Let me try one more time:

What I am saying is that, yes, V-Set beatsticks break the game. You can disagree all you want.
They break the game because at base value, they wipe the floor with any team that DOESN'T have a big beatstick in their squad.

Why do you think there was such a kickback from GOWK? Because he crashed the game into the ground.

This argument is pointless, please allow me summarize this entire discussion.

Man #1: The game is getting unbalanced and some pieces are overpowered.
Man #2: If you think that piece is broken, then simply use this broken piece to break it.
Man #1: I'm not looking to break the game, I want things to be balanced.
Man #2: Okay, you're not listening. That piece is not good, because look at this broken piece. Do you see how great it is?
Man #1: Seriously, I was just saying the game is getting unbalanced.
Man #2: Unbalanced? I can beat that piece with this piece, look at how broken it is!
Man #1: Dude, I'm just saying all they do is make pieces more broken than the last.
Man #2: More broken? Ha, just look at this broken piece, it'll take care of that.

This argument is right up there with Gun Control on topics that simply will not go anywhere. Some of us want to play a fair game, but some pieces are so overpowered it ruins casual play. Some of you will not understand this because you play to win, which to me, is not playing for fun. But while I play for fun, it's hard to enjoy a game when there are pieces that can simply wipe out entire squads.

Kezzamachine: that was a very articulate and well-argued post, good sir!

The way you describe Save11, you're making me want to move to NZ...they already have the LotR and the Hobbit movies, and now they also have one of the healthiest SWM groups I've ever heard of....

3. Someone in here said that some of the people who hated GOWK were some of the V-Set makers, which while maybe factual, sure doesn't make sense why they make pieces that are significantly better than him for less points. Unless if by bringing balance to the game they are doing it the same way Magic does, in which each set they will come out with more broken cards than the last set.

Thanks Hutts for the plug. Yep, I've tried to keep the game here running along with the US as I think it's the best version of the game. Vsets have carried on WotC's tradition exceptional well with the exception of far less crap pieces and better support for the bottom factions - and I hesitate to say that's just my opinion as I believe that is pretty much fact. But I'll keep it as my opinion for now. Yes, Mace was devastating and I've lost to him enough to know... yes, Poggle Bombs are the most frustrating negative play experience I've ever had in the game, but that was no different than facing a rampant GOWK back in the day or having Mara come out of nowhere and kill off your big piece in a flash.

I'm going to go out on a limb and state how NZ has handled Vsets since they've come in. When I say NZ, I'll qualify that and say the 30-40 players I oversee in the whole country. There are players out there that I am yet to meet and I don't know what they play, but I have direct contact with exactly 43 SWM players/collectors, most of whom play the game. I'll refer to us all collectively as Save11, just to keep it clear. And, I should make this point, I find it necessary to speak on behalf of my fellow countryman who play the game so I can add weight to my position - it's not just my opinion, but rather that of 30-40 of us.

We in Save11 find the Vsets to have been a totally positive step for the SWM game. Both Competitively and non-Competitively. The introduction of new characters, new abilities, new styles of play... of the strengthen of the "lesser" factions so that they can foot it with the bigger ones, the flattening and broadening of the meta, in strengthening and lifting up of old, previously unuseful pieces... it's all been such a positive step for SWM, and we here in Save11 swear by it. Whether we are playing tournaments, mass battles, goofing around... we extensively use the ideals of the Vsets - and I need to make this clear - not just solely Vset characters. We still use a hefty dose of old WotC pieces - in fact, our most recent tournament was won by Dave/Daman (pronounced The Man) using a squad that consisted mostly of WotC pieces. We fully support the direction the game is in.

That doesn't mean that we 100% like everything that happens in the game. As I said before, I have had negative play experiences with Poggles - a lot of us have (is there a support group?) - and different ones of us have issues with different pieces and parts of the game. That is healthy - we have some disagreements and some discussions. But, we are involved in the game. We regularly playtest - an excellent way to have your say on the future of the game! - we are heavily involved in online discussions and podcast discussions, and we have had the honour of having one of our number included in overseeing the Playtesting for Vset6. We see the avenues for change, or for being involved in the game and use them. We have our say.

Question: Darth Reignir and Blah Blah Words - do you playtest? I can totally recommend it. It's a great way of beginning the process of having more of a say.

