Jump to content
Musical Xeno

Gold Squadron's X-wing Flight Academy: Using the Extra Space Between the Nubs aka "The Wiggle Room"

Recommended Posts

This is going to make me check an opponents templates to make sure they are regulation width. Even a few mm off each side can end up making a huge difference. Another good reason to use a more armada like method for measuring. Vassal and Fly Casual simulator eliminate this too. So while not cheating where in the bad form camp does this lie? No big deal or just this side of cheating?

Share this post


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

This is going to make me check an opponents templates to make sure they are regulation width. Even a few mm off each side can end up making a huge difference. Another good reason to use a more armada like method for measuring. Vassal and Fly Casual simulator eliminate this too. So while not cheating where in the bad form camp does this lie? No big deal or just this side of cheating?

 Those are regulation width templates.

The rulebook clearly states that the template must be flush against the base of the model and between the nubs. As long as the bases are not modified any wiggle room is fair play. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

That being said, the longer templates you use the shorter wiggle room you have. There's a reason he took 5 turns to avoid the rock. Any sane player is going to setup not running into the rock and dial in a 4 straight in this case and blow right past it. It's not like you deploy ships then setup rocks. It's in fact quite the opposite.

Overall it's a really weird legal interaction that has so little application in an actual game. In order to get the most out of this trick you need to be constantly slow rolling, and if you're slow rolling you stand a good chance of being Outflanked/bombed/rammed/focus fired. Only thing I can think that might even majorly affect it is Nym Trajectory simulatoring a bomb out the front, but even then, he's only moving the bomb a microscopic amount, because you must use the 5 straight template. (Trust me, the change in difference is so small over 1 iteration if you were supposed to get hit by the bomb the wiggle room here is minscule, within a perfect enviorment you would still be hit by said bomb). 

And the time it takes messing around with this to get it perfectly right every time could be enough  to be considered slow playing.

So in conclusion: 

Yes it exists, but the amount of turns needed to successfully execute this move leave the ship open to other forms of attack, and you're better off not wasting your time with it.

I'm halfway tempted to make a video called "How to actually avoid rocks" and show setup and then an X-wing perform a 4 straight move and boost past the rock (T-65, S-foils closed). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you guys are misunderstanding my comment. I know there is wiggle room in templates I was stating that I would check someone has not shaved additional space on either side. Therefore increasing the wiggle room, we’ve seen in the past years that people are not above cheating and this would be a slick add to a cheaters arsenal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LordFajubi said:

I think you guys are misunderstanding my comment. I know there is wiggle room in templates I was stating that I would check someone has not shaved additional space on either side. Therefore increasing the wiggle room, we’ve seen in the past years that people are not above cheating and this would be a slick add to a cheaters arsenal.

It's all good, bro. 

Just don't bring any dice or templates, then agree with each opponent to use theirs for the duration of the match. 

Sharing these componants between two players is allowed in the core rules. 

Bring cheating stuff...now everybody gets to cheat with you! Yay!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure it's a manufacturing choice to ensure the templates actually fit. I won a set of third party acrylic templates in the early days. They were actually a bit too wide to fit within the nubs of my bases. 

A little bit if wiggle room is far more acceptable than templates that are too wide! I played a game with them and wasn't really paying too close attention but was wondering why the angles of my ships kept changing. Finally I looked close, and sure enough, they didn't quite fit! In to the trash those went!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So question, now that templates have a center line that can be followed...will it be possible that making your opponent line the center line up on all maneuvers...I know it sounds crazy but do you think it could become a 2.0 tournament rule?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TheOz said:

So question, now that templates have a center line that can be followed...will it be possible that making your opponent line the center line up on all maneuvers...I know it sounds crazy but do you think it could become a 2.0 tournament rule?

I imagine if people get any kind of practical use out of the above video, it could easily become a rule 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bucknife said:

Bring cheating stuff...now everybody gets to cheat with you! Yay!


Except it could be done for supreme advantage.

For instance, imagine a Ghost player loads his green dice... to be blanks.  Then, if the opponent shares his dice, that opponent would have proportionally fewer evades than they statistically should, getting their ships killed faster.  The Ghost, however, has its bulk behind HP and not agility dice, so it will be far less affected that agility-dependent ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, LordFajubi said:

This is going to make me check an opponents templates to make sure they are regulation width. Even a few mm off each side can end up making a huge difference. Another good reason to use a more armada like method for measuring. Vassal and Fly Casual simulator eliminate this too. So while not cheating where in the bad form camp does this lie? No big deal or just this side of cheating?

What exactly do you mean by a “more Armada like method?” Because it’s insane how much play the Armada maneuver tool has in it, especially after it’s been used for a while. I don’t see how that is even remotely better than the minuscule amount of play between the templates and the base-nubs in X-Wing. 

22 hours ago, FlyingAnchors said:

That being said, the longer templates you use the shorter wiggle room you have. There's a reason he took 5 turns to avoid the rock. Any sane player is going to setup not running into the rock and dial in a 4 straight in this case and blow right past it. It's not like you deploy ships then setup rocks. It's in fact quite the opposite.

 

Pretty sure the point of the video was not “hey look at this cool trick for avoiding obstacles,” but rather “look at how much these minuscule adjustments can add up over the course of several maneuvers.” The obstacle and the speed 1 template were just part of the set up to demonstrate the aggregate effect. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Herowannabe said:

What exactly do you mean by a “more Armada like method?” Because it’s insane how much play the Armada maneuver tool has in it, especially after it’s been used for a while. I don’t see how that is even remotely better than the minuscule amount of play between the templates and the base-nubs in X-Wing. 

Pretty sure the point of the video was not “hey look at this cool trick for avoiding obstacles,” but rather “look at how much these minuscule adjustments can add up over the course of several maneuvers.” The obstacle and the speed 1 template were just part of the set up to demonstrate the aggregate effect. 

I know, that’s why I commented as such. 

If you do the same thing but with longer templates it will take much longer to produce the desired effect though. 

Ironically it’s probably large based ships that get the most out of the drift technique.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:


Except it could be done for supreme advantage.

For instance, imagine a Ghost player loads his green dice... to be blanks.  Then, if the opponent shares his dice, that opponent would have proportionally fewer evades than they statistically should, getting their ships killed faster.  The Ghost, however, has its bulk behind HP and not agility dice, so it will be far less affected that agility-dependent ships.

In a world where EVERYONE is sharing a single set of dice and templates in competition, and a hardcore ghost player wants to cheat so bad he actually brings BAD dice on purpose to screw his opponent...

More power to him. 

I hope he wins something and feels better about his place in the universe.

Share this post


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

In a world where EVERYONE is sharing a single set of dice and templates in competition, and a hardcore ghost player wants to cheat so bad he actually brings BAD dice on purpose to screw his opponent...

More power to him. 

I hope he wins something and feels better about his place in the universe.

To be fair, that goes for any ghost player regardless

Share this post


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

What exactly do you mean by a “more Armada like method?” Because it’s insane how much play the Armada maneuver tool has in it, especially after it’s been used for a while. I don’t see how that is even remotely better than the minuscule amount of play between the templates and the base-nubs in X-Wing. 

I thought Armada cupped the prongs not went inbetween them. Sorry if I was mistaken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As many people know, I'm strongly against abuse of rules.  For example, the "you can measure 'for TL' to a ship across the board" is complete BS.  It is clearly abuse of the rules and a crutch.  (Ironically, the biggest champions of "it's fine" are the people who say "X-Wing is 90% skill" more than anybody else.  Yet they feel the need to abuse rules and measure when they're not supposed to.  Go figure.)

In this case, though, there's not an issue, because there's just not an alternative.  Without a rule saying, e.g., "flush to the left," (or right) then there's no standard to adhere to.  There's no abuse of a rule, or against the spirit of a rule, because there's just not a rule on it at all, and no practical way for there to be.

2.0 will change that.  I won't be surprised to see 2.0 require (eventually, if not on launch) lining up the hashmarks on token and templates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

As many people know, I'm strongly against abuse of rules.  For example, the "you can measure 'for TL' to a ship across the board" is complete BS.  It is clearly abuse of the rules and a crutch.  (Ironically, the biggest champions of "it's fine" are the people who say "X-Wing is 90% skill" more than anybody else.  Yet they feel the need to abuse rules and measure when they're not supposed to.  Go figure.)

Sorry if this is a tangent from the original topic, but I wholeheartedly disagree with this philosophy.  The rules are what they are, and you can’t fault players for using the rules for their advantage-that’s the nature of competitive games.  You have a personal preference that folks shouldn’t measure target locks like that.  That’s just fine for you, but no one should expect others to follow their personal rules that aren’t part of the rule book.

Share this post


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

Sorry if this is a tangent from the original topic, but I wholeheartedly disagree with this philosophy.  The rules are what they are, and you can’t fault players for using the rules for their advantage-that’s the nature of competitive games.  You have a personal preference that folks shouldn’t measure target locks like that.  That’s just fine for you, but no one should expect others to follow their personal rules that aren’t part of the rule book.

"Don't abuse the rules" is in the rules.  You are not actually checking for a TL; you are, instead, measuring range for other purposes.  That is quite literally abuse of the rules for measuring for a TL.  There's simply no way around it.  There's definitely a certain type of player who has no problem abusing the rules, and is very happy that the prohibition on abuse of the rules isn't ever enforced.  But it does exist.

Edited by Jeff Wilder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Old Sarge said:

Sorry if this is a tangent from the original topic, but I wholeheartedly disagree with this philosophy.  The rules are what they are, and you can’t fault players for using the rules for their advantage-that’s the nature of competitive games.  You have a personal preference that folks shouldn’t measure target locks like that.  That’s just fine for you, but no one should expect others to follow their personal rules that aren’t part of the rule book.

You are so wrong, I don't even want to type it down, because I think you don't understand the problem, and it's just futile. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The “don’t abuse the rules” rule is vague, leaving us to follow the interpretation of of a judge.  If it’s allowed by the judge, then it’s allowed, and I don’t fault anyone for doing what is allowed.  In any case, second edition seems to have solved the problem with some more precise rules language.  It’s one of many improvements we have to look forward to.  ??

 

Edit to say, Commander Kaine said I was wrong above.  I’ve been wrong plenty of times.  He might be right.

Edited by Old Sarge

Share this post


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

The “don’t abuse the rules” rule is vague, leaving us to follow the interpretation of of a judge.  If it’s allowed by the judge, then it’s allowed, and I don’t fault anyone for doing what is allowed.

Just so we're clear, do you or don't you agree that "pretending to measure for a TL while actually measuring for other purposes" is "abusing the rule" for measuring for TL?  I'm genuinely curious.  Just looking for a straightforward answer.

I've run into many, many people who are willing to do it.  I've so far not met a single person who doesn't admit it is abuse of the rules.  (Which, again, is itself against the rules.)  The fact that people know it is abuse of the rules -- yet are still willing to do it, simply because there's no enforcement against it -- is pretty telling.

Edited by Jeff Wilder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just a rules question, really.  As I understand the rules, you can declare a target lock on a ship.  Then you measure range to that ship.  If it’s in range, you must take the lock.  If it’s out of range, you may not take the lock and you may declare another action.

What I think we’re discussing is the case where you declare a target lock on a ship when you are sure or pretty sure the ship is out of range.  To confirm, you measure range, which gives a secondary benefit of helping both players quantify just how far apart the ships are.

I don’t view that as an abuse of the rules.  From my perspective it’s comparable to intentionally fouling the opponent’s worst shooter at the end of a basketball game or running the football to take time off the clock in American football.  They are techniques that either side can use, and are blessed by referees, even though some fans and players may not like it.

If a judge decides it’s an abuse of the rules I’m fine with that.  If judges specifically allow it (as opposed to letting it slide because they didn’t see it), then the players should operate under those rules.

To be clear, I’m not sure how X-Wing judges rule on this issue.  My bottom line is that I’ll follow those rulings.  If it’s allowed, then I should not fault players that do it, and if it’s not allowed, then we shouldn’t do it.  

I will also note the difficulty of enforcement if it isn’t allowed.  We’d be left to complete subjectivity to ascertain whether the other player was sure a ship was beyond range 3.  That’s a crummy concept for a rule.  Would a judge be tougher on an experienced player who can probably estimate ranges better than a noob? It gets murky real fast, which is why I suspect what we’re talking about is commonly allowed by judges.  Any experienced judges want to weigh in?

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...