Jump to content
WickedGrey

Phantoms just got nerfed, hardcore

Recommended Posts

C-3PO is not in the same league as the Phantom, as far as balance issues are concerned. No one should hold his or her breath waiting for a fix, there.

 

Probably true, but C-3P0 is still extremely good.

 

People realise 3PO is significantly weaker than Isard, right? 3PO is mathematically 5/8s of a free evade token, and Isard is a whole evade token. 3PO + and evade die caps at one damage cancelled, Isard and an evade die (Kenkirk) can block two, and that's without spending an action.

 

3PO only triggers once per round. He's either going to cancel one damage or the evade die will have cancelled it anyway. He's a threat when you're attacking a Falcon with a single ship, but focus fire on the thing and the odds of survival are, well, never tell him the odds.

 

C-3P0 is actually almost certainly worth more than Isard, both in relative and absolute terms. 

 

Added value = New ship value - old ship value

 

YT-1300 New Ship Value ~= (((13+(rounds C-3P0 procs)*(5/8))/13)^0.5)*(old ship value)

VT-49 New Ship Value ~= (((16+(rounds Isane procs))/16)^0.5)*(old ship value)

 

 

With some reasonable numbers:

 

YT-1300, using 64 point Fat Han and 5 rounds of procing as an example:

C-3P0 added value = (((13+5*(5/8))/13)^0.5 -1)*61 = 6.93 (card costs 3)

 

Now for the VT-49: Lets also use a 64 point Fat Decimator and 3 rounds of procing on Ysane:

Isane value added =(((16+3)/16)^0.5 -1)*60 = 5.38 (card costs 4)

 

C-3P0 value: ~7. Cost: 3

Isane value: ~ 5.5. Cost: 4.

 

7 > 5.5

7-3 >> 5.5 - 4

 

Math FTW.

 

 

 

C-3PO is not in the same league as the Phantom, as far as balance issues are concerned. No one should hold his or her breath waiting for a fix, there.

 

True, it is in a league of its own, far above the Phantom when on a Fat Falcon.

 

There's no variance or risk involved, unless you are flying and rolling, poorly (the attacks), that you'll ever need to guess more than 0.

 

If Threepio were as dangerous as you claim, he'd be an auto-include on the Falcon--but we didn't see that in either Wave 4 or Wave 5. He was a common inclusion, but not a universal one, and lots of ships without him did fine.

 

I only remember seeing Falcon + C-3P0 on the top tables for as far as the eye could see even in wave 4. The only limitation seemed to be the $90 entry fee of buying a CR-90. Now that most people have access to C-3P0, it is autoinclude, for reasons above (and also discussed on Nova episode 19, I believe)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Vorpal, it's not just 3PO; he's one card. It's 3PO, Falcon title, and R2 crew (Lando for the gamblers) in combination on one ship that is "broken," for lack of a better term. Essentially a guaranteed ability to ignore/regain 3 damage per turn is the problem when 90+% of ships are 3 attack or less. Yes, it can be beaten, blah, blah, but it is disproportionately good and disproportionately affects every game it appears in. Personally, the game is overdue for damage deck update which affects crew, sensors, mods, etc which would be one small step. Otherwise, it is hard for me to see how they "fix" a combo of cards without essentially targeting 1 card, which would probably be 3PO.

 

My point is something more like this: substitute Chewbacca for Threepio in that combination and see how much worse it gets. If the answer is "not much", then the problem is stacking durability upgrades on an already-durable ship, not any of the individual upgrades.

 

And the right fix for the combo is to make sure the game creates incentives to stay on offense, rather than to spend a dozen points building a turtle.

 

*

P.S. I already did this on Nova episode 19, math summary here.

 

Chewbacca value on a 64 point (total) ship: 

(((13+2)/13)^0.5 -1)*60 = 4.4

 

Chewbacca value on a 58 point (total) ship (classic HSF): 

(((13+2)/13)^0.5 -1)*54 = 4.0053 <----- number referenced on NOVA podcast

 

Chewbacca provided about 0 points of net value* on HSF, and 0.5 points on a 64 point ship.