I have to put my hand up to some extent and say that, yes, Save11 is largely what you might call a "competitive" playgroup. However, I have two things that arise in response to my own admission. Firstly, I find the term competitive a touch misleading in that, the game is about beating your opponent. Whether you play in national tournaments, or whether you meet once a month at your mates house for minis and beer, you still build a squad (using synergies and such) to beat the other player. It's just the attitude behind that that I think could be labelled "competitive". I don't know if I agree that there is any real distinction, however, except maybe that "competitive" players spend more time thinking through options and combinations, probably play more practising with those combinations, but that's probably it.

Secondly, here in NZ, the line between "competitive" and "casual" is incredibly blurred, to the point of my suggesting we don't have a line like that at all. In Save11 NZ, we have different regions, and one of those Regions is Save11 Hawera - a group of 5 very, very hard-core gamers who meet every week on Monday night and are probably the best example of this competitive/casual blend I speak of. When they play to win, they play hard. They have excellent, well thought out squads and have every chance of winning an NZ event when they turn up to it. However, their normal mode of play is more akin to casual. We have four major tournaments spread out throughout the year plus one regional league for that region. In the times when Hawera is not preparing for tournament play, they are playing very casual games. They mixup squads, they change the rules, they add in incentives that sometimes go against the power-pieces, they are constantly asking each other to come up with weird squads and enjoy different styles of play. This example of theirs reminds me strongly of the guys at SWMiniverse - if you haven't heard it, I totally recommend it - they are constantly doing the same thing with their group week in, week out. It would scare me if SWMiniverse and Save11 Hawera got together in the same room. Anyhoo, the Save11 Hawera boys grew into SWM out of DnD, which they played every week and enjoyed the hack'n'slash and fun of the night. But they flow so fluidly from "competitive" and "casual" that I don't believe there is such a line, unless it is defined by your group. We in Save11 Lower Hutt (where I play) don't play as often (not in an organised sense, anyway) but I have played several fun, "casual" games and I use Vset pieces for those as I would in normal play.

Something that happened to me once, which I suggest as an excellent solution to worries about being smoked in a fun game is this: I organised a game with a fellow Save11 player - Aaron/sharron - and we turned up ready to run a 200pt fun game. We revealed our squads and it was instantly obvious that his squad would smoke my squad. No two ways about it, he'd managed to bring a combination that was head and shoulders above mine. Now, it wasn't because he'd brought a top tier build, rather that he'd just managed to bring a fun combination that my fun combination had no answer for. It happens! So, rather than play the game and have a negative experience, we laughed, had a quick three-minute conversation about how the game would go, talk any through any possibilities I might have (which were none!) and then we agreed on the type of squad I should run instead. Five minutes later, we started our 'second game' which was heaps of fun.

I understand and appreciate that different playgroups may look at the Vset characters and be very concerned by them. That is what makes us all different and it is a totally valid opinion. I think we need to be careful about how we approach the Vset designers and those that are a part of the process though. For one, they are volunteers that give up their own time (and a lot of it!) to do something that they don't have to do. The game could have stopped three years ago, but a group of individuals took a chance on something they loved and this is where we are. I know that in NZ we are forever in your debt (a life debt?) and appreciate your commitment. The design process is not done in isolation either. Community suggestions are taken, the design team shape those along with requests and discussions from threads into 72 pieces, which then get handed on to a massive amount of playtesters. Their results come back through committees and the pieces are then shaped to their final position by the committee, the design team, rules people and card design people. It's a massive endeavour that passes through many hands. It's easy to think that one person comes up with an idea, writes it onto a card and then, six months later, that's the new piece that we have to take (which, by the way, was pretty much the WotC process), but rather that every piece that we see is touched by literally dozens of hands before we get it.

There have been "mistakes" as such, pieces that have made it through the net and have had a tremendous impact on the game, and they have been spoken about at length. If you listen to the SHNN, they speak of how predicting how a piece will affect the game/meta is a very difficult thing. Some pieces that were designed specifically to be powerful have done little, while others who were lesser have grown to great stature. I believe that the designers have been very open with discussing these "mistakes" and I feel that they have always owned up to them, when they have actually been so. Although, we must bear in mind, the definition of a "mistake" is quite a loose term - what one group considers a "mistake" may not always be viewed by others. However, my point really is that I have always found the designers to be forthcoming with things they would have liked to have done differently. Kudos for your honesty, gentlebeings.

