Jump to content

Inquisitorsz

Members
  • Content Count

    562
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from SirDragonBane in Australian Nationals for Imperial Assault *to be updated as the weekend goes*   
    My imperial list is indeed 2 officers and Terro instead of the second ejets. 
    Cheers for the write up Kenny, I'll do one when I get home on Monday. I'm taking some notes this time soon don't forget things. 
  2. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from Masterchiefspiff in Australian Nationals for Imperial Assault *to be updated as the weekend goes*   
    My imperial list is indeed 2 officers and Terro instead of the second ejets. 
    Cheers for the write up Kenny, I'll do one when I get home on Monday. I'm taking some notes this time soon don't forget things. 
  3. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from ryanjamal in Australian Nationals for Imperial Assault *to be updated as the weekend goes*   
    My imperial list is indeed 2 officers and Terro instead of the second ejets. 
    Cheers for the write up Kenny, I'll do one when I get home on Monday. I'm taking some notes this time soon don't forget things. 
  4. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from ThatJakeGuy in Australian Nationals for Imperial Assault *to be updated as the weekend goes*   
    My imperial list is indeed 2 officers and Terro instead of the second ejets. 
    Cheers for the write up Kenny, I'll do one when I get home on Monday. I'm taking some notes this time soon don't forget things. 
  5. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from theaficionado in Australian Nationals for Imperial Assault *to be updated as the weekend goes*   
    My imperial list is indeed 2 officers and Terro instead of the second ejets. 
    Cheers for the write up Kenny, I'll do one when I get home on Monday. I'm taking some notes this time soon don't forget things. 
  6. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from NeverBetTheFett in Current scum list discussion   
    I tried this last night. 
    Maul
    Ahsoka
    Shyla
    Onar
    Gideo
    eWeequays

    It's actually pretty scary. Decent trait mix, a solid number of threats, good number of activations and health. 
    Had a very close game but Han and Chewie proved too strong in the end. 

    I like Ahsoka's flexibility but I think she just struggles to make the points back sometimes... and can die a bit too easily. Makes great bait though. 
    I like Maul for blocking and being annoying, but also doesn't hit hard enough sometimes. Very dice roll dependent. Can often be ignored. 
    Shyla, Onar and Weequays are great as always. 
    The lack of support characters and "spare" activations can hurt a bit too...  
    There's some potential here but I'm thinking that Ahsoka is going to be bench warming from now on. She just isn't impactful enough compared to something like palp, terro or shyla. 
     
  7. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from TallTonyB in FFG: PLEASE PRE-PAINT   
    I'm not sure why everyone is missing this.
    If you're worried about not being able to paint well or not having the time to paint... then don't. There, I just solved your problem. 
    It's no different in Imperial Assault. Plenty of people paint those miniatures, but you don't have to, and many don't. But that get's a pass for some reason because it's considered a "board game" not a "tabletop game"? 
    Who cares what the game is labeled as?
    Either you enjoy the game, the hobby or both. The game caters for all 3 groups. 
    Whether or not there's an expectation that your miniatures are painted depend entirely on the community so make it what you want it to be. 
    I very much doubt FFG will every introduce a "must be painted" requirement that's common to other tabletop game tournaments.
    Btw, very few of those other tabletop games are actually designed for tournament play in the same way as FFG games are, which means often the hobby side has a stronger presence than the gaming side. I expect Legion to be more evenly balanced between the two or even skewing to the gaming side.  

    This is what FFG usually puts in their tournament rules for similar games:
    "Players are welcome and encouraged to personalize their army according to the following rules:
    • Players may paint their figure models. They cannot modify a figure in any way that would create confusion about which unit the model represents." 
  8. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from rag1n in Store Championships 2017 Results Thread   
    Milsims 
    Melbourne Australia 
    3rd June 2017 
    Winner: Luke K running Poe/Rey 
    Top 4: Poe/Maz, Poe/Rey, ePalp, 2xStormTrooper+TIEpilot+Bala 
    The swarm list went 4-0 in Swiss 
     
  9. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from davidhaus in Store Championships 2017 Results Thread   
    Milsims 
    Melbourne Australia 
    3rd June 2017 
    Winner: Luke K running Poe/Rey 
    Top 4: Poe/Maz, Poe/Rey, ePalp, 2xStormTrooper+TIEpilot+Bala 
    The swarm list went 4-0 in Swiss 
     
  10. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from thereisnotry in Battle Report: Worlds 2017   
    Awesome post Brett. Thanks for that. 
    It still surprises me that people go down into that rancor pit when there's a massive fight going on in the middle of the room. 
    Yeah you get some points but when you're taking someone like Obiwan or Davith or a Gammorean out of the fight upstairs you end up giving your opponent a huge positional and figure advantages that tends to snowball a lot faster than some objective points do. 
  11. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from nickv2002 in Anchored Cantina - New Map Rotation Discussion   
    OMG that's so annoying.  We really didn't need extra book keeping. 
     
    What is the point of this rule? It makes zero sense. 
    And why bother making specific rules about going below zero if it's impossible to spend the VPs that can cause you to go below zero....  
    FFG need to lay off the LSD 
  12. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from Arviss in Anchored Cantina - New Map Rotation Discussion   
    OMG that's so annoying.  We really didn't need extra book keeping. 
     
    What is the point of this rule? It makes zero sense. 
    And why bother making specific rules about going below zero if it's impossible to spend the VPs that can cause you to go below zero....  
    FFG need to lay off the LSD 
  13. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from ElGarfio in Vic Regionals report   
    Hi everyone, 
    Since I can't log in to these forums at work any more, I typed up my report on reddit. 
    Here's the link. 
    Enjoy
  14. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from nickv2002 in Vic Regionals report   
    Hi everyone, 
    Since I can't log in to these forums at work any more, I typed up my report on reddit. 
    Here's the link. 
    Enjoy
  15. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from DerBaer in Broken Gamorean Weapon in JR   
    It's because they use really crappy resin. It's fine for thick parts with low detail, but when you try making things more delicate, it's a crappy material. 
    They need something a bit stiffer and firmer. 
    My stuff wasn't broken but lots of bent bits. I already replace all my lightsabers and similar staffs etc... with metal rods. I can't stand pool noodle lightsabers.
    The Gamorran axes are all pretty bent, as is the Dewback shock lance and even Terro's gun somehow. 
  16. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from a1bert in Companion movement   
    Yes they do.
    However, enemy figures don't pay double for a space occupied by a companion. 
  17. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from Swusn in Rebels   
    Rebels is much better than most of Clone Wars is. 
    Clone wars has so much filler. It's certainly better than the prequel movies, but Rebels is overall darker and more serious. 
  18. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from Baer in Tournament Regs have been updated again. This time they're much clearer.   
    That depends what you want from a game. 
     
    It's like comparing checkers to chess. Both have some strategy and both can be played to fairly high competitive level. But they are completely different beasts. Checkers is your "faster & more furious" game. Chess is the slower more "thinking' game. Yes you can play chess fast as well but that's almost a completely different skill set. 

    I've played quite a few regionals now over the last two years and I have to say I've never had a problem with people running away and points denial. That's where the mission objectives become important. That's what drives the conflict. That's what pushes the two armies towards each other. In my opinion, that's how it should work. 
     
    I've said it multiple times that I think these rule changes risk removing some elements of strategy from the game. Just because you don't like "running away", doesn't mean everyone does. 
    I don't call it running away. I call it point denial at worst, and good positioning at best. 
    I don't have to run to the far corner of the map to deny points. I can do so with clever positioning of other units or creating threat/pressure elsewhere and forcing tough choices for my opponent. That element is diminished now because everything is worth points and it's much easier/quicker to score them. 
     
    If this game becomes 40K... turn up and roll dice. Then my interest in it will severely diminish. The depth is what I like about it. In some ways, the rule change has "simplified things". That's fine for entry level and casual play, but it's not why I got so deep into the competitive side. 

    Competitive game has and always will put setting/fluff/flavor second. If you want to just play Han and Chewie then stick to campaign or casual play. There's nothing wrong with that. But don't go around saying everything has to change because it doesn't fit what your view of a star wars strategy game should be. 
  19. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from Bitterman in How does the new rule change (points for kills) affect strategy?   
    I never leave home without some cheap objective grabbers. Smugglers, officers, hired guns, ugnaughts etc.... are all great. 
     
    Too often people look at some abilities or what dice are in an attack and instantly poo-poo a unit. 
    They don't consider what role that units fits. The role is more important than the damage output. 
    Hired guns don't kill much, the thing they do best is die. BUT, they are very cheap, very fast, and people hate wasting attacks to kill them (especially since they can shoot back). 
    They (just like the smuggler) are great for grabbing/contesting terminals and objectives. 
     
    It's the reason why no one uses elite smugglers and elite hired guns. They cost more but don't really do their role any better. The smuggler maybe because he get's faster and his movement abilities get better. But the point is, the role of the unit is the same. There's not point taking something more expensive to just is up the back. 
     
    That's why C3PO is so good. A focus is nice, and his distracting ability is sometimes handy, but he can't attack at all, is slow and need to be adjacent for all his abilities. So why take him? He's bloody cheap. He does one thing and he does it well, for little cost.
     
    Conversely, it's why units like Mak, Loku and Murne don't get much play time. They are attackers but just don't do that job well. 
     
    When people complain about over costed units. I don't look at the abilities or damage. I look at what role/purpose a unit fills. Vader isn't just an expensive beat stick. He's also got line of sight range with unmitigated damage (force choke) and he's huge points denial. On top of that, he's very imposing and sometimes people are scared of him. Sometimes the psychological aspect is important. I've seen experienced players underestimate units like Vader, Han, RGC and AT-ST because of a preconceived notion that they are uncompetitive or over costed. 
  20. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from Bitterman in Tournament Regs have been updated again. This time they're much clearer.   
    That depends what you want from a game. 
     
    It's like comparing checkers to chess. Both have some strategy and both can be played to fairly high competitive level. But they are completely different beasts. Checkers is your "faster & more furious" game. Chess is the slower more "thinking' game. Yes you can play chess fast as well but that's almost a completely different skill set. 

    I've played quite a few regionals now over the last two years and I have to say I've never had a problem with people running away and points denial. That's where the mission objectives become important. That's what drives the conflict. That's what pushes the two armies towards each other. In my opinion, that's how it should work. 
     
    I've said it multiple times that I think these rule changes risk removing some elements of strategy from the game. Just because you don't like "running away", doesn't mean everyone does. 
    I don't call it running away. I call it point denial at worst, and good positioning at best. 
    I don't have to run to the far corner of the map to deny points. I can do so with clever positioning of other units or creating threat/pressure elsewhere and forcing tough choices for my opponent. That element is diminished now because everything is worth points and it's much easier/quicker to score them. 
     
    If this game becomes 40K... turn up and roll dice. Then my interest in it will severely diminish. The depth is what I like about it. In some ways, the rule change has "simplified things". That's fine for entry level and casual play, but it's not why I got so deep into the competitive side. 

    Competitive game has and always will put setting/fluff/flavor second. If you want to just play Han and Chewie then stick to campaign or casual play. There's nothing wrong with that. But don't go around saying everything has to change because it doesn't fit what your view of a star wars strategy game should be. 
  21. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from Bitterman in Tournament Regs have been updated again. This time they're much clearer.   
    I've always seen IA as chess with dice. The strategy about what to move, when and where is super important. You don't run your queen to the other side of the board by herself in chess either. 
    I don't like rolling dice for the sake of rolling dice. 
    If I can win a game without rolling dice, eg. through smart and strategic play, then that's a well designed game. Multiple ways to win is what adds depth to a game. Sure, delaying tactics can be "unfun" but it also promotes the opposition into reacting. 
     
    This game is at it's best when both players try to out think each other. When one player does something sneaky, the other one reacts. If I run away with something, the opponent has to make a tough choice to chase the points or not... they have to look a few activations or turns ahead and see what they can achieve otherwise. Maybe they got some cards up their sleeve to chase and catch my cowardly figure. Maybe they've calculated that a certain combo with objectives is all they need... 
     
    To me, a game gets boring in two ways....
    Either I can predict fairly well what my opponent will do, and despite my actions to counter him, he'll continue do to it because he refuses to change up his game plan.
    or
    I just have a better list or a better match up and apart from some huge swing in dice luck, my opponent is going to struggle all game. That's not fun either. That's common with new players or those who pick "sub-par" lists. 
    I don't like that some list or units are just flat out weak but that's reality and will always be the case in competitive play. 
  22. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from RoyalRich in When to Play Aggressive in Skirmish   
    Post game analysis is a great tool, especially when learning. What did I do wrong? How could I have played better? 
    Sometimes you just get outplayed by some massive combo of cards and a strong figure, sometimes it's the simple mistakes that really hurt. 
    Something as simple as putting a figure in a corridor, and blocking all your other shooting can have a massive effect. 
     
