Jump to content



Photo

Z-Swarm the new swarm meta?


  • Please log in to reply
195 replies to this topic

#41 Emperor Palpatine

Emperor Palpatine

    Member

  • Members
  • 24 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 06:05 AM

You don't need to be a statistician to appreciate that odds are calculable and give you a good idea as to the probability of doing a certain thing. What people are probably more upset about (which may be a strong word, but I'm not an English major) is how you are dismissing math as a factor when math is the core of how dice work. You need to trust those who have more education and experience in this matter. I've spent seven years in a university learning about math and science, and believe me when I tell you that the numbers don't agree with your assessment of the Z-95, and they aren't something you should brush aside. It shows a staggering lack of respect for the most fundamental of all the sciences, a science that has allowed the construction of enormous skyscrapers, 300-meter aircraft carriers, supersonic planes, 200mph cars, and other wonders of the modern world without needing to go with gut feelings or trial and error and possibly getting people killed in the process.

 

I know you don't care about the "maths" as you call it, but please stop disrespecting the hard work done by people to try and estimate the effectiveness of new units and find out what they're best suited for.

1. I am well educated thank you. You have never met me so how can you make comments about my standard of education?

 

2. Saying I don't have much interest in the maths isn't disrespecting anybody. It says what it means, I don't like the game being reduced to statistics as I play it in a non tournament setting, that's my choice, I don't criticise those who see it differently. 

 

3. People getting killed building Skyscrapers? You are equating people dying with a game pushing pieces of plastic around? Are you serious? Really?? You weren't to know this of course but I'll be sure to mention this to my wife when I go to her resting place later. She died from a leukaemia so rare that only 400 adults in the entire country get it in a year, she was just 47, we had been married 18 months when it came, 11 months later she was called Home so you will forgive me if I don't put much faith in science, statistics and maths when it comes to dying or relate pieces of plastic to it! Trust me on this, it isn't the same.

 

4. I don't "need" to do anything, this is an internet forum where people could be anybody and say any old guff. Amateurs built the Ark, professionals built the Titanic. I will qualify that with the remark that this seems to be a forum full of decent, helpful people who give sensible opinions in a polite way most of the time but nevertheless I don't "need" to follow anyone's advice or views thanks.

 

5. If people put hard work into a hobby then good for them but I didn't ask them to. I hope they got something out of it and they enjoyed it and I respect the positive use of their time, don't ask me to fall at their feet in gratitude for something I never requested though.

 

6. Often the problem with internet wargame forums is somebody gives an opinion that differs from the majority view and everyone piles in and whilst not being rude often they aren't too polite about it either. It usually ends up in new people saying "sod this" and not coming back. If it happens repeatedly over time the forum stagnates into a bunch of people agreeing with each other and eventually peters out. X-Wing is the new "big thing" at the moment. I've been a wargamer for 33 years, long enough to know it won't be that forever so to keep it going we need to be friendly and not confrontational.


Edited by Emperor Palpatine, 12 July 2014 - 06:22 AM.

  • Lucky Loser likes this

#42 Millennium Falsehood

Millennium Falsehood

    Member

  • Members
  • 907 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 06:28 AM

 

You don't need to be a statistician to appreciate that odds are calculable and give you a good idea as to the probability of doing a certain thing. What people are probably more upset about (which may be a strong word, but I'm not an English major) is how you are dismissing math as a factor when math is the core of how dice work. You need to trust those who have more education and experience in this matter. I've spent seven years in a university learning about math and science, and believe me when I tell you that the numbers don't agree with your assessment of the Z-95, and they aren't something you should brush aside. It shows a staggering lack of respect for the most fundamental of all the sciences, a science that has allowed the construction of enormous skyscrapers, 300-meter aircraft carriers, supersonic planes, 200mph cars, and other wonders of the modern world without needing to go with gut feelings or trial and error and possibly getting people killed in the process.

