Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Kumagoro

  • Rank
  • Birthday 12/07/1973

Profile Information

  • Location
    Genoa, Italy

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Kumagoro


    Oh, sure, the "you have to be intelligent" defense of badly written rules. Classic. So wonderfully missing the point every single time.
  2. Yavin isn't even an actual battle, it was more of a Hail-Mary sabotage run. The battle part of it was being lost, the Rebels were dropping like flies, then everything amounted to pray to the Force very hard, "Please Force, can you destroy this ginormous battle station, please? Pretty please?", and the Force said, "Okay. Only this time, though". "Sure, it'll never happen again."
  3. A properly fixed Punisher could be the savior of the Empire. Or the "putting the Empire on the same level where the ordnance game is concerned guy of the Empire", that is.
  4. Yeah, Imperials care about verisimilitude. That's how the Rebels won: Imperials were fighting like they were in a war docudrama, Rebels were fighting like they were the protagonists of a fantasy novel.
  5. Yep, maybe you wanna check how manaless dredge works. Also, I didn't say you don't use those types, I said you don't have to commit them to the board. And in several decks, you only commit collateral resources, like in Burn and Ad Nauseam, where your endgame stays in your hand and library until it's delivered. Anyway, bluffing is part of any game of Magic. Even the most green (competitive) player knows you always have to keep a card in hand to make your opponent wonder if you have a counter or answer to their play. And that's just the most basic of mind games, there are plenty. Including to feign tapping to cast something then change your mind. Or attack into an opponent board status where apparently you'll lose your attackers. Except maybe there's a combat trick coming. Except maybe there isn't, but you banked on the opponent thinking there was and letting the attack through because he was afraid there was and according to his math he would stand to lose more if there was. And so on.
  6. You're talking of basic Magic for newbies, not pro-level Magic. There's always one or more major archetypes in any format at any given time where you don't actually have to commit resources to the board.
  7. That's just an element. Being good at poker involves keeping your cool, not betraying what you have in hand while trying to guess what your opponent holds based on their reactions. Involves fast thinking, rapid math and taking calm decisions and calculated risks. You do all that in Magic. You can theoretically play with one shared deck in Magic (some fringe formats do it) and those elements will still be in play. And you can certainly bluff your way to win. You often leave certain kind of lands open to represent an answer you don't actually have, forcing the opponent to take in consideration that you may indeed have it, which could lead to potentially catastrophic ramifications in their decision tree.
  8. Meaning no offense here, but you have no idea of what you're talking about. I assume you never seriously played Magic. It's a game that spawns pro players. As in, professional individuals, making a living out of it, in some cases making a pretty penny. There's thousands of them and only dozens of different archetypes at any given time, so they often use identical decks but the best players win more often. How? Because they're lucky? Too bad luck doesn't actually exist in the realm of objective observations. Building new decks is something pro and semi-pro players do at the beginning of a season, then winning events it's a mix of both strategy AND tactics. Thinking ahead of your opponent based on what you know it's in your deck (and what you know it's in their deck, because an experienced player will know what their opponent is playing by just looking at the first card they play) and act accordingly: that's strategy. Following your endgame: that's strategy. Managing your resources on the battlefield: that's tactics. Playing a card at the right time to maximize its effect: that's tactics. Deciding which threat you remove, which spell you counter: also tactics. Deciding when to attack, with what to attack, when to block, with what to block: that's a complex layer of tactical thinking. Correctly guessing what's the opponent is holding in hand and what's going to do next: that's still tactics, I think. Bluffing: that's tactics for sure. Doing the complex math in your mind that certain combo and control decks require to be piloted successfully: I can't tell what this is, but that's also an element of the game. Successful Magic players need two main skill sets: the skill set of a chess player and the skill set of a poker player. A lot of Magic pro player are former or current professional poker players too. Is poker a strategy game or a tactical game?
  9. Far from it. Rotation is deciding that different parts of your game work better in isolation. It's true of all games that keep adding elements over time. It's impossible to keep a complex system balanced over a decade or more of evolution where the designers may have changed, or at the very least learned more about the game they're designing, found new design space that the old elements couldn't exploit. To be fair, the rotation in M:TG is more about protecting the new sets from the insanity that were the early ones, back when the designers didn't entirely understand the competitive power of certain cards, so it's sort of a reverse power creep, as it's the old stuff that's overpowered. But actually, this is putting it wrongly. There's no rotation on M:TG, there's ONE rotating format (Standard) which only uses the latest two years or so of material. And then all the other formats are so-called "Eternal": there's a format (Modern) that uses all the cards from the point where the game changed visual appearance onward; a format (Legacy) that uses all the cards except the most broken ones; and a format (Vintage) that uses all the cards, restricting a few of them to just one copy per deck (rather than four). Plus Commander, which is basically its own separate game, and a lot of other niche formats. Each format has its subset of devoted players. So maybe X-Wing doesn't need rotation as much as it needs formats?
