Jump to content

SDCC

Members
  • Content Count

    855
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    SDCC got a reaction from clockworkspider in The Paradox Of FFG   
    I CANNOT HEART THIS ENOUGH.
  2. Thanks
    SDCC got a reaction from Darth Meanie in The Paradox Of FFG   
    I CANNOT HEART THIS ENOUGH.
  3. Like
    SDCC got a reaction from Wazat in The Paradox Of FFG   
    I CANNOT HEART THIS ENOUGH.
  4. Thanks
    SDCC reacted to Wazat in The Paradox Of FFG   
    So a gatekeeper is a fleet (or type of fleet) that keeps lots of other fleets out of the meta because they just can't stand against it.  Every list has a hard counter, but a gatekeeper is a hard counter for many lists and it's consistently in the meta keeping them out.  For example, there are lots of fleets that would approach meta-viable if it weren't for the Aces lists that can pick them apart, or the vulture swarm that will consistently make them lose the joust they're built around, etc.  Those types of lists have dominated the meta for quite some time, and hence they've defined what can be in the meta over that long period of time.
    If you build a fleet you'd like to take to a tournament, you need to practice against a variety of opponents like beef (lots of healthy ships like b-wings and x-wings), swarms, and anything else that might be strong in the meta at the moment (be it a specific fleet like Boba-Fenn, or something general like munitions alpha-strikers).  But aces are a constant, they'll always have a role in the meta; as I understand it, this is deliberate on FFG's part (everything is supposedly balanced around aces, and aces are where they want them to be).   (Example ace lists include jedi in all their iterations like anakin-obiwan-optional buddy, vader + friends, kylo+quickdraw+grand inquisitor, etc)
    Cagey Aces (my term for aces that fly very skittishly, staying away and refusing to engage nearly the whole game, waiting until they have the perfect opportunity) are one of the most challenging playstyles to face in the meta, and their mere presence means any fleet that does poorly against them likely won't even bother showing up.  They're not easy to fly, but once you figure them out and develop the patience and timing sense to do well with them, you've got strong odds in your favor.  There's not much out there that has a good time against them.  And they tend to hard-counter most of the types of lists I like to fly.  C'est la vie.
    I've been told straight up from someone on these forums (I think Blail Blerg?) that if my fleet cannot beat the top aces lists at least 50% of the time consistently, then it's garbage.
    So that's a gatekeeper: they determine who can even have a chance to compete in the meta.  If one of your hard counters is a gatekeeper, you either switch tournament lists, don't play in tournaments, or go in knowing full well you will not do well.  (Which I've done a couple of times, e.g. with Wullffwarro War Crimes, just to see how far I could get).
    That's a big reason why I'm a FFC (filthy f****** casual) and proud of it.  I really don't care to live by the strict rules of the meta; I prefer to explore lots of fun stuff instead.  Once you step a level or two down from the top meta, the entire game opens up to you and you can fly auzitucks, kimogilas, TIE Advanced that aren't Vader, etc.
    Also I'm too lazy to practice the same fleet 6x a week. 
    /rant
    Yea, at that point they probably need to stop borrowing and start diving into the game themselves.    Though they may not have understood you were waiting for them to buy in.  Some people are used to one person providing the game they're all playing.  On x-wing days you're providing x-wing, and at another time they may provide the game they have (e.g. Warhammer, Arkham Horror, etc).
    Haha, yea.  I eventually dove all in too...  Initially I tried to start small, but I was so impressed with the game I saw, I dove in hard and I regret nothing.  2.0's been overall fantastic!  And having a few billion spare cards means I can be generous to my buddies who can't afford to splurge like that, and to any new players who are flirting with the game.
  5. Like
    SDCC reacted to DR4CO in InFlight Report News! New Ships!   
    FFG give you something ahead of schedule and you berate them for it?
    There really is no pleasing this community sometimes...
  6. Haha
    SDCC reacted to FTS Gecko in Does it feel like X-Wing's become unimportant to FFG?   
    Yes, it's almost as though it's not business as usual during an unpredictable and unprecedented global crisis.
  7. Like
    SDCC reacted to HawkZ71 in EA’s Star Wars Squadrons   
    My hate for the Sequel films is not knee-jerk. I was open minded to all 3 of them. I recognize the garbage for what they are. In no way are they fun movies to watch over and over. Each time I re-watched any of them, I feel even more disgusted.
    Unlike the original trilogy...more so A New Hope and Empire Strikes Back, which I have watched so many times over the last 40 years I lost count and still to this day I can watch again and still feel entertainment and drawn into the story.
    The Sequel Trilogy was a massive fail.
  8. Haha
    SDCC reacted to LUZ_TAK in EA’s Star Wars Squadrons   
    TIE pilots hatch in their cabins, everyone knows that.
  9. Like
    SDCC reacted to SunDancerGE in X-Wing V2 Solo alpha play rules first impressions   