    Here's an example. Last night my opponent placed a weequay just around a corner. The corridor was very long but had one blocking square. So the weequay took a shot, did a few damage. 
    Except now, that weequay was in the perfect spot to block the rest of his list shooting. Bossk could still get around but would have to go deep and he's got short range. All the other stuff had long range and couldn't shoot.
    So that means, not only do I have to take less damage from some HKs this turn, but it also allows me to move up. 
    I was running fast, melee heavy list, so I needed to rush forward. The positioning error made it possible for me to get across the map without taking much damage. Usually by this stage Obi-wan would have taken a sever beating. 
     
    Once my melee stuff was in position to strike, that's when the real aggressiveness started.
    Knowing what is and ins't likely to kill your figures is a key part of planning your attack. For example. I know that Bossk can't kill Jedi Luke in one shot. My opponent had initiative, step around the corner, shot Luke. Cool. I take some damage and then Luke jumps deep and kills both HKs before they can activate. Not only have I taken out a whole activation, but I've also significantly reduced the damage that Luke will take for the rest of the turn. 
     
    I think there's two main points about being aggressive. 
    1)
    Do it only when you are sure you'll come out better - Don't go deep with that Bantha or Rancor or Vader just to kill two troopers and then die. That's not worth it. It doesn't have to be points based either. In the example above, even though Luke is 12 and the HKs are 8... taking out a whole activation and two strong attacks is a pretty good deal. depends how the rest of the game is going of course, but generally I'd be happy with that trade had Luke died straight after. Know your opponents strong points and go for those. 
    As a side note - know what your figures are good against and what they are bad against. Don't shoot troopers at the Dianoga. They'll do 2 damage each max. Ignore it and punish the opponents force instead.
    And in a similar way, know what your figures minimum and average range is. Nothing makes me smile more when an opponent misses a medium to long range shot. That's a completely wasted attack. Sometimes you just have nothing else you can do, sure, but usually just getting better positioning for later, or shooting something else is more beneficial.  Most figures will get 2-3 attacks per game. Wasting one completely (be it on something tough to hurt or something hard to hit) is wasting 33% of that unit's killing power. 
     
    2)
    When you go aggressive. Go full aggressive. Pick your time to strike, and go hard. You might be waiting for a good setup, or for initiative, or for a good combo of command cards. But when that opportunity is there, go for it. Don't just throw your one strong guy in there. Give him full support. Bring everyone in, overwhelm your opponent. Even if that means distracting somewhere else, or baiting them into activating something in a less favorable order. 
    Basically when you spring your trap or enact your plan... do it fully. The game doesn't last long enough and there aren't enough turns for a do-over. 
  23. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from leacher in When to Play Aggressive in Skirmish   
    Post game analysis is a great tool, especially when learning. What did I do wrong? How could I have played better? 
    Sometimes you just get outplayed by some massive combo of cards and a strong figure, sometimes it's the simple mistakes that really hurt. 
    Something as simple as putting a figure in a corridor, and blocking all your other shooting can have a massive effect. 
     
    Here's an example. Last night my opponent placed a weequay just around a corner. The corridor was very long but had one blocking square. So the weequay took a shot, did a few damage. 
    Except now, that weequay was in the perfect spot to block the rest of his list shooting. Bossk could still get around but would have to go deep and he's got short range. All the other stuff had long range and couldn't shoot.
    So that means, not only do I have to take less damage from some HKs this turn, but it also allows me to move up. 
    I was running fast, melee heavy list, so I needed to rush forward. The positioning error made it possible for me to get across the map without taking much damage. Usually by this stage Obi-wan would have taken a sever beating. 
     
    Once my melee stuff was in position to strike, that's when the real aggressiveness started.
    Knowing what is and ins't likely to kill your figures is a key part of planning your attack. For example. I know that Bossk can't kill Jedi Luke in one shot. My opponent had initiative, step around the corner, shot Luke. Cool. I take some damage and then Luke jumps deep and kills both HKs before they can activate. Not only have I taken out a whole activation, but I've also significantly reduced the damage that Luke will take for the rest of the turn. 
     