 

I know you don't care about the "maths" as you call it, but please stop disrespecting the hard work done by people to try and estimate the effectiveness of new units and find out what they're best suited for.

1. I am well educated thank you. You have never met me so how can you make comments about my standard of education?

 

2. Saying I don't have much interest in the maths isn't disrespecting anybody. It says what it means, I don't like the game being reduced to statistics as I play it in a non tournament setting, that's my choice, I don't criticise those who see it differently. 

 

3. People getting killed building Skyscrapers? You are equating people dying with a game pushing pieces of plastic around? Are you serious? Really?? You weren't to know this of course but I'll be sure to mention this to my wife when I go to her resting place later. She died from a leukaemia so rare that only 400 adults in the entire country get it in a year, she was just 47, we had been married 18 months when it came, 11 months later she was called Home so you will forgive me if I don't put much faith in science, statistics and maths when it comes to dying or relate pieces of plastic to it! Trust me on this, it isn't the same.

 

4. I don't "need" to do anything, let alone trust an internet forum where people could be anybody and say anything. Amateurs built the Ark, professionals built the Titanic. I will qualify that with the remark that this seems to be a forum full of decent, helpful people who give sensible opinions but nevertheless I don't "need" to follow anyone's advice or views thanks.

 

5. If people put hard work into a hobby then good for them but I didn't ask them to. I hope they got something out of it and they enjoyed it and I respect the positive use of their time, don't ask me to fall at their feet in gratitude for something I never requested though.

 

1. I never said anything about your education, but the fact that you dismiss math as a factor clearly indicated to me that you're a liberal arts major of some kind. The kind of math involved with this sort of thing is stuff that most people in the sciences learn in the first couple years of basic courses, so it shouldn't have been something you'd dismiss if you were a science major of some kind.

 

2. Having no interest in math and no interest in the work done by people to generate estimates are two different things.

 

3. *sigh* Now I *really* call your educational level in question. Have you never taken a logic or debate course? Because that's a red herring. I mentioned that to drive home my point that math is incredibly important and that you dismiss it entirely.

 

4. If you were educated enough to know the math, you wouldn't need to trust them. You'd know it from the math itself.

 

5. I'm not. I'm telling you to respect the amount of work they do and what it took to accomplish their goals.


Edited by Millennium Falsehood, 12 July 2014 - 06:32 AM.

  • Hinnyboy and Hobojebus like this

Rebel Alliance: 7 X-wings, 4 Y-wings, 4 A-wings, 1 YT-1300, 2 HWK-290s, 3 B-wings, 1 GR-75, 1 CR-90

Galactic Empire: 6 TIE Fighters, 1 TIE Advanced, 2 Firespray-31s, 1 Lambda class Shuttle, 3 TIE Bombers

 

"Main characters defeat a Star Trek villain? Give 'em a Star Wars celebration!"


#43 WonderWAAAGH

WonderWAAAGH

    Oasean Ork

  • Members
  • 2,332 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 06:30 AM

You just make it sound like you've made up your mind and can't be budged on the issue.


It seems like I wasn't very far off the mark.
  • Disgruntled, Hinnyboy, godofcheese and 2 others like this

It's not easy being green.


#44 Ravncat

Ravncat

    Member

  • Members
  • 619 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 06:35 AM

 
1) The Z-95's dial is actually very average, slightly different from an X-Wing's, but no worse. Only three Rebel ships have a 1-hard maneuver (one of which is red, and another you're likely to pay over 42 points for), so that's not really a mark against the Z-95. Similarly, only two Rebel ships have a 5-straight. It does share a 3-K with both the A-Wing and YT. Again, the Z-95's dial is very average, but I count that as a good thing - especially since you're only paying 12 points for it.
 


I'll go out on a limb and challenge the assertion that it's no worse than an xwing' dial, and cite the 2 banks being green, over the 1 banks being green in conjunction with the 3 k turn. This makes the 95 more aggressive in range positioning out of a k turn, if you want to destress for an action. As the bank maneuvers after a k turn can be useful, but the 2 banks coupled with the shorter k put you a lot closer than you might like to be. The xwing will be further back, and have a little bit more time, using the 4k with the 1 bank for angle adjustment.

