Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Gausebeck

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

752 profile views
  1. Those were my first thought, along with Merl + Intimidation. Passive mods everywhere plus -2 agility on a target that Merl blocks. I love all the pieces but it would probably have ~15 points left over, which is awkward.
  2. Oh... I just thought of a big problem with Automated Targeting Protocols. Say you have a swarm of FO all with ATP and all at the same initiative. If your first couple attacks destroy a ship, it's still a valid target because it's not removed until the next initiative. Does that mean the remaining ATP ships have to keep attacking the already-destroyed ship rather than attack a non-destroyed ship at longer range?
  3. I'm not a fan of Angled Deflectors on Malarus. Costs one shield upfront and costs a focus each time you reinforce (which would probably have saved at least one damage), so it doesn't help until reinforce has saved you at least 3 damage in one round or 4+ damage across multiple rounds. I think I'll be happy with Malarus hanging out in back and lasting long enough that way. I'll definitely have to try out Automated Targeting Protocols on everyone. Passive double mods (ATP + Malarus) while having a swarm bump-fest could be effective. I'll also want to try Sensor Buoys (plus Proud Tradition? Rivas?). They seem like they could be fairly survivable if you put them inside obstacles, but placement will be tricky and they might end up shaping the battlefield more than they'd actually provide locks. Phasma seems limited by the 0-1 range with Malarus wanting to stay in back. Terex could work but my first impression is that ATP looks like a better source of calculates. Lots of fun options to try, though! I'm excited that we get Malarus + 6x FO and some room to play with upgrades.
  4. Gausebeck

    Dash Is Back

    With 121-point Dash, there's just enough room to fit Lando. A generally solid ship with the ability to give Dash a pre-maneuver barrel roll (or pre-K-turn double focus) seems like it could make for a good wingman, though Lando isn't as strong when you can't fit Nien Numb.
  5. I took a look at the two big Extended tournaments since the points update (Dathomir and Corellia), which were both won by Nantex swarms. Defining "Nantex swarm" as a list with six Nantex, there were nine of those lists across the two tournaments and every one of them did very well. The combined record of those nine lists was 46-8 in Swiss, or 41-3 if you exclude the mirror matches. In the elimination rounds their combined record was 19-6, or 17-4 excluding mirror matches. That leaves a grand total of seven non-mirror-match losses, and the lists that won games against them were: Vader (FCS, Afterburners) + Soontir (Crack Shot + Targeting + Shield) + Grand Inquisitor Redline (ProTorps + Prox Mines) + Whisper (Passive + Fifth Bro) + Grand Inquisitor (2x win) Seventh Sister + Fifth Brother (Passive + Homing) + 2x Sigma (2x Crack Shot) (2x win) 6x Trade Fed Drone (3x Discord) + 2x TUB (2x Plasma Torps) Grievous (Title) + 4x Nantex (4x Gravitic Deflection, 3x Crack Shot, 1x Marksmanship) So... mostly my conclusion is they don't lose to much at all. Those win records are pretty insane. Of their few losses, a little over half were to ace-y lists that could move after the I4 Nantex either by initiative or bid. But it's not much of a pattern, and they certainly beat more of those types of lists than they lost to. Hopefully we'll see someone figure out a counter by the next big tournament.
  6. I was playing this exact list before the points update with Marksmanship on both B-Wings (cheap and good with Autoblasters) and the rest as a bid. Now that Lando is one point cheaper, I really like this version: Lando Calrissian + Nien Nunb (83) Luke Skywalker + S-Foils (62) Ten Numb + S-Foils + Autoblasters + FCS (55) Total: 200 One frustration I had with Lando + Braylen + Ten is that Braylen has a lot of trouble turning around because he can't shed stress like Ten. This version feels a lot more maneuverable and has been fun to fly. Luke doesn't have the raw firepower of a double-tapping B-Wing but I think the time on target makes up for it, and he's significantly tankier and even a bit of an ace with Lando letting him reposition before or after his maneuver.
  7. Yeah, the strain wouldn't be too bad (except on Malarus herself, who shoots early and can't decline the effect). The other part is not being able to reroll eyes when you don't have focus. Howl swarms can be surprisingly effective on passive mods alone; a Malarus swarm would be somewhat less so.
  8. This was my first thought, too. I love Howl swarms and this would be more flexible (range 0-2) and tougher, even though the reroll ability isn't as strong and comes with strain. I hope Malarus comes in at 50 or less but with Howl at 46 I'm not sure that will happen.
  9. The main use I see for the single Intimidation is in the initial engagement. With speed 5 + boost it's pretty easy to put that ship in front and block or ram something, and then the other six ships can focus down that reduced-agility target. After that, I agree it's unlikely that one ship will be the right one in position to block. Even if it just works once, though, removing six green dice from the game seems like a good deal for 3 points. There are definitely some interesting six-ship versions. I thought about Ion Missiles + Passive Sensors and if you can line it up it would be brutal. The main issue I had with it is that later on the Barons would all want to be doing reposition + focus instead of spending their actions on Passive Sensors. In Extended prockets are a big punch, but you can only fit six Barons with five prockets. It's also possible to run Howl + Iden + 4x Baron and fly in formation, though the dials don't match up perfectly.
  10. It's not any amazing new idea, but with the new points we can now fit up to seven Barons in a list, and it seems like a strong swarm competitor: Baron of the Empire + Intimidation (31) Baron of the Empire (28) Baron of the Empire (28) Baron of the Empire (28) Baron of the Empire (28) Baron of the Empire (28) Baron of the Empire (28) Total: 199 Compared to other similar swarms, TIE/FO pack more bodies with the same basic statline and Scyks have some better attack and control options. Instead the Barons get I3 and an amazing dial and action bar. In a joust vs. other swarms the I3 is enough to make up the difference, and against other lists I think the maneuverability and linked actions should mean more time-on-target (with mods) than other swarms. Plus the inquisitor dial is just a lot of fun to fly. The big issue is, of course, lots of small single-modded attacks that have trouble landing on aces. I can't think of any tech the empire can really bring in to help with that, so I guess the answer is just to get good at blocking?
  11. Gausebeck


