X-wing Miniatures Game Play & Chat Live on TTS - 2.5 vs. 2.0 vs. 1.0 in-game

Continuing the conversation between the different editions of X-wing, here is a live play of X-wing 2.5 (AMG) with comparison's to 2.0, Legacy and 1.0 live in-game
Don't forget the X-wing Hub: xwhub.com/ !
Rulebook here: cdn.svc.asmode...
X-wing Documents (points, rules, errata, scenarios): www.atomicmass...
#Xwing #XwingMiniatures #XwingHub #XwingCommunity #CommunityContent #FindXwingPlayers #HowDoIPlayXwing #WhatIsXwingMiniatures #XwingRules #XwingRulebook #TabletopSimulator #TTS

[@groan-up]

This was fun. I have a couple homebrew escalation mods and missions but have yet to see proper scenarios played. Also with both X-Wing and Attack Wing I have relied on published AI for opponent movement/action for solo play, but this has me considering self v. self.

[@casualdadgames]

You definitely have to be in the mood for it, but it works! Let's you directly test two lists at once and avoid the somewhat silly stuff AI will do. I guess I didn't wrestle too much flipping the board around in the recording then, I sure felt it a few times XD

[@crastestpixles5972]

Good video, I wounder how it would have played out using 2.0 turn order rules with bidding,I imagine that haveing set turn order would effect 2.5 objective play. If you want to go first or second might also change on what scenario is being played too.

[@casualdadgames]

Very true, in this game there were two full initiative overlaps too

[@camwardart]

Firstly fantastic job demoing the games. Some of my thoughts and commentary while watching the video… This could be because I tried it on TTS but when I played 2.5 it looked like more than 80% of the non major/generic characters pilot cards got cut from the game. I personally give that two thumbs down. Also enjoy whatever version you like but the upgrade system in 2.5 seemed bonkers to me. Like what level of strategy is there in picking upgrades when everyone is just entitled to get whatever they want and it has no impact on the actual value/points on your list. I also might be misremembering but 1.0 had tons of named characters at a competitive level, you just had to make harder choices wether to take them (and upgrade them) compared to the 2.5 system I saw presented here….which seems like it doesn’t even want there to be any level of strategy/choice beyond wether to give the pilot 1 upgrade or the other… I personally like generics and non named Star Wars characters in games like this because It makes me feel like I get to make my own characters and stories in Star Wars and have them still feel part of the universe. Sometimes it gets a little tiring/boring/silly having the same major plot characters show up in every Star Wars game you play. Also sometimes Disney drops a hot turd of a Star Wars product and kills your love of a character so you would rather just run them as a generic instead. I like the manual turret arc swap I think it’s a great change, but you mentioned in 1.0 there was no counter play to turrets and I strongly disagree with that. Almost all turrets had a minimum+max range they wouldn’t function in and maneuvering within those range belts was a huge part of strategy/play back then. Having said that I do think 1.0 turrets where way to OP. The objective play is… interesting… part of me likes it, part of me doesn’t. I think it’s great in legion, and it seems to be implemented in a really similar way to xwing 2.5… but other part of me use to like the simple straight up dogfights of old.. even back when I played 1.0 we would do objective games so I think at the very least having it as an option for players is a great thing. Looking forward to further content!

[@mavhass]

How are you playing this on TTS? I;m getting dozens of import error messages trying to run it, suggesting almost none of the hosted files are available anymore!

[@casualdadgames]

Oh NO! I'm not sure what the issue is there, I set TTS up years ago and haven't touched it. I can basically guarantee though that any issue is temporary, and it's going to be fixed up - somehow. I'll see what I can find out!

[@casualdadgames]

I just checked in on the TTS Discord, and they said the error you're getting is most likely a server hiccup and temporary. Give it another shot when you have a minute, and if you get more errors send me the details and I'll get them to the mod team!

[@kudosbudo]

target locking rocks is a bit daft. any rules that just ban that?

[@casualdadgames]

You can Lock any in-game "Object," but the only card effects I can think of that have any interaction with it are Qi'ra Crew, Padric Y-wing, and - of course - Jam Now that we're about to enter a community-run Wild West, you could suggest banning it?

[@lloydpowell5683]

@@casualdadgamesya, go the easy AMG developer decision, that should go well… You did just give me an idea for my homebrew, ‘Galactic Civil War’, AKA XWing! 🤗

[@Hedgehobbit]

I don't think it's fair to say that 2.0 prices generics aggressively. Often a named pilot will cost the same or even less than a generic of the same Initiative. However, eventually 2.5 will have to do a points rebalancing and address the named vs generic issue. Even if that just means they decide to keep generics sub-optimal. And if they do decide to lower the cost of the generics, then the differences between 2.0 list building and 2.5 will become less and less.

[@casualdadgames]

With Wedge/Luke vs. a baseline X-wing, my god yes it does 😂 But you're also right that Initiative is one of the key pricing factors, so an I4 Generic is closer in price to an I4 Named, which makes sense considering the power of Initiative in 2.0 Since one of the biggest cases for Generics is the whole build-a-bear aspect of making your own characters, I would like to see them at least playable in 2.5 - but they would need a *lot* of loadout to really compete, which gets problematic very quickly when they're spammable. But hey, we'll see what happens!