I can see there bing a counter argument based on play style perhaps, or that the z's weaker gun may merit a more aggressive positioning. Interestingly, I think the 2 banks as green, mean that the z flies better with an e wing companion....

#45 WonderWAAAGH

WonderWAAAGH

    Oasean Ork

  • Members
  • 2,332 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 06:39 AM

I've found that 3-Ks are generally more advantageous than 4s, but that's just my personal experience. I don't think there's a hard and fast rule for which is better, 3 or 4.

It's not easy being green.


#46 Joe Boss Red Seven

Joe Boss Red Seven

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,672 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 06:40 AM

I'm gonna go get my six wonderful Z's and hold them and tell them how much I love them, then I'm gonna set 'em up on my table and and just look at them and smile for a bit...

<_<


Edited by Joe Boss Red Seven, 12 July 2014 - 06:45 AM.

  • Rob Jedi, z0m4d and Sir Osis of Liver like this

"There Is No Such Thing As Luck." BLACK SIX RED SEVEN

 

ALLIANCE: [A-WING: 3] [B-WING: 3] [E-WING: 3] [HWK-290: 2] [X-WING: 6] [Y-WING: 6] [Z-95: 6] [YT-1300: 1] *EPIC* [TANTIVE IV: 1] [GR-75: 2*GROUND FORCES* [T-47 AIR SPEEDER: 11] JEDI: [DELTA-7: 1] [ETA-2: 4] EMPIRE: [TIE ADVANCED: 1] [TIE BOMBER: 3] [TIE DEFENDER: 3] [TIE FIGHTER: 5] [TIE INTERCEPTOR: 6] [TIE PHANTOM: 3] [FIRESPRAY-31: 1] [SHUTTLE-LAMBDA: 1] *GROUND FORCES* [AT-AT: 4] [AT-ST: 6] SITH: [ETA-2: 3] [INFILTRATOR: 1] [INTIMIDATOR: 1]

 


#47 Millennium Falsehood

Millennium Falsehood

    Member

  • Members
  • 907 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 06:40 AM

It's something that is a matter of personal taste, really.


Rebel Alliance: 7 X-wings, 4 Y-wings, 4 A-wings, 1 YT-1300, 2 HWK-290s, 3 B-wings, 1 GR-75, 1 CR-90

Galactic Empire: 6 TIE Fighters, 1 TIE Advanced, 2 Firespray-31s, 1 Lambda class Shuttle, 3 TIE Bombers

 

"Main characters defeat a Star Trek villain? Give 'em a Star Wars celebration!"


#48 Joe Boss Red Seven

Joe Boss Red Seven

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,672 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 06:42 AM

I've found that 3-Ks are generally more advantageous than 4s, but that's just my personal experience. I don't think there's a hard and fast rule for which is better, 3 or 4.

 

You big green dummy!

:rolleyes: 

 

Everybody knows that a 4K is better... because TIE Defenders have a white 4K!!!

:D


  • VorackTheGrim likes this

"There Is No Such Thing As Luck." BLACK SIX RED SEVEN

 

ALLIANCE: [A-WING: 3] [B-WING: 3] [E-WING: 3] [HWK-290: 2] [X-WING: 6] [Y-WING: 6] [Z-95: 6] [YT-1300: 1] *EPIC* [TANTIVE IV: 1] [GR-75: 2*GROUND FORCES* [T-47 AIR SPEEDER: 11] JEDI: [DELTA-7: 1] [ETA-2: 4] EMPIRE: [TIE ADVANCED: 1] [TIE BOMBER: 3] [TIE DEFENDER: 3] [TIE FIGHTER: 5] [TIE INTERCEPTOR: 6] [TIE PHANTOM: 3] [FIRESPRAY-31: 1] [SHUTTLE-LAMBDA: 1] *GROUND FORCES* [AT-AT: 4] [AT-ST: 6] SITH: [ETA-2: 3] [INFILTRATOR: 1] [INTIMIDATOR: 1]

 


#49 Ravncat

Ravncat

    Member

  • Members
  • 619 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 06:54 AM

It's not the three vs four k, it's the addition of the 2 banks being green, if you want to change angle after the k (and destress) with a z95 you have to com back pretty much to where you started the k turn. In several on v one dogfights vs a tie, I often wished that it had a green 1 bank over the 2.

