Jump to content

AngryAlbatross

Members
  • Content Count

    839
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    AngryAlbatross reacted to millertime059 in Audacious balance: Should we try to balance generics out first? (now that the game has existed for a while)   
    Having played enough with 5+bonus tie, I can say that 6x Strikers wouldn’t be busted as it is so very variance prone. But Interceptors need it far more. The extra health makes all the difference at I1.
  2. Like
    AngryAlbatross reacted to dadocollin in Audacious balance: Should we try to balance generics out first? (now that the game has existed for a while)   
    I just came here because there is not nearly enough support in this thread for 6 Strikers!
    I was so sure they were going to drop the Sentinel to 33 pts. when the Striker released in 2.0 that I went on eBay and bought an extra set of Striker conversions to get ready for all the 6xStriker joy.  And now, points update after points update, my poor Strikers are Sad...
  3. Like
    AngryAlbatross got a reaction from millertime059 in Audacious balance: Should we try to balance generics out first? (now that the game has existed for a while)   
    I for one would love to see RZ1's and Interceptor come down.  The generics are overpriced and for the interceptors there is just no reason to take them over a striker.
    It would be cool if they gave us generic i5 interceptors as royal guards.  Soontir, 2 guards and a shuttle should be a list.
  4. Like
    AngryAlbatross got a reaction from Darth Meanie in Audacious balance: Should we try to balance generics out first? (now that the game has existed for a while)   
    I for one would love to see RZ1's and Interceptor come down.  The generics are overpriced and for the interceptors there is just no reason to take them over a striker.
    It would be cool if they gave us generic i5 interceptors as royal guards.  Soontir, 2 guards and a shuttle should be a list.
  5. Like
    AngryAlbatross reacted to theBitterFig in 2.0 Ciena Ree and Interceptors   
    I think the recent Jake/AP-5 discussion is relevant.
    My understanding of the majority opinion is that "while coordinating" on AP-5 describes only the initial action, the one part of the 3-step process of coordinating; linked actions are allowed, but they happen outside the window of time which could be called "coordinating," and would not apply AP-5's allowance to perform actions while stressed.
    I think it's possible to bring that understanding of time and coordinating to Ciena Ree's "if the ship you coordinated performed a Barrel Roll or Boost action."  The Interceptor is only the ship Ciena Ree coordinated while for the time period when it's performing the coordinated action.  Then it's just some other ship in the list.  Autothrusters happens when the Interceptor is no longer the ship Ciena Ree coordinated.  A ship which used the coordinate to perform a Focus wouldn't meet the test "if the ship you coordinated performed a Barrel Roll or Boost action."
    However, since Afterburners and Ciena Ree's twist are effect which are triggered by the same event: the coordinated action.  As such, if the coordinated action was a boost or barrel roll (thus valid for Ciena's ability), the Interceptor could resolve the Autothrusters action before resolving the twist.  Again, only so long as the coordinated (and not just the Autothrusters action) was a valid trigger for Ciena's ability.
    I'd agree with this.
  6. Like
    AngryAlbatross reacted to Vineheart01 in 2.0 Ciena Ree and Interceptors   
    from Ability Queue in the rules:
    If a player has multiple abilities that triggered from the same event, that player chooses the order that those abilities are added to the ability queue
    Both trigger after doing an action. Specifically, the first Coordinated action because linked actions are not considered one action.
    Ciena would trigger at the same point, which is off the Focus action. But due to "i can order these as i see fit" you do the boost or roll first.
    Ciena now gets to check if a boost or roll was performed. Since she does NOT specify "the coordinated action" and two actions were done before she checks, its valid.
    If she specifically stated "If the ship you coordinated performed a boost or roll with the free action from coordinate" then no she wouldnt work.
    And i totally flipped my view on this midwrite for this lol....wrote that rule and went...uh...wait no she does work lol
  7. Like
  8. Like
    AngryAlbatross reacted to Blail Blerg in Audacious balance: Should we try to balance generics out first? (now that the game has existed for a while)   
    Audacious balance: Should we try to balance generics out first? (now that the game has existed for a while)
    I'm going to posit some positions here. I'm looking for people to analyze, support or refute them with good reasoning and data (either anecdotal or hard numbers). I hope people generally do arguments and suggestions like this. Look for counter-issues, provide reasoning, provide some data. 
    The best balance is when diversity is highest. See xwing 1.0, starcraft 2. 
    I think that one of the most doable things we could do to this game is immediately begin balancing out the generics and generic spam (mostly without upgrades) as a way of methodically pushing the game towards a stable balanced state. After that, it should be much easier and transparent to do balancing for 1. Initiative scaling, 2. Pilots individually, 3. Upgrades, combos, etc. 
    Here's another very arguable point, (that even myself could argue against) - generic spam is one of the lesser NPE, abusive,easy archetypes as a top-tier strat. 
