PastrySandwich

Members
  • Content count

    298
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About PastrySandwich

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday

Recent Profile Visitors

250 profile views
  1. I don't have any hate for a netlister I just don't understand it. Building a list is like half the fun of the game. Its deck building and that's great. It is so much fun to find a combo and build around it or find some great synergy. Also when you THINK you have a great combo and its an utter trash fire on the mat can be equally as fun (for other reasons). I will amend my point to account for these. I have no problem with a netlister, but I will agree netlisters tend to have, anecdotally, far more sore losers. Netlisting seems far more in line with the WAAC mentality. Seems people that went out of their way to make sure they brought the "best" list to the mat get very upset if that list doesn't just auto win. I find this especially true if they simply get outflown or are totally unprepared to face a list made of "random garbage". End of the day fly whatever the **** you want, but its a game with toys, so have fun about it.
  2. So double the number of crits needed? Two crits for a card.
  3. It actually seems surprisingly balanced for such a simple solution. Clearly there would need some other tweaks, but it seems close.
  4. You realize that is like exactly what Lucas did right? In the early days Lucas had very little power to enforce his "vision" (which you can see when he had no one question his ideas we got the turds that were the prequels). About 90% of all the things people love about star wars was not due to Lucas but to the many others that worked on the project, but they rarely receive any credit. And Lucas was always about the M.O.N.E.Y. His decisions during the entire process were totally motivated around selling toys he held the **** merchandising rights. Empire quite literally invented the merchandising marketing for movies that is so commonplace today. Star Wars has been a toy franchise, not a movie one, since day one. Even with Disney's, recent, uptick in marketing and merchandising items, they have nothing on the amount of garbage Lucas put his brand on. And not to say any of that is bad. Just you can't pretend that Lucas was doing this for the art of the situation, he was in it for the money as much as Disney is.
  5. There are a few of these out there already. However, none of them actual work to any practical degree as of yet. Eventually though in a generation or two of miniatures games I would imagine that they are built around this type fo stuff where, while planning you can run visualizations of your own and your opponents moves.
  6. I'm guessing that has more to do with your "hardcore tourney goers" than the ships in the wave.
  7. Looks pretty similar to the wookie ship (color scheme aside).
  8. He is spot on though, I mean last time we had 30 years before we got new on screen ships and the game just barely made it through. You think we get that lucky again?
  9. Depends on the context really, but in general it refers to two areas. Either it is the attitude of gameplay this would be counter to the win at all costs (WAAC) mindset that arises in many miniatures games communities. Basically this would be its a game, treat it as a game. If you opponent inadvertently bumps a ship its not the end of the world, that kinda stuff. Otherwise, it is the attitude of how to play. The idea that there is no "correct" way to play x-wing or to not follow the meta. That kinda stuff. Overall, when anyone is talking about flying casual the idea is to take the game less serious and try to enjoy it more. It keeps it as a game, and makes it much more inviting for new players. The fly casual mentality that has been openly supported by FFG is a big reason the game grew as much and as quickly as it did.
  10. I don't play competitively and the game is just as fun as it was when I started. No list can beak the game if you play a different list every time.
  11. While I understand the desire to build it "correctly" and planning ahead is nice, and you have already done that. I think you will have more fun if the build is truly yours plus maybe you can find a 'better' build in brainstorming some ideas with your squadron. What you and your wingmates think of your loadout are far more important than what is actually good or not!
  12. It woulda been in the rule book since it is part of the cardboard. Falcon came with a boost card to explain the boost action available via engine upgrade.
  13. Are you suggesting that a bomb sight is a term someone could copyright? That would be like suing someone for the use of "scope". Its a general use term. Now whatever the Norden device is actually have a trademark associated with it, but I highly doubt that spefiic name was ever in the running to be used.
  14. Wait, how does a radar dish even apply to the notoriety (or lack thereof) of a pilot?
  15. For a new player, it isn't like they are reading the meta lists or anything so any power list would likely be of their own device. And for me, I see list building as paramount to the game (it was one of the draws of the game coming a card game background, not a miniatures one) and the enjoyment of the game (although I only play casually). And while there is fun in finding a combo that works well is I find it fun to play something you think sounds great on paper and is a dumpster fire. Plus this way they learn the whole game at once, all in manageable bites.