It's ok though, it makes the ship handle differently and I'm already used to it, but I definitely believe that it's a slightly worse dial for it, though it can be advantageous in pursuit of another ship. Consider a z vs an x against a phantom, the extra distance will help have a wider area of arc to catch the phantom with. So as I mentioned, it may be to situational or play style dependent to objectively declare... Hence the bit about going out on a limb... It's not a super strong argument

#50 Emperor Palpatine

Emperor Palpatine

    Member

  • Members
  • 24 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 07:04 AM

 

 

You don't need to be a statistician to appreciate that odds are calculable and give you a good idea as to the probability of doing a certain thing. What people are probably more upset about (which may be a strong word, but I'm not an English major) is how you are dismissing math as a factor when math is the core of how dice work. You need to trust those who have more education and experience in this matter. I've spent seven years in a university learning about math and science, and believe me when I tell you that the numbers don't agree with your assessment of the Z-95, and they aren't something you should brush aside. It shows a staggering lack of respect for the most fundamental of all the sciences, a science that has allowed the construction of enormous skyscrapers, 300-meter aircraft carriers, supersonic planes, 200mph cars, and other wonders of the modern world without needing to go with gut feelings or trial and error and possibly getting people killed in the process.

 

I know you don't care about the "maths" as you call it, but please stop disrespecting the hard work done by people to try and estimate the effectiveness of new units and find out what they're best suited for.

1. I am well educated thank you. You have never met me so how can you make comments about my standard of education?

 

2. Saying I don't have much interest in the maths isn't disrespecting anybody. It says what it means, I don't like the game being reduced to statistics as I play it in a non tournament setting, that's my choice, I don't criticise those who see it differently. 

 

3. People getting killed building Skyscrapers? You are equating people dying with a game pushing pieces of plastic around? Are you serious? Really?? You weren't to know this of course but I'll be sure to mention this to my wife when I go to her resting place later. She died from a leukaemia so rare that only 400 adults in the entire country get it in a year, she was just 47, we had been married 18 months when it came, 11 months later she was called Home so you will forgive me if I don't put much faith in science, statistics and maths when it comes to dying or relate pieces of plastic to it! Trust me on this, it isn't the same.

 

4. I don't "need" to do anything, let alone trust an internet forum where people could be anybody and say anything. Amateurs built the Ark, professionals built the Titanic. I will qualify that with the remark that this seems to be a forum full of decent, helpful people who give sensible opinions but nevertheless I don't "need" to follow anyone's advice or views thanks.

 

5. If people put hard work into a hobby then good for them but I didn't ask them to. I hope they got something out of it and they enjoyed it and I respect the positive use of their time, don't ask me to fall at their feet in gratitude for something I never requested though.

 

1. I never said anything about your education, but the fact that you dismiss math as a factor clearly indicated to me that you're a liberal arts major of some kind. The kind of math involved with this sort of thing is stuff that most people in the sciences learn in the first couple years of basic courses, so it shouldn't have been something you'd dismiss if you were a science major of some kind.

 

2. Having no interest in math and no interest in the work done by people to generate estimates are two different things.

 

3. *sigh* Now I *really* call your educational level in question. Have you never taken a logic or debate course? Because that's a red herring. I mentioned that to drive home my point that math is incredibly important and that you dismiss it entirely.

