the rules, etc. It's reasonable for someone to take a look at something and decide it just isn't for them. I'd rather someone didn't force themselves to try something that they know they won't like. It's just the vitriol itself that bothers me.

[@alexs7670]

Look heres what you have to understand, people have invested thousands of dollars and ten times as many hours into this game. They like it and amg arbitrarily changes things to solve problems no one had. People are upset because they are no longer getting what they paid for. More than that, coming into these comments and moralizing doesn't make you a better person. You arent going to get an amg mug for whitknighting in youtube comments. Amg is a business not a person. No one is being "hateful" of anything other than massive alienating changes. You are not better because you think you are above being negative, there is nothing wrong with being negative. It is, however, wrong to be dismissive of the negative positions others have presented with their experiences speculation.

[@JS-mp7fy]

@@alexs7670 Your reply is freaking hilarious. I am also a person that has invested into this game, about wave 3 of 1.0, I have been playing for a while. I liked it how it played back then and for the few waves afterwards, but as most games do, they create power creep to sell stock and the game turned from a dog fighting game to a initiative bidding and list building game, so much so that you could bid 20 points and still win comfortably. Your summation that AMG arbitrarily changed the rules leads me to believe you do not know what arbitrarily means, these changes have been in the works for a while and I would hazard a guess that they have been play tested before being released, or has nostalgia ruined your brain and you forget the sh*t state that FFG released some ships in? OP or otherwise. With the changes that FFG made, I wasn't getting what I initially paid for, but I gave it a go. Who the f*ck is moralising? I am saying don't be a sooky little b*tch before trying it out, if you want to sell your stuff, awesome do that. I am sure there a re a lot of people out there who are looking for a good deal. This is a game of plastic spaceships, who the hell is white knighting is that your catch all to try and debunk any critical comments to the complainers? If you aren't with the complainers you must be a shill? Can you explain to me how they are alienating without even trying it? Or you are that awesome you just naturally know everything and you don't need data to create an opinion? Speculation can be wrong, give it a try or go away, no one cares if you are going to have a cry that things change.

[@soapboxk2203]

@@JS-mp7fy Your assumption that this stuff was extensively playtested is just ignorant. AMG is a fraction of the size FFG was, and FFG could barely get enough testing in with the game to avoid large blunders. AMG didn't want this dumped in their lap. All it takes is one look at their website to see that.