I am completely against a new damage deck. However, I like your errata to the Munitions Failure card.

The Raider preview was only three days ago, but I wanted to beat Crabbok to it.

Interesting that all 3 of you "liked" that post. But I liked it f1rst.

500 skeptics could spend 10 hours each learning MJ math. Or MJ could spend 1 hour dumbing it down further. You do the math. He's not obligated. I merely asked. Blindly believe if you want. I question what I don't understand and ask for help when something's out of reach. Please don't hold that against me.

8.98% of the time a 2-evade ship will waste its evades against a 2-attack ship with fewer hits, correct? (No modifiers.) Regardless, it's the difference between the two that matters most, yes? I think 1-evade ships waste more (.5 no attack x .5 no attack x .375 evade = 9.375%) against 2-attack ships than 2-evade ships (8.98%). And not every ship is 2-attack. The 2-evade ship is less likely to waste evades against 3+ attack ships. Then the advantage between a 2-evade ship and 1-evade ship will grow if you assume both will always use focus for defense. Even this math I can do and demonstrate for most to understand and fact check. This is much better than arcane formulas that you could make up for all I know. (I doubt you would, but it's the point that we shouldn't blindly trust.)

Let me ask you something else, BaronFel. Do you fully understand all the mathematical formulas and why they were chosen and how they're applied in MJ's treatise? If so, are you capable of explaining it if you had the desire and time?

I don't think MJ asked for it or wanted it, but his conclusions are considered infallible and are referred to often by people who don't understand the math. The Bible was available, but few outside the priesthood understood Latin. The analogy is apt. I took a moment to explain my calculations above, both why and how I came to those conclusions. I don't think it's too much to ask--and for crying out loud, I'm just asking--for the advanced math MJ uses to be brought into light in the same way. "Tough, that's your problem--go look it up" is the defensive, knee-jerk reaction I've received instead of the help I'm sure others would also appreciate. I hope you're never in a position where you want to learn something that's beyond your current education level. If you do, eat your own medicine. Edit: If I had the secret to life but couldn't make it accessible to others, what good is knowing it?

Except I wasn't asking you. Why are you answering for him? Maybe he wants to explain it further and you're being presumptuous and wrong. In my calculation, there are 3 evades on an 8-sided green die, so there's a 3/8 or .375 or 37.5% chance of evading per die. For the one-die B-Wing, it's either 37.5% to evade or 5/8 (the number of eyeballs/blanks) or 62.5% to not evade. For the X-WIng it's slightly more complicated because you have to consider the total of both dice. You can have: A. No evade (.625) and no evade (.625) B. No evade (.625) and evade (.375) C. Evade (.375 and no evade (.625) D. Evade (.375) and evade (.375) You multiple the factors of A to result in ~39% for no evades whatsoever. Do the same for B (23.4%) and C (23.4%), but since they are the same result (one evade) in different combinations, you add them together to get ~47%. Lastly, we do the same for D to arrive at 14%. MJ is brilliant. I get it. Way smarter than me. I won't understand his level of math. But bring it back to Earth to a level that the layperson can reasonably understand it. I don't think asking that deserves the degree of criticism I've received.

Broadly speaking, yes. But I wish he'd walk us through the steps to arrive at the conclusion, explaining the equations and why he used them. Anything short of that is simply faith.

Was this a typo MF? Because the math that Maj. Juggler is using is waaay beyond most people with university level education, much less high school. I just want scripture translated into lingua franca so the people can see the truth themselves rather than just trusting the priesthood. Edit: And not be condemned for heresy.

I want to know why he's applying certain equations. I have an above-HS level of education, I just don't have a HS diploma. ...Have you not read the thread where the jousting numbers are posted? The math is explained in incredible, painstaking detail. If you're unable to read / comprehend the equations because you dropped out of school, that's your own problem. This isn't about jousting. You're right, it is my problem if I can't understand something. Guess how that's solved? Reaching out for help from someone who knows more than me. PS: why do you highlight everything in white? I'd show you how to avoid doing that, but I guess it's your problem.

So just trust you? I'd rather learn something instead. Nobody is stopping you. :-) Can you explain the math? In school (before I dropped out), my teachers always made me show the steps, even when I intuitively knew the answer. They wanted to know how I arrived at the answer. I'd like to know how you arrived at your answer. Unfortunately, you might have to explain some of it instead of just throwing a bunch of equations at the screen.

So just trust you? I'd rather learn something instead.