    Historically, the most powerful spam archetype is probably the Howlrunner Tie Swarm. As people know though, a very difficult list to play correctly. However, it was known to reduce options very considerably for quite a while. Also generally as a strategy, there usually isn't more one can do to buff up the list at list building stage, so in terms of future proofing, its pretty easy to avoid a runaway combo disaster like 3 Jumpmasters. 
    --
    Here's a bunch of generics that I think could go down in price PAST THEIR CURRENT SPAM LIMITER safely without breaking the game. At this point cost, are singles or non-all-list numbers of this ship still balanced? Do you think that if a bunch of these changes happened (so theres a bunch of spam lists to choose from), would these be balanced in the general meta? Is there a spam + ace build with upgrades that becomes out of hand? (Note that upgrades themselves might need their own balancing, if the naked generics look fine, but adding the upgrade makes it broken, its likely an issue with the upgrade cost)
    REBEL
    Xwings and Bwings 41->40 points - 5 Xs, 5 Bs. I think this one is the most dangerous one. 5Xs sounds like a very tanky list with strong firepower and lots of mobility choices. 5Bs in a bit less worried about and think it would be a very interesting spam power list and really make a knife fight spam list really interesting. However, I think 5 of either of these would likely still be ok. 
    Blade Bwing 43->42
    Cavern Angel Zealot 41->40
    Red Squadron vet 43->42 
    Ewings Knaves 54->50 - 4Es. I think this one is easily doable, not overpowered and would be rather fun, zooming around, taking locks. 
    Rogues 56->53
    IMPERIAL
    I'm almost audacious enough to ask for reduction to the tie Fighter, but I'm not. I still think its pretty worthless as a filler in small number but I'm not sure of that. 
    Defenders 70->68? Still 2 only- (Still can't have 3 of them at that cost, would need 66) hmm. Not sure if this really should go down by much, even though 3 Tie Defenders seem not so good/fine, I'm more worried about these combo-ed with an Ace. (maybe??) (At 66, you'd easily be doing 2 Defenders + Vader/Whisper_upgraded)
    Onyx 76->74
    Interceptor 34->33 - 6 Alphas. All, everyones favorite. Now this looks like dastardly fun while being simultaneously dangerously awful? The Init1 sucks, but you'll have tons of blocking potential. This could easily be too easy to block things too, but I think some table time might show that to be false? 
    Sabers 40->38. Add predator or unreleased targeting computer? Doesn't seem broken. 
    Strikers 34->33 - 6 Strikers. Again a fan favorite. I think this would be exactly the same criterion for power as the Ints. 
    Black Squadron Scout 38->37 - 5 of these at Init3 each with a seismic charge. However, seismic changes are harder to drop than they used to be, looks ok. 
    SCUM
    Z 24->23, Empty Illicit slot isn't worth 1 point. 
    FIRST ORDER
    Silencers 52->50 - 4 Init1 Silencers. Again this is more of an issue of generics + aces. I definitely think 4 Silencers wouldn't really break things. Note that 2.0 silencers start at Init1 now. 
    First Order Test Pilot 58>54. Init4 silencers at cheaper would make for that good midrange + ace list like the very acclaimed QD + 2 Silencers lists. Also, currently no good double mods exist for generic silencers. 
    REPUBLIC
    Ahh, my favorite topics. 
    Torrent 25->24? You could already fit 8 of these into a squad, and I doubt its a very good list at all. Sadly, the Z at 23 has a much better dial, this offsets the extra hp ever so slightly. I still find these to be rarely worth anything if ignored. 
    Blue Squadron Protector Init3 = Gold + 2. 26 or 27. These definitely need to go down a lot. Would be good for missile spam or Dedicated spam. 
    Delta 39->36. These are still better than a Init1 Alpha, but not by that much. I expect they still hit like wet noodles.
    CLT likely should use a different formula
    Jedi Knight with 7B - 7B from 15->12, total 54->51. I do think 4 of these would be a royal pain the tush. I think its too dangerous to allow 4 in a list. 
    Arc 42->41. These are also just about right. I do think 5 Arcs would be probably a bit too strong. It would be awful to fly that list though. That medium base is cloggy and not fun at all. But that amount of firepower+durability is pretty staggering, esp with the rear arc. 
    Squad Seven Vet 47->44 it is ridiculous.
    SEPARATISTS
    Generally I think these are fine, if a bit on the strong side.
    Vultures - the main issue I think is that ESC is too cheap and provides so much extra power. Yet, balancing around that is not right either. Due to its serious spam blocking capacity, it would be wrong to bring down the naked Vulture by too much, otherwise it becomes rather easy to block the board very cheaply and body blocks are still good things in this era of the game. 
    ESC 4->5. (I really think it should be more like 6 points, but the extra point probably should be baked into the Vulture cuz of how strong bodies are). I don't think raising each Vulture with ESC up by a point is necessary. 
    Trade Fed Drone 20->19 ; check would be 25 meaning 8 with concussion missile? (Still probably not that great?)
    Separatist Drone 22->21
    Precise Hunter 26->23
    Haor Chall Proto 23->21
    DFS-311 24->23
    DFS-081 27->24
  9. Like
    AngryAlbatross got a reaction from StriderZessei in Looking forward to 2020 (*light spoilers*)   
    Ah yes, the TIE Super Punisher...
  10. Like
    AngryAlbatross reacted to Bucknife in Looking forward to 2020 (*light spoilers*)   
    Thought I'd shake things up with some stuff I'm really looking forward to this next year in X-Wing (hopefully)...

