|
Corbeau posted:T-65 X-Wing Only If only they'd actually put the ship names on for all the ships. There's going to have to be something really janky to stop T70s from using any T65 fix. Probably 'must not have tech slot'.
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 21:51 |
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:If only they'd actually put the ship names on for all the ships. There's going to have to be something really janky to stop T70s from using any T65 fix. Probably 'must not have tech slot'. They should have used the ship icon from the lower left of the pilot cards when describing specific ships on upgrade cards. Not that it matters now, but they already were using the upgrade icons, so there's really no reason they couldn't have.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
Devlan Mud posted:They should have used the ship icon from the lower left of the pilot cards when describing specific ships on upgrade cards. Not that it matters now, but they already were using the upgrade icons, so there's really no reason they couldn't have. That would be so loving easy to misinterpret given how similar some of them are. I know I wouldn't know offhand which TIE Fighter was being referred to or which x-wing just by the image.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:If only they'd actually put the ship names on for all the ships. There's going to have to be something really janky to stop T70s from using any T65 fix. Probably 'must not have tech slot'. "X-wing only, non T-70 X-wing only" would be a bit ugly but it would be better than some rube goldberg mechanics imo. thespaceinvader posted:That would be so loving easy to misinterpret given how similar some of them are. I know I wouldn't know offhand which TIE Fighter was being referred to or which x-wing just by the image. Yeah, it's just about okay with the upgrade slots because there aren't that many of them, but there are too many ships for using icons to be good there. (since doing the reverse lookup on an icon is a real pain in the rear end) Warmachine uses icons for a lot of the special abilities and it's pretty annoying to do the lookup if you don't have the card library app to do it for you. Jeb Bush 2012 fucked around with this message at 23:45 on Feb 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:That would be so loving easy to misinterpret given how similar some of them are. I know I wouldn't know offhand which TIE Fighter was being referred to or which x-wing just by the image. I'm guessing if we had been paying closer attention to those symbols for the past few years the game has been out, and if FFG designed them for looking different, that wouldn't have been an issue. Regardless, it's not happening, I just think it would have been a better way to label particular ships in card texts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
The T-70 is technically part of a different faction, so "Rebel Alliance X-wing only" might still work.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
T-65 X-wing only. It's not difficult. Royal Guard TIE equivalent would be funny for a couple games and then just boring. There are exactly three modifications that X-wings want to take, and they are Guidance Chips if you're using a torpedo, and Integrated Astromech if you're not, and Engine Upgrade if you can't handle the dial as is. If you want more shields fly a T-70 for cheaper than a shield upgrade. If you want more hull fly a T-70 and get the shields for cheaper than a hull upgrade. If you want boost, fly a T-70 and get boost for cheaper than an Engine Upgrade. Targeting computer is utterly useless. Can't take Autothrusters unless you take Engine Upgrade, and then you're spending six points to be a babby T-70. The end result is you take Guidance Chips and IA every game and there's no reason to ever take anything else. Two EPTs would be broken as poo poo, because then you can take something like Expose and Opportunist on Wedge. It's 8 points, sure, but you're also shooting six dice at range 1 with a primary, and if you bring Jan suddenly you're making a six dice primary at range 3. Or VI and Predator for a more reasonable and still utterly insane combination. More Astromechs is probably the easiest fix. The Rebel ones pretty much suck with a few exceptions (R2-D2, R5-P9, R3-A2, and R2 Astromech) and 75% of the ones worth taking are unique. Give me an Astromech that reads "At the start of the Combat Phase, if you have no stress tokens you may receive one stress token to assign an evade token to your ship" or "Once per round when you are declared the target of an attack, you may assign one of your stress tokens to the attacker if that ship is within range 1-2" or "At the start of the End Phase, you may remove one of your stress tokens to regain a shield point (up to your maximum shield value)" or "Once per turn, when you are dealt a face down damage card as the result of an attack, you may acquire a target lock on the attacker" or "When attacking, you may spend a target lock and focus token in order to cancel one of the defender's evade results." The possibilities are there (and that last one would be loving amazing), just waiting to be realized.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Chill, you are a cool dude but this is super loving annoying. If you don't want to talk strats that's fair enough, but don't start discussing things and then go "well my pal PAUL HEAVER". It's just obnoxious. Huh I thought I responded to the last point when someone else brought it up but I guess not. The basic heuristic of do this all the time is fine and there are the corner cases when it doesn't hold. Still, IMO it's a lot better to state it as an ironclad general rule that is sometimes broken (once the questioner gets why) rather than stick to a "well it depends" answer all the time. I personally find the latter annoying because it doesn't answer anything. Chill la Chill fucked around with this message at 00:06 on Feb 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
