Jump to content
Boom Owl

The Poe Principle & Soontir Should be 69 Points

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, C3gorach said:

Is it only me that thinks Soontir doesn't actually costs 53, but 63ish cause you need to reserve those points for a bid to ensure he can do his shenanigans...

Not exactly, since the bid helps all the other aces.  It's not like Soontir is 63 and Whisper is 67 and Grand Inquisitor is 62.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
  • This thread is the perfect illustration of why Hyperspace is so important, and ought to be the primary (but not only) competitive format.
  • The most important thing that Hyperspace does is that it separates controlling the metagame from fair pricing of ships.
    • Hyperspace allows FFG to observe that folks are flying a tonne of U-Wings, and it's getting boring, and they can be shifted out of Hyperspace.¬† But all through this, U-Wings have always been fairly priced.
    • Fact of the matter is, there will be ships which get overplayed without being noticeably overpowered compared to the rest.
  • Enter Triple Aces.¬† It's an archetype which a lot of people hate.¬†
    • There's no coincidence that folks who seem to really hate triple ace also seem to really hate pre-maneuver reposition tricks.¬† It's about BS more than it's about OP.¬† As such, all the "wellactually Soontir isn't winning too many tournaments" is just so utterly misdirected.
    • Ace lists get a lot of play, probably more than they deserve (again, fully accurate and rational pricing is not enough).
    • Soontir is probably pretty close to right at 53 points (I'd give him a Chef John Tappa-Tappa), but still kind of a pain.¬† Sun Fac was more of a pain than they were actually-tournament-effective (BS not OP), and deserved the smackdown they got.
    • Synecdoche-Fel.png
    • Anyhow, to respond to ubiquitous and annoying Triple Ace, there is a wicked easy solution. The Hyperspace/Extended wall can descend, and leave Soontir and Whisper on the other side.
      • They don't need massive nerfs, or to have all the upgrades removed, or the game itself radically redesigned.
      • Just exclude them.¬† Simple.¬† Wonderful.¬†
    • The same could be applied to any other ship or list archetype which gets a little too common, but where a nerf would be excessive.
  • Now, I don't fully agree with Boom Owl.
    • Some solid suggestions and directions get lost in Hyperbole.
    • I think a lot of the suggestions like "Nearly No Upgrades" and "69 point Soontir" feel like major overreactions; somewhere between Anger and Bargaining in grief over the death of Hyperspace.
    • Maybe I'm still back in Denial, but all these suggestions seem like just worse ways to accomplish by trickery what Hyperspace did directly.¬† I don't need all this complexity and destruction in my X-Wing.
  • Still, it's better than being a total jerk like SOTL has throughout the thread.
Edited by theBitterFig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

Now, I don't fully agree with Boom Owl.

  • Some solid suggestions and directions get lost in Hyperbole.
  • I think a lot of the suggestions like "No Upgrades" and "69 point Soontir" feel like major overreactions; somewhere between Anger and Bargaining in grief over the death of Hyperspace

 

I think I have established already that pricing Soontir in the high 60s is not intended as hyperbole. You can call it that if you want to as a way to dismiss it as others have. But its just not my intent. I think 69 is a reasonable price. If you disagree cool, low 60s would be super reasonable to. I am still generally not sure why 69 points is viewed as ridiculous though when 68 is accepted as fine for Fenn. That seems to me like continued bias in favor of cheap high init mobility and passive mods for Empire. 

As for "No Upgrades" I dont know where that is coming from. Don't need to rehash that thread but introducing Upgrade per Ship limits is something I have suggested as an idea that would be useful to be able to address some of this stuff across formats without ripping out upgrade slots entirely or pricing pilots that are enjoyed beyond access. But "No Upgrades" is not something I would support or ever have. One Upgrade limits for specific problem pilots sure. No upgrades at all? No thanks. 

Also want to mention again that Trip Aces is not an archetype I hate playing or playing against. Very much the opposite. I play and enjoy it, and have for years. Its just an archetype that I believe has been under-costed for all of 2.0 in various forms and should be forced to make substantially greater compromises during list building and during game, like Poe has to.   

As for Hyperspace, I agree with you its a better competitive format. That said extended is here to stay and could be made better, no reason not to try. 

Edited by Boom Owl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/15/2020 at 6:59 PM, Boom Owl said:

I want ALL Ace lists to be expensive enough to force players to make the following compromises during list building: 

  • Make their 3rd ship an i4¬†
  • Make their 2nd and 3rd¬†ships more ships.
  • Make their 3 Ship i5/i6 list select 1 or 0 upgrades to fit within 200 pts¬†

I think this is a pretty reasonable direction for the game.

