Jump to content
SaltMaster 5000

Carolina Krayts is the best X-Wing podcast

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Biophysical said:

What if there was a rule that said you had to take two ships less than i5 for each ship i5+?

this would be interesting. I also think force limitations like in Legion might be cool

like, make all the i6 and all the high-reposition i5s be "ace units" and say that you can have at max 1 ace unit per squad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Biophysical said:

What if there was a rule that said you had to take two ships less than i5 for each ship i5+?

I think it takes away people’s freedom to play what they enjoy, reduces archetype options, and ultimately would simply just change the problem rather than fix it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, jagsba said:

Force limitations where you're capped at a certain # of force per list

limitation being 3, yes?

19 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

I think it takes away people’s freedom to play what they enjoy, reduces archetype options, and ultimately would simply just change the problem rather than fix it.

only for certain competitive play

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, jagsba said:

Restrictions are interesting and good

Then why didn’t you just say that? Would have saved time then a cryptic reply and misused reaction.

And while I do prefer this direct response, I must criticize it for not having an actual answer to my last point. I do not see how the suggestion actually fixes anything, it just changes the problem. If you feel I am missing something, I would love to have a conversation about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

axadzlx3y9341.jpg

also I agree that restrictions are good. The problem of no restrictions is that it makes mono-spam lists legal. I'm talking archetypally here. 

A common example of monospam that is bad is massed TIE Interceptors. It creates matchup dependence - in 90%+ of matchups, five Sabers are not great, but in those 10% against lower initiative that cares about positioning, they're a monster. Pentuple Soontir, no thanks. 

5 X-Wings is similar. Whether or not it would be good, we don't want to see it, and thus the poor Blue Squadron Rookie is doomed to be overpriced. 

Triple ace is an archetype that should not exist. It is similar to monospam of anything else in that some matchups will be  really bad and some will be really good. This is not ok in my opinion because I want to play the game, not lose in the matchup pairing phase. 

That being said, there are people who disagree fundamentally with that.  I have talked to a lot of people who basically said that they don't want games purely determined by luck and skill, they want the listbuilding and matchups to factor into it. So idk what you think of that, but personally I hate rock/paper/scissors and thus hate spam of any one thing, so I think triple aces (or triple trajectory bombers, or quadruple passive sensor proton torpedoes, or any other archetype spam) should not exist. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

Then why didn’t you just say that? Would have saved time then a cryptic reply and misused reaction.

Because any chance is to quote @catachanninja is a chance worth taking. And I stand by my reaction.

7 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

And while I do prefer this direct response, I must criticize it for not having an actual answer to my last point. I do not see how the suggestion actually fixes anything, it just changes the problem. If you feel I am missing something, I would love to have a conversation about this.

I mean, I don't see how changes the problem instead of fixing it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

Does Corran prefer Afterburners (like Vader) or does he prefer Hull/Shield to up the threshold by one?

Socrates was a huge afterburners fan, but Plato thought it wise to pay for more HP, and so the age old question continues. Given the lack of good link actions on the E-wing I’m inclined to lean afterburners but extra hull or shield could be just as useful. 

Edited by FlyingAnchors
Confusious say: man who fly E-wing should just take Wedge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jagsba said:

Because any chance is to quote @catachanninja is a chance worth taking. And I stand by my reaction.

I mean, I don't see how changes the problem instead of fixing it. 

Then perhaps you should put into words what confuses you, like your second point. It would make explaining myself easier. 😀

From watching your posts and behavior, you have a problem with high initiative Aces, particularly force capable ones. Applying @Biophysical‘s suggestion still means I can take B7 Obi & Mace both with regen, and have points left over for a R5 Wolffe, or a CTL Ahsoka with say Chopper on board. Thus, Jedi Aces mutate, and are not fixed. I also seem to recall you expressing dislike for Rz-2s. The current 5A list I’ve seen only has one i5, thus unaffected by this suggestion. 

Now, if I have misunderstood your stances or the purpose of this suggestion, I do apologize. I welcome correction and comment.

16 minutes ago, FlyingAnchors said:

This is the way.

Good line.

As a thesis with no backing explanation, I do admit to finding it less than illuminating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Kieransi said:

axadzlx3y9341.jpg

also I agree that restrictions are good. The problem of no restrictions is that it makes mono-spam lists legal. I'm talking archetypally here. 

A common example of monospam that is bad is massed TIE Interceptors. It creates matchup dependence - in 90%+ of matchups, five Sabers are not great, but in those 10% against lower initiative that cares about positioning, they're a monster. Pentuple Soontir, no thanks. 

5 X-Wings is similar. Whether or not it would be good, we don't want to see it, and thus the poor Blue Squadron Rookie is doomed to be overpriced. 

Triple ace is an archetype that should not exist. It is similar to monospam of anything else in that some matchups will be  really bad and some will be really good. This is not ok in my opinion because I want to play the game, not lose in the matchup pairing phase. 

That being said, there are people who disagree fundamentally with that.  I have talked to a lot of people who basically said that they don't want games purely determined by luck and skill, they want the listbuilding and matchups to factor into it. So idk what you think of that, but personally I hate rock/paper/scissors and thus hate spam of any one thing, so I think triple aces (or triple trajectory bombers, or quadruple passive sensor proton torpedoes, or any other archetype spam) should not exist. 

Fair, but as I read your logic, it seems to also make the idea of Swarms likewise problematic. Do you think the TIE Swarm has a place in the game? And if yes, why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Kieransi said:

 

A common example of monospam that is bad is massed TIE Interceptors.

You are dead to me.

25 minutes ago, FlyingAnchors said:

Socrates was a huge afterburners fan, but Plato thought it wise to pay for more HP, and so the age old question continues. Given the lack of good link actions on the E-wing I’m inclined to lean afterburners but extra hull or shield could be just as useful. 

Frederick the Great was a fan of burners, though, and he knew more about fighting than both of them. 

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...