 

4. If you were educated enough to know the math, you wouldn't need to trust them. You'd know it from the math itself.

 

5. I'm not. I'm telling you to respect the amount of work they do and what it took to accomplish their goals.

 

You know what, I give up. If it takes this level of debate just to make a comment about a ship it's really not worth the effort as far as I'm concerned. Your attitude to this is waaaaay too serious for me. If you think I need to attend a logic and debate course or be a science major to have a valid point of view then there's really no hope for this game long term. Sorry, but I was willing to listen to alternative viewpoints on the Z95 but I've lost interest now. Enjoy your stats and your tournament builds guys, looks like I came to the wrong place.

 

I wish you all the very best.


Edited by Emperor Palpatine, 12 July 2014 - 07:07 AM.

  • Lucky Loser likes this

#51 Millennium Falsehood

Millennium Falsehood

    Member

  • Members
  • 907 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 07:07 AM

Whatever. I don't have a serious attitude about X-wing. I do however have a serious attitude about math, and forgive me if I take offense at someone who doesn't treat it with the respect it deserves.


  • Hinnyboy and Hobojebus like this

Rebel Alliance: 7 X-wings, 4 Y-wings, 4 A-wings, 1 YT-1300, 2 HWK-290s, 3 B-wings, 1 GR-75, 1 CR-90

Galactic Empire: 6 TIE Fighters, 1 TIE Advanced, 2 Firespray-31s, 1 Lambda class Shuttle, 3 TIE Bombers

 

"Main characters defeat a Star Trek villain? Give 'em a Star Wars celebration!"


#52 Emperor Palpatine

Emperor Palpatine

    Member

  • Members
  • 24 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 07:16 AM

Whatever. I don't have a serious attitude about X-wing. I do however have a serious attitude about math, and forgive me if I take offense at someone who doesn't treat it with the respect it deserves.

 

Forget it mate, like I said, I've lost interest. Have a good day.



#53 WonderWAAAGH

WonderWAAAGH

    Oasean Ork

  • Members
  • 2,332 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 07:37 AM

You know what, I give up. If it takes this level of debate just to make a comment about a ship it's really not worth the effort as far as I'm concerned. Your attitude to this is waaaaay too serious for me. If you think I need to attend a logic and debate course or be a science major to have a valid point of view then there's really no hope for this game long term. Sorry, but I was willing to listen to alternative viewpoints on the Z95 but I've lost interest now. Enjoy your stats and your tournament builds guys, looks like I came to the wrong place.

I wish you all the very best.


I'm not sure what you thought was going to happen, considering the fact that you told us from the outset that you expected to be told that you're wrong. You're welcome to your opinions, of course, but "I'm not a tournament player" and "I think math ruins the game" are not valid reasons for disregarding factual data, whatever your experience might be.

Edited by WonderWAAAGH, 12 July 2014 - 07:37 AM.

  • Disgruntled, Hinnyboy, Hobojebus and 1 other like this

It's not easy being green.


#54 Dieter122

Dieter122

    Member

  • Members
  • 107 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 08:29 AM

Lots of bickering over a game.

Thought this thread was a discussion about XWing..

Nope.

#55 Aminar

Aminar

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,918 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 08:39 AM

Lots of bickering over a game.
Thought this thread was a discussion about XWing..
Nope.

It quite definitley was and is. Issue being one party decided ignoring the single greatest factor in game effectiveness(so far as ships are concerned) isn't a factor. That destroys the point of reasonable discussion.
Math is a part of X-Wing. Discussions of that math and its validity therein are discussions on X-Wing.
  • Hobojebus and Dieter122 like this

#56 That One Guy

That One Guy

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,262 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 08:43 AM

You don't need to be a statistician to appreciate that odds are calculable and give you a good idea as to the probability of doing a certain thing. 

You can, however, elect not to make statistical calculation factor in to your chosen method… like a certain space-faring rogue we all know.