    Republic Gunships.

    Scum with Tech slots.

    Nasty little robot wasps.

    Resistance TIE Defenders.

    Small/Med base FO crew carriers.

    Imperial version Kimogila.
    ______________________________
    FO bomber or assault TIE or something incoming as well per the Resistance season 2 trailer.

    That's everything off the top of my head. We're still out figuring out wave 4, waiting eagerly for 5, teasing at 6, and after that? 
    Well, Ep9 will be out by then. So I guess we'll just create another thread and talk about it then.
     
  11. Haha
    AngryAlbatross reacted to JJ48 in Which upgrade would you like to see return for 2e?   
    I thought 2.0 already had a Cruise Missile.

  12. Like
    AngryAlbatross reacted to ImperialAce95 in Which upgrade would you like to see return for 2e?   
    Would love to see more of the obscure and interesting generic weapons come back, such as Flechette Torps / Cannon, as well as Seismic Torps. Maybe the Flechette weapons could inflict strain(?) Mag-Pulse Warheads inflict deplete, so why not?
    A Torpedo that basically allows you to lock obstacles and turn them into seismic charges would be cool. Would pair great with R3. Maybe:
    Seismic Torpedoes    Front Arc   2 charges   Range 2-3
    Attack(Target Lock): Spend 1 charge and choose 1 obstacle. Each ship and remote at range 0-1 of that obstacle suffers 1 damage. Then remove that obstacle.
  13. Like
    AngryAlbatross reacted to gadwag in Buzz Droids Question? In middle of a game now   
    "After an enemy ship moves through or overlaps you" does trigger if a launched droid lands under an enemy ship, right? I could see an argument for "the droid overlapped the enemy ship" rather than "the enemy ship overlapped the droid" causing the droid to not relocate. Given the rigged cargo ruling though, I'm pretty sure the droid does indeed relocate right away
  14. Sad
    AngryAlbatross reacted to Archangelspiv in Buzz Droids Question? In middle of a game now   
    That’s a negative Ghostrider. Ships are objects, 
  15. Like
    AngryAlbatross reacted to SpiderMana in Buzz Droids Question? In middle of a game now   
    1) If you move through or overlap them, they are moved. If you do not move through or overlap them, they stay put. Barrel rolls are a notable way to get them off of you because of this.
    2) If, after moving through/overlapping, they cannot be placed in front of you or behind you, due to obstacles, other ships, or even other remotes/devices, they are successfully "brushed off," as they take one damage. This also deals a damage to this ship, because scraping those buggers off is gonna hurt your hull a touch.
    Basically, as the CIS player, your goal is to keep the Buzz Droids in the front of the ship and block potential barrel rolls. This keeps the ship moving through them every round and taking a crit at i0 engagement.
  16. Like
    AngryAlbatross reacted to Darth Meanie in Better (335 Days) Late Than Never   
    I finally played my first ever game of 2.0 last night, 11 months and 1 day after 2.0 dropped.  I want to dedicate it to @Kehl_Aecea, who out of the compete kindness of his heart sent me an Imperial conversion kit he'd won knowing that this old coot was too cantankerous to ever pony up his own money to play his fave faction.  I played Inferno Squad plus a couple of Black Squad TIEs, and won!!

