Jump to content



Photo

The Assault Missiles Thread- By popular demand


  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

#41 magadizer

magadizer

    2014 X-wing Store Championship Participant

  • Members
  • 1,088 posts

Posted 18 November 2012 - 08:29 AM

ScottieATF said:

 

 

magadizer said:

 

 Yeah, but I feel the same way as the KarmikazeKidd. I STILL have not yet had a successful hit with proton torpedoes. I will think very long and hard before I commit 5 points to these missiles, even though they are so tempting, and seem like such a fun addition.

 

 

I'd think a little longer and harder before staking to a position that hinges on, well, less then likely results.  It is completely correct to say you can wiff with Proton Torpedoes, Assault Missiles, etc; that's a reality of the upgrade.  But still both weapons are more likely to land then not, which is the requirement of the Assault Missiles.  But still missing is a possible reality that diminishes the total galaxy domination this thread insinuates.

And of course there are all the ways you have to further hedge those bets.

I understand the odds, which is why I have even used them at all after my initial attempts. But experience is a powerful motivator, and so far proton torps have given me a bad taste in my mouth. 


Be seeing you.

#42 hothie

hothie

    Member

  • Members
  • 989 posts

Posted 18 November 2012 - 09:31 AM

So first attempt at using them: 2 hits, 2 evades.

Just played the second attempt: 2 hits, 2 evades. 

Grand total of 0 damage done. Just a little Empirical evidence for you. (see what i did there? :P)



#43 KarmikazeKidd

KarmikazeKidd

    Member

  • Members
  • 157 posts

Posted 18 November 2012 - 10:40 AM

 Methinks Scottie is a Vulcan. I'm not some caveman cringing at the lightning gods. I understand the odds and that superstition is bumpkis. But if you knew me, and had a history of playing minis games with me…you would believe in bad luck too. I have a long list of witnesses that will attest to it. Besides that, it's just good strategy to minimize chance as much as you can.



#44 ScottieATF

ScottieATF

    Member

  • Members
  • 712 posts

Posted 18 November 2012 - 11:09 AM

KarmikazeKidd said:

 Methinks Scottie is a Vulcan. I'm not some caveman cringing at the lightning gods. I understand the odds and that superstition is bumpkis. But if you knew me, and had a history of playing minis games with me…you would believe in bad luck too. I have a long list of witnesses that will attest to it. Besides that, it's just good strategy to minimize chance as much as you can.

Oh I have some friends that prove that bad luck is as real as you or I.



#45 spacemonkeymafia

spacemonkeymafia

    Member

  • Members
  • 305 posts

Posted 18 November 2012 - 11:27 AM

ScottieATF said:

The amount of haphazard conjecture regarding something, that has not been released, by someone that has done no testing with it, already announcing it as a harbinger of ruin is just absurd.

You can't declare a play style invalidated with absolutely no testing behind that 'conclusion'.  The hubris behind that is just absurd.  It's not even a conversation you can functionally have, as no one knows what they hell they are talking about.  Because no one has had a chance to even test the theory they are basing their conclusions on.  We all went through middle school science class correct?  We are all aware of the basics of the scientific method?

So clumping you TiEs together becomes less attractive when facing down Assault Missile wielding craft.  So what if you split up and collapse in?  Force a non-ideal Assault Missile shot, and then benefit from your opponent bringing a less the ideal (A-Wing and Adv due to stats) or really expensive (Falcon) to carry the Assault Missile.  You've lost the sheer weight of clumping together but you've offset it by, wait for it, actually adjusting your tactics.  But that is complete conjecture because no one except play testers have had any way to test what we are talking about.  But I'm not trying to sell my theory as anything but theory.

Holy crap we might have to 'gasp' adjust our play to accommodate new additions to the game? Inconceivable.

Ha! I stopped reading this thread on page one when I got to this response. Nothing else of value will come from this thread as Scottie nailed it right away. 



#46 FrutigerSans

FrutigerSans

    Member

  • Members
  • 11 posts

Posted 18 November 2012 - 01:03 PM

spacemonkeymafia said:

ScottieATF said:

 

The amount of haphazard conjecture regarding something, that has not been released, by someone that has done no testing with it, already announcing it as a harbinger of ruin is just absurd.

You can't declare a play style invalidated with absolutely no testing behind that 'conclusion'.  The hubris behind that is just absurd.  It's not even a conversation you can functionally have, as no one knows what they hell they are talking about.  Because no one has had a chance to even test the theory they are basing their conclusions on.  We all went through middle school science class correct?  We are all aware of the basics of the scientific method?

So clumping you TiEs together becomes less attractive when facing down Assault Missile wielding craft.  So what if you split up and collapse in?  Force a non-ideal Assault Missile shot, and then benefit from your opponent bringing a less the ideal (A-Wing and Adv due to stats) or really expensive (Falcon) to carry the Assault Missile.  You've lost the sheer weight of clumping together but you've offset it by, wait for it, actually adjusting your tactics.  But that is complete conjecture because no one except play testers have had any way to test what we are talking about.  But I'm not trying to sell my theory as anything but theory.

Holy crap we might have to 'gasp' adjust our play to accommodate new additions to the game? Inconceivable.

 

 

Ha! I stopped reading this thread on page one when I got to this response. Nothing else of value will come from this thread as Scottie nailed it right away. 

Was that a Princess Bride reference there Scottie? I’ll tip my hat to you. 



#47 Hrathen

Hrathen

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,496 posts

Posted 18 November 2012 - 06:10 PM

 A lot has been said about these being game breaking or not.  Personally I agree with the wait and see group.  I actually think it will be fun to find out just how tuff these little things are.  I am looking forward to trying out 3 TIE advanced with a Assault missile each.  But that is 15 points just on upgrades.  That isn't even a cheap TIE, it is a pretty medium one.  Not to mention the extra points you paid to have TIE Advanced instead of normal TIEs.

My worry is if (an this is only a possibility) this card only comes with the falcon expansion.  I know someone out there would be willing to buy Three Falcon expansion sets (or just by the cards on Ebay or something) so that they can have their awesome list.  Now if it turns out that three assault missiles is a bad idea then it isn't much of a problem, but if they are even remotely a good idea then they verge into the territory of spending your money into being good at the game. 

I hate games that require you to spend money to be good at them.  Not spend money to have stuff to play with, but spend money to get the3 good stuff.  I am plenty willing two pay over $50 for some table top units but am getting what I pay for.  But in CCGs or other collectable game you end up paying that much money just to get a good chance to get what you want.  You end up buying lots of stuff you don't want so you can get the things you want.  I don't want to have to buy three Falcons (2 of which I will never use) just so I can get two more little missile cards.


Putting an end to this distructive conflict and bringing order to the galaxy.

#48 Duraham

Duraham

    Member

  • Members
  • 859 posts

Posted 18 November 2012 - 08:58 PM

 buy just 1 of everything, then go on Vassal?



#49 Nazull

Nazull

    Member

  • Members
  • 64 posts

Posted 19 November 2012 - 12:26 AM

Has there been an A-Wing spoiler, to show that the  A-Wings gets to use Assault missiles,

I thought A-wings use P.Ts in the old X-Wing game.

 



#50 magadizer

magadizer

    2014 X-wing Store Championship Participant

  • Members
  • 1,088 posts

Posted 19 November 2012 - 12:51 AM

 I again think this cost fear is unfounded. The picture for Slave 1 shows that the Assault missiles come with it. Almost everyone playing this game with the dedication to be on these forums is going to buy both the slave 1 and Falcon. (Read the threads on "how many models do you own etc." for some testimony to this.)

So "everyone" will have 2 of these cards to play with, and can you really see running more than 2 of these in a squad for competitive play at the point cost?

To answer the other question, if the preview pics are acccurate, A-wings do not have the Assault missiles card, but they have the Concussion and Cluster missiles card from the TIE adv, as well as a new Homing missiles card.


Be seeing you.

#51 Hrathen

Hrathen

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,496 posts

Posted 19 November 2012 - 04:27 AM

Nazull said:

Has there been an A-Wing spoiler, to show that the  A-Wings gets to use Assault missiles,

I thought A-wings use P.Ts in the old X-Wing game.

 

FFG posted some pictures on there expansion pack preview.  It looks like they come with concussion missile cards and a new missile maybe Homing Missile.  But based on the pictures FFG posted they don't come with Assault Missile card, but do have the missile upgrade icon


Putting an end to this distructive conflict and bringing order to the galaxy.

#52 Hrathen

Hrathen

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,496 posts

Posted 19 November 2012 - 04:28 AM

magadizer said:

 I again think this cost fear is unfounded. The picture for Slave 1 shows that the Assault missiles come with it. Almost everyone playing this game with the dedication to be on these forums is going to buy both the slave 1 and Falcon. (Read the threads on "how many models do you own etc." for some testimony to this.)

So "everyone" will have 2 of these cards to play with, and can you really see running more than 2 of these in a squad for competitive play at the point cost?

To answer the other question, if the preview pics are acccurate, A-wings do not have the Assault missiles card, but they have the Concussion and Cluster missiles card from the TIE adv, as well as a new Homing missiles card.

My point is that if you did want to SPAM them then it costs $30 per card.  You are forced to buy expensive stuff you don't want just so you can build the particular build that you wanted to try out.


Putting an end to this distructive conflict and bringing order to the galaxy.

#53 magadizer

magadizer

    2014 X-wing Store Championship Participant

  • Members
  • 1,088 posts

Posted 19 November 2012 - 05:41 AM

Hrathen said:

magadizer said:

 

 I again think this cost fear is unfounded. The picture for Slave 1 shows that the Assault missiles come with it. Almost everyone playing this game with the dedication to be on these forums is going to buy both the slave 1 and Falcon. (Read the threads on "how many models do you own etc." for some testimony to this.)

So "everyone" will have 2 of these cards to play with, and can you really see running more than 2 of these in a squad for competitive play at the point cost?

To answer the other question, if the preview pics are acccurate, A-wings do not have the Assault missiles card, but they have the Concussion and Cluster missiles card from the TIE adv, as well as a new Homing missiles card.

 

 

My point is that if you did want to SPAM them then it costs $30 per card.  You are forced to buy expensive stuff you don't want just so you can build the particular build that you wanted to try out.

I understood your (hypothetical) point. However, my point is, is this really something to worry about in actuality?


Be seeing you.




© 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