 

C-3P0 provides about 4 points of value on a 64 point ship. 4 is much larger than 0.5, therefore C-3P0 is autoinclude.

 

 

* with a free kicker that Chewbacca gets to choose when to discard a crit, making him a slightly net positive value.

 

 

Again, 20 seconds of math that yields better results than months of design and playtesting.

 

#ThemsIsFightingWords

#KnowledgeIsPower

#MathFTW

#ThingsThatCouldHaveBeenAvoided

#HindsighIs2020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With some reasonable numbers:

 

YT-1300, using 64 point Fat Han and 5 rounds of procing as an example:

C-3P0 added value = (((13+5*(5/8))/13)^0.5 -1)*61 = 6.93 (card costs 3)

 

Now for the VT-49: Lets also use a 64 point Fat Decimator and 3 rounds of procing on Ysane:

Isane value added =(((16+3)/16)^0.5 -1)*60 = 5.38 (card costs 4)

 

Accepting your expressions arguendo, let's assume Isard starts triggering on the third round of combat. (If Threepio activates N times, Isard activates N-2 times.)

 

That means Isard's value increases more quickly than Threepio's as the game lengthens, and takes over after 9 rounds. So Chewbacca is the best crew upgrade over 1-3 rounds of sustained fire, and then Threepio is better from 4 rounds to 9 rounds, and then Isard is better from 10 rounds on.

 

[EDIT 2: If Isard activates a round sooner, she takes over at 5 rounds, not 9.]

 

Again, I'm not saying Threepio isn't a good upgrade: that's a very useful range for Threepio to sit in. He should likely be priced at 4-5 points. But it's not an enormous balance concern, because defensive efficiency doesn't cause you to win games--it causes you to lose games more slowly. In order to win you still have to do damage, and a 64-point Fat Han is one of the least efficient damage-dealers in the game. Against Phantoms, you can count on melting 40-50% of your opponent's list very quickly, and if you don't lose your Falcon/Decimator after that you're guaranteed a win.

 

Against a more varied metagame, particularly one that includes BBBBZ and Warthogs, you're in for a rougher set of games.

EDIT: We crossposted.

 

P.S. I already did this on Nova episode 19, math summary here.

 

Chewbacca value on a 64 point (total) ship: 

(((13+2)/13)^0.5 -1)*60 = 4.4

 

Chewbacca value on a 58 point (total) ship (classic HSF): 

(((13+2)/13)^0.5 -1)*54 = 4.0053 <----- number referenced on NOVA podcast

 

Chewbacca provided about 0 points of net value* on HSF, and 0.5 points on a 64 point ship.

 

C-3P0 provides about 4 points of value on a 64 point ship. 4 is much larger than 0.5, therefore C-3P0 is autoinclude.

 

 

* with a free kicker that Chewbacca gets to choose when to discard a crit, making him a slightly net positive value.

 

 

Again, 20 seconds of math that yields better results than months of design and playtesting.

3.5 points of net value (as you say, actually a little less because Chewie lets you discard the first crit you don't want) is not actually all that big, given the level of noise introduced by dice and the game's geometry. It's not nothing, but it will be relatively difficult to observe in a particular match--and, as above, my overall point is that if substituting Chewie in for Threepio isn't enough to reliably swing a game toward your opponent, then Threepio isn't the broken game element some people are suggesting.

And I understand what you're saying about the value of statistics to the design and playtest process, but if you'll recall I'm also a consistent advocate for the value of mathwing... so I'm not really sure who you're arguing with, here.

Edited by Vorpal Sword

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isard provides a guaranteed evade every round after the first 4 damage (on a Decimator). Which of those produces the larger overall effect is variable depending on the context of the game, but Isard has the mathematical edge.

 

Minor nitpick; Ysanne doesn't kick in on a Decimator until after the first 5 damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Isard provides a guaranteed evade every round after the first 4 damage (on a Decimator). Which of those produces the larger overall effect is variable depending on the context of the game, but Isard has the mathematical edge.

 

Minor nitpick; Ysanne doesn't kick in on a Decimator until after the first 5 damage.

 

 

And it only kicks in the turn after. So there can reasonably be a period where you can't activate her and loosing 2-4 hp until the moment you do activate her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

There have been a lot of level-headed comments, but I can't help but laugh at those who say "Finally, I can start playing again!". You, sirs, are your own undoing.

See, I'm just excited because I've been wanting to play a Phantom, but didn't want folks to think I was being a jerk by playing a Phantom. So now maybe I can get in some table time, flying what's in my head just a Super-Interceptor, without feeling like a netlister or something.

very much this and a host of other factors, such as

1.) Playing Whisper got a lot less ******* boring because there's more thinking to be done and less "oh, you're over there? let me decloak in the opposite direction"

2.) Sigmas will see the light of day not just because we're done kissing whisper's feet, but because less phantoms should lead to (fingers crossed) less turrets (and **** turrets)

I can't imagine you being fun to play against. You seem easily bored.

 

Looking at all his messages, be prepared to hear a lot of swearing too... When someone feels the need to always swear when he type, I just can't imagine how it must be verbally.... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

There have been a lot of level-headed comments, but I can't help but laugh at those who say "Finally, I can start playing again!". You, sirs, are your own undoing.

See, I'm just excited because I've been wanting to play a Phantom, but didn't want folks to think I was being a jerk by playing a Phantom.  So now maybe I can get in some table time, flying what's in my head just a Super-Interceptor, without feeling like a netlister or something.

It's you're game, run whatever the heck you want. If people say you're a jerk it's coming from a place of them not being good at the game and unable to counter.

 

It's not just my game. It's my game plus the game of my friends. My ability to play the game is entirely predicated on their willingness to play it with me. Personally, I tend to play against a lot of players who are still starting out or new at the game, and I have been specifically avoiding the Phantom because it's simply too much to ask them to take in. I already have an edge from being experienced and having all of the ships. I didn't need to be dancing out of their firing arcs on top of that.

 

The worst way to sell the game to a new player is with a Phantom.

 

''Didn't you have fun? you never got a chance to land a hit on my ship while I anihilated yours 1 by 1! I love this game!.... Hey... where're you going?... Don't you want to play another game... wait!''

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

C-3PO is not in the same league as the Phantom, as far as balance issues are concerned. No one should hold his or her breath waiting for a fix, there.

I don't know - many claimed a rules change like this one (for the Phantom) wasn't needed or coming either. If C-3PO is changed, then the card is changed. If not, then not. Seeing is believing here. Admittedly that is not quite the same as holding one's breath...but I for one won't be utterly surprised if C-3PO receives an erratum as well.

One reason to change some rule might be to 'open up' design possibilities for future releases. So we might not know all considerations that went into this.

 

Except he didn't receive an errata. I don't know why they would do it later when it is a "problem" at the moment. The thing to remember, the highly defensive Falcon is more in response to popularity of other Falcon builds in the meta. With the Phantom being taken down a bit, a lot of the things that can fight Falcons will be around.

 

That, and I don't see how Falcon's still are not hurt by Autothrusters flying around...

One erratum, two errata.

My point was not that C-3PO needs an erratum or a fix, but rather that it still seems premature to say that this will not happen. As I said: more than a few posters in this forum, as my sketchy memory recalls, argued quite well that the Phantom was fine as it was. I was convinced. Then along comes this.

Fool me once, fool me twice...I'm not going to believe 'the meta is like this so so-and-so will not be changed' wisdom.

 

It was. It was good, maybe a bit too good, but no godship. The nerf brings it back into line with the others, but it wasn't utterly broken before.

 

flying what's in my head just a Super-Interceptor

 

Thing is, the new errata means it isn't that any more. Mechanically now it's a cloaking TIE fighter with massive firepower. Cloaking is now disappearing into one of three locations rather than a super barrel roll.

Edited by TIE Pilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What makes you so sure that the formulas and ASSUMPTIONS you are using are right?

 

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/128417-mathwing-comprehensive-ship-jousting-values-and-more/

 

id rather fight fat Han than whisper any day.

 

Yeah, that can also be true, I'm not debating that one way or the other, I was just jumping into the C-3P0 vs Isane fray.

 

 

 

With some reasonable numbers:

 

YT-1300, using 64 point Fat Han and 5 rounds of procing as an example:

C-3P0 added value = (((13+5*(5/8))/13)^0.5 -1)*61 = 6.93 (card costs 3)

 

Now for the VT-49: Lets also use a 64 point Fat Decimator and 3 rounds of procing on Ysane:

Isane value added =(((16+3)/16)^0.5 -1)*60 = 5.38 (card costs 4)

 

Accepting your expressions arguendo, let's assume Isard starts triggering on the third round of combat. (If Threepio activates N times, Isard activates N-2 times.)

 

Side note, the Decimator is already less durable than a YT-1300 even before considering the MF title. 2 rounds of less procing for Isane vs C-3P0 is probably about right. Incidentally I used 5 rounds for C-3P0 and 3 rounds for Isane.

 

That means Isard's value increases more quickly than Threepio's as the game lengthens, and takes over after 9 rounds.

 
Right, although the Decimator also starts of with more hit points to start with so it provides less of a proportional advantage. They both provide 12 points of value after 9 rounds (9 procs for C-3P0 and 7 for Isane). However, C-3P0 costs 3 and Isane 4, so to reach the true break-even total value point it is more like 10 rounds.
 
The Decimator's problem is that it won't last that long. It's already less durable, and its durability standard deviation is very low, so it will die. Plus the Falcon can mitigate 2 damage per round, making such long end-game scenarios more likely.
 
Related, the break-even point for C-3P0 is about 2 rounds, so he is auto-include vs Chewie if your Falcon lives 3 rounds or longer (i.e. pretty much every single game).
 
 

Again, I'm not saying Threepio isn't a good upgrade: that's a very useful range for Threepio to sit in. He should likely be priced at 4-5 points. But it's not an enormous balance concern, because defensive efficiency doesn't cause you to win games--it causes you to lose games more slowly. In order to win you still have to do damage, and a 64-point Fat Han is one of the least efficient damage-dealers in the game. Against Phantoms, you can count on melting 40-50% of your opponent's list very quickly, and if you don't lose your Falcon/Decimator after that you're guaranteed a win.

 
Being a tank vs a glass cannon is fine. It just slows the match down. Neither one is better than the other in a mathematical vacuum. However because of timed matches and no partial points, you only need to kill more points than your opponent does... which is a separate issue.
Edited by MajorJuggler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

There have been a lot of level-headed comments, but I can't help but laugh at those who say "Finally, I can start playing again!". You, sirs, are your own undoing.

See, I'm just excited because I've been wanting to play a Phantom, but didn't want folks to think I was being a jerk by playing a Phantom. So now maybe I can get in some table time, flying what's in my head just a Super-Interceptor, without feeling like a netlister or something.

very much this and a host of other factors, such as

1.) Playing Whisper got a lot less ******* boring because there's more thinking to be done and less "oh, you're over there? let me decloak in the opposite direction"

2.) Sigmas will see the light of day not just because we're done kissing whisper's feet, but because less phantoms should lead to (fingers crossed) less turrets (and **** turrets)

I can't imagine you being fun to play against. You seem easily bored.

 

Looking at all his messages, be prepared to hear a lot of swearing too... When someone feels the need to always swear when he type, I just can't imagine how it must be verbally.... ;)

 

 

eh, it's no ******* problem. By this sh*tty point in ******* time, it's all just ******* vernacular for my local group anyway, so all those bastards are ******* used to it and are never ******* about it

 

 

...****

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

There have been a lot of level-headed comments, but I can't help but laugh at those who say "Finally, I can start playing again!". You, sirs, are your own undoing.

See, I'm just excited because I've been wanting to play a Phantom, but didn't want folks to think I was being a jerk by playing a Phantom. So now maybe I can get in some table time, flying what's in my head just a Super-Interceptor, without feeling like a netlister or something.

very much this and a host of other factors, such as

1.) Playing Whisper got a lot less ******* boring because there's more thinking to be done and less "oh, you're over there? let me decloak in the opposite direction"

2.) Sigmas will see the light of day not just because we're done kissing whisper's feet, but because less phantoms should lead to (fingers crossed) less turrets (and **** turrets)

I can't imagine you being fun to play against. You seem easily bored.

 

Looking at all his messages, be prepared to hear a lot of swearing too... When someone feels the need to always swear when he type, I just can't imagine how it must be verbally.... ;)

 

 

eh, it's no ******* problem. By this sh*tty point in ******* time, it's all just ******* vernacular for my local group anyway, so all those bastards are ******* used to it and are never ******* about it

 

 

...****

 

Yeah..... I can picture it now...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed the FAQ made no mention of the firing arcs on the new Scum firesprays. The cards dont have the marks around the attack value, but the bases do have the rear firing arc marked.

 

 

Last page. Its in the questions part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed the FAQ made no mention of the firing arcs on the new Scum firesprays.

It did, in the FAQ part towards the end of the doc.

As far as the Phantom change. I like it. It doesn't really destroy Phantoms, but will make it easier to get them in arc, that means more shots on them.

One of the most common things I heard from some was how a good Phantom player would never let a X-Wing even get a shot in on it. Now even without EU you can take things like X's, Y's, B's, Ties, ect... and even though it will have 4 evades you'll actually be able to shoot it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I noticed the FAQ made no mention of the firing arcs on the new Scum firesprays.

It did, in the FAQ part towards the end of the doc.

I just flipped through the document again, but dont see it.

 

 

Page 14:

"Q: I noticed the Scum & Villainy Firespray-31 Ship cards are missing the auxilliary firing arc symbol. Is this a mistake?

 

A: Yes, this is a misprint. Scum & Villiany Firespray-31s have an auxilliary firing arc; it is printed on their ship tokens, just like Imperial Firespray-31s."

Edited by WWHSD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Related, the break-even point for C-3P0 is about 2 rounds, so he is auto-include vs Chewie if your Falcon lives 3 rounds or longer (i.e. pretty much every single game).

 

That's assuming he always blocks one damage. He doesn't block anything if the evade die does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Phantom handcuff is going to bring out more Swarms. I thought the Phantom was suppose to slow down/remove the Swarm but I plan on dusting off my Swarm list now.

Cool. AT Aggressors tend to murder two-dice lists full of low-PS ships. :D

Plus, the Phantom will still murder your swarm. Only now he also gets to block you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Phantom handcuff is going to bring out more Swarms. I thought the Phantom was suppose to slow down/remove the Swarm but I plan on dusting off my Swarm list now.

 

it'll more than likely remain an incredibly credible threat

 

it can't trivially arc dodge, but it did gain the advantage of a less easily blocked de-cloak (and the potential to block you, we're in ******* soviet Star-Wars, people!  :o ) and Whisper is still going to trololo with 4 green dice and a focus if she gets a shot, which are rough odds for ties

 

phantoms have also lost precisely none of their firepower, so that's still scary

Edited by ficklegreendice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I thought the Phantom was suppose to slow down/remove the Swarm but I plan on dusting off my Swarm list now.

 

It was supposed to slow down swarms, not murder them entirely and hide the body where no one was ever going to find it. Now swarms will have a decent chance but won't be super dominant like they were in wave 1. Which should mean that turrets will become less dominant since their counter will become more so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mixed feelings about the Phantom change; I'm not a Phantom player but never found the named Phantoms particularly intimidating (I do dislike C3P0 on the Falcon, as it happens). I'll have to see the new variation in play.

 

I don't like the ion change though, as it significantly reduces the value of Ion as a Phantom counter -- where before you could keep their move predictable (and keep them from shooting), now their move is more unpredictable and they can still shoot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...