Jump to content
SaltMaster 5000

Carolina Krayts is the best X-Wing podcast

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

...on to the next one to be sure.

The real kicker is that your perspective is entirely mutable and almost totally as you wish it to be :D

Just had my tea :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, LagJanson said:

Sunny Bounder. 27 points.

The ability certainly isn’t worth two points mathematically, but when you repeatedly trigger it in a single game and tilt your opponent, it’s priceless.

 

 

 

Heroic against 2 die ships is nonsensically tilting.  They finally get double hits, see double/triple blanks and get all excited...then that one little word "Heroic!".

 

Saw a droid v 5x A-Wing match where the droid player looked like he was about to flip table every time his opponent yelled heroic.

Edited by MasterShake2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to get some games in for a local store champ, and I'm definitely playing FO, so what are my best options?  I'm usually a triple ace player, but have spent a decent amount of time playing 5 ship FO.  What is the best option right now, and if it is 5 ship FO what are some good opening setups... I don't have a ton of time to mess around with a bunch of different openings if that is what I'm going to run.  I love how balanced FO seems right now, but it is killing me list building.

TL;DR there are too many mid tier FO options I like, wat do for a tournament next week.

Share this post


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

 

Heroic against 2 die ships is nonsensically tilting.  They finally get double hits, see double/triple blanks and get all excited...then that one little word "Heroic!".

 

Saw a droid v 5x A-Wing match where the droid player looked like he was about to flip table every time his opponent yelled heroic.

186 had a good line about heroic recently. Terrible upgrade for a game, pretty good upgrade for a tournament. 
 

Mathematically not a huge increase, but the increase is entirely reducing the left side of the bell curve, right? Skews distribution right, or something like that? 📈

 

I want better stat emojis, it goes from:

_/ \_  to / \_, give or take. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone seems grumpy about number of rounds and going to time. Has anyone really talked about how that could influence list building?

 

I internally groan every time someone talks about needing to bring a late game closer. How often are we really getting to late game, much less having a bunch of time there to close? I would have thought “alpha and run out of time before they can claw back” or “trade up early” or “win the joust” are all much better strategies. 
 

I’ve been trying to force my way to mid game quickly with kamikaze dead man fireballs, and it’s kinda working? Not enough that I really want to bring Poe, but enough that Zizi or something similar can plink to half or finish off the limping ships and probably be ahead on points. 

Edited by AEIllingworth
Clarity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AEIllingworth said:

Everyone seems grumpy about number of rounds and going to time. Has anyone really talked about how that could influence list building?

I'm grumpy. 

I'd rather see more even trading point for point, but also that we can kill lists within the time. atm, we have the good of having to fight brutally hard for each point (due to half points) but like 90% of games have significant stuff alive at the end. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

I'm grumpy. 

I'd rather see more even trading point for point, but also that we can kill lists within the time. atm, we have the good of having to fight brutally hard for each point (due to half points) but like 90% of games have significant stuff alive at the end. 

I agree, but I’m looking to be constructive about it. I’m pretty sure it means we mostly don’t have to worry about late game in list building, theory, or practice? Concentrate on openings, opening engagements, and maybe some mid game and you should be good to go?

 

Coffee is for closers, but closers are for untimed games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, AEIllingworth said:

I agree, but I’m looking to be constructive about it. I’m pretty sure it means we mostly don’t have to worry about late game in list building, theory, or practice? Concentrate on openings, opening engagements, and maybe some mid game and you should be good to go?

 

Coffee is for closers, but closers are for untimed games. 

I'd just argue mid game is longer. 

Early game - 1-3 

Midgame - 4-7or8 - this used to be like 4-5or6. Especially when early game meant significant stuff didn't survive the alpha. A lot more stuff survives now. 

Lategame, turn 9 only. Used to be like from 6-9. 

 

--

Dunno what to do about it. I actually don't want the game to go back towards 1.0 levels of speed and double-mods and insta-death. 

 

---

I'm also surprised 5X isn't played more and doesn't kill more things. I thought it would. But the bulk lists are just getting more powerful... who woulda thunk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, AEIllingworth said:

I agree, but I’m looking to be constructive about it. I’m pretty sure it means we mostly don’t have to worry about late game in list building, theory, or practice? Concentrate on openings, opening engagements, and maybe some mid game and you should be good to go?

 

Coffee is for closers, but closers are for untimed games. 

 

So, I did the scorekeeping for my team, general thoughts:

Quad Jedi predictably saw no completions, however, given the trajectory of the games, it didn't seem like any of them going to completion would've changed the outcome

FO saw 1 game go to completion and 2 basically over but the crying, again, no significant change to the outcome

My B-Wings went to completion 4 of 5 games and very close to completion in game 5.  Game 5 was the only game where time could've easily changed it (Braylen at 4hp vs Jess Pava at 4hp)

-

My question is always this:  If the game is going to time, but the player that would most probably wins, wins anyways, is it actually a problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MasterShake2 said:

 

So, I did the scorekeeping for my team, general thoughts:

Quad Jedi predictably saw no completions, however, given the trajectory of the games, it didn't seem like any of them going to completion would've changed the outcome

FO saw 1 game go to completion and 2 basically over but the crying, again, no significant change to the outcome

My B-Wings went to completion 4 of 5 games and very close to completion in game 5.  Game 5 was the only game where time could've easily changed it (Braylen at 4hp vs Jess Pava at 4hp)

-

My question is always this:  If the game is going to time, but the player that would most probably wins, wins anyways, is it actually a problem?

I’m still trying to look at it from a different perspective. Don’t care if it’s a problem or not, just how the game is. 
 

Ace miniswarm can’t really use the tactic of “throw swarm at them, then ace cleans up” because you run out of time in between “them” and “then”. That means the ace needs to be more of a punchy flanker than a late game closer? 

 

Thesis statement: This should be influencing list building and tactics more than it currently is. 

Share this post


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

Thesis statement: This should be influencing list building and tactics more than it currently is. 

 

Question:  How many lists will be up on points at time in the mid-game that wouldn't also win in the early or late game?

 

Is X-Wing really the kind of game where Lists start out super aggressive and run out of gas or really take time to ramp up?  Maybe ordinance for the early game, but very little of that is viable right now (and a list that only tries to win the initial joust is going to be too dice-dependent to reliably win anything) and no lists really gains resources from early to late.  In other words, what would a list or tactics look like that only really wins the mid-game?  Follow up, finals are far longer than 75 minutes, will that list win cut rounds?

 

Counter Thesis:  The reason we haven't seen much to exploit is that the options to do so are limited and unrealiable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, AEIllingworth said:

Ace miniswarm can’t really use the tactic of “throw swarm at them, then ace cleans up” because you run out of time in between “them” and “then”. That means the ace needs to be more of a punchy flanker than a late game closer? 

The ace needs to be both.

While the grunts are alive, the ace needs to take advantage of the flank the grunts are creating and score free damage -- doubly so because the ace most often has the best guns in the list. Then, once the grunts have been traded away, the ace will find itself already on the flank of a heavily depleted enemy list and can transition into closing out the game.

Share this post


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

I want to get some games in for a local store champ, and I'm definitely playing FO, so what are my best options?  I'm usually a triple ace player, but have spent a decent amount of time playing 5 ship FO.  What is the best option right now, and if it is 5 ship FO what are some good opening setups... I don't have a ton of time to mess around with a bunch of different openings if that is what I'm going to run.  I love how balanced FO seems right now, but it is killing me list building.

TL;DR there are too many mid tier FO options I like, wat do for a tournament next week.

I have been having a blast and a lot of local success with

kylo, scorch, backdraft, Rivas, epsilon

no upgrades, when kylo doesn’t move last screen with other ships, I tend to put them on one side and kylo on the other, force hard choices, punish whichever choice

i also think it’s worth considering lowering backdraft to a zeta sf and making the epsilon a zeta as well...but when backdraft does backdraft things it does feel glorious I also like the spike damage he adds to cut through higher agility ships

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MasterShake2 said:

My question is always this:  If the game is going to time, but the player that would most probably wins, wins anyways, is it actually a problem?

Its not a balance problem. 

The game is good/balanced as is. 

Its just... not satisfying both player-feel-wise and design-wise. 

Now is the above a problem for a having fun time which a game is... that is a question. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, AEIllingworth said:

Ace miniswarm can’t really use the tactic of “throw swarm at them, then ace cleans up” because you run out of time in between “them” and “then”.

I disagree with the assumptions behind this on multiple levels

But I don't know how to express my reasoning clearly except by question, so, my questions would be - why would throwing (eg) 130 points of swarm at 200 points of list be a viable strategy?

If the answer is "because the ace is flanking", the ace isn't really being useful until they're shooting things; and threaten one angle with ABC while ace threatens a flank is a super common strategy. So I don't even know what's happening.

Why should any ace in the game, by rights, be able to solo >1.0x their points given unlimited minutes? Is the problem the type of things that in this context constitute ace? 

Your set of underlying assumptions seems so far from mine that I don't even know what's real

There's no value in actually discussing your surface point without addressing the iceberg of the unseen assumptions gap between us

7 hours ago, MasterShake2 said:

Is X-Wing really the kind of game where Lists start out super aggressive and run out of gas or really take time to ramp up?  Maybe ordinance for the early game, but very little of that is viable right now (and a list that only tries to win the initial joust is going to be too dice-dependent to reliably win anything) and no lists really gains resources from early to late.  In other words, what would a list or tactics look like that only really wins the mid-game? 

I don't know how you could think this unless you're someone who just sticks with one list/style, and tries to "fear the man who practiced one punch" etc etc your way through swiss? Different lists have vastly, wildly divergent efficacy vs time graphs.

Droids (ordnance or not makes no difference) are a list that is strongest early and fades extremely rapidly. Six damage to a B-Wing is a still living, shooting, focusing, probably barrel roll action linking for double modsing, threat. Six damage to a droid swarm is four red dice off the table, two fewer calculates per round, two fewer blockers and a net that's two arcs narrower. And add on initiative kills, which are matchup dependant (all of this is), but accelerate the efficacy loss of droids through the mid game. If you lose two droids for "free" in the opening, you don't tend to come back from it.

Fangs, OTOH, have a phenomenal power spike through mid and late game. Fenn is scariest when there's only 2 or 3 ships left and maybe they're somewhat scattered. Concordia means Fangs scale inversely with enemy ship count, and their linked boosts and predictable blue twos are strongest with fewer blockers to avoid and fewer range two shots to run in fear from. And Fangs ability to knife-fight keeps the opponent trapped between the Fangs and whatever else is still alive (eg: more fangs on the opposite flank, Boba being really angry with a rear arc and lots of mods, a bunch of tractor scyks coming to forcibly relocate your mobile home, etc)

Aces power spiking into the late game seems kind of self evident? Whisper is maybe the strongest example of such a ship that exists in this game right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, svelok said:

I disagree with the assumptions behind this on multiple levels

But I don't know how to express my reasoning clearly except by question, so, my questions would be - why would throwing (eg) 130 points of swarm at 200 points of list be a viable strategy?

If the answer is "because the ace is flanking", the ace isn't really being useful until they're shooting things; and threaten one angle with ABC while ace threatens a flank is a super common strategy. So I don't even know what's happening.

Why should any ace in the game, by rights, be able to solo >1.0x their points given unlimited minutes? Is the problem the type of things that in this context constitute ace? 

Your set of underlying assumptions seems so far from mine that I don't even know what's real

There's no value in actually discussing your surface point without addressing the iceberg of the unseen assumptions gap between us

I don't know how you could think this unless you're someone who just sticks with one list/style, and tries to "fear the man who practiced one punch" etc etc your way through swiss? Different lists have vastly, wildly divergent efficacy vs time graphs.

Droids (ordnance or not makes no difference) are a list that is strongest early and fades extremely rapidly. Six damage to a B-Wing is a still living, shooting, focusing, probably barrel roll action linking for double modsing, threat. Six damage to a droid swarm is four red dice off the table, two fewer calculates per round, two fewer blockers and a net that's two arcs narrower. And add on initiative kills, which are matchup dependant (all of this is), but accelerate the efficacy loss of droids through the mid game. If you lose two droids for "free" in the opening, you don't tend to come back from it.

Fangs, OTOH, have a phenomenal power spike through mid and late game. Fenn is scariest when there's only 2 or 3 ships left and maybe they're somewhat scattered. Concordia means Fangs scale inversely with enemy ship count, and their linked boosts and predictable blue twos are strongest with fewer blockers to avoid and fewer range two shots to run in fear from. And Fangs ability to knife-fight keeps the opponent trapped between the Fangs and whatever else is still alive (eg: more fangs on the opposite flank, Boba being really angry with a rear arc and lots of mods, a bunch of tractor scyks coming to forcibly relocate your mobile home, etc)

Aces power spiking into the late game seems kind of self evident? Whisper is maybe the strongest example of such a ship that exists in this game right now.

 

You're talking about playstyles, which is fine, I'm talking about win condition.  What lists gains a bunch of points early, but struggles to finish out the game (because obviously if it can finish out the game, it defeats the point of the exercise for building specifically not to go to time)?  Aces may be harder to pin down as you lose ships, but that just increases the viability of an overall win, not the points they're picking up.  Most lists that will win by time, will also win if fought to completion, so the thought exercise is not "what has a slow/fast playstyle?", but rather, "What picks up points exclusively in the early-mid game, but couldn't also win if playing to complete destruction of one side?"  I'm not convinced that list exists because, again, most lists that will rack up enough points to comfortably win in these phases also win if played to time.

Share this post


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

 

You're talking about playstyles, which is fine, I'm talking about win condition.  What lists gains a bunch of points early, but struggles to finish out the game (because obviously if it can finish out the game, it defeats the point of the exercise for building specifically not to go to time)?  Aces may be harder to pin down as you lose ships, but that just increases the viability of an overall win, not the points they're picking up.  Most lists that will win by time, will also win if fought to completion, so the thought exercise is not "what has a slow/fast playstyle?", but rather, "What picks up points exclusively in the early-mid game, but couldn't also win if playing to complete destruction of one side?"  I'm not convinced that list exists because, again, most lists that will rack up enough points to comfortably win in these phases also win if played to time.

every droid game I've played against hyper-ace lists were this way, where if given infinite time, im 90% confident I lose as the droid player.

Examples of hyper-ace lists:

  • 2x 7b jedi (likely regen) [can be a third - this list was common pre-january points]
  • adv. sensors guri + 1 (I hit adv. sensors guri + boba at the first chance qualifier).
  • 2+ phantoms list (faced triple phantoms at nova)

 

In each case, I can usually push an early points lead, which then forces the other list to watch the clock and actually engage me in good faith, or just generally, they are aware if the game goes to time, it's a final salvo. However, *I* have to play to basically cover my flank and "flush" them at all times (assuming im actually trying to play the game, which I am).

This involves me "minesweeping" the board - I go up, turn in, closing off a part of the board, then slowly (but not too slowly?) enroach and try and close off the board (sweeping the mines).

 

If given an infinite amount of time, they probably just still win this. I've literally heard many of these opponents whine about wanting more time, or wishing they had more turns or literally saying "if this was untimed, I think I win this game", which is probably true, but...  man, that's probably always untrue, and honestly, bad for the game. I'm not sure those kinds of lists should actually ever exist: lists that actually just always likely win with some 90+% confidence if the game is un-timed.

