Jump to content
SaltMaster 5000

Carolina Krayts is the best X-Wing podcast

Recommended Posts

58 minutes ago, Brunas said:

read past what they're saying and read what they mean!

read forum posts as intended

FRPAI, not FRPAW

but interpreting them as written is better because interpretation them as intended is open interpretation. Unlike interpreting them as written. No interpretation there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, wurms said:

I played against a TA-175 at Worlds and judge ruled it does work. My drone shot first and killed his drone, and he got the popcorn for his return shots. I killed two of his drones that round and all his drones were now stacked with calculates for return shots.

The judge read this part:

A ship is destroyed after it has a number of damage cards that equals or exceeds its hull value.

But missed this part:

If an effect triggers after a ship is destroyed, the effect resolves immediately before the ship is removed.

 

I was not a happy camper with that ruling, and barely won the game 94-93. 

Honestly, the whole "destroyed now, but it doesn't count now" thing is kind of silly.  Thems the rules, but it's silly.

If FFG cleaned it up to work for both "destroyed now = effect now" and "Serissu or such can stick around to the end of the Initiative step," if those two timings worked, that'd be great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bucknife said:

I agree, and it's a phase I've literally heard and read multiple times regarding Ensnare

 

It turns out, most players don't do or study game design.

 

"Objectively bad game design" is a thing, but what the game and the element are trying to achieve has to be factored in. 

For example, in Malifaux 1.5, there was an infinite combo with Lure, Double Take and Nephilim Heart that could basically kill any model in the game from across the table.  In Magic, there are a few infinite combos (I recall at least 2 when I was a judge, but I think they've added some in the last 15 years...god I'm old).  Why was it egregious for Malifaux, but viable for Magic without ruining the game?  Execution.  All you had to do in Malifaux was declare using Nephilim Heart and then get LoS to a target.  In Magic, more individual elements are required an you don't have access to all of them right away like you do in a miniatures game (and your opponent can react to any part of the combo).  TL:DR full context and design goals have to be factored and doing so rarely results in clean cut objectivity (although there are some highly questionable decisions).

 

Nantex + Ensnare is not objectively bad design, but it feels like a bad case of "wouldn't it be cool if...." where designers really try to make an element work even when it's becoming clear that the payoff is outweighed by the drawbacks.  They just have this idea like "What if you could resurrect zombies?" or "What if this was like a gladiator?", but the implementation is just...wonky...it either doesn't quite work or the language is weird or they can't find a good cost point, but they can't quite bring themselves to drop it either even as the problems mount and the playtesting comes back as "why are we even doing this?".  It's an idea without a design goal or objective and without that, there's no clear priority to focus on if/when it starts going off the rails and you have to start doing triage.

 

Sorry, minor design rant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Assuming you knew the time constraints, just stipulate whichever (obstructed or not) is less favorable for you, just to move on.

I know and I said it doesn't matter he gets obstructed and to just roll the dice, but he insisted on measuring. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, skotothalamos said:

The rules (Floor rules) do work that way:

"The play on resolution means that, after both players acknowledge the mistake and the Judge determines that neither player was given notable advantage because of it, the game is continued without “going back” and resolving or correcting the mistake."

If a guy rolls 3 dice instead of 2 and gets all blanks, neither player was given a notable advantage because of it, so the game can continue without giving him 2 more dice to try again.

The attacking player was given notable advantage in this situation. You should always reroll after rolling too many dice.

Edited by Boreas Mun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Brunas said:

Objectively...

It's easy to demonstrate it's unfun - just watch a game or two with it. 

Unfun is not an objective thing either though....

I doubt it could easily be demonstrated that it's widely unfun enough to warrant measures either tbh. A poll would not reach far and would most likely attract far more unfunners that OKers.

Bottom line is that it will need to become much more widely used and win something major before anything changes, regardless of opinion. Unfun is one thing, unfun and successful is very much another.

Personally, I don't find it unfun or OP, but it wouldn't surprise me if it did grow into just that, for a large enough majority, and receive treatment. The opposite would not surprise me much either tbf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cuz05 said:

Unfun is not an objective thing either though....

I doubt it could easily be demonstrated that it's widely unfun enough to warrant measures either tbh. A poll would not reach far and would most likely attract far more unfunners that OKers.

Bottom line is that it will need to become much more widely used and win something major before anything changes, regardless of opinion. Unfun is one thing, unfun and successful is very much another.

Personally, I don't find it unfun or OP, but it wouldn't surprise me if it did grow into just that, for a large enough majority, and receive treatment. The opposite would not surprise me much either tbf.

🚔**** take alert🚔

See triple upsilons

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cuz05 said:

Unfun is not an objective thing either though....

I doubt it could easily be demonstrated that it's widely unfun enough to warrant measures either tbh. A poll would not reach far and would most likely attract far more unfunners that OKers.

Bottom line is that it will need to become much more widely used and win something major before anything changes, regardless of opinion. Unfun is one thing, unfun and successful is very much another.

Personally, I don't find it unfun or OP, but it wouldn't surprise me if it did grow into just that, for a large enough majority, and receive treatment. The opposite would not surprise me much either tbf.

 

Ironically, "unfun" can actually be easier to determine than whether something is good/bad design because generally fun is a function of player engagement i.e. how much are they participating and making meaningful decisions?  If you're playing magic and you cast a cool creature, then it casually gets counterspelled, almost nobody is going to claim it was "fun" just because in that instance you won't get a distinct feeling that the decision was relevant, so you'll get the grim resignation "they were going to counter whatever I did anyways".  If you're playing Warmachine and the enemy caster puts a spell that says a unit cannot charge on your melee only unit, roughly 0% of players are going to claim that as "fun" experience because the unit has now been rendered casually useless, so the decisions you make with them don't matter unless you brought anti-spell tech.

 

In terms of the Nantex, from just banging iterations out against everyone ranging from players with all the skill of the baked potato to those who finished top 16 at worlds, I'd gauge the overall engagement of opponents at between 5-10%.  Even when they're not actively saying they're not having fun, you can tell by body language and tone when there just is no longer an engagement factor.  This includes games where the Nantex lost.  Victory not increasing engagement is usually a red flag that an element is objectively unfun.

 

Since we're already on game design and the Nantex, one of the weirdest phenomenon that I was trying to explain was an inverted decision paralysis curve.  Decision Paralysis occurs when a player is just overwhelmed by the available options.  It's very common among newer players and usually decreases significantly with experience.  the Nantex was actually doing the opposite i.e. the newer players were making decisions very quickly and the veterans were struggling to come up with anything.  For the newer players the problem seemed to be a "you don't know what you don't know", so they would rush into poor decisions and die assuming the Nantex wasn't that different from another ship.  The veterans, OTOH, who actually had a good grasp of what the Nantex could do, were really struggling to figure out what to do.  This could be confused for a puzzle solving engagement, but the answer was a little more troubling.  They actually realized that if I had plotted the correct counter, their maneuver literally didn't matter, so they just had to blind guess on positions where my maneuver + arc placement wouldn't allow me to catch them.  If it was a simple matter of calculation, they could've arrived at the solution significantly faster, but the realization that it was just a blind guess and there was no demonstrably correct solution or even a "correct enough" solution was actually the source of the problem.  Players feeling like they're just taking shots in the dark or everything is luck based is another negative factor that can influence engagement.

 

That was a lot of words, but just relaying some observational thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, jagsba said:

but interpreting them as written is better because interpretation them as intended is open interpretation. Unlike interpreting them as written. No interpretation there.

look man, read it as whatever absolves me of the most responsibility.  It's just how it's written, there's literally nothing I can do, nevermind the fact that the marshal/head judge has the power to override errors in the rules reference.  If it's always RAW, which is apparently a meaningful phrase, there can't be errors.  EZ.  My hands are tied.

2 hours ago, Cuz05 said:

Unfun is not an objective thing either though....

I doubt it could easily be demonstrated that it's widely unfun enough to warrant measures either tbh. A poll would not reach far and would most likely attract far more unfunners that OKers.

Therefore nothing can ever be deemed unfun?  I'm not sure how telling people that are complaining that something isn't fun that they aren't able to give any form of feedback possible that would or should change things is... useful?  What do you want them to do, write letters directly to FFG?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Chumbalaya said:

🚔**** take alert🚔

See triple upsilons

I for one keep a print out of Worlds Results next to me while playing with or against Ensnare with small bases.
Knowing its first month tournament performance makes getting dunked on by high init re-positioning tractor token 270 turret engagement demolition aces alot more fun. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cuz05 said:

Unfun is not an objective thing either though....

I doubt it could easily be demonstrated that it's widely unfun enough to warrant measures either tbh. A poll would not reach far and would most likely attract far more unfunners that OKers.

Bottom line is that it will need to become much more widely used and win something major before anything changes, regardless of opinion. Unfun is one thing, unfun and successful is very much another.

Personally, I don't find it unfun or OP, but it wouldn't surprise me if it did grow into just that, for a large enough majority, and receive treatment. The opposite would not surprise me much either tbf.

It actually doesn't need to win a ton and be successful if its unfun and justifiable to take. We have the example of the trip upsilon getting an emergency points change without necessarily winning much or being that widespread. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Boom Owl said:

I for one keep a print out of Worlds Results next to me while playing with or against Ensnare with small bases.
Knowing its first month tournament performance makes getting dunked on by high init re-positioning tractor token 270 turret engagement demolition aces alot more fun. 

A fellow man of culture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

I for one keep a print out of Worlds Results next to me while playing with or against Ensnare with small bases.
Knowing its first month tournament performance makes getting dunked on by high init re-positioning tractor token 270 turret engagement demolition aces alot more fun. 

do you have the original or the post judge correction standings?  Obviously nantexs only did regular well in the original version, but once it was determined that all the judge calls were wrong we had to go back and redo it. Duncan Howard is the new world champion, and nantex lists were six of the top sixteen, including making the final table. I can get you a copy if you want

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, catachanninja said:

do you have the original or the post judge correction standings?  Obviously nantexs only did regular well in the original version, but once it was determined that all the judge calls were wrong we had to go back and redo it. Duncan Howard is the new world champion, and nantex lists were six of the top sixteen, including making the final table. I can get you a copy if you want

do I need to mail back my participation dial covers, or did the FO player count stay the same?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MasterShake2 said:

They actually realized that if I had plotted the correct counter, their maneuver literally didn't matter, so they just had to blind guess on positions where my maneuver + arc placement wouldn't allow me to catch them.  If it was a simple matter of calculation, they could've arrived at the solution significantly faster, but the realization that it was just a blind guess and there was no demonstrably correct solution or even a "correct enough" solution was actually the source of the problem.

Not going to disagree with anything because it's all very in depth and reasonable, there's nothing to disagree with.

This bit though, you are right ofc, but at this point of the engagement with a Nantex, you've just moved past the point where your choice would have mattered. 50/50 gambles into the lesser of 2 bad options happen with everything, setting those in your favour, rather than walking into them, is next level biz. As I'm sure you all know.

That's the interesting thing about playing against it for me, plotting your counter to what the Nantex can do has to be done much earlier than against any other ship. I quite like that extra twist in my planning.

All this does add up to it being a f**king nightmare for new, casual players ofc, but there's plenty of that around already.

I honestly have no agenda on this. I'm happy for a load of people to hate it and complain about it, if that's what they want to do. I'm happy if they nerf it. I'm still happy if they don't. It's the internet, we all just say stuff because we've got nothing better to do :)

 

Re. Trip Ups and Unfunness in general.

Trip Ups were so much more extreme than this, in the way they just broke traditional engagements, that it's really not a relevant case in my mind. The Nantex just does not do that, you still have multiple approach options.

No. Nothing can ever be proven to be unfun for everyone. There is always some weirdo..... But I did say widely unfun enough. That point generally becomes clear when it's reached. Even if it's not an empirically provable point.

I personally don't think it's clear yet, all the negativity I've seen is still stuck on general msg boards and hasn't generated much ire in the circles I move in. Barely moved out of hype mode and anecdote so far really. That's not to say it won't ofc, when the architecture is complete.

That told you so moment is not yet upon us. I'm not ruling it out though, just to be clear myself.

Also, I'm just being pedantic probably, it's a thing I do.

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...