Whether or not Soontir in particular needs a 15 point nerf (I think Fenn Rau is more expensive because he's better)... that seems like it's getting lost in the weeds.

//

Improving Extended isn't a bad goal either.  I just think things need less drastic changes, or at least less immediate drastic changes.  Doing several rounds of tappa-tappa will get there in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@theBitterFig

But what guarantees do we have that Hyperspace is going to continue to be as balanced as people view it now? Remember, the people who are in charge of the rotations are also the ones that put out the cards that you think distort balance. Why should we make this new Hyperspace the primary (or only) competitive game in town now when we’ve only had one rotation?

Share this post


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

I am still generally not sure why 69 points is viewed as ridiculous though when 68 is accepted as fine for Fenn.

 I definitely missed this obvious comparison earlier in the discussion...

I'm curious as to why you think a point more than Fenn is justified when Soontir has less health?

Is it the quality of in-faction support for Soontir vs the faction options for Fenn (micro-meta vs macro-meta costing)? 

I mean, I could easily see 60-68 Soontir; 68 for any non-force I6s seems to be very close to correct in general. But comparing the chassis, abilities and available faction upgrades for both Soontir and Fenn, I just don't see the 69. 

But I'm probably just being too lazy and writing instead of reading the pages and pages of debate here. 

Anyway. Good show, gents. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Bucknife said:

 I definitely missed this obvious comparison earlier in the discussion...

I'm curious as to why you think a point more than Fenn is justified when Soontir has less health?

Is it the quality of in-faction support for Soontir vs the faction options for Fenn (micro-meta vs macro-meta costing)? 

I mean, I could easily see 60-68 Soontir; 68 for any non-force I6s seems to be very close to correct in general. But comparing the chassis, abilities and available faction upgrades for both Soontir and Fenn, I just don't see the 69. 

But I'm probably just being too lazy and writing instead of reading the pages and pages of debate here. 

Anyway. Good show, gents. 

Your on the right track, definitely¬†don't scroll to far up ūüôā¬†

TLDR: For context I think Fenn might be a couple pts cheap to and probably should start at 70 in relation to Poe being 68. I also think Mobility is generally under-costed. 

Semi related but worth discussing, given the choice which would you rather have as Boba's deadweight on current points?

  • Fenn Rau with Fearless
  • Soontir with Predator
  • Poe with R4 Black One
Edited by Boom Owl

Share this post


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

Semi related but worth discussing, given the choice which would you rather have as Boba's deadweight?

  • Fenn Rau with Fearless
  • Soontir with Predator
  • Poe with R4 Black One

Fun question. 

I've flown FennBoba. It's fun and Fenn can really pull weight, but I'd have to go with Poe. 

I'd trade the 'possible' offense of Fenn for the longevity and tactical-control flair of Poe. Boba usually does most of the lifting regardless, and I'm pretty sure the current points still leave a bid with Boba decked-out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, C3gorach said:

Is it only me that thinks Soontir doesn't actually costs 53, but 63ish cause you need to reserve those points for a bid to ensure he can do his shenanigans...

The Imperial bid is a very interesting component of this discussion. 

I don't doubt that the bid is at least a consideration in the current design philosophy for Imps, but I feel like a few increases on the aristocracy and maybe a couple upgrades could easily still leave 1-6 points of Imperial bid. 

That said...

The devs don't show a record or "tiny nerfing" the "problem lists" so far. 

They always go up to around 120. 

ūüėē

Share this post


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

Semi related but worth discussing, given the choice which would you rather have as Boba's deadweight on current points?

  • Fenn Rau with Fearless
  • Soontir with Predator
  • Poe with R4 Black One

Fearless Fenn, no question.

If it was Soontir with Outmaneuver (or even Crack Shot), Hull, and Targeting Computer, well, that's another kettle of fish.

1 hour ago, SabineKey said:

@theBitterFig

But what guarantees do we have that Hyperspace is going to continue to be as balanced as people view it now? Remember, the people who are in charge of the rotations are also the ones that put out the cards that you think distort balance. Why should we make this new Hyperspace the primary (or only) competitive game in town now when we’ve only had one rotation?

Depends on how we use the word balance.

If we're talking about "correct points cost," there is no reason Hyperspace would be any more or less balanced than Extended.  The whole reason I think Hyperspace is good is because it adds some more distance between the topics of being correctly priced and being too popular.

If by balance we mean a diverse whole, I mean, there's no guarantee, but it's a lot easier to keep frustrating or overly ubiquitous archetypes in check by "banning" out a piece of them.  First Order is more vibrant without Quickdraw, for example.  There will be times when a Maul Boba slips through, but the thing is: presuming we get to a point where things are priced correctly, then there is literally NOTHING that can be done in Extended to help a healthy meta develop.  You'd have to make things deliberately unbalanced in order to break up a log-jam, and that's bad.  Hyperspace can be a breath of fresh air, without arbitrary nerfs and buffs.  That's a major upside.

Share this post


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

Semi related but worth discussing, given the choice which would you rather have as Boba's deadweight on current points?

  • Fenn Rau with Fearless
  • Soontir with Predator
  • Poe with R4 Black One

This won't go over well in this discussion because I'm clearly not speaking to the point, but I'd choose Fenn because he's just more fun to fly.  Not because he's better, nor because it's a wise choice, just because he's the more interesting option mechanically.  When I fly Fenn I frequently get him killed because I'm lost in the joy of flying 'im.  But when I do well with him, he's both effective and engaging to command.  Moreso than Poe or even Soontir.  This is also why I really like Vonreg, nevermind his inferiority to other ace choices.

I suspect that applies to a lot of players who love flying the aces archetype and don't fly them ultra-cagey and slow.  Even if it wasn't as strong and effective in the meta as it is currently, they'd still want to fly aces simply because they're inherently fun and interesting.  IMO I enjoy flying Delta-7s when they're not oppressively powerful against my opponent's fleet (hence it's been a while since I've given them any table time).  FO aces are my favorite ace list currently, because they're interesting and, balance-wise, they feel better than unleashing jedi on my usually-non-meta opponent.

But triple aces are not necessarily fun to fly against, especially when flown super-cagey by a player who knows how to never give over points and likes to run & regen etc.  A lot of otherwise good lists just have no good answer to this.  Like the tractor shenanigans, it can be difficult to balance the game around that; unlike tractor shenanigans, it seems FFG's goal is to balance the rest of the game around that.

On reflection, my suspicion is triple aces are here to stay on purpose, and other stuff will be boosted to fit, not just with points reductions, but with other substantive changes over time.  Hopefully the excessively-cagey playstyle will face some sort of insurmountable obstacle in the meta or rules sometime soon, removing the main problem people have with facing ace lists and opening up the design space again.  I don't wanna see aces ripped from the meta, but I do want their NPE aspect handled somehow.  That benefits everyone overall, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably Poe.  Fenn has already proven himself to be not good enough in that role and Soontir would be singularly ineffective one the fast-moving battlefield Boba creates.

Poe at least distracts opponents from Boba for a decent length of time.

Share this post


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

Semi related but worth discussing, given the choice which would you rather have as Boba's deadweight on current points?

  • Fenn Rau with Fearless
  • Soontir with Predator
  • Poe with R4 Black One

Fearless Fenn is too good at presenting a threat. If you ignore him in favor of Boba, he's going to light you up. Poe no doubt would be a nuisance and would be rough to end game against, but doesn't cause the early game ruckus that Boba needs to survive. Same consideration for Soontir. none of them would be a bad choice, it's just that Fenn is the more right choice for Boba. Both Soontir and Poe need more toys to threaten as much as Fenn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Bucknife said:

Wooooooooooooooooo!

The Poe Master himself?! 

I recant. 

I clearly am a B-Tier player. 

Hah, I'm not a master of much of anything. 

If I could take Fenn over Poe with a loaded Rey, I would.  He's almost always a threat, usually lives forever if played well and one leans into what he does well.  I don't think Poe end games all that well compared to most other I6s. 

Share this post


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

 

Depends on how we use the word balance.

If we're talking about "correct points cost," there is no reason Hyperspace would be any more or less balanced than Extended.  The whole reason I think Hyperspace is good is because it adds some more distance between the topics of being correctly priced and being too popular.

If by balance we mean a diverse whole, I mean, there's no guarantee, but it's a lot easier to keep frustrating or overly ubiquitous archetypes in check by "banning" out a piece of them.  First Order is more vibrant without Quickdraw, for example.  There will be times when a Maul Boba slips through, but the thing is: presuming we get to a point where things are priced correctly, then there is literally NOTHING that can be done in Extended to help a healthy meta develop.  You'd have to make things deliberately unbalanced in order to break up a log-jam, and that's bad.  Hyperspace can be a breath of fresh air, without arbitrary nerfs and buffs.  That's a major upside.

While this helps, I don‚Äôt feel like it fully answers my questions. While this round of Hyperspace is looked at favorably by you and others, how are you so sure that it will remain consistent with that? We have an example of one in how well they can curate a ‚Äúdiverse meta‚ÄĚ. Is that really all we need to throw all are eggs into the new Hyperspace basket?
 

As a new point, I rather disagree with your take on a ‚Äúcorrectly priced Extended‚ÄĚ. If things are correctly priced, then things should be in balance, meaning a thoughtfully constructed list of any archetype has a shot at victory. Yes, you can have lists that are seen more because more people fly them, but in this theoretical situation where everything is correctly priced, that doesn‚Äôt mean you have to follow the trend. If people like flying triple aces and you can field a list of your preference with equal chance of victory, why put limits on something just because it‚Äôs popular? This is also assuming that no new content is coming to shake things up. While the OT factions are seen as ‚Äúdone‚ÄĚ by the developers, we can still see pilot packs to add some new options and faces to the meta. We could go down a whole rabbit hole about the possibilities of card packs that could add list options that could inject some new spice into the Extended Meta.¬†
 

I don’t type this with the intent to say that Hyperspace is bad and we shouldn’t use it. I am quite pleased with it thus far and am excited to see how it goes. But, due to its variable nature and limited data on how each wave stacks up on balance (including list diversity), I am very hesitant to embrace it as the primary way forward. On top of that, while there are many who are very much in support of Hyperspace, there are also many who still prefer Extended. Why remove the preferred play style of a portion of the player base as a competitive option when there are ways to satisfy both player bases? Even if your surmise about a correctly priced Extended comes true, why remove it when we aren’t there yet?

Share this post


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

If things are correctly priced, then things should be in balance, meaning a thoughtfully constructed list of any archetype has a shot at victory.

It's a complicated idea, but essentially something can be priced correctly for what it does, but not for how it interacts with other options.  A good fleet is usually far more valuable than the sum of all of its parts.

Thus when you have a format like Extended where everything is available, certain combinations become available that make those ships and upgrades significantly more powerful together than they'd be in some other fleet.  In a limited format like Hyperspace, you can take key options away so that pilots that normally are extremely effective and popular, because of their wingmen or other options, are nowhere near as strong or dominant.  And pilots that normally would not get a chance to shine (because they didn't combine well with the dominant options) now have a valuable role.  Points didn't change, available combinations did.  That's the idea he's explaining: rather than using points as the only method of balance and giving the meta a different feel, FFG can also use Hyperspace to create a smaller meta that behaves very differently with the same points.

In extended you would have to make things far more pricey than in hyperspace to tamp down on every possible explosive combination.  And when you do that, some pilots or options basically have to be priced to obscurity.  But they might still thrive in a limited format where the ships that overshadow them or prey on them aren't dominant anymore.

Share this post


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

It's a complicated idea, but essentially something can be priced correctly for what it does, but not for how it interacts with other options.  A good fleet is usually far more valuable than the sum of all of its parts.

Thus when you have a format like Extended where everything is available, certain combinations become available that make those ships and upgrades significantly more powerful together than they'd be in some other fleet.  In a limited format like Hyperspace, you can take key options away so that pilots that normally are extremely effective and popular, because of their wingmen or other options, are nowhere near as strong or dominant.  And pilots that normally would not get a chance to shine (because they didn't combine well with the dominant options) now have a valuable role.  Points didn't change, available combinations did.  That's the idea he's explaining: rather than using points as the only method of balance and giving the meta a different feel, FFG can also use Hyperspace to create a smaller meta that behaves very differently with the same points.

In extended you would have to make things far more pricey than in hyperspace to tamp down on every possible explosive combination.  And when you do that, some pilots or options basically have to be priced to obscurity.  But they might still thrive in a limited format where the ships that overshadow them or prey on them aren't dominant anymore.

I intended the ‚Äúthoughtfully constructed‚ÄĚ part to be an answer to this. I think all lists have a bit of that ‚Äúmore than the sum of its parts‚ÄĚ or at least should.¬†
I do not mean this example to say that Hyperspace doesn’t have things to offer in the long run. Just that I disagree that in this hypothetical situation where everything is priced right (which also in my mind includes how they interact with other ships and archetypes), things aren’t that dire for extended. 
 

I appreciate you taking time to offer up an explanation. I have enjoyed your insight in this and other discussions. Would you mind taking a look at my other points and questions from that post? I have tried to convey why I am concerned about trying to turn Hyperspace into the only competitive mode at this time. Can you see something I’m missing? 

Share this post


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

On reflection, my suspicion is triple aces are here to stay on purpose, and other stuff will be boosted to fit, not just with points reductions, but with other substantive changes over time.  Hopefully the excessively-cagey playstyle will face some sort of insurmountable obstacle in the meta or rules sometime soon, removing the main problem people have with facing ace lists and opening up the design space again.  I don't wanna see aces ripped from the meta, but I do want their NPE aspect handled somehow.  That benefits everyone overall, IMO.

Honestly think extended would be massively improved by taking whatever version of rebel 4-ship trying-to-remember-the-rebel-bunker-good-days fits now and just balancing all the other stuff around that. Trip aces being a benchmark just warps so much other unrelated stuff and basically forces a lot of it to be bad. It's the biggest thing gatekeeping a lot of the random ships/lists that random forum users want to be good but aren't. (Droids gatekeep a little bit too, but: 1. a lot of the reason why droids gatekeep things is because of aces gatekeeping the changes people would otherwise make to deal with droids; and 2. as the least played faction by far and then some of those lists not being the good ones, the odds of hitting droids are drastically lower than the odds of hitting aces except particularly in the top cut of large events)

There's an entire pool of fast, hyper-defensive i4 pilots that triple ace players have basically just never had to even tap into yet. A whole bench just waiting in the wings because they haven't been needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

Anyhow, to respond to ubiquitous and annoying Triple Ace, there is a wicked easy solution. The Hyperspace/Extended wall can descend, and leave Soontir and Whisper on the other side.

This is essentially the solution they tried and it didn't really work without removing the aces entirely from hyperspace. I can assume that if they removed one ace list, that another ace list would just be dominant (as, structurally, we have good data that X-wing favors aces, hence the talk about changing the structure of either list building or the rules), and if they removed all ace lists, there probably would be a player revolt.

 

6 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

It's about BS more than it's about OP.  As such, all the "wellactually Soontir isn't winning too many tournaments" is just so utterly misdirected.

This also runs counter to the idea that HS is a fix for the problem. HS and limit formats bias towards fixing the OP, because they are about fixing the tournament scene for competitive players. I think it is fair to say a lot of casual players play extended (How else am I going to have my fanfictiony list of Dash-Jyn-Kyle-Cassian, Hmmmm?) and thus just leaving the problem to 'rot' in extended isn't going to remove the BS for the majority of players who think it is BS.

That is the tricky thing about rotation lists: Pro-players don't like too many rotations and bans to powerful things in a given rotation because they want to be able to practice in an environment they know, but rotations aren't good for removing problems you just don't want to crush a new player's face because new players tend not to play in limited environments, so in the end rotations are more about metagame shakeups than legit balancing. The main thing that affects casuals through tournament regulation are ban lists and building restrictions outside of 'set' limitations (ex: Most Casuals won't play Yu-Gi-Oh vs someone stacking Pots of Greeds in their deck even though they don't generally play regulation decks because the endorsement of not playing with that specific card at all helps normalize it as binder fodder). 

Basically X-wing despite rotations and points changes had had some aces list at the top spot for its entire 2.0 life, which indicates there is something more fundamental than a points shift or ban list required to allow aces to exist without always being the top spot.  It is ok for a powerful option to peek up a ton (ex: In HS Zoo-Warlock decks are ALWAYS strong decks, and in some sets they are the best, but even though they are always in the upper tiers their position inside them changes dramatically by set), but if a variation of a strategy literally never leaves #1 you got a problem (ex: Druids in Hearthstone almost always were in the top 3 decks because the fundamental structure of what druids did was way too strong and advantaged them regardless of the metagame, so they had to have their core set reworked and most of the tools that were too 'meta independent' removed). Aces seem to lean more druid (fundamental tools of all aces lists are too strong, or more likely non-aces lists are too structurally disadvantaged by listbuilding and needing to balance the game around ship breakpoints which Aces don't due to the fact aces have a price ceiling rather than a price floor) than zoo-warlock.

9 minutes ago, svelok said:

Honestly think extended would be massively improved by taking whatever version of rebel 4-ship trying-to-remember-the-rebel-bunker-good-days fits now and just balancing all the other stuff around that. Trip aces being a benchmark just warps so much other unrelated stuff and basically forces a lot of it to be bad. