Jump to content

Liher

Members
  • Content Count

    30
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Liher

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

438 profile views
  1. Several of my gaming association mates have already sold their armies. If FFG does not make some kind of bold move this is not looking good. The games is still as good as ever, and I love playing it, but we all have great games that died. One of the greatest blows have come from FFG its self when they announced Legion. Some people that were doubting made their minds and even some that were already in decided to leave the game.
  2. Great job, I have my own excel file that simulates combats. Its limited and very (very) spaghetti coded (I am not a programmer) but I can share it with you. The logic for rerolls is sound I would say.
  3. Ìt should run ok but a small monitor is a disadvantage as you are supposed to look at a gaming table were there usually is plenty of information.
  4. Tabletop Simulator, known as TTS its a PC "game" that allows to play online different board games. You can find it on Steam for example. Several times a year you can buy it with discount. Really worth the price as you can play hundreds of great games. It is also very useful to practice moves or even play solo. A really good buy.
  5. Very good news! When finished we should create a Discord group, similar to the Armada one so that we can play easier. Thank you OP!
  6. I don't see that Waiqar are now in disadvantage. As the OP was already pointing the key is Blight. It can very effectively diminish the damage output of the units no matter how big. The bigger the death star, the more we have to focus on it. With this goal, I recommend no less than two archer units and two carrion lancer units. Being the goal to blight, the smallest the more effective: -Blight does not increase with size. -The smaller the unit the less return the enemy will have on attacking them. Single carrion lancers are especially useful to slow dangerous units charging them from the side. Again, the smaller the unit, the easier its to charge on the side and the more units you can field with the same goal. Obviously slowing is not enough and although there are different strategies for damage dealing my favorite in the last games is to field two Reincarnate units. One the damage dealer and one with Ankaur Maro, that will add trays to the first one so that they can stand as long as needed. With Waiqar I find more difficult to get 200-0 victories but in general in our local meta, they are winning more games than losing. PS. A list I played with good results as an example Reanimate Archers x2 [18]--Training: Rank Discipline [4]----------Total Unit Cost: 22Reanimate Archers x2 [18]--Training: Combat Ingenuity [6]----------Total Unit Cost: 24Reanimates x6 [35]--Champion: Ankaur Maro (I) [20]----------Total Unit Cost: 55Carrion Lancers x1 [15]----------Total Unit Cost: 15Carrion Lancers x1 [15]----------Total Unit Cost: 15Reanimates x6 [35]--Champion: Ardus IxErebus [23]--Heraldry: Blighted Vexillum Bearer [3]--Music: Aggressive Drummer [5]----------Total Unit Cost: 66
  7. It is a very interesting question. I would say that all units count towards first deploying (the competitive rules does not make any difference among units) but it is a fair question. Let's imagine a list with 8 units (list A), of which 6 are scouts and 2 are not. The other army has 4 units (List B). In my interpretation it should work like this: The list with more units (list A) should deploy 4 units, after deploying the 2 non scouts , all that he has left are scouts, so the list B have to deploy his 4 units. After that, list A should deploy the remaining 6 scout unit. Alternative interpretation: If we do not count the scouts, the 4 unit list army should deploy 2 of its units before. That would make scouts much more powerful because it would not only be the scouts who benefit from their improved deployment but all the army. It is up to the developer to clarify because none is obvious but I would think that the first interpretation is more balanced.
  8. I have a question around this, lest imagine 2 2x1 units in combat only in contact in one of the trays. A third unit destroys one of the contact trays with a ranged attack. Does any of the units have the opportunity to close in?
  9. It is It is better than a 0,5 precise because there is no risk of rolling worse. I don't have the time to do the math now, but it is probably better than a full precise more often than the opposite.
  10. Nice picture. My opinion on your questions. 1. The answer is the red one. You can only successfully end a charge when there is space for the unit before squaring up. 2. This is one of the questions that I think needs further examples in the faqs, but you rotate around the contact line with the enemy unit, not the center. This is done in order to avoid losing contact with the enemy after reform. 3. No problem. 4. Yes, it is legal. As I understand it the threat would still be 2. For the threat calculation, it does not matter how many are in direct contact with the enemy. 5. I would say that the effects are simultaneous, it makes sense lore wise (the shield reacts magically to the enemy's attack) and game wise (it would take away a big part of its value and would probably have been specified if it was the case).
