Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About heliodorus04

  • Rank
  • Birthday 11/11/1968

Profile Information

  • Location
    Denver Colorado

Recent Profile Visitors

547 profile views
  1. I quit the game when TLT was released because ... (insert the most intolerable whine to you personally, and that's what I'm saying herein) But I love the minis and I came back... when Harpoon was released... I played 3 games and I entered a pit of self loathing that I didn't do enough research before spending another $200 on X-WIng... I haven't looked yet at 2.0. I knew that the 100 point dogfight took the fun out of the game for me, and the game had no grounding in any consistency but was in the phase of rampant power creep to promote the newest models. Do I get my hope up? I was fooled twice. I'm in "shame on me" territory. I wanted a fun star-warsy game and I got math-hammer. Math-hammer between offense dice and defense dice will remain the same. Well, then offense is always going to be a better place to emphasize your list than defense, doesn't it? None of the ships I liked thematically (Defender, TIE Swarm, TIE Bomber/Punisher) ever amounted to much and if I cannot play the ships that look cool at a competitive level then there is no point pursuing this game.j Will I be able to play the ships I like?
  2. The single statistics are irrelevant without an understanding of the difference between what the two sides are actually probable to roll. X-Wing butchers probability better than most games in dice design. X-Wing, emphasizes more heavily than any game I personally know, a structural difference between attack and defence dice. Then add action economy, and there's no point trying to teach a layman about X-Wing probabilities because no two situations are alike in terms of the modifiers to the attack dice. What we know is that the modifiers to defense dice don't amount to anywhere near as good the modifiers to attack dice. This is all you need to know about probabilities in X-Wing: hits are probable, evades are incidental. The more attack dice, the better you'll feel. The more evade dice, the greater you're level of disappointment... There's an app for seeing the probabilities of #of hits and #of evades out on app sales sites. Go look at what 4 dice with a TL and a focus look like compared to 4 evade dice with a focus and an evade action. The probable differences are what you need to understand. Harpoon... ruins... the... game... (in combination with other meta elements like LRS, point cost, etc.).
  3. Crikey, what had you suspending disbelief that long?
  4. I'm a novice player, and I don't understand "timing" the way others do. I had Kulda firing at a ship that was in both bullseye and regular firing arc. My veteran opponent (who apparently didn't know the universal bullseye firing arc rules anyway ) said he was entitled to spend his focus and evade tokens on Kulda's attack (he had one of each) BEFORE Kulda's ability (remove all focus and evade or suffer 1 damage) was able to trigger, effectively nullifying the ability. Now, I realize that we were both wrong about the basic ability of a bullseye arc. But setting that aside, how does timing work in such a situation?
  5. I understand why pros like them. Do pros understand why casuals do not like them? Whose opinion should have higher value? Generally on the forum, casuals do not get a fair shake. It's 4 hits, almost every time (in application) plus splash damage. It's stupid easy to score 4 hits. Four hits kills a great many ships (particularly from earlier waves), making them impractical at best for pros and foolish for amateurs & beginners. It's just not the way I want this game to play (but I've always wanted a more cinematic X-Wing experience, and have a bias). How is the Harpoon situation different from the Jumpmaster-5000 situation pre Jumpmaster nerf? I wasn't around then, but the nerf was in application, quite huge.
  6. My defense against Harpoons is House Rule 1: No Harpoons
  7. "The difference between a good matchup and a great one: a good matchup appears evenly balanced by everyone. A great one appears to be unblanaced in equal parts but in favor of opposite sides." If the only opinions that matter are the tournament players, then the community is more incestuously compromised by group-think than my current impression... I can't convince new players to start buying into THIS game. The cost isn't worth the payoff. That such a majority of X-Wing players think harpoons (or TLTs, or simply the ubiquitous Miranda DOni) are fun is another matter altogether... I've tried to make my gameplay fit the meta, but it just isn't fun to always have to buy the same 10 basic lists and join in abusing the most leveraged stress points of the game. I realize this means I should sell my toys and leave, eh? I've always wanted a much more cinematic game than the rules set enables. Documented balancing mistakes include Deadeye/Jumpmaster (as well as Jumpmaster and its torpedoes, illicit, and mech), Biggs revamp, Tactician, among others. I recall the 'truly top players' saying that those original states were okay at the time, too...