    So here are my first thoughts on the alpha solo play rules from Star Wars: X-Wing
    First of: if you (like me) haven’t played X-Wing in a while, read up on the rules before. Trust me.
    Setting up the table: you need your regular 3’x3′ gaming space, two hyperspace entry points and six parts of obstacles. It is a bit fiddly because of the measurements given by the solo play rulebook what has to have what distance to what but it’s manageable.
    For this first try I went with the most basic setup I could which was only the minis from the core set. You should take one or more ships for your force and make them a 35 – 45 points list. Or a “threat level 2” from the quick build rules. Same amount of points/threat level should be applied to the enemy force. The enemy force must be a greater number then the player force and divided into two waves with each wave totalling around 50% of the players points cost/threat level. A third wave with a list almost as high as the players total should be set aside as reinforcements.  I choose the thread level approach because that was the easiest to set up. I ended up with a rouge squadron veteran and two TIE fighter academy pilots.
    And here is where I screwed up for the first time. I started with both TIEs on the mat when it should have been only one. Well, to late now.
    Next up is movement. Like in the normal game the pilot with the lowest pilot skill goes first. Depending on where the next player controlled ship is you roll one attack and one defence die and that gives you the manoeuvre you should do. in the first turns the TIE had a tendency on using “the slowest blue bank or turn manoeuvre towards your Tally”.
    And here is where I screwed up the first 4 turns. After movement you determine the attitude (offensive, balanced or defensive) of the enemy ship. The attitude then itself has a list of actions you should take for the automated ship. For example doing a barrel roll if you’re heading for an obstacle or are in an enemies firing arc.
    So after moving and actions is done the fun part begins: shooting. This is (at least in my case) the most fun and easiest part of the whole thing because it’s the simplest.
    After some bumping into asteroids and into each other I finally got a lock on one TIE and killed him.
    At the beginning of Turn 4 the second wave should arrive on the hyperspace markers. And maybe even reinforcements if you have killed any of wave one. Since I had just killed one TIE I simply brought him back into play. At turn 7 one of the reinforcement ship should enter play. Since I didn’t have reinforcements as such but had again killed a TIE he came into play again.
    Only in round 7 you can declare victory if the last solo play ships is destroyed or your forces have left the table. It took me 10 turns to defeat 4 TIE fighter.
    Was it fun? Yes.
    Was it exhausting? Yes but mainly because I’ve forgotten so many rules.
    Will I play it again? I think so. I didn’t sort away all tokens and cards but put them aside so that the next setup should be a lot easier.
    Side note: I did record all of the play on video but I’m not sure if I can use it for anything. Lighting isn’t very good and over long stretches there is nothing happening because I’m stuck reading rules. Maybe some stills can be salvaged to make a battle report of sorts.
  10. Like
    SDCC reacted to FTS Gecko in June is here, can we expect a points change.   
    Wouldn't have thought so.  Regardless of what has been said previously, I doubt there's going to be any significant changes or announcements until Organised Play is ready to resume.
    And I doubt there's any real need for any changes until Organised Play is ready to resume, either.
    As pleasant a distraction from reality as this hobby can be, there's far more important things to consider at the moment.
  11. Like
    SDCC reacted to ScummyRebel in New Official App In Development!   
    FFG organized play shared a message on their Facebook that they are working on redoing the entire app.
    ”Hello Star Wars™: X-Wing players!
    Many of you have noticed that the huge ships have not been added to the X-Wing Squad Builder app. We are actually in the process of completely reworking our X-Wing Squad Builder app, including developing a much more user-friendly interface, offline mode, and support for huge ships and epic play. For now, all tournament-legal ships are still supported by the current Squad Builder app. For huge ships and epic play, we recommend that you use the points lists provided on the FFG website for now.
    We'll have much more information to share about the reworked Squad Builder app as it comes closer to release!”
  12. Like
    SDCC reacted to FTS Gecko in Fly Casual X-Wing Simulator   
    As nice as it would be to have Fly Casual available for multiplayer given current circumstances, I'm pretty sure @Sandrem and everyone else working on Fly Casual have a lot more important things to worry about right now.
    Now, if they woke up this morning to find the equivalent of a month or two's wages sat in their Patreon, that might be a different matter.  But pretty sure it would still be way down the priority ladder.
    At the very least, we still have a way to get our pew pew fix, so many thanks for that!
  13. Like
    SDCC reacted to Fordawn in 2.0 Upgrade cards creator   
    Thanks that's cool I'll check that this evening
     