Strobe posted:T-65 X-wing only. It's not difficult. Well, except that T65 isn't actually written on the original x-wing cards, and this is the game where they had to FAQ the fact that Vader's TIE Advanced X1 counts as being able to equip TIE Advanced Only stuff. E: the obvious solutions would be a Chaardan-style -points Torpedo, and a title, and I fully expect to see one or both of those things in Rebel Veterans. HOw they make it not equippable for the T70 is the issue. And you can say all you want about 'just take the T70 for cheaper than $thing on the T65', but that doesn't let you put Wedge or Luke or Biggs or Hobbie or etc etc etc in a decent X-Wing. It's grand for the generics though. E: it also doesn't help all the people who... you know, own a bunch of T65s and would like to play them rather than replace them. thespaceinvader fucked around with this message at 00:08 on Feb 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Well, except that T65 isn't actually written on the original x-wing cards, and this is the game where they had to FAQ the fact that Vader's TIE Advanced X1 counts as being able to equip TIE Advanced Only stuff. This is literally why the FAQ exists. It's easier to say "T-65 X-wing only" (and much simpler as soon as printing actually happens) than it is to say "X-wing only. non T-70 X-wing only."
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
Strobe posted:This is literally why the FAQ exists. It's easier to say "T-65 X-wing only" (and much simpler as soon as printing actually happens) than it is to say "X-wing only. non T-70 X-wing only." Except printing something you immediately have to FAQ is dumb as gently caress when you could have just... printed something that is clear on the card, even if it's a bit janky.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Huh I thought I responded to the last point when someone else brought it up but I guess not. The basic heuristic of do this all the time is fine and there are the corner cases when it doesn't hold. Still, IMO it's a lot better to state it as a general rule that is sometimes broken (once the questioner gets why) rather than stick to a "well it depends" answer all the time. I personally find the latter annoying because it doesn't answer anything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:08
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Except printing something you immediately have to FAQ is dumb as gently caress when you could have just... printed something that is clear on the card, even if it's a bit janky. Correcting mistakes from prior printings isn't dumb. We've had similar rulings about what constitutes a TIE Fighter as recently as the Gozanti and Youngster. Having circuitous, janky text on cards doesn't help.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:Huh I thought I responded to the last point when someone else brought it up but I guess not. The basic heuristic of do this all the time is fine and there are the corner cases when it doesn't hold. Still, IMO it's a lot better to state it as an ironclad general rule that is sometimes broken (once the questioner gets why) rather than stick to a "well it depends" answer all the time. I personally find the latter annoying because it doesn't answer anything. Well, sure, but how many people in this thread only say "Well it depends" and don't go into further detail?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:22
|
|
|
Strobe posted:Correcting mistakes from prior printings isn't dumb. We've had similar rulings about what constitutes a TIE Fighter as recently as the Gozanti and Youngster. Having circuitous, janky text on cards doesn't help. We haven't actually, we've had some emails from the devs. There's not been a formally issued clarification on that point. There's a formal rule about what constitutes a TIE Fighter for the purposes of equipping upgrade cards and that's *exactly the rule that's causing this discussion*, since to fix the T65 without letting the T70 use it, you'd need some way of blocking it from the T70 or not saying 'X-Wing Only' as the restriction. I'd be perfectly happy with them issuing an erratum that basically says 'the following ships' names should be 'T65 X-Wing'' (and 'the following ships' names should be 'TIE L/N Fighter'' for that matter) and then correcting future reprints of them - but I doubt they will, since they've proven very unwilling to errata poor design choices before. They could have just errated the Advanced, but they instead issued fix cards for it. Same for the A-Wing, same for the TIE Interceptor. This is a game with a whole host of underpowered or slightly janky content, but very, very few errata. Decloak, Tactician, and a number of EPTs that went from 'as a red manoeuvre' to 'as a white manoeuvre then take a stress'. They haven't even amended Vader, and that could easily have been fixed in a reprint. I dunno, I could see them going either way, and either way would work and wouldn't bother me in particular - but I know which I'd prefer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:24
|
|
|
