Jeff Wilder

Members
  • Content count

    1,125
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Jeff Wilder

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 05/23/1968

Profile Information

  • Location
    San Francisco Bay Area

Recent Profile Visitors

498 profile views
  1. Fixed!
  2. Ugh. I want that three minutes of my life back. (Yes, yes, TWSS.)
  3. Exactly. Thematically, Vineheart01 is right ... there are a lot of those issues with cloaking. (For example, by the same logic, a cloaked Phantom could never bump.) Allowances are made for game-play reasons.
  4. "I was informed, by multiple sources, that the Empire was dead."
  5. I won the Endgame (Oakland, CA) 21-player store championship yesterday with: Rear Admiral Chiraneau (46) Veteran Instincts (1) Rebel Captive (3) Darth Vader (3) Gunner (5) Thermal Detonators (3) Engine Upgrade (4) "Quickdraw" (29) Adaptability (0) Fire-Control System (2) Pattern Analyzer (2) Lightweight Frame (2) Special Ops Training (0) Total: 100 View in Yet Another Squad Builder One of my wins was the first-round Bye (which I can't complain about too much, since that's the first time that's happened to me in two dozen or so Store Champs over the years), and one was unremarkable, just because I have such a hugely favorable match-up. I won an extraordinarily unfavorable match-up (mirror-match, except he had Kylo instead of Rebel Captive, which makes that a near auto-lose for me; and he's a much better Decimator flyer than I am) when my dice just went absolutely insanely hot, while his blanked out multiple times, and landed 1 damage on Quickdraw twice. Kylo only got one use -- preventing a Quickdraw fire-back -- because I piled so much damage (including a Major Hull Breach) on anti-RAC so quickly. This is the kind of game that makes me just roll my eyes when players underestimate how much luck still exists in X-Wing. Jossle's list: Rear Admiral Chiraneau (46) Veteran Instincts (1) Kylo Ren (3) Darth Vader (3) Gunner (5) Dauntless (2) Engine Upgrade (4) "Quickdraw" (29) Adaptability (0) Fire-Control System (2) Pattern Analyzer (2) Lightweight Frame (2) Special Ops Training (0) Total: 99 View in Yet Another Squad Builder I lost one game in Swiss (barely, on a bad final move that could have had RAC out of range) to Fenn+FTL, Asaaj+PTL, Unkar+Perma-Cloak) against a good player I hadn't played against before, and underestimated. Clark's list: Asajj Ventress (37) Push the Limit (3) Latts Razzi (2) Fenn Rau (28) Push the Limit (3) Autothrusters (2) Concord Dawn Protector (1) Unkar Plutt (17) Cikatro Vizago (0) Pattern Analyzer (2) Cloaking Device (2) Spacetug Tractor Array (2) Total: 99 View in Yet Another Squad Builder In the semi-finals, I barely won (1 HP left on Quickdraw) against Dan M.'s Biggs-Kanan+Zeb list. I pooched the approach, coming in one tick too fast with RAC, which kept me from arc-dodging both ships. RAC took 8 damage in the first round! But then I read Dan pretty well, and ruthlessly used the broken-@ss Large-ship boost to stay in the Ghost's Range-1 sides (while Quickdraw hunted and killed Biggs, who'd had to separate) until I had it down far enough for Quickdraw to kill. When Zeb came out on destruction, Quickdraw was blocking the K-turn, and in a rare mistake Dan deployed him so that he couldn't K-turn from there, either. So Quickdraw swung easily into tailing position. Dan was forced into a K-turn over a rock, and Zeb blew up on it. Dan's list: Biggs Darklighter (25) M9-G8 (3) Integrated Astromech (0) Kanan Jarrus (38) Fire-Control System (2) Twin Laser Turret (6) Rey (2) Finn (5) Tactical Jammer (1) Ghost (0) "Zeb" Orrelios (18) "Chopper" (0) Total: 100 View in Yet Another Squad Builder In the finals, I played against Matt P., who flew straight-up Paratanni: Fenn Rau (28) Attanni Mindlink (1) Autothrusters (2) Concord Dawn Protector (1) Asajj Ventress (37) Attanni Mindlink (1) Latts Razzi (2) Manaroo (27) Attanni Mindlink (1) Total: 100 View in Yet Another Squad Builder Fenn is much, much, much less frightening when you've got Gunner+Vader. (As it turned out, thanks to Quickdraw, and a nasty defensive blankout, I only had to Vader once.) It wasn't really a close game ... it's a favorable match-up for me, my dice were good, and Matt's weren't spectacular. I forgot Rebel Captive through the entire game (...), but as it went I just didn't need it. He got half-points on RAC only. Anyway, I flew well, I think. I made two mistakes in positioning with RAC -- in one case going 1 too fast, and in one