    The way i'm doing upgrades cards now I don't think it will work but I know it would be a goo addition. I'll add it to my todo list.
     
    There are a lot of things that can be added/fixed, between this and some 40k painting I will be productive this week.
    Looks really fun, and yes maybe it will play better with a condition and stress tokens
  14. Like
    SDCC reacted to Fordawn in 2.0 Upgrade cards creator   
    Hi,
    The data for the ships come from 2 files, I just need to take the time and add each ship one by one. See here for more info (if one of you know about json, git and pull requests you can even help me to do it ! )
    If you select only the action on the right, it will be red.
    Hmm to be honest I don't remember changing anything on this side. I think the problem was coming from the image (it still doesn't work for some image other than png, i'll have to find where the problem is coming from).
  15. Like
    SDCC reacted to Darth Meanie in Losing interest: Hyperspace is stale, and I’m uninterested   
    That's not stale.
    You are disenchanted you can't fly a handful of pilots that are your favorites.
    Ergo, hyperspace is working just fine.  Try something new.  Ya know, the exact opposite of stale.
    Edit:  OK, that might get stale.
    Which is why, IMHO, Environments need to become part of tournament play.  Imagine if there were 13 different ways to play 200/6.
  16. Like
    SDCC got a reaction from Archangelspiv in Show us your commute lists!   
    Not commute, but purely some time to myself.
    Lando - Nien Nunb
    Wullffaroo - Saw, Hull Upgrade
    Tala Squadron - Crack Shot
    Tala Squadron - Crack Shot
     
    What can I say. I've recently got into playing Rebel. I dig the Auzi!
     
  17. Like
    SDCC got a reaction from CoffeeMinion in Show us your commute lists!   
    Not commute, but purely some time to myself.
    Lando - Nien Nunb
    Wullffaroo - Saw, Hull Upgrade
    Tala Squadron - Crack Shot
    Tala Squadron - Crack Shot
     
    What can I say. I've recently got into playing Rebel. I dig the Auzi!
     
  18. Like
    SDCC got a reaction from admat in Show us your commute lists!   
    Not commute, but purely some time to myself.
    Lando - Nien Nunb
    Wullffaroo - Saw, Hull Upgrade
    Tala Squadron - Crack Shot
    Tala Squadron - Crack Shot
     
    What can I say. I've recently got into playing Rebel. I dig the Auzi!
     
  19. Like
    SDCC got a reaction from Magnus Grendel in Alphabet Squadron: SHADOW FALL   
    Great book. Ranks second for me in the new canon books after Lost Stars. Well worth a read.
  20. Like
    SDCC reacted to EBerling in How many games have you tried to force Final Salvo as part of your strategy?   
    I certainly agree that people shouldn't be brats when games don't go their way.  
    I strongly disagree with the first claim, though.  The way Final Salvo is set up, for better or worse, it has an innate asymmetrical aspect to it which in many match-ups creates an Advantaged Player and Disadvantaged Player (more dice vs less dice).  This structurally places an onus on the Disadvantaged player to engage on the Advantaged Player's terms. 

    X-Wing is a very rare breed of competitive game, in that it provides absolutely no incentive to either player to engage their opponent (outside of the Final Salvo Disadvantage noted above).  Most tabletop games have either "gambit zones" or "control points" or "flags to capture" or "exit zones" or "loot crates" or "sportsball+goal" or establishes an "offense team and a defense team" or has some other spatial features on the board that motivate players to move their pieces out into the board.  My experience with miniature gaming is pretty limited, but in every game I am aware of except X-Wing, there are built-in incentives for at least one player to go places on the board, thus providing incentive for engagement.  This is also true, I think, in many online games.  But not X-Wing, it just gives the players a 3x3 fishbowl and a 75 minute clock with no incentives or instructions or expectations for how or where ships should go or engagement will occur.  Leaving it entirely to the strategic and tactical decisions of each player involved.   Whether this is a bug or a feature probably varies quite a bit between players' own preferences and expectations for the game.  But could you imagine an online FPS that didn't have flags or objectives or the like?  What's to stop each player from posting up in deep cover and "corner camping"?  Why would anyone venture out into the open and go anywhere?

    What this has meant for competitive X-Wing is that it's often been a game of chicken when two relatively experienced players square off,  waiting to see who breaks first and goes ahead and engages on their opponent's terms (because it's sub-optimal (probably even a play mistake) to simply grant your opponent's most ideal engagement to them).  I remember having HowlSwarm players get very visibly and verbally annoyed/frustrated/angry that I would not simply deploy my Rebel fighters directly across from their Howlswarm and simply straight-line joust right into them (which many players did do back then), as that was mathematically ensuring the Howlswarm got a free win (e.g. see Gencon 2013(14?) final of Pichelmeyer vs Naegle, where N's Rebels joust right into P's Howlswarm and vaporize in about three rounds).  In that case, the HowlSwarm player wants the opponent to simply fly right into the teeth of the swarm, where the opponent wants the Howlswarm to get drawn out on a chase, hopefully getting stretched out and separated (or damaged) as they get pulled through the obstacle field.  But if the Howlswarm wasn't willing to give chase and risk getting stretched out in the process... and the opponent wasn't willing to just go fly into the teeth of the Howlswarm ... what happens? Well, you have a game of chicken to see who will crack first (or you sit there for 75 minutes while the squads K-Turn back and forth out of range of one another).  Back then, there wasn't even Final Salvo to nudge the Swarm's opposition to engage (14 Die for the Swarm on FS), so the options become: (1) Engage on your opponent's terms, (2) wait and run out the clock, refusing engagement, or (3) try to orchestrate / try to avoid having the opponent spring in during the final round and sneak a kill for the win.  (1) usually means you lose, while (2) and (3) are horribly boring and don't feel like you're playing X-Wing.


    Controlling when and where the engagement happens on the board is a huge part, if not the most essential part, of X-Wing.   But the game itself provides no incentive to either player to actually be the one who caves and engages on their opponent's terms, so when engagement plans don't line up for both players it's a game of cat-and-mouse until someone gets the engagement they want.   I think this is a less than ideal aspect of competitive X-Wing, but it's the game we've had for over five years, so we have to accept it, embrace it, and enjoy it.  The Final Salvo rule, if nothing else, sometimes creates an Advantaged/Disadvantaged player from the very outset (when attack dice are lopsided between squads), which at least then dictates who is going to have to bite the bullet (or laser) and engage on sub-optimal terms.  In these cases, at least than Advantaged Player can effectively say "okay, YOU have to come engage me on my terms, or else I win Final Salvo" and the Disadvantaged Player has to say "ugh, fine" or else risk the lopsided Final Salvo.  


    I don't see how it's "poor sporstmanship" (or "cheating"?!) for one player to in essence put forward: "Ok, because I have the game's Final Salvo advantage,  you're gonna have to come engage me on my terms or else risk losing on the salvo."  What's the counter?  For the opponent to rebuke "NO, that's cheating!  YOU have to come engage ME at a disadvantage instead!"  It's rare for two squads to want the exact same engagement conditions, so somebody is gonna be engaging at an advantage or disadvantage most of the time, and Final Salvo at least tells us who that is.  Granted, it's an inadequate band-aid for a deep structural issue within X-Wing (at least regarding competitive play), but it's hard to see it as "poor sportsmanship" or "cheating."  If nothing else, it tells us who gets to play Offense and who gets to play Defense. 
     
  21. Like
    SDCC got a reaction from BCooper85 in Fan made swag, am I being rude by saying no thanks?   
    Tone and wording are important.
  22. Like
    SDCC got a reaction from PanchoX1 in Fan made swag, am I being rude by saying no thanks?   
    Tone and wording are important.
  23. Like
    SDCC got a reaction from FTS Gecko in Fan made swag, am I being rude by saying no thanks?   
    Tone and wording are important.
  24. Like
    SDCC got a reaction from Wiredin in Fan made swag, am I being rude by saying no thanks?   
    Tone and wording are important.
  25. Like
    SDCC got a reaction from JJ48 in Fan made swag, am I being rude by saying no thanks?   
    Tone and wording are important.
×
×
  • Create New...