  8. What ships are surviving that wouldn't have? I'm not seeing that. I'm seeing the opposite. Maybe the Alpha Shuttle itself? But that's a factor of it being a dirt cheap Harpoon platform with 7 hit points (see below). The Nu is pretty devastating, and you can get 4 of them in a generic list. Hard to arc dodge all of them... A Harpoon has a 73+ probability of scoring 3 hits on its native Target Lock (and above 75 probability for 4 hits if a Focus is available) . This is its innate problem (all other attack types are inferior per cost point). This is prior to splash damage, combination effects (such as TLT or Long Range Scanners), ease of access, effective range (huge!). It creates the dilemma of "Do I have enough Hull to survive an alpha strike (or do I have a high enough PS to arc dodge lower pilots' harpoons). Harpoons should be in every list (in fact, they must be). In trying to maintain my question's relationship to the original "Game Theory" post, how is this not a reduction of the Rock/Paper/Scissors design less skill dependent, less matchup dependent? This Harpoon thing just works, all the time. They're great. Everybody should have at least 2 in a list! In X--Wing's abstraction of Rock/Paper/Scissors, revealing your attack item first (i.e., firing first with Harpoons) is now more important than whether your opponent picked Rock/Paper/Scissor (or Harpoon). Piloting matters, but less so than in the past; the harpoon survivability of your list arises as a factor competing with the importance of pilot skill. It's much easier to set up that Range2-Range3 firing area and count on 3 hits from the firer (even on 4 evade dice, you can only count on 1 evade, leaving 2 damage and a harpoon condition card). I don't think it's reasonable to point out the list-expanding capabilities created by Harpoon without discussing the reduction in armaments you're going to encounter; Harpoon is now ubiquitous, hits hard and accurate, leaves a splash damage generation factory (that TLTs love), and is cheap enough to throw on suicide ships. It's all around bad news. Requiring expenditure of the TL when firing seems like an obvious leverage point that could not have been missed (i.e., obvious power creep decision). The evolution of the game has had its ups and downs; what I dislike is when a card becomes so obviously advantageous that it becomes everywhere. Harpoon is everywhere. It's not fun for me (emphasis added). I don't dislike the thing itself. But game impact is overwhelming and reduces flavor for me.
  9. Hey, I've really enjoyed your PTL videos, and have watched a great many. One criticism is that too many times the commentators are not talking about what IS happening at the game in front of them, but talking about what happened in another game. I have watched as commentators get lost in the game they are supposed to be simul-casting, and it's been unprofessional and frustrating. Otherwise, though, I am digging your league and the concepts.
  10. I liked your article. Rational, reasoned. Nice work. You made excellent comments about the nature of the Harpoon's effect on X-Wing through some indirect factors (missile vs. torpedo). I think this is more of a question: How do these (following) factors impact the theory-craft of game design? 1. Harpoon's cost relative to other similar ordinance (torpedo/missile family). 2. Target Lock SPEND requirement (Harpoon is a rare missile to not require TL forfeiture to fire). The sub-category here is the statistical awesomeness of 4 dice with Target Lock, and the ease with which TLs can be aquired since Range 3+ target lock capability in game. 3. Target Lock splash damage. The sub-category is the complimentary (and sometimes self-harming) nature of this game impact, particularly in the alpha strike meta; 4. Is it not demonstrable (mathematically) that Harpoon implements a full Rock/Paper/Scissors within the "Attack Dice:Cost: Hit Likelihood: Ease of Use" formaula where Harpoon relegates TIE Swarms, or TIE Interceptors (for example's sake, and not to be exclusive) into really bad ideas. Harpoon is "stupid not to bring". 5. Harpoon alone changes the way all list-building in the game must be considered. The release of Harpoon is, at least at this present moment, an epochal event.
  11. heliodorus04

    New FAQ

    I'm stunned that the Harpoon is encouraged to be so overwhelmingly essential to your lists. As if TLT wasn't good enough?
  • Create New...