• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About AllWingsStandyingBy

  • Rank
  • Birthday

Recent Profile Visitors

361 profile views
  1. Not surprised that there appears to be this trend: Those players who complain they don't have any time to play are the ones saying they love the game and have no complaints. The way to love and enjoy X-Wing most is to not play X-Wing, heh.
  2. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that if one of the errata cards was the Store Champ card, it'll have the original (non-errata'd) text.
  3. This is a great idea! It can take a page out of the U-Wing's book and have a dual-card title that represents it's two forms: starfighter and walking. The Fighter Form can give it agility or barrel roll or something. The Walking Form could allow it to overlap obstacles without penalty, since they'd be able to land on and walk across or swat away asteroids/debris pieces. Also, it absolutely needs the EPT "Roger Roger!" that is Droid-Fighter Only.
  4. It brings me satisfaction to see the U-Wing down at the bottom as the 5th worst-performing ship in the game. Where are all those lovely folks who kept telling us to stop being so negative and kept saying that the U-Wing was great and that Tobber and Andor would shake-up the Rebel meta? Also, Scum are even better-off than the chart indicates, since some of those Y-Wings (3rd Best Ship) are in fact Syndicate Thugs with TLTs. This mean that Scum possess the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th best performing ships. Guess that's what happens when you drastically undercost most of their recent ships, give them access to a slew of upgrade slots, give them the most generous dials, and give them an in-faction Super Action Economy EPT. The Jumpmaster alone has been hit with three-four nerfs (Aggromech, Deadeye, Manaroo, Zuckuss) and it's still the best-performing ship.
  5. I dunno about "easier" or whatever, since we're just talking about probabilistic possibilities that emerge as sample sizes increase, but agree to disagree I suppose. Either way, it's been a fun discussion, so thanks
  6. I think you're perhaps misunderstanding my point. The "math" behind Swiss Pairings is that the # of Swiss Rounds relative to # of Players is determined by the minimum number of rounds that will yield a picture of a 'clear winner' (ie, you ideally only have 1 Undefeated player after the final swiss round). But that's not related to what I'm talking about above, which is about the chance for oddities or peculiarities in "match-up history" to emerge, since the bigger the number of players the more such opportunities of particular types can be found. In a 4-Player event where only one player has brought Archetype A, everyone else has a 100% chance of playing against Archetype A one time. However, as the size of an event grows, even if Archetype A is still 25% of the total field, you have more opportunities to find players with a "peculiar" match-up history (e.g. a player who doesn't play against Archetype A at all, or a player who plays against Archetype A for the majority of their rounds). These players may be rare examples of very good (or bad) pairing luck, but as event sizes grow so to do the opportunities for such match-up history anomalies.
  7. Right. I understand the practical limitations of Swiss Rounds. But that's my original point -- at exceptionally large events like Worlds, you can expect to see a few more oddities in pairings/match-up history because of the asymmetrical increase in number of players vs. amount of Swiss rounds played. To make the point as clearly as possible: If there is a 4 Player tournament, and one person has Archetype A (that is, Archetype A is 25% of the field), there is a 100% chance everyone plays against Archetype A once (since everyone plays each person once). If there is a 512 Player tournament, and 128 people are playing Archetype A (that is, Archetype A is 25% of the field), there is a <<100% chance that a player will play against Archetype A (since everyone only has 9 opponents, and there are 384 players not running archetype A). If we assume all lists are interchangeable, there's almost an 8% that any given player will not face any Archetype A in their 9 Rounds of Swiss (that is, roughly, 41 players who would not play against a list that represented a quarter of the field). Of course, this is looking at it from the exaggerated extremes to illustrate the point, but the chance to find oddities of extreme good (or bad luck) when it comes to pairings is higher in the largest events.
  8. You're right that Fat Han + Jake doesn't play like any other current list. It plays like Parattani, except you don't bring Manaroo... and Fenn can only use his ability once, and then gets a permanent Weapons Disabled crit (as this makes him pretty close to Prockets Jake). I have to disagree with your second point, I'm afraid. If it were true that a "solid list nobody is ready for" really was a lot stronger than a better list people are prepared for, we wouldn't be seeing the past year and a half of tournament seasons consistently dominated by the same 2-3 list archetypes. In the Spring/Summer/Fall of 2016, pretty close to every Regional, National, and Worlds was won by either Dengaroo, Palp Aces/X7s, or Torp Scouts with very few exceptions. Where were all the "solid but unexpected lists"? The recent tournament season is pretty much the same, with Mindlink Parattani and Miranda claiming a majority of big wins.
  9. If it were a perfectly linear relationship between # of players and # of rounds of Swiss, I'd agree. Except, in reality we see: Worlds: 350 players and 9 Rounds of Swiss vs Regionals: 100 players and 7 Rounds of Swiss
  10. Wouldn't this just make that new turret that requires TL utter garbage then? A Focus is far, far easier (don't have to juggle ranges and don't have to commit to a particular target until you attack) and if necessary you can spend that Focus on defense instead. So why would anyone ever run the Attack: TL turret if Blaster was it's Attack: Focus counterpart? Blaster Turret is basically a niche card for a select few pilots in a select few scenarios, and I think that's okay. It's intended for ships like the Moldy Crow, especially when flown by Palob. It's also solid on a Mindlink Kavil, who can make it 4-Dice and can easily get Focus + Focus or Focus + Target Lock, thanks to Mindlink, so he's able to fire and modify the shot. if if weren't for TLT being so good, we might even see a few Kanan Ghosts with Recon Spec + Rey double-tapping with Blaster Turrets for it's uncapped damage. It's also an interesting choice in Epic, where things like Tarkin, General Hux, Comms Boosters, or Esege can all easily allow a wing of generic Y-Wings or TIE/Aggressors to make full use of their blaster turrets (which are still the only way outside of Dorsal Turret to have a turret that is uncapped in damage potential, which can be useful when fighting against AG0 huge ships that are hard to joust with since they can crush you). So, it's true that in Standard you can't just slap Blaster Turrets onto generic Ys or HWKs. It's not your typical standard spam weapon. It really is a specialized tool of a few select ships/pilots and builds, and I don't think that is a problem nor is it grounds to buff the card. If your suggested buff was implemented, Mindlink Kavil would definitely be a thing, flying around with his 4-Damage TL+F turret and we'd definitely see some Kanan Ghosts double-tapping with it, since FCS + Recon + Rey means you could pretty effortlessly have a TL+F modified turret shot twice a round.
  11. Worlds is always a bit weird, given that there are so many players. Given the size of the field, there is always a chance that some lists might slip right on through with unusually favorable match-ups all day long. Take for instance the current champ, Nand, who won with Dengaroo. Even the developer of Dengaroo didn't take the list to Worlds because he said it was simply too unreliable against X7s. Yet Nand was able to get all the way to the finals only playing against a single list with X7s (and he lost that game). Once you get over 300 players, match-up oddities can start to create unusually fortunate pathways for a few players. Whether we like to admit it or not, match-ups (read: pairing luck) probably plays as much of a role in determining the winner of tournaments as does list-building and on-table decision-making. Despite their World's appearance, I wouldn't typically expect a Fat Han + Jake to be able to compete in the meta, generally speaking. Han's damage output is just too low for his price point. We can compare Han + Jake, a past staple of the meta game, and compare it to S&V's most popular Mindlink list (Manaroo + Asajj + Fenn). Han hits about as hard as Asajj (though Asajj bypasses AT while Han does not), and Jake hits as hard as Fen Rau one time with his prockets (5 die and 5 die), but once the prockets are gone Jake is hitting much less hard than Fenn. So it has less overall damage output potential than Asajj+Fenn, and this isn't even considering the fact that Parattani also has Manaroo flying around with her 2-3 die turret offense. Mindlink also makes Parattani much more insulated against stress-dealers than Han/Jake... one stressbot or one blocker and Jake is entirely shut down. When it comes to defense, I'd argue that Fenn is at least as hard to kill as Jake (both have 3 Agility and AT, and while Fenn has no shields he also gets +1 Agility at R1 and has an auto-evade in-arc at R1, though Jake does have the innate Evade action). Han is roughly about as hard to kill as Asajj (while Han has a few more hits of HP, Asajj has double the agility of Han, can easily get F+F or F+E thanks to Mindlink, and has Latts' evade-buff). On top of that, you get the 2 Agility and 9HP of Manaroo. So, in my opinion, a list like Han+Jake is basically fighting at 2/3 the potency of Parattani. And I suspect this is why we (to my knowledge) haven't seen any other Fat Falcon performances of note during the Regionals and System Open series. It's also a good way to see the absurdity of how cheap and efficient Scum are, in particular Parattani. They're basically analogous to Han+Jake except with a more consistent 5-Die R1 attack from the ace and a "free" Manaroo to boot.
  12. Resistance Han is really good in all of those Missions where you have to collect cargo tokens or satellite tokens or whatever. In fact, he likely breaks most of those scenarios. In standard 100pt play, he's pretty underwhelming because if you use his ability he's going at it alone and it's not clear you gain much by starting the conflict a turn or two early, at least it's hard to see how that's going to outweigh having the ability to reroll every attack all game long. I suppose he could be obnoxious for ships with Comms Relay, Rey (crew), or Moldy Crow that want one or more turns of nothing happening so they can start banking tokens. But in general, he's pretty bad in standard and it's not clear why you'd run him instead of Rebel Han if you were set on running a PS9 Falcon. Of course, Rey is the best Falcon by far these days, and even she is struggling to win in the current meta.
  13. At this point, FFG almost needs to make a Second Edition (X-Wing 2.0). They've learned a lot, and there are definitely a lot of things that would benefit from a bump up or a bump down in power level. Of course, over time, even a 2.0 would need a nerf here or there, but after 5 Years X-Wing has a lot of cards which are showing the stresses upon the game's seams.
  14. I am always amused to see the "fixes" people think are balanced. I'm sure Inquisitor would happily give up his TIE/v title to take this. He loses his Evade, which is a bummer, but at Range 3 he's rolling 4 Attack Dice and 5 Defense Dice with Autothrusters. I suspect he's okay with that. TIE Phantoms would take this as a no-brainer as well, since they are primary based and have nothing else in the title slot. I suspect TIE Interceptors would give up Royal Guard title for this as well, especially since at only 1 point it's cheaper than all the other standard "second mods" that are usually taken. My gut says this is very broken, especially in a 6-7 TIE Swarm or Crack Swarm, but probably also on TIE Phantoms and TIE Interceptors and the Inquisitor. But that's...just like... my opinion man.
  15. I thought it had been ruled Biggs couldn't protect, but guess I was wrong. I must be remembering a rule from a custom scenario-based tourney I played in years ago, it seems. My bad.