"Broken" is a dangerous word, as it carries such a weight in this game. I think there are a lot of very, heavy pieces in the game at the moment, and that is no different than in WotC's time. I think the only truly "broken" piece would have to have been GOWK and, even then, it was only for a time. For me, the definition of a "broken" piece would have to be if there was little or no way to beat it, that if you weren't running it and someone else was, that there would be no way for you to be able to win. GOWK was that piece for a time and was handled accordingly by being banned from play and errata'd. The game was just not fair with him in it. Since then, pieces have come and gone that have approached that in terms of their dominance to the game, but I don't think they've been as close. Here in NZ, you can show up to a tournament with any piece(s) you like and you can't guarantee a win, and I believe it's the same anywhere in the world. Will you automatically win with Bastilla? No. Are you guaranteed to walk away top if you run Poggles? No. Mace? Hell no... we have people turn up to tournaments with him thinking they'll do well and failing to make the top 4. As I said earlier, our most recent tournament was won with Thrawn, Mas, Cad Bane, Morrigan and Lobot and it had little to do with what was run, but rather Dave/Daman is an excellent player. We find nothing less in NZ - good, smart players who know how to make a squad with lots of excellent synergy and then execute that squad win.

I would make the case that if there are any characters that are broken in today's meta, that they are Lobot and the Ugnaught. They are always in winning squads.

If you run a playgroup and you are finding Vsets hard to swallow, I have a suggestion which you might like to consider. Something that the Vsets have done excellently is provide awesome options for Tier 2 squads and the like. There are so many fun things you can try! I think of fun additions to the game like Niles Ferrier and OOM-9, pieces that perhaps lack the monstrous Tier 1 power, but add some great options for more "casual" players. If you took the Top 20 pieces of each set, you're still left with 200-odd other pieces that will add hugely to your causal games. I encourage you to have a look. Here's how:

You could do one of two things: firstly, head to BlooMilk (well, you're actually already here!) and using the player ratings to filter out the top lot of characters. You could pick a rating value and, for example say, take out every piece with a rating of 8.0 or higher. That way, you'll be able to get rid of any pieces that might cause you any controversy. (I have always wanted to run a 6.5 Tournament... that is, everyone must make the best squad they can with characters rated 6.5 or lower on BlooMilk... awesome fun!) You could also look to include WotC pieces in that too, if you liked.

The other thing you could do is to sit down with you group over a series of nights and, one set at a time, vote on pieces to exclude from your game. That would be one) an excellent way of veto'ing pieces that would give your group any negative play experiences, two) having them vote on it gives power across your group, and three) gives you the excellent opportunity to discuss the values of certain pieces and understand that cards and abilities. The result will be a strong united playgroup, using the best of what has come out for your group. If you didn't want to have to introduce 200-new characters all at once, perhaps add a set a month (depending on how often you play).

I recently had the privilege of bring a whole playgroup into line with Vset characters. The Pulsar playgroup in Wellington, NZ, had played and supported the game from the get go. They, however, hadn't kept up with the changes in the game since the introduction of Vsets and didn't have access to any of the pieces. Over a process of about a year, I went in to meet with them and begin the process of integrating Vset characters into their game. It is pretty weird to have a guy show up into your playgroup and say "hey, here's 200 new pieces that are what we play. You should too," so I had to build with them slowly and allow them to see what Vsets were about. It started with me playing in their local tournaments with their rules (WotC only pieces) before I was able to give them the Vsets and start those conversations. It was a slow process, allowing them to ask questions and to even say "this pieces is too strong!" and the like, and getting them into it slowly. Now, the Pulsar guys play Vsets and love their addition to the game. It's meant that they can still continue to support the game they love but that there is always something new for them to try. The game is no longer stagnant for them, it's continually evolving. They now come out to our tournaments and run Vset pieces comfortably, but still feel like they are their own group and have the freedom to do what they like.

That's it, I think. I've been reading through this thread this morning and wanted to add this to the conversation. I've said "I" and "Me" a lot, but I do feel confident that everything I have said here could be backed up by any of the Save11 group. We are 30-40 strong AND GROWING! We play "competitive" and "casual" and sometimes both at the same time. We feel that there are no broken pieces, only really good ones, and feel that it is still the player and their tactical approach to the game that wins.

"Mauri ora, mauri mate" is a saying in Maori (one of New Zealand's official languages) where "mauri" (mow-ree) is a life force and "ora" (or-ra) is to be alive and healthy. "Mate" (mah-teh) is death. You would say "mauri ora" to someone if you wanted to wish them well, that their life force is ever present in their life. I've added "mauri mate" to say that the 'life force' is present in life and in death, which is the closest way in Maori that I have found that says "May the Force be with you".

Mauri ora to you all, my SWM whanau ("Far-no" or family) and mauri ora, mauri mate!