I personally don't think it would be the end of the world if the T-70s got buffed as a result of buffing T-65s, as well; both ships could use some action economy, to be frank. Also, someone already posted the most elegant solution to the X-Wing "problem," and that's to print "You may only equip this upgrade if you have no (tech slot icon) in your upgrade bar." Bam. Done. We already have similar language for when you can equip upgrades w/r/t to missile and torpedo slots, so this doesn't feel like it would be that difficult to accomplish. Listening to the Scum and Villainy podcast, it was interesting to hear Heaver's take on T-70s (he also thinks that besides Poe, "Red Ace" is the most playable of the bunch, and he doesn't use "Red Ace," so I guess that should tell you what he thinks of non-Poe T-70s) and on his Boba Fett (which he similarly does not think of as meta-warping in any sense of the word, despite the insane reaction from FFG's forums et al) - I think the example he gave was literally "I hate Engine Upgrade on large-base ships, Boba kills Engine Upgrades on large-base ships." Looking to practice more POW tomorrow at GA potentially, or at least talk shop with anyone who has experience with the list or against the list. Store Champs on Saturday and I'd like at least a ruler. For the record, "Captain Yorr's Ruse Cruise" wound up winning the name-the-squad vote. I wonder if it would be in poor taste to select the rock with the ballsack, the middle finger rock, and the Wario mustache rock as my obstacle choices.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
Hadn't thought of Boba killing EU. Goes to show I guess how PHeaver knows what he's doing more than Us Plebs. Because thinking about it, my pet hate build (VI Chiraneau Palp/Gunner/EU) loses a lot more if you take off EU than if you take off Palp... And yeah, Poe and Red Ace are the only two unique T70s I see as being really competitive. Ello is nice I guess but his ability isn't astounding, so he mostly winds up as a pilot skill/EPT carrier if he gets used at all. I should probably listen to Scum and Villainy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:Hadn't thought of Boba killing EU. Goes to show I guess how PHeaver knows what he's doing more than Us Plebs. Because thinking about it, my pet hate build (VI Chiraneau Palp/Gunner/EU) loses a lot more if you take off EU than if you take off Palp... At the risk of sounding like a jerk, Paul doesn't offer a ton of insight in the episode I listened to - he's mostly very chill, reserved, and affable. S&V as a whole seems very... weird? Like the quality of analysis is very up and down. Sometimes I'll listen to it and think to myself, like, oh, poo poo, I hadn't even considered that, dang. Most of the time it's just weird in-jokes and forced memes and FFG's forums-esque game analysis and such. Part of the issue I've had in trying to find a compelling X-Wing TMG podcast is that none basically exist. S&V is the best of the bunch from my experience and is very middling. YouTube choices are similarly limited (lol MWG). The best stuff I've been able to glean from the internet is either on forums or just by watching high-level players play on Vassal. Like, Heaver thinking "Red Ace" is next best after Poe is cool but it essentially just confirms stuff we already thought we "knew," right?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
Pretty much I guess? I dunno it's gone midnight. My biggest learning in X-Wing was watching commentated games on youtube from championships. I've picked up comparatively little from the internet except a couple of stock builds, and even then I think I probably would have pegged to those myself.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
X-wing's greatest secret is that there is no Magic Build hidden in the game that synergizes with a stupid number of cards. There are good builds, and these are generally obvious to anyone who understands the underlying mechanics, and there are bad builds, usually obvious to the same. There's not a sure fire tip that works on every game, there's not a universal unbeatable strategy. If you're looking for incredible insight you're not going to find it on a podcast, guts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
Yeah i think I remember saying when you first asked that there aren't any insightful podcasts 
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
Strobe posted:Two EPTs would be broken as poo poo, because then you can take something like Expose and Opportunist on Wedge. It's 8 points, sure, but you're also shooting six dice at range 1 with a primary, and if you bring Jan suddenly you're making a six dice primary at range 3. Or VI and Predator for a more reasonable and still utterly insane combination. Reminder that expose becomes *worse* compared to focus or TL as your number of red dice increases. "Six dice" sounds cool but it's a lot worse than "five dice with TL or focus" which is in turn Jeb Bush 2012 fucked around with this message at 01:43 on Feb 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:38
|
|
|
You can still bring Jan or Garvin or Kyle. The point was that double EPTs on an X-wing is ridiculous in a way that double EPTs on A-wings isn't, both because A-wings don't have a native PS 9 and only two attack dice. X-wings have the EHP to take a hit without crumpling (but not much more than that) and two EPTs gives them stupid painful punch.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:46
|
|
|
Strobe posted:You can still bring Jan or Garvin or Kyle. The point was that double EPTs on an X-wing is ridiculous in a way that double EPTs on A-wings isn't, both because A-wings don't have a native PS 9 and only two attack dice. X-wings have the EHP to take a hit without crumpling (but not much more than that) and two EPTs gives them stupid painful punch. Honestly, it probably wouldn't be that bad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
Strobe posted:You can still bring Jan or Garvin or Kyle. The point was that double EPTs on an X-wing is ridiculous in a way that double EPTs on A-wings isn't, both because A-wings don't have a native PS 9 and only two attack dice. X-wings have the EHP to take a hit without crumpling (but not much more than that) and two EPTs gives them stupid painful punch. Maybe there's some broken pair of EPTs to take on an X-Wing, but Expose and Opportunist is not that pair.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:58
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:Honestly, it probably wouldn't be that bad.  Maybe not. The combination of 3 attack dice and two EPTs seems silly good, though. PTL and Wingman flying in formation. Predator and Outmaneuver on Wedge. Hell, any combination of PtL/Outmaneuver/Predator/Opportunist on Wedge.Don't get me wrong if it happened I'd be all over it, but I don't think it's a good fix for them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
FFG tends not to double-dip on design ideas like that, but if it did happen the proliferation of Veteran Instincts on X-Wings would be more my concern than any gimmick combination (just like how it's gone with A-Wings). I don't think the extra attack die or extra EHP really skew potential double EPTs away from the A-Wing status quo of VI and something (although I don't think it'd be VI and PtL).
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
The text posted says if the pilot already has an EPT. Would it work with the EPT astro?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:That's fair. I figured it out. The way I teach people the basics of this game, or even any game, or any unfamiliar deck in magic, or whatever, is that I stick to telling them the ironclad general rule. Until they run into a situation where it might not hold true, ask me about it, and then I expand the rules. This is probably not the best way to do it in a forum, but I find its the best way to teach people in person. I get annoyed by front loading the explanation because a lot of it gets lost, but that's probably the best method in a forum style. However, I post in a forum the way I normally speak. So aside from rare posts like these, I rarely get 3 sentences in Chill la Chill fucked around with this message at 04:41 on Feb 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 03:50
|
|
|
3 blue novice t70s with r2 and ia plus Roark made top 4 locally.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 03:57
|
|
|
That's awesome, I want to see more lists with generics!
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 04:02
|
|
|
Strobe posted:X-wing's greatest secret is that there is no Magic Build hidden in the game that synergizes with a stupid number of cards. There are good builds, and these are generally obvious to anyone who understands the underlying mechanics, and there are bad builds, usually obvious to the same. There's not a sure fire tip that works on every game, there's not a universal unbeatable strategy. One thing that strikes me about good builds is that they tend to be uncomplicated. It's easy when starting out to get caught up in action chains and one ship passing actions/tokens to combo this or that ability, because a lot of pilots and upgrades give you the impression you can pull it off. Then you lose a ship/bump/take some stress and it all crashes down, leaving you wondering where it went wrong. Top squads tend to just be piles of good stuff that can function relatively independently, from what I can see.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 04:56
|
|
|
Otisburg posted:3 blue novice t70s with r2 and ia plus Roark made top 4 locally. TLT Roark?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 05:06
|
|
|
The XXX list made a triumphant return at league tonight though part of the success came from my opponent. He had a 64 point (!) Bossk along with Talonbane. He slow rolled Bossk and tried to flank with Talonbane. I feinted him and turned into Talonbane when he approached. Wes and Wedge were both range 1 and Luke was range 2. Except that Wes landed on an asteroid by the barest of margins and Talonbane (he took initiative) managed to get two hits and a crit through onto Wedge. The crit was the one that denied your next attack. Instead of a three ship volley to decimate Talonbane, I got one hit through with Luke.  Wedge couldn't escape Bossk's arc even at speed 4 though he managed to survive the shots. Tried a three hard next turn but was just barely in arc and ate one more die than I had hull and evade for; Wedge never got to shoot. Things went better after this as I managed to double stress Talonbane on a turn where he was already stressed (I don't remember why) then blew him out next turn. Through some bad asteroid maneuvering, the YV-666 ended up in front of Luke and Wes. Wes have him a critical stress hit; the only way he could survive more than two turns was a hard 3 to the left; my opponent, through his inexperience with big ships, chose a1 bank and flew off the board. I mean, he was doomed with those two ships behind him but still. RIP Wedge. Speaking of, I gave Wedge R4-D6 as a test; it ended up not mattering because the only round I could use it, it would have had the same effect as using my focus token except I would have gained a couple stress and kept a focus that I wouldn't have been able to use anyway. Admiral Joeslop fucked around with this message at 05:38 on Feb 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 05:35
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:TLT Roark? That very Roark.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 05:36
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:I've picked up comparatively little from the internet except a couple of stock builds, and even then I think I probably would have pegged to those myself. This is generally the impression I've had since starting the game. X-Wing is an amazingly easy game to pick up, but because the crux of it is outthinking/outbluffing/outballsing your opponent, the potential for ~playmaking~ and strategic "but he knows I know he knows this dial" nonsense is off the charts. X-Wing, to me, is mostly fun on the play; listbuilding is largely perfunctory, once you identify what your strengths and weaknesses are as a player (I am a whore for Action Economy™ and will give preferential treatment to dicehax even if more purely efficient things exist; I will generally make at least one, usually two plays a game that are charitably "high risk, high reward" decisions; etc.) the list-building part of the game is just, How do I capitalize on that? Strobe posted:If you're looking for incredible insight you're not going to find it on a podcast, guts. A lot of what I mean when I say "insight" is "explicating your reasoning behind making the decisions you made at the points that you did." Lists are the least insightful part of any analysis, which is why I think someone who is new to the game (not just me, basically anyone new who does a lot of wangs) can still provide relatively decent in-a-vacuum analysis of current ships and upgrades. We may not agree on whether or not Boba Fett poses a significant cost:benefit risk to Palpshuttles, but we can generally agree that it only works in limited scenarios (AHM gimmicks) or after you've already chewed through shields anyway. Whether or not I think it's "good" or "bad" is basically not even relevant, once we agree on how this stuff works within the context of the current state of the game. I learned a lot playing in Vassal lately just by watching people better than I am play X-Wing, and then trying to analyze why they made the choices they made at the times that they did. It's still a dice game, and sometimes you'll lose even if you make the "right" play, but identifying the "right" play is where insight would be impactful. Sadly... alg posted:Yeah i think I remember saying when you first asked that there aren't any insightful podcasts ... this is basically accurate. S&V, which is basically the best of a bad situation, spends a lot of time in many episodes talking about precisely the kind of low-content bullshit analysis that I tend to post ("Omega Leader Still Good, News At 11") in a fraction of the time. I'm not going to claim that what I throw up on SA is of the same quality as a well-executed podcast, but I'm also not not going to claim that, either. It makes me wonder as to whether or not it would be worth it to jump into that market, but I'm an idiot and I don't think I have the know-how to do something like that. Like, a good example of what I'm talking about is the recent CLC mini-derail. CLC is evidently pretty good at this X-Wing thing. What little strategic discussion I see of Chill's on SA I tend to disagree with, often vehemently (EU on Vader being bad, always taking/giving initiative w/r/t to Whisper/Soontir). A large part of this, I have to reckon, is because I just don't know why those decisions get made. "Shoot before Whisper, move after Soontir" makes sense, but it isn't a 100% do this or you're poo poo thing to me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 06:08
|
|
|
Otisburg posted:That very Roark. I don't know what the gently caress is up with the HWKs but they're loving everywhere at Atomic Empire, I honestly am wondering if there's some secret Stark technology that got discovered that I am just too stupid to comprehend, because I just cannot bring myself to like that ship or any of its pilots in either faction
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 06:16
|
|
|
So is there a known issue with new pegs? I just realized that there's a bunch of pegs I now have that can't fit old ships. I'll have to attempt to quarantine them but they only seem to fit the T-70.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 06:25
|
|
|
I want to fail with imp firesprays some more. The only advantage it has over similar role ships empire side is a large chunk of health and a crew slot. Kallus on a generic seems reasonable? 35 points, the fewer ships your opponent has the longer you live by a dramatic amount, and you can evade on top of that. Need a way to mod offensive dice though, just Kallus isn't going to be enough I'm sure.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 06:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 21:51 |
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:So is there a known issue with new pegs? I just realized that there's a bunch of pegs I now have that can't fit old ships. I'll have to attempt to quarantine them but they only seem to fit the T-70. Yes. Wave 7 pegs and peginas are bigger. T-70s and /FO's are too loose to pick up by the model if you try to put them on wave 1-6 pegs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 06:51
|
|