  10. I say ban list, and a dynamic one at that. That's the main crux of FFG's awkwardness in dealing with an increasingly competitive game. You can't errata stuff as a solution to power creep or design mistakes or wrong readings of the meta. Because then you can't errata back, you can't errata the errata, it'd be even more awkward, and generally a mess (which is generally what they're doing). A carefully curated ban list would give tournament players a constantly fresh, reasonably balanced meta; all the others could keep playing everything as published, but with the knowledge that if certain cards are problematic in tournament play, then everyone should tread carefully when employing them in casual play. So, say, Palp is an issue in the current meta? Give him the ban. Then one year later, reevaluate. Don't "fix" cards based on the way they perform against each other in a given moment in time. If they're really broken, they'll just remain in the ban list permanently. Maybe someday you'll release a new version of the banned character, if that feels important for flavor reasons. If you examine any of the announcements Wizards of the Cost releases every other month for M:TG (not all of them contain actual bans, and of course they have multiple formats to maintain), you'll find sentences like these: (Plus of course they never enforce any dramatically altering ban right before a key moment in the tournament season). All this is normal talk. They never come off as saying, "Oh my God, we made a mistake, we're so dumb! Sorry, guys!". It's pure evolution of a game, it's an inescapable process. This is the tone and philosophy a serious game publisher should adopt. Of course, WotC has an Organized Play department and a Rules department that are kept entirely separate from the R&D department, whereas I think FFG has designers doing the erratas and the evaluations of the meta, which is not what designers should be doing, like, at all.
  11. So there's just one contracted scout in the galaxy? Man, that has to be a very lucrative contract!
  12. I just theorized a First Order Squad in the Silencer thread, but I went with two fat aces and one blocker instead (it all started from reflecting on the viability of Fat Kylo). So like this: Kylo Ren (35) – Push the Limit (3), Advanced Sensors (3), Pattern Analyzer (2), Autothrusters (2), First Order Vanguard (2) – Ship Total: 47 "Backdraft" (27) – Expertise (4), Fire-Control System (2), Lightweight Frame (2), Special Ops Training (0) – Ship Total: 35 Omega Squadron Pilot (17) – Crack Shot (1) – Ship Total: 18 Squad Total: 100 Or you can go for three PS 9, this way: Kylo Ren (35) – Push the Limit (3), Advanced Sensors (3), Pattern Analyzer (2), Autothrusters (2), First Order Vanguard (2) – Ship Total: 47 "Backdraft" (27) – Veteran Instincts (1), Fire-Control System (2), Lightweight Frame (2), Special Ops Training (0) – Ship Total: 32 Zeta Leader (20) – Veteran Instincts (1) – Ship Total: 21
  13. I want to elaborate further on this, because maybe there is a list where a 47-point Fat Kylo could be at home. I established you'll need one other similarly scary ship to take some heat off him, right? What about Vessery with Expertise, TIE/D, Tractor Beam, and Twin Ion Engine? That's 41 pts, which leaves enough room for an Academy Pilot as a blocker. (Or you can drop the Engine and convert Advanced Sensors into the more Vessery-friendly FCS, in order to turn AP into Wampa, although I'm not really a fan of Palp-less Wampa, that's not a strategy, it's randomly hoping for the best). I hardly think it could be a competitive list in the meta, but it doesn't look bad, does it? Or for the same points you can go with Backdraft with Expertise, FCS, Pattern Analyzer, LWF, Harpoon Missile, and title. (Or Quickdraw without PA). That's also a good wingmate for Kylo. And if you drop the missile and PA, the TIE Fighter can get upgraded to an Omega Squadron Pilot with Crack Shot, becoming an all First Order squad!
  14. I certainly disagree. First of all, you seem to think Fel's three hull made him timid. Before the bomb meta, nothing was more far from the truth. Fel would keep turning into his target, chasing it like a dog with a bone, and laughing off turret shots. Carry stress? Not even close, once he was close enough, he would dial green every single turn, do his two actions, turtling in the process. The thing is, Fel has one more action than Kylo. That's 50% more action efficiency. I don't think this could be offset by any other trick. Fel has 4 agility and constant focus, which means his green dice's math actually offsets the bonus hull and shields, for anything but auto-damage. One consistently modified point agility is worth several sitting-duck points of hull/shields. A TIE Bomber has double the Interceptor's hull, yet it's way, way more fragile. Soontir Fel flown well could last the entire game without taking a single hit, and certainly could be expected to land shots almost every turn. We're not talking an underdog, rarely seen ships here; we're talking a top tier one. There was a reason for that.
  15. I don't know what such insane dial would have to look like, though. I mean, it will certainly be a great dial, but to make the difference compared to an Interceptor dial or an Adv. Prototype dial, what could it add, green K-turns? (Would the Silencer even care having green K-turns? You don't need K-turns when flying an Interceptor or Phantom). The thing about Kylo's Silencer, and the Silencer in general, is: it's a great ship that's however an expensive ship that takes up almost half the list at 100/6. Because it's great that it can take Advanced Sensors, so you have to give it Advanced Sensors. But then you have to give it PTL to exploit AS. But then you have to give it Pattern Analyzer to combo with PTL. But then how could you not give Authothrusters to any ship that can take it? And how could you not give such an expensive ship its title, which guarantees one saving throw against death? And before you know it, you have invested 47 points in this chain of "how could you not", and every point makes sense and makes the ship stronger and more efficient. So you either build the list with Kylo plus a couple of smaller ships, but then the opponent will just hunt him down first thing, or with Kylo paired with one other equally high-profile ship, but which one? It even steals point from RAC (only 7 free points remain, so not even Palp is an option), making it again not really a choice which one to hunt down first, especially if you gave Rebel Captive to RAC. And would such a build exploit Kylo's ability at all? Would it have enough damage output? It'd basically be a straightforward list with no tricks, say RAC with EU and Predator, so consistently scoring 3 hits, and Kylo doing the same, and they move around well and choose their targets freely, but is it enough? Wouldn't it be inferior to a list where fat RAC with Kylo crew is paired with Whisper or Quickdraw/Backdraft?
  • Create New...