  11. Very interesting and useful post. I liked specially the reference to big and expensive units. I agree that deathstars are frequently beaten by moral tests. I find "uncertainty" a specially dangerous card for only 2 symbols, a reform that usually is more damaging than "loss of faith", "discipline breakdown" and even "betrayal".
  12. About the posts numbers, I have been monitoring them for the last 3 months. I am not happy with the situation. It is obviously not a perfect measure of the health of a game, but I do believe there is a relationship. I was to open at some point a post about "the state of the game" but I believe that it is probably more optimistic and discreet to open it in this thread. The numbers are very bad. I was worried in May when a just started game was not competing with a game such as Armada (Xwing is always off charts), but now things have gone way worse. The first thing I have to say is that the game is fantastic. It's just everything I would have wanted. Fast but deep, competitive but also "fantastic". Now the whole point is what can FFG and we do to make it succeed more? I do believe that keeping the actual direction is not good enough. Things are going too slow, and in this world if you go too slow you die. Old (for example WG PP ) and new games (CMON) are going to fight hard and communities can not hold an unlimited number of games. Under certain thresholds, people don't find rivals and change games. Here I can put my 2 cents about what I believe could help the game. In my local group they are really crying for a FAQ. They can not understand that such an "easy" thing to do takes so long. You might not be able to answer yet all the questions, but surely there are some things that FFG has no doubts about. Lore, this is very important especially when you are competing against very powerful Ips. What we have until now, it is too few and too bland. I was really expecting a novel or something that could put some meat around the bones and increase loyalty. Other easier solutions could also do the trick, but we have to improve the Lore! Championships, some bigger presence in social networks, in youtube, twitch, give your fans something to talk and discuss. Faster deploy of additional armies. This would be so good! A lot of people are waiting for elves or even dwarves to jump into the game. But they are waiting so long. In 1 year time, they might not want to wait anymore. And I think that I can play Daqan and Waiqar endlessly but not everybody thinks the same. I am still optimistic, I believe that it will probably succeed, but it is not guaranteed. We have to push it faster or it may start falling and then it will be too late. P.S. The numbers in the graph are the posts to the previous graph point for every 100 XWING posts.
  13. Yes, maximize damage. If there are 3 or more full lines left, I will reroll all the Red and White one hits. If there is only one reroll left, only the zeros starting by the white dice, after the red, and last the blue. Obviously if there are effects like surges or precisions in play, the program should behave differently but it wouldn't be very practical even if bothered with the programming .
  14. Ok, I had 15 min to spare. The results are surprising. The 4x1 option is just better. Those 13% of the fights that were won by the reanimates were just pure luck. One of those fights below. The "Unidad Rápida" is the Fast Unit. In this case the OC. They started fine, with a 12 impact hit. But were very unlucky in the Rounds 2 and 3. The reanimates even without any second Row were very very lucky. The last turn, the Reanimates even increased their numbers in one.
  15. We all know by now how important is the initiative. But I wanted to measure exactly how much, and the conclusion is that the difference is huge. I have programmed an ugly but functional excel file that simulates combats. It is not supposed to simulate the game (no moral for example) but the necessary damage, rerolls, impact of the remaining trays, etc. I have 2 examples I would like to share now. First a combat between 50 pts of RuneGolems and 50 pts of Reanimates. The Reanimates would win 88% of the combats. If we would give the Runegolems the Initiative (Magic!) , that 88% would become a 5%. Huge difference. I have repeated this exercise with another case. 46 points of Oathsworn Cavalry against 46 points of Carrion Lancers. As before, no moral effects, No surges, No Blights. If the Lancers attack on Initiative 3 with a bonus to Defence they will win 78% of the combats. With the following chart showing the remaining knights. If we change to Initiative 7, and apply a+1 impact instead, the results are catastrophic. Only in 0,4% of the combats would the Cavalry win. Obviously the +1 to defense they also lose plays an important role, but as you see in the last graph, if we would keep that +1 Defence instead of the +1 Damage, the situation would improve slightly but only to about 1,6% of Victories to the OC. Initiative is the single most important factor.
×
×
  • Create New...