 

Edited by Tlfj200

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, MasterShake2 said:

 

Heroic against 2 die ships is nonsensically tilting.  They finally get double hits, see double/triple blanks and get all excited...then that one little word "Heroic!".

 

Saw a droid v 5x A-Wing match where the droid player looked like he was about to flip table every time his opponent yelled heroic.

Heroic would be perfectly costed whether tie fighters costed 6 points each or 50.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

every droid game I've played against hyper-ace lists were this way, where if given infinite time, im 90% confident I lose as the droid player.

Examples of hyper-ace lists:

  • 2x 7b jedi (likely regen) [can be a third - this list was common pre-january points]
  • adv. sensors guri + 1 (I hit adv. sensors guri + boba at the first chance qualifier).
  • 2+ phantoms list (faced triple phantoms at nova)

 

In each case, I can usually push an early points lead, which then forces the other list to watch the clock and actually engage me in good faith, or just generally, they are aware if the game goes to time, it's a final salvo. However, *I* have to play to basically cover my flank and "flush" them at all times (assuming im actually trying to play the game, which I am).

This involves me "minesweeping" the board - I go up, turn in, closing off a part of the board, then slowly (but not too slowly?) enroach and try and close off the board (sweeping the mines).

 

If given an infinite amount of time, they probably just still win this. I've literally heard many of these opponents whine about wanting more time, or wishing they had more turns or literally saying "if this was untimed, I think I win this game", which is probably true, but...  man, that's probably always untrue, and honestly, bad for the game. I'm not sure those kinds of lists should actually ever exist: lists that actually just always likely win with some 90+% confidence if the game is un-timed.

 

 

Do you have a non-ace example?  i.e. a matchup against a non-ace where the person would win if time were not a factor?  

 

I'm actually wondering because droids vs. aces seems to be a case of polar opposites fighting an non-representative of the field as a whole.  If droids would win to completion against everything but aces, is it worth adjusting time just so aces have a chance to beat droids?

Edited by MasterShake2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MasterShake2 said:

 

Do you have a non-ace example?  

Probably not, tbh. My initial thought was the worlds final. When Vader was in the bad spot, I turned to the guy next to me and said “if he can take wedge with him, whisper can solo the rest”. Oil was down on points, but had 90 minutes to close and he did. 
 

Does he win that game at 75 minutes? I mean, probably, he got there, but it looks a lot worse. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AEIllingworth said:

Probably not, tbh. My initial thought was the worlds final. When Vader was in the bad spot, I turned to the guy next to me and said “if he can take wedge with him, whisper can solo the rest”. Oil was down on points, but had 90 minutes to close and he did. 
 

Does he win that game at 75 minutes? I mean, probably, he got there, but it looks a lot worse. 

I coincidentally checked the other day, actually  - he did win the game like 106-102, though we know both players would have played differently leading up to that point. That said... I'm reasonably confident 'calling' that game like 2 rounds previous to the 75 minute mark.

https://youtu.be/v6clH-e4xaA?t=14195

 

(Daniel later simply concedes with 20 minutes left on the clock, as the game quick proceeds to 'unwinnable' territory thereafter)

Edited by Tlfj200

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

If given an infinite amount of time, they probably just still win this.

Droids are on an init kill clock. Thats how I think of it at least. 

So much so that the clock ticks closer to midnight substantially just by putting 1 hull dmg into 2 droids in a turn since it can easily be followed by a double tap the next turn. 

Its true for Droids vs Non-Ace lists as well. 

Weird how when your i1 basically every matchup looks like a variation on "aces that joust" , "aces that partial joust", "aces that dont joust", and "aces that turret joust". 

 

On the other end the droid opponent usually "knows" they are going to trade a piece of their list entirely, but not all of their list. And the strategy against droids revolves around that reality. Your gonna lose something. 

Edited by Boom Owl

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...