  • oneway, mazz0 and Hobojebus like this

#57 Mikael Hasselstein

Mikael Hasselstein

    Member

  • Members
  • 781 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 09:11 AM

Hey guys,

 

I don't know if you failed to internalize what Emperor Palpatine just told us, but it's clear that he's had a major loss in his life that he disclosed to us. While that may not have any bearing on our subject matter, it does behoove us to be human beings for a moment and slow down the rhetoric.

 

 

I know you don't care about the "maths" as you call it, but please stop disrespecting the hard work done by people to try and estimate the effectiveness of new units and find out what they're best suited for.

1. I am well educated thank you. You have never met me so how can you make comments about my standard of education?

...

1. I never said anything about your education, but the fact that you dismiss math as a factor clearly indicated to me that you're a liberal arts major of some kind. The kind of math involved with this sort of thing is stuff that most people in the sciences learn in the first couple years of basic courses, so it shouldn't have been something you'd dismiss if you were a science major of some kind.

 

MF, my friend...

 

"Maths" is the British way of abbreviating 'mathematics', There's nothing wrong or uneducated about calling it that.

 

AND, flaming on the liberal arts as not being a school of disciplines that uses mathematics turns around the discussion of education on you. I teach social sciences under a 'College of Liberal Arts', and the idea that we don't use mathematics is preposterous. Statistical mathematics, our stock in trade in the social sciences, is precisely that branch of mathematics that grows out of the mathematics of probability. 

 

I've had more (and not enough) of that stuff in my long 'liberal arts' career

 

Also, check out what falls under 'Liberal Arts' for a moment. I do think I see 'mathematics' there.


  • Cremate, Syleh Forge, rym and 4 others like this

#58 MajorJuggler

MajorJuggler

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,848 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 09:18 AM

ive seen quite a few people here (mathhammers) say that the 95' is better per point cost than the tie.. there was an entire thread on it somewhere buried here on the forums. tie was 100% and the 95' was like 112% or 106% or something. in comparison a y wing was 88%.  

 

That's my thread here:

 

http://community.fan...ress/?p=1111620

 

The short summary is that 2 shields + 2 hull behind 2 agility is a hair more durable than 3 hull behind 3 agility, accounting for critical hits. Since the Z-95 gets +1PS, it's effective PS1 cost is 11.5, making it more cost efficient looking at just the naked ships. Howlrunner increases 2 base dice damage output by around 35%, which increases the ship's value by ~17%. So Howlrunner TIEs are still better than Z-95's, but once Howlrunner goes down....

 

I intend to also calculate the distribution for the number of hits required to destroy each ship, which should yield almost the same results. There could be a slight bias towards ships with less HP, since any extra damage done to them above and beyond their hull value doesn't actually count towards real damage, whereas it does in my numbers above.

 

Wave 4 Regionals results so far are bearing this out. Z-95's have essentially replaced vanilla X-wings as the successful filler ship of choice, especially in YT-1300 builds.


  • Mikael Hasselstein, z0m4d, Hobojebus and 1 other like this

#59 Mikael Hasselstein

Mikael Hasselstein

    Member

  • Members
  • 781 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 09:31 AM

Ah, I've been hoping you'd jump in.

 

I trust that you're just calculating the 2/2/2/2 against the 2/3/3/0. I would be entirely non-plussed (pun intended) if you had also come up for a way to factor the value of the TIE's superior movement dial. Is there even a way to do that, at all?


  • mazz0 likes this

#60 MajorJuggler

MajorJuggler

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,848 posts

Posted 12 July 2014 - 09:44 AM

Ah, I've been hoping you'd jump in.

 

I trust that you're just calculating the 2/2/2/2 against the 2/3/3/0. I would be entirely non-plussed (pun intended) if you had also come up for a way to factor the value of the TIE's superior movement dial. Is there even a way to do that, at all?

 

Yes, I am just comparing the stat line values for this discussion.