    I've been looking at some similar lists. Holo + LeHuse + Rivas + Zeta w/Passive is a fun efficiency combo if you can pull it off. Holo locks a target during activation, Rivas gets the free lock, LeHuse spends it, Zeta locks another target during engagement and Rivas gets the second free lock to use for himself. Obviously not worth all those shenanigans just for Rivas to get a second free lock, but if all those pieces are in the list anyway, it fits with the kinds of things they already want to be doing. Holo + Proud Tradition (56) LeHuse + SF Gunner (49) Zeta Survivor + Passive Sensors + Concussion (41) Rivas (27) Epsilon Cadet (25) Total: 198
  12. You’d get just as many points for a 200-170 victory as a 200-0 victory. What gets penalized is going to time rather than the victory being a close one. I’d like to think that with a system like this top players would prioritize playing faster and finishing games within time because it’s to the benefit of both players. And the pairing luck factor already exists for MoV. The solution is “don’t lose games” and then MoV doesn’t matter, but in practice it matters for a bunch of players and is affected by pairing luck. However, I agree that it’s a big risk changing scoring so that you could win all your games and still not make the cut. That’s kinda the point, though — to make it so that stalling and winning all your games with very little engagement wouldn’t be a winning strategy. I think there’s a good chance the specific points I suggested would cause more problems than they solve (including pairing luck like you mentioned), but I feel like there might be something promising in that general direction. An in-between solution would be 1 TP for destroying at least 100 points but not an extra one for destroying 200.
  13. One way to resolve both draws (instead of Final Salvo) and stalling would be to add tournament points for destroying enemy ships. For example: Win - 3 TP Draw - 1 TP Destroy at least 100 points - 1 TP Destroy all 200 points - 1 TP So you could end up with TP scores of 1-1 (0-0 draw), 5-0 (200-0 victory), 3-0 (50-0 victory), 4-1 (150-120 victory), or even 3-3 (200-200 draw). A draw is worth something, but 4-0-1 (with no points destroyed on the draw) wouldn’t put you ahead of the 4-1-0 pack, so there’s no incentive to intentionally draw. Stalling could still hurt your opponent, but it hurts you, too (because a later engagement likely means fewer points destroyed). Not a perfect solution there... Of course, something like that would have other major effects on the game. Cagey or slow play in general gets penalized. Aces getting ahead on points and running away becomes less viable. And it doesn’t solve anything during elimination rounds. Definitely some issues with it, but I think it would be interesting to try out.
  14. If a wargame ever has a situation where the strongest option for both players is to turtle and whoever engages on the opponent’s terms is at a disadvantage, I consider that a flaw in the game. It turns things into a game of chicken about who is willing to perpetuate a boring game longer, and then whoever did the most to keep the game boring (by turtling longer) gets rewarded for it with a tactical advantage. X-Wing’s tournament rules address this by just saying you can’t do it — they prohibit “intentionally stalling”, but they don’t define it (aside from fortressing). So we’re left with a situation where there’s a prohibited behavior that can confer an advantage, but it’s poorly defined and can look very much like the careful maneuvering that’s exactly what the game encourages. It’s not a great situation, and the only solutions I see are a clear definition or agreement on what the unacceptable behavior is (unlikely at best, if this thread is any indication) or a change to the game so that stalling/turtling can’t provide an advantage. It’s not that big a deal in the scheme of things and is generally fine for casual play, but for competitive play I’d really appreciate it if FFG would clean up situations like this.
  15. @JBFancourt How important has Skilled Bombardier been in your games? I was thinking about a version using Prox Mines with Tua/Hull instead of Dauntless/Shield/Bombardier. I've been enjoying the list with Tua instead of Dauntless, but it does play noticeably differently. Lone Wolf becomes less important as Chiraneau has more actions available to lock (with Tua handling the reinforce) and I also use Jerjerrod less since Chiraneau is more consistently stressed. However, getting several more actions with Chiraneau per game has made a big difference. I could fit Prox Mines in that version and I prefer the idea of guaranteed damage over area deterrence, but I've been skeptical of the ability to actually land them. I'll have to keep an eye out during my games for times when a Prox Mine would have worked successfully, but I'm wondering how many times Skilled Bombardier makes the difference.
  • Create New...