    Next, we tried out the Meteor Storm Environment card.  Y'all know I hate 200 point sandbox, right??  This was a hoot!!!  Every other turn you get to toss a rock on the board, foul up you opponent's perfectly good flight path, and in the end have a crazy random asteroid field to fly thru.  It ended up looking like this:

    My two X-wings ended up bugging out to R5 some damage, and circle around the back side of that mess.  With 1 Hull left per T-70, and Dooku at 5 Hull, my brother decides a 4 die R1 attack won't need a Focus and spends it to avoid a crit from Snap.  He rolls 2 eyeballs and 2 blanks on his attack against Lt Bastion!!  Lt Bastion pounds him for 3 hits cuz Bastions is luckily still there, and the next turn Snap Init kills Dooku with guns!!

    So, I'm 2-0 in 2.0!!
    At this point, I would say that Charge tokens add one heck of a lot of chit management, but we both can see how this makes for a much improved game in terms of design.
    DM gives 2.0 a thumbs up!
     
  17. Haha
    AngryAlbatross reacted to JJ48 in I’m Just Going to Leave This Here   
    Superman's X-Wing looks pretty cool!  Now show us Batman's.
  18. Like
  19. Like
    AngryAlbatross got a reaction from heychadwick in Buzz Droids Question? In middle of a game now   
    I think this is incorrect.  Only if you would overlap an obstacle can you not be placed.  Overlapping multiple ships is fine!
    Otherwise why would the card say 'each enemy ship at range 0'

  20. Like
    AngryAlbatross reacted to Hiemfire in Just a couple Tri fighter pilot ideas   
    Due to the size and mix of weapon options they have access to in Canon I think they may end up being a third small base with hardpoint.
  21. Like
    AngryAlbatross reacted to Prosk_019 in Just a couple Tri fighter pilot ideas   
    I thought it would have a pretty substantial attack as well but apparently that central gun is akin to the tie fighter's two guns in terms of power. Can't remember what I read on the wiki to come to that conclusion but I'm certainly open to a 3 die primary cause after all, it does look like it should have some teeth.
  22. Like
    AngryAlbatross reacted to Bucknife in Rename X-Wing   
    I've found the header "X-Wing: Take control of powerful X-Wings and nimble TIE Fighters to be a misleading summation of our little hobby. 
    Maybe call it:
    STAR WARS: EveryWing
    Take control of any ship from the Star wars universe that was worth making a model for...
    Feedback appreciated.
    Asking for a friend. 
     
  23. Like
    AngryAlbatross reacted to thespaceinvader in Buzz Droids Question? In middle of a game now   
    Ships are objects...
  24. Like
    AngryAlbatross reacted to KiAdiMoody in Buzz Droid   
    Yes. From page 13 of the Rules reference:
     
  25. Like
    AngryAlbatross got a reaction from JJ48 in Buzz Droids Question? In middle of a game now   
    I think this is incorrect.  Only if you would overlap an obstacle can you not be placed.  Overlapping multiple ships is fine!
    Otherwise why would the card say 'each enemy ship at range 0'

×
×
  • Create New...