case going 1 too slow -- but it only cost me the game in one of them. On the other hand, I was in the zone with Quickdraw, reading all the near-50/50s with pretty much perfect accuracy. I didn't have a single game with bad dice, and I had one game with good dice and one game with insanely good dice ... while my opponent had really bad dice. That's fortunate enough, but that it happened in a game that was so bad a match-up for me just iced the cake. And the plaque is nice again! Boy, that 2016 plaque sure looks lame with the others, FFG ... (Regarding Rebel Captive ... yes, I know I should remember, but it's mandatory. All of the spectators knew I was forgetting it, but couldn't say anything about a rule being broken by both players, because of a really stupid tournament rule. That rule needs to be changed.) Thanks to Endgame in Oakland, for hosting, and thanks to Brain F. for running the tournament so selflessly, giving up playing in it!
  6. So far the Resistance Sympathizer is allowed, and I think it will probably stay that way. The alternative is the Outer Rim Smuggler, and being stuck with one of those (if you fail to draft a real YT-1300 pilot) would suuuuuck. On the other hand, it would also represent probably the biggest boost in points if you did manage to draft a real pilot ... +15 point boost, at least?
  7. Exactly. In my opinion, FFG has only made two serious play-balance mistakes in 4.5 years of X-Wing: Phanton decloaking (which still isn't good, but that's a different subject) and the entire JumpBastard expansion. Those two things should have been caught in playtesting. But two serious mistakes, in 4.5 years of a game as complex as X-Wing? That's not bad at all. That said, I do think they have learned an immense amount about designing for the game, as it has moved from beer-and-pretzels to cheat-on-stream-competitive, which is why I want to see 2.0. My desire for 2.0 isn't a condemnation of FFG ... it's a statement of confidence.
  8. I'm also going to be heavy theme. I think it's gonna be awesome. BTW, we should arrange a way to recognize each other. I mean, my name-tag will work, but I doubt yours will say "Darth Meanie." (But if it does, awesome!)
  9. I don't know if it's workable, but it would be super-sweet to just have access to a printer. Build mission squads in (YA)XWMSB (or wherever), print them out, and go. It would save an amazing amount of time. A small wireless printer is maybe $70. If I had a way to provide one, I would.
  10. ... Interesting.
  11. That's a good point, and maybe it can be the kernel of an idea: Biggs Darklighter, 25 points, If you are in the firing arc at Range 1-3 of an attacking enemy ship, if it does not attack you, it may not modify [eyeball] results on its attack dice. Which, ironically, is why I do have sympathy for them: it just isn't an easy puzzle to solve.
  12. That's my point, though: an entire faction was not designed around Palpatine. Nerfing him was both proper (as is probably the case for Biggs) and easy (as is not the case for Biggs). It isn't that other Imperial ships are weaker without Palpatine; they're the same strength they were designed. Rebel ships were designed with Biggs in mind, so removing Biggs actually changes their design foundation.
  13. It doesn't, though. Biggs is a different case. He has existed from the beginning of the game. Every single Rebel ship, pilot, and upgrade has been designed around Biggs functioning more or less the way he does now. So, in practice, if you significantly weaken or remove Biggs, you potentially weaken literally every ship, pilot, and upgrade the Rebels have available. You could do something like, e.g., "Once per turn ... ," which seems pretty reasonable, but in actuality it's a near-meaningless change, because that just means you're giving your opponent the choice of whether to concentrate fire or not ... and "not" is almost always the right answer. It's not as easy as people think.
  14. That's correct. "Edition" is a standard part of event submission, so it's usually/always filled out even if there have been no edition changes. So it's not really additional grist for the speculation mill. That said, I really would not be shocked if some form of announcement were made at GenCon. Maybe nothing formal, but just, "There is a 2.0 on the horizon." I don't know what the marketing implications of that would be ... I can see positives and negatives, but what I know about marketing could fit in a thimble, with room left over for a finger.
  15. ... Wut?