    I think there's two main points about being aggressive. 
    1)
    Do it only when you are sure you'll come out better - Don't go deep with that Bantha or Rancor or Vader just to kill two troopers and then die. That's not worth it. It doesn't have to be points based either. In the example above, even though Luke is 12 and the HKs are 8... taking out a whole activation and two strong attacks is a pretty good deal. depends how the rest of the game is going of course, but generally I'd be happy with that trade had Luke died straight after. Know your opponents strong points and go for those. 
    As a side note - know what your figures are good against and what they are bad against. Don't shoot troopers at the Dianoga. They'll do 2 damage each max. Ignore it and punish the opponents force instead.
    And in a similar way, know what your figures minimum and average range is. Nothing makes me smile more when an opponent misses a medium to long range shot. That's a completely wasted attack. Sometimes you just have nothing else you can do, sure, but usually just getting better positioning for later, or shooting something else is more beneficial.  Most figures will get 2-3 attacks per game. Wasting one completely (be it on something tough to hurt or something hard to hit) is wasting 33% of that unit's killing power. 
     
    2)
    When you go aggressive. Go full aggressive. Pick your time to strike, and go hard. You might be waiting for a good setup, or for initiative, or for a good combo of command cards. But when that opportunity is there, go for it. Don't just throw your one strong guy in there. Give him full support. Bring everyone in, overwhelm your opponent. Even if that means distracting somewhere else, or baiting them into activating something in a less favorable order. 
    Basically when you spring your trap or enact your plan... do it fully. The game doesn't last long enough and there aren't enough turns for a do-over. 
  24. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from DerBaer in How does the new rule change (points for kills) affect strategy?   
    I never leave home without some cheap objective grabbers. Smugglers, officers, hired guns, ugnaughts etc.... are all great. 
     
    Too often people look at some abilities or what dice are in an attack and instantly poo-poo a unit. 
    They don't consider what role that units fits. The role is more important than the damage output. 
    Hired guns don't kill much, the thing they do best is die. BUT, they are very cheap, very fast, and people hate wasting attacks to kill them (especially since they can shoot back). 
    They (just like the smuggler) are great for grabbing/contesting terminals and objectives. 
     
    It's the reason why no one uses elite smugglers and elite hired guns. They cost more but don't really do their role any better. The smuggler maybe because he get's faster and his movement abilities get better. But the point is, the role of the unit is the same. There's not point taking something more expensive to just is up the back. 
     
    That's why C3PO is so good. A focus is nice, and his distracting ability is sometimes handy, but he can't attack at all, is slow and need to be adjacent for all his abilities. So why take him? He's bloody cheap. He does one thing and he does it well, for little cost.
     
    Conversely, it's why units like Mak, Loku and Murne don't get much play time. They are attackers but just don't do that job well. 
     
    When people complain about over costed units. I don't look at the abilities or damage. I look at what role/purpose a unit fills. Vader isn't just an expensive beat stick. He's also got line of sight range with unmitigated damage (force choke) and he's huge points denial. On top of that, he's very imposing and sometimes people are scared of him. Sometimes the psychological aspect is important. I've seen experienced players underestimate units like Vader, Han, RGC and AT-ST because of a preconceived notion that they are uncompetitive or over costed. 
  25. Like
    Inquisitorsz got a reaction from thereisnotry in How does the new rule change (points for kills) affect strategy?   
    I never leave home without some cheap objective grabbers. Smugglers, officers, hired guns, ugnaughts etc.... are all great. 
     
    Too often people look at some abilities or what dice are in an attack and instantly poo-poo a unit. 
    They don't consider what role that units fits. The role is more important than the damage output. 
    Hired guns don't kill much, the thing they do best is die. BUT, they are very cheap, very fast, and people hate wasting attacks to kill them (especially since they can shoot back). 
    They (just like the smuggler) are great for grabbing/contesting terminals and objectives. 
     
    It's the reason why no one uses elite smugglers and elite hired guns. They cost more but don't really do their role any better. The smuggler maybe because he get's faster and his movement abilities get better. But the point is, the role of the unit is the same. There's not point taking something more expensive to just is up the back. 
     
    That's why C3PO is so good. A focus is nice, and his distracting ability is sometimes handy, but he can't attack at all, is slow and need to be adjacent for all his abilities. So why take him? He's bloody cheap. He does one thing and he does it well, for little cost.
     
    Conversely, it's why units like Mak, Loku and Murne don't get much play time. They are attackers but just don't do that job well. 
     
    When people complain about over costed units. I don't look at the abilities or damage. I look at what role/purpose a unit fills. Vader isn't just an expensive beat stick. He's also got line of sight range with unmitigated damage (force choke) and he's huge points denial. On top of that, he's very imposing and sometimes people are scared of him. Sometimes the psychological aspect is important. I've seen experienced players underestimate units like Vader, Han, RGC and AT-ST because of a preconceived notion that they are uncompetitive or over costed. 
×
×
  • Create New...