Help support TMP

"Unofficial X-Wing Rules Modification" Topic

16 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the Star Wars Message Board

659 hits since 13 Dec 2012
©1994-2014 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Mako1113 Dec 2012 1:24 p.m. PST

I was thinking the other day, based upon on-line stats I've seen, and the old Star Warriors rules, that the Hull ratings for the Tie fighters are just too powerful.

In the past, I've conjectured that this is due to the FFG folks not wanting to put three Ties in a box with a single X-Wing, in order to help keep up Rebel morale.

However, if you are interested in a more cinematic type game, where there are swarms of the basic Tie fighters, and they virtually explode when hit, then the following unofficial rules modifications are for you:

1. reduce the Hull ratings for the Tie fighters to 2, from their current 3 (even the X-Wing is only rated with a 3, which just seems wrong – relatively speaking, the Tie has a Hull R.U. of 14, while X-Wings have a rating of 20 in Star Wars lore);

2. reduce the costs of the Tie fighters to approximately 2/3rds of their current ratings;

3. now, the astute amongst you will note that the above makes the Ties die more quickly, but you'll have 50% more of them, so they'll actually have higher total cumulative attack values, if you follow the above plan.

That is correct, but it's difficult to cut down an attack rating of 2, to 2/3rds of that, cleanly.

However, I have a plan.

In order to mitigate that anomaly, simply, just reduce the Ties' weapons range to the 1 and 2 bands, instead of the normal 1 – 3. If I recall correctly, the Empire's weapons were a little less powerful than those of the Rebels, so the range 1 – 2 rating works perfectly. If I'm incorrect, simply press on, and ignore that, since it still makes the numbers work well, and permits a bit more differentiation in terms of overall tactics.

Rebels can attack at a variety of ranges, while the Imperial pilots need to press in close to carry out their attacks. Given the latter's better speed, and maneuverability, that should make for a more interesting game.

Give it a try, and let me know what you think.

The point values might need to be tweaked a bit for the Empire, in order to make things fair for the Rebels, due to the now 3:1 advantage their will have, instead of the basic 2:1 ratio.

thosmoss13 Dec 2012 1:55 p.m. PST

And to think official tournaments are being overrun by people playing a swarm of 8 TIE Fighters for 100 points … A TIE pilot losing his Range 3 isn't a huge impact on his standard tactics.

Problem with your math above is it doesn't allow much for the overwhelming number of dice the Imperial player will be throwing at those rotten Rebels. Now it'll be increased half again, no matter how fast the TIEs go "pop".

Ghostrunner13 Dec 2012 2:12 p.m. PST

I agree that the correction seems rather unneeded, but it might make an interesting variant of the standard TIE.

If the TIE pilots all had low Pilot skills, the Rebels MIGHT be able to whittle down enough TIEs (with one-shot kills) in a first head-to-head pass to even the odds.

However, IF they chop down the TIEs on that first pass, the TIEs will start to die like FLIs (punny, huh?) soon thereafter, and it could be a curb-stomp for the Rebels.

Therefore, I could see the game coming down to the die rolls on that first pass, which might make the rest of the game rather a foregone conclusion.

Personal logo nazrat Supporting Member of TMP13 Dec 2012 4:26 p.m. PST

No corrections are need at all to the X-Wing game! It's darn near perfect as is.

Chief Lackey Rich Supporting Member of TMP Fezian13 Dec 2012 4:44 p.m. PST

Show a good reason that there ought to be even more TIEs on the table when people are already concerned (overly so, IMO) about TIE swarms and it might be worth trying. Damaging a good game just to match some fictional statistics (especially from as dead a game as Star Warriors) is just silly.

JeremyR13 Dec 2012 6:40 p.m. PST

Obviously FFG and all their playtesters got it wrong. They should have just contacted Mako to develop the game for them.

While this would make individual TIE Fighters slightly crappier it would make a TIE swarm even more powerful. Twelve TIE Fighters would be a bit overwhelming for a three or four ship Rebel build. Not to mention that TIE Fighters are fairly ineffective at range 3 anyway and it is in their best interest to close to short range as fast as possible.

Mako1113 Dec 2012 11:50 p.m. PST

"They should have just contacted Mako to develop the game for them".


That way, I'd be laughing all the way to the bank, with the royalties, and they would too, since they'd be selling even more minis………

Ah well, perhaps they'll be so inclined on their next project.

Personal logo richarDISNEY of the RDGC Supporting Member of TMP14 Dec 2012 8:16 a.m. PST

I also thought that the TIEs have too much hull.
The X-Wings are supposed to be more robust (as per the books…).

Ghostrunner14 Dec 2012 8:46 a.m. PST

Other than Wedge and Luke (2 Key Heroes in the movie series), how many X-Wings were ever shown in the movies to shrug off a hit from a TIE?

Red Leader didn't blow up after the first hit, but he knew he was done.

Porkins may or may not have actually been hit as part of his 'problem', but again, he wasn't making any more moves after that.

The shields give Rebel Fighters a pretty good boost as it is. Regardless of what the books or various tech manuals and games have said, making X-Wings into Cruisers doesn't help the game in my opinion.

Amalric14 Dec 2012 12:09 p.m. PST

Cool idea in the OP.

I like the balance per the rulebook but if Mako wants to tweak rules for his game more power to him.

Personal logo nazrat Supporting Member of TMP15 Dec 2012 12:00 p.m. PST

"That way, I'd be laughing all the way to the bank, with the royalties, and they would too, since they'd be selling even more minis………"

Thank goodness you didn't design it! From what I have seen of your suggested modifications, it would have made for a rules-heavy, convoluted, horrible game. So they wouldn't have been selling more of anything, since the system wouldn't have been nearly as good.

Mako1120 Dec 2012 4:59 p.m. PST

I understand your point of view Nazrat, but just don't agree with it.

Some people enjoy checkers, while others enjoy chess.

I am definitely in the chess camp.

JeremyR20 Dec 2012 5:41 p.m. PST

A TIE Fighter, when compared to older game systems, probably should have only 2 hull points instead of 3 but the only thing your modification does is make the TIE Fighter even more powerful in groups. Why would having 1 less hull point reduce the cost of the entire ship by 1/3? There are other stats besides hull points to factor in. Why should a TIE's lasers not have the same range as every other ship in the game? Even taking away range 3 from the TIE, in addition to the loss of 1 hull point, is not enough of a handicap to justify making a TIE Fighter 8 points instead of 12.

A TIE swarm currently has 16 attack dice and 24 hull points. Your 12 TIE swarm has 24 attack dice and 24 hull points and the only handicap is losing range 3, which is virtually meaningless as most TIE pilots can't hit anything at range 3 anyway. Maybe if the points were 10 it might be reasonable. Then you would have 20 attack dice and 20 hull points in a swarm. But this is still somewhat imbalancing in the game as an attack die is worth twice the amount of points that a hull point is.

So, in conclusion, I'm not sure what this modification is supposed to be but it most certainly is not chess because it is not very well thought out.

Ghostrunner21 Dec 2012 8:33 a.m. PST

The only way this change makes sense (downgrading the TIE hull, and lowering the points) is if you allow shields to automatically regenerate. Then rebel fighters might (emphasis – might) be able to survive a super-TIE-swarm.

However, the game designers chose to make shields regenerate under only limited circumstances.

Since they tossed the idea of auto-regen shields, they clearly had to toss a few other assumptions from the older games.

Frankly, I think the system they chose is a nice variation – shields have a role without excessive bookkeeping, and you don't need huge swarms of TIEs to balance 2 or 3 Rebel fighters.

DB Draft24 Feb 2013 7:58 p.m. PST

All TIEs have "regenerating shields"… they are called evade tokens.

Personal logo vojvoda Supporting Member of TMP24 Feb 2013 9:42 p.m. PST

I am not against any modifications to the rules as I do not see the system limited to just tournament play. Heck I have been toying with altitude rules for the game before the system even came out. I had some pretty good home rules but no where near polished as they are now nor did I address point totals. I did have more different capabilities of each type of ship then the game does now and down the road I might try and tweek it some just because I can. Mako keep making recommendations it is always good to brain storm.

James Mattes

Sorry - only trusted members can post on the forums.