Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About dotswarlock

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1,631 profile views
  1. I played Arizona Sunshine on my Occulus Quest with a buddy. Before starting the zombie killing, I stopped him and took the time to do a proper handshake. It felt oddly satisfying 🙂
  2. Or make it a 3 player game on team viewer: 2 players play, the third (impartial) inputs the moves from the remote player
  3. I have been flying IG-88 in tournaments since version 1.0 and have kept doing it all the way in 2.0. It is a great ship and has lots of cool abilities and possibilities to equip upgrades. Flying it successfully, however, requires a lot of practice and experience, especially considering its initiative, but it can also be a lot of fun! After easily several hundred games, both in real life and on Flycasual, I have come to believe that the chassis itself needs a tiny tweek. The current ability reads: "After performing a calculate action, gain 1 calculate token." This ties most of the chassis' offensive capabilities (which is what is required to win a tournament round) into a single action: calculate, thus severely limiting other actions that it can use. After so many hours of flying IG-88, I believe that the chassis ability needs to be reworked into the following: "Once per round, after performing an action, gain 1 calculate token." Under most circumstances, the calculate action would still be the default one that a player should use. However, this would open up other actions that IG-88 would normally not dare use, such as target lock or advanced sensor-boosting. It would benefit IG-88C and to some extent, IG-88D. The inclusion would mostly put IG-88 into a level of flexibility that most force users currently enjoy (bearing in mind that it is still only an initiative 4 pilot that can easily reach 100 points once fully equipped). That's just my 2 cents of the day. Have fun out there!
  4. Serious answer: no. You already did the right thing by having stats that cumulate over many games: my greatest cumulative variance is +6% evade dice over 1414 for the AI, so perfectly acceptable. There is one guy in our Facebook group who's cumulative variance reached 20%, which is a bit odd, but that can happen in real life as well (and I'm not sure how often he plays). Short of having a cheat mode that allows you to add or remove results, I can't see how to make anyone happier.
  5. Anger unleashed: you may regenerate an additional force point during the end phase. Each time that you use a force token, if you have 5 stress or less, suffer 1 stress. Otherwise, suffer 1 damage.
  6. Slight note: in the meantime, if you have a new build that does not fit in the 200 point limit, you can simply disable the point limit in the options. Sure, it might mean that you could lose control of the initiative, but it allows you to play any concept in the meantime
  7. I use both Advanced sensors and contraband Cybernetics on my IG-88. There are times (hopefully rare), you just did a k-turn, find yourself stressed for next round and can't avoid the block that the enemy has in store for you. When that happens, popping that contraband cybernetics allows you to use those advanced sensors, bump into the enemy and make him regret it while clearing the stress for the next round. For use in emergency, but it works quite well. A slight note though: 2 ships is workable: I finished 1st place with dual IG-88 during the last 4 round tournament
  8. I would find a way to include Sunny. She can be very good for giggles at time
  9. I brought my slightly modified dual IG-88 to a tournament last weekend and won all 4 of my matches. The point changes affected the meta, which included more lower initiative ships, like 5 X-Wings (which I did face). I like where the point change pushed the meta, because lower initiative means that lists ressemble more what I find on FlyCasual (which is where I practice being outnumbered and tearing the opponent piece by piece a lot, hehe).
  10. Most of the changes are good, except for IG-88. 1 point less is nice, but the increase cost of cannons kind of nullifies that. In my favorite build, it actually adds 2 points total, which is a bit of a bummer. Still, it opened up other possibilities to look into, so its not all bad.
  11. I did not have the time to read every post, so let's hope I'm not just repeating something that someone else said. The story was interesting, although perhaps in need of more development to fill in the plot holes. What concerns me from a world building point of view is how mangled the Star Wars universe was left after this trilogy. - The Holdo Manoeuver was not necessary. From a story perspective, simply turning around, full shields forward and crashing headlong into an enemy ship would have created the same effect (probably even more dramatic) without creating a scenario where you suddenly have to say, in every other movie, why don't we use the Holdo Manoeuver? The shot looked cool, but causes problems down the line. - In the same manner, equipping every ship with a Death Star Weapon is simply useless. If you have a huge fleet like that then just send 10 at a time in a system and bomb the surface using conventional weapons, maybe have a specialized ships to pierce through planetary shielding if need be. Saying that now even a basic Imperial Star Destroyer can be a planet killer like the Death Star causes mind blowing problems for movies down the road. If it does not add anything to the story then don't make something overpowered.
  12. The Instigator is a nasty piece of work. Fortunately, there are a few ways to counter it. Kagi is the most obvious choice: drag all target locks to you and a few of them are removed in the process because of the sensor expert's limitation of being on different ships. Flying in a wide formation also helps, as does dropping jam tokens (Captain Seevor is practically an auto-include in scum epic). If the Raider has a targeting battery, however, it can reacquire a lock, to the poor ship's demise (usually). Freelance slicer could potentially help protect against (multiple) missile attacks against the same target. Even so, the Raider is a dangerous piece of work.
  13. Balance wise, I would say this: Dreadnought Hunter is a waste. If you position a ship so that it is both in the fore and side arc, you have a base 60% chance of causing a precise shot (inflicting a jam token or disabling a hardpoint), so carefully positioning a ship goes a long way to accomplish the same goal. Meanwhile, Dreadnought Hunter needs to be equipped by an initiative 4 or higher, which implies that in order to be useful, you need to have an ally take down the shields first, so that means sinking even more points in other initiative 4 or higher allies. So far, with a cost of 10 points, I would rather put a lot more initiative 1 units than sinking points in that upgrade. Balance wise, I think this is the clearest one that could use a change.
  14. Flew 4 games with the C-Roc (scum) so far. Depending on its configuration, it can be a weird breed of something in between a support and attack ship. It needs to be tailored for the specific scenario that you expect to encounter. - In one game (Passing engagement), I had it setup with as many weapons as I could, which made it too expensive and earned me a loss. - In the second game (same scenario), I had it setup as a support / coordinate kind of ship with the appropriate crew, and it did all right. - Third game was configured as a sniper (3 player scenario), but it was actually Moralo Eval that broke the game, with his ability to go behind enemy lines and destroy mission objectives. Game ended by turn 2. - Fourth game was configured as a sniper, but with boosted scanner to boot. Between its now extended jam and Captain Seevor's ability, it created some unique play option where it sort of neutralized the Raider's initial firepower by quite a lot. Definitely a scum build if I ever saw one.
  • Create New...