The X-wing does catch up eventually, but the likelihood of surviving that long is extremely rare. Here's a couple pictures that I just whipped up to illustrate. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_FtpUvAFB8peTF2WU1rNVJXT1U/view?usp=sharinghttps://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_FtpUvAFB8pR0N1QTl3VW9pQkE/view?usp=sharing The X-wing catches up at 9 hits, but you're talking a 98.15% chance of being dead (B-wing) vs 97.95% chance of being dead (X-wing). I would like to understand, but you still haven't explained it. I see how the X-Wing catches up after 9 hits in your chart, but you haven't explained how your chart deviates from the simple application of 3/8 x 8 = 3.The short version is that if you roll 8 defense dice you might come up with 3 evades--that's the most likely result, anyway, and ththe average. But 37% of the time it'll be less (0-2 evades), and 35% of the time it'll be more (4-8 evades). And if you throw attack dice in there, too, there's even more variation in the result of an attack against a B-wing.So if you want to know how long a ship will survive, you have to go deeper than just looking at the average result. How can 2 evade dice give you a chance > 0 for 4-8 evades? For the X-Wing, I think it should be 39% 0 evades, 47% 1 evade, 14% 2 evades. For the B-Wing, it would be 62.5% for 0 evades and 37.5% for 1 evade. I want to understand this system, but, despite the fact that I dropped out of high school, I'm starting to suspect it's flawed. Edit: My math was flawed at first, but I think I righted it.

The X-wing does catch up eventually, but the likelihood of surviving that long is extremely rare. Here's a couple pictures that I just whipped up to illustrate. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_FtpUvAFB8peTF2WU1rNVJXT1U/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B_FtpUvAFB8pR0N1QTl3VW9pQkE/view?usp=sharing The X-wing catches up at 9 hits, but you're talking a 98.15% chance of being dead (B-wing) vs 97.95% chance of being dead (X-wing). I would like to understand, but you still haven't explained it. I see how the X-Wing catches up after 9 hits in your chart, but you haven't explained how your chart deviates from the simple application of 3/8 x 8 = 3.

Statistically incorrect, the B-wing still has a higher survival chance. I have the probability density functions for expected number of rounds to kill each, but only returned the final mean results for the Mathwing thread. How? An evade die is 3/8 effective. Extensive math. The methodology is here: https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/128417-mathwing-comprehensive-ship-jousting-values-and-more/ I'll probably make a big "MathWing: Durability thread" someday. It depends what exactly is shooting at you, but you almost universally have a higher chance of surviving 8 random shots on a B-wing than taking those same equivalent shots on an X-wing. I'll have to dig out the exact density functions at some point to see if the X-wing ever "catches up" on the "shots to kill" curve for many many shots. Pretty sure the B-wing still comes out ahead for any reasonable percentage chance of staying alive though. OK, but you still haven't explained how 3/8 x 8 = 3 doesn't apply conceptionally.

Can you just dumb it down for the layman? 3/8 x 8 = 3.

Statistically incorrect, the B-wing still has a higher survival chance. I have the probability density functions for expected number of rounds to kill each, but only returned the final mean results for the Mathwing thread. How? An evade die is 3/8 effective.

I think this is the key right here. If you were to put Blue and Rookie pilot cards side-by-side, 9 times in 10 you'd take the Blue. Both ships are pilot skill 2. Both ships have 3 attack dice. The B-Wing has 1 less evade die. (Most don't view this as a big hindrance because green dice are so unreliable anyway). Both ships have 3 hull points. The B-Wing has 3 more shield points. (This is HUGE.) The B-Wing has 1 more action available to it (barrel roll). The B-Wing has more available upgrade slots (system, cannon, +1 torpedo), but does not have the astromech upgrade like the X-Wing. The B-Wing costs 1 point more. The B-Wing dial has a lot more red on it than the X-Wing dial, but it is not a bad dial. The B-Wing actually has the Hard 1's that are so awesome, even if they are red maneuvers. It lacks the Hard 3's that the X-Wing has and the K-turn is shorter (2 for the B, 4 for the X), but otherwise the dials are pretty similar in terms of options. So, for your extra point you are getting a pretty significant bump in survivability (3 more HP, despite the loss of 1 agility) and another action option (barrel roll) at the cost of a slightly worse dial. Unless you really, really need that astromech slot, most players would pay the extra point and take the Blue. I think you'd see X-Wings more regularly if they were cheaper in some way; as it stands, their costs are too close to the B-Wing for them to get a ton of use. They need to cost fewer points in order for them to see more regular competitive play. Eight attacks equals three health. If the X-Wing and B-Wing are expected to be attacked eight times per match, the shield/evade difference is a wash. If they're attacked less, the advantage goes to the B-Wing. Nine or more times favors the X-Wing.

Since the best players in the world don't aren't currently using them in tournaments, they must need a fix.

The furthest right of the top row of cards in the preview appears to be a picture of Palpatine.

Lol, wow. I needed those comments after today. Thanks.

... click bait threads? Me neither. Just state the topic in the topic title line. Simple enough, yeah?

I don't think Extra Munitions works on Slave-1 torps, because the card uses the only torp slot. It will give two bombs though.

Maybe when the T-70 comes out there will be lots of crossover cards for the X-Wing. That's my guess.