PWTs don't want to be shot at. Decisions have to be made with more than minimal consequences (chance to suffer damage or not).I've mentioned this many of the times you've claimed PWTs don't care at all about arc dodging or movement. I don't know if you've never read the replies, don't understand the concept, or simply refuse to accept because it doesn't support your argument.

There's more instances of Chewie than Han in the top 8, but nobody complains about him because he will rip their arms off Never lose to a Wookie.

But as has been said before, it remains a subjective thing. My last games with turrets have been exciting enough. I'm too lazy to insert a witty internet meme here, but "I don't like thing!" comes to mind. Which is totally okay, but there is just not enough reason to really call the turrets broken on that basis alone. I accept that and have. My campaign is against the incessant posting of complaints and turret nerfs. We heard them the first hundred times. The PWTs are not as hard to play against or quite as meta-dominating as they describe (it's always worse if you don't like something). The meta will change next Wave and they'll complain about something else. Maybe Conner Nets are broken and should be nerfed and FFG should have known and should have play tested it first and should have consulted the Wise Forum first. You seem really mad that people are posting about something you don't want to talk about, as if you can't just move on. You seem to think FFG couldn't possibly make any mistakes and that anyone who has any problems with anything is some kind of idiot. I am frustrated, due to the utter abundance of posts about the same thing over and over and over again with no new content or insight. What's the point? We heard you. FFG isn't perfect, but 1) they're much better than most posters give them credit for, 2) their product ideas far exceed those that posters usually produce, and 3) FFG isn't mini g the forums for your brilliant fixes to problems that either don't exist, are blown out of proportion, or already have a minor buff in the works. But no, let's rail on. Again.

The bare statistics do not convincingly suggest some change is needed, because some other combination of three ships might just as well become equally popular. What are we supposed to do if three ships happen to be in 60% of winning lists? Look for their common characteristic and nerf that? Of course not. Thank you! However, the statistics do show that there's a good chance you will play several PWTs in a row. That kind of sucks if you don't like how the game plays when one side has such a ship. So keeping in mind the dislike I mentioned earlier, the statistics confirm what the complaining crowd is saying: the competitions have too many games that they don't like. But as has been said before, it remains a subjective thing. My last games with turrets have been exciting enough. I'm too lazy to insert a witty internet meme here, but "I don't like thing!" comes to mind. Which is totally okay, but there is just not enough reason to really call the turrets broken on that basis alone. I accept that and have. My campaign is against the incessant posting of complaints and turret nerfs. We heard them the first hundred times. The PWTs are not as hard to play against or quite as meta-dominating as they describe (it's always worse if you don't like something). The meta will change next Wave and they'll complain about something else. Maybe Conner Nets are broken and should be nerfed and FFG should have known and should have play tested it first and should have consulted the Wise Forum first.

Two points: 1) your initial argument was that a decline in showing between earlier stages and final table showed that a ship wasn't overpowered. What should we conlcude if we discover that the reverse is true? If there was a statistically significant jump, then my first inclination would be that it's over-powered. However, it could be that the players who outperform other players happen to pick YT-1300s, and other players who don't outperform also pick YT-1300s If the YT-1300 itself was overpowered, then I'd expect outperforming players who choose the YT-1300 and under-performing players who likewise choose the YT-1300 to both do exceptionally well in tournaments, relative to their initial representation in the field. Can you tell I used to study quantitative analysis? Numbers can mean lots of different things, and it's easy to rush to false conclusions. Given a large number of ships, we can expect only a certain number out of a normal distribution will be outside a standard deviation or two. Even if all ships were perfectly balanced performance-wise, you would never see every ship represented at 4% each. Some are going to be more favored, more in fashion, and randomized due to other factors beyond knowing. So with 25 ships, any ship that is represented around 4% is represented fairly and those above and below are popular or unpopular: Y-Wing (Rebel) and TIE at 7%; X-Wing at 6%; Firespray-31 (Scum) and A-Wing at 4%; Z-95 (Scum), Y-Wing (Scum), and Lambda at 3%; and Star Viper and Firespray-31 (Imp) at 2%, and HWK-290 (Scum) at 1%. That's 11 ships out of 25 that are in the expected range. That's healthy diversity to me. Those that are popular include: YT-1300, Aggressor, Decimator, Interceptor, Z-95, E-Wing, B-WIng, and Phantom That's only 8 out of 25 ships. The thing that struck me here is that while the YT-1300 is the most popular of the popular ships, it is not widely more popular, only marginally more popular. My perception (this is an opinion) of the way some people (perhaps not you) go on about PWT, and Fat Han in particular, is that it so dominates the meta that it's just about the only thing they ever face and there's no diversity. These numbers tell me otherwise.

Not in the immediate recency, but often enough. Sorry, I thought you one of those re-posters. No worries, carry on.

Blurt Blerg?

Haven't we done this thread a few times already?

I see it's the most common, but it's not dominating at 40% or so as I suspected, the way some carry on. The Interceptor, Decimator, and Aggressor are close at 17%, 16%, and 15%, respectively. And if it was so op, the percentage of top 8 lists with Fat Han would be higher than the percentage of total lists with Fat Han. That isn't the case.

The rise of Nerf gun turrets lately have completely dominated the forum meta. They're completely over-powered. https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/182953-nerf-gun-turret/ Therefore, Nerf gun turrets must be nerfed.

I think you're an exception. Most complainers complain about Fat Han.

Thanks for the clarification. Regardless, the YT-1300 is under-performing relative to its initial showing.

Yours, mine, or anyone else's opinion is just an opinion. Factually, aren't lists with at least one PWT pulling way more wins than any other kind of ship at Regionals (if I counted well in the Regionals thread there are 41 winning lists with PWTs and 30 without)? Wouldn't that hint that maybe PWTs are currently a stronger type of ship than any other? What that tells me is that a lot of people are playing them. How many Fat Turrets crash and burn at the bottom of the rankings? Less % than make the top 8. They're being picked often because people think that. Whether or not its true is only peripherally related: if they're at least balanced to the rest of the game (as opposed to old TIE advanced underpowered) and people think they're power pieces they'll take them and inflate their win numbers, which makes them look powerful. Vicious cycle. We had it with the TIE swarm and we had it with the TIE phantom. PWTs win all the time because they're popular and there are a lot of them. They also get some artificial help in tournaments in the form of consistency (often more valuable than power in a tournament) and from the "point forts" that MoV makes them into. These things can actually be checked by regionals that have reported in Listjuggler. I've posted this in another thread, and I'm sure analysis as to the degree will vary but current results are as follows: YT 1300, YT 2400, and Decimators make up 24.27% of all points in reported regionals. Those same ships make up 29.98% of elimination rounds. All three of these ships see an increase, though the YT2400 is very small (.2%). (This can be broken down by named pilots as well, but I don't have time right now) While I'm not sure how significant this difference is (a 20% increase) this is since I'm not a math expert, I'm going to guess that it's more than simply random. In other words, I'd at least be confident with those numbers saying that it not simply popularity that causes them to be seen so much in the top lists. The YT-1300 is under represented (19%) in the final 8 compare to its overall showing (21%). If anything, it under performs slightly relative to other units. And let's not kid ourselves. Most of the hate is very specific: Han Solo YT-1300 with Falcon title, engine upgrade and C3P0 crew, possibly also gunner or Chewie or R2D2 crew. Most complainers are complaining with complaints complaining about the YT-2400 or Decimator in their complaints that they complain about.

So the YT-1300 isn't dominating the meta since it comprises only 21% of all lists (popular, but not dominating). And it isn't over-powered since it does worse than that, making it to the top 8 only 19% of the time.

That's another hamfisted rule then. When you have to start creating rules for specific ships, you either have a broken game, or else a bad rule. There is no real need to nerf PWT's, they're only as effective as they are because of the other things that go along with them. You make them less maneuverable or less survivable, and the problem will mostly go away. FFG isn't going to directly nerf the Falcon, VT-49 or Outrider directly. They can and should however do something about the combos you can put on those ships. I don't think they're going to nerf combos. Not sure we've even seen it before or ever will. Instead, they'll provide new ships and combos to counter it, as we've seen.

Good point. I've long argued that [certain ship] scores well in tournaments not because it out-performs, but because it's popular. That's not to say [certain ship] isn't a high performer, only that it's not the only, and perhaps most important, factor.

You already see a lot less. How is this not a huge victory for everyone who complains about the Fat Turret dominating the meta?

The YT-1300 was represented in only 11% of the top Regional lists. I don't know what everyone is still complaining about. https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/182930-many-bothans-died-to-bring-us-this-information/ Doesn't look to me like it dominates the meta.

Interesting. I would've thought YT-1300 would be closer to 90%.

Has anyone seen Ribann lately?

Has anyone seen Ribann lately?

Most do not agree. Some agree.

No.

This thread is troll bait.

Best post ever No further comment necessary.