 

I do have a method of comparing dials, but it obviously doesn't affect the raw "jousting" (stat line) values. It's all in the thread that I linked, it's all explained if you want to take the time to get a handle on the underlying assumptions. In general, non stat line capabilities can still be valued pretty well when multiple ships have the same or similar functionality, because then you have a baseline and can check the results against reality. On the other extreme you have the TIE Phantom with a cloak action, which nobody is sure how to properly value yet. The dial in particular I break down into several categories of functionality:

  • tightest turn
  • shortest moves
  • longest moves
  • K-turn options
  • green stress removal
  • unique (currently only 0 move on Lambda)

Again - none of that affects the raw stat line calculations here. Just for kicks though here are the results from that thread. It needs some updating to include more info and wave 5, but is still very informative.

 

 

(boiler plate stuff, background in the "spoiler" tab below)

Spoiler

 

min, std. and max columns are to cover various meta environments, which changes the ship's underlying jousting value. TIE Fighters are used as the 100% reference point for all meta. 

 

Degrees of certainty refer to results in the "Total Efficiency" columns. The Jousting columns are all very high certainty.

 

Very High Degree of Certainty

 

                                         Jousting Efficiency           Total Efficiency      

Ship                            min           std.          max         min         std          max

TIE Fighter                   100.0%    100.0%   100.0%     100.0%   100.0%   100.0%
TIE Fighter + Howl        116.6%    117.1%   117.8%     116.6%    117.1%  117.8%
TIE Advanced               80.6%       80.7%      80.7%       80.9%     81.0%    81.0%
TIE Interceptor              88.3%      89.5%     91.0%         94.5%    95.8%     97.4%
TIE Interceptor + Howl  101.2%     103.2%   105.6%      106.3%   108.3%  110.9%
X-wing                           88.9%       91.8%     94.0%        94.1%     97.1%    99.4%
A-wing                          85.1%       85.1%      85.1%       89.5%      89.5%    89.5%
B-wing                           92.4%      97.2%      100.3%     100.0%   105.2%   108.5%
E-wing                           80.2%      81.4%     82.8%        89.2%     90.5%     92.1%
Z-95                             104.7%     106.6%   107.3%      108.5%   110.5%    111.2%
A-wing + Refit               96.4%       96.5%     96.5%        98.8%     98.9%      98.9%
 

High Degree of Certainty

TIE Bomber: requires ordnance to fill a useful role.

 

                                         Jousting Efficiency           Total Efficiency      

Ship                            min           std.          max         min         std          max

TIE Bomber                 95.8%      97.5%       98.2%       96.2%     97.9%     98.6%

 

 

Medium Degree of Certainty

Y-wing: turret on a 2 attack ship.

YT-1300: 360 degree primary weapon

Firespray: rear arc

 

                                         Jousting Efficiency           Total Efficiency      

Ship                            min           std.          max         min         std          max

Y-wing                         84.9%       88.1%       89.4%       86.5%     89.8%    91.1%
ORS                            60.1%       62.4%       63.3%       82.0%    85.1%    86.3%
Named YT-1300          66.5%       70.0%       72.3%       90.7%    95.4%    98.5%
Firespray                    82.3%       84.9%       87.0%       95.2%     98.2% 100.6%

 

 

Low Degree of Certainty

HWK-290: turret on a 1 attack ship.

Lambda: No K-turns and no white turns

TIE Defender: white K-turn

TIE Phantom: cloak action

 

                                         Jousting Efficiency           Total Efficiency      

Ship                            min           std.          max         min         std          max

HWK-290                     55.0%       57.2%      58.5%      38.2%     39.7%     40.7%
Lambda                       108.1%     113.8%    117.4%     83.6%    87.9%     90.7%
TIE Defender               78.8%       79.9%      81.3%       88.8%    90.0%     91.6%
TIE Phantom                84.6%       88.2%     91.4%        96.4%    100.5%  104.2%
TIE Phantom + cloak   102.3%     105.4%    110.0%      116.6%   120.1% 125.3%

Edited by MajorJuggler, 12 July 2014 - 09:45 AM.

  • z0m4d, gundamv and BobbyM like this




© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS