Earning points according to your opponent’s deficit?

[u/Technical_Turn3497]

Can someone help me understand this rule? I believe it is for the 2.5 version of the rules. The scenarios say that you start off with points equal to your opponent’s deficit. This doesn’t make sense to me. If your opponent has less than the agreed upon point value, shouldn’t your opponent be the one to get back those extra points in his score?

[u/Phileepay]

It is because you can score points by destroying your opponent's ships, so if they have fewer than 20 points, you have fewer available points.

Realistically, this rarely happens.

[u/Mikhs89]

Note that for XWA, lustbuilding requires you to have a squad between 46 and 50 points, and the deficit points from your opponent are only scored if you fully destroy your opponent squad, so this is something that almost never happens.

[u/j_tonks]

That was AMG 2.5 rules, which I don't think anyone plays anymore. With XWA and 2.0, you have to destroy all of your opponent's ships to score their deficit.

[u/Technical_Turn3497 → u/j_tonks]

But does that make sense? If your opponent has fewer than the allowed points, then his squadron is weaker, so why would you get more points by destroying it?

Perhaps I’m misunderstanding this?

[u/WASD_click → u/Technical_Turn3497]

Because people score objective points to win, your list isn't just 50 points of ships: it's 50 points of objectives for your opponent.

If your list was normally three hard to destroy ships and one easy to destroy ship, you might be tempted to just not bring the easily destroyed ship so your opponent can't claim those objective points.

[u/j_tonks → u/Technical_Turn3497]

Before AMG introduced Random Order After Dials (the part at the end of the planning phase where you roll dice to see who is first player), the player with the lower squad point total could decide whether they wanted to be first or second player for the whole game. Thus, people were fielding ace lists with massive points deficits to ensure they moved after every opponent they faced. I can't remember if it was FFG or AMG that first came up with deficit scoring, but it was a way to discourage these huge point bids. Then AMG introduced ROAD, but kept deficit scoring, which never made sense to me. I am hugely critical of how AMG handled all aspects of X-Wing, but ROAD was one thing that absolutely improved the game, I just don't know why they kept deficit scoring.

[u/Killerbeardhawk]

If I bring a 0 point squad, would I earn 50 points and just win the match? I think your logic is off here.

[u/Technical_Turn3497 → u/Killerbeardhawk]

It’s possible I am misunderstanding, so bear with me. My understanding is that, say in a 50 point game, if I bring 50 points and my opponent brings 47 points, then at some point I get 3 points because of his deficit.

This is the part I’m not understanding. Ofc, it should be conditional on something, like destroying his ships, otherwise as you pointed out he’d win by not having a squadron.

The only thing I can assume is that the purpose is to not have any point deficit because of the rule that the person with the lower point total can decide if he wants initiative. Which I guess makes sense, but I never found that to be a major game-changer.

[u/Killerbeardhawk → u/Technical_Turn3497]

Do you not use ROAD to determine who goes first?

[u/Technical_Turn3497 → u/Killerbeardhawk]

We’re primarily using the 2.0 rules. But I’ve been wanting to switch to 2.5.

Oh NVM, I understand what you mean by ROAD now.

[u/Killerbeardhawk → u/Technical_Turn3497]

With random order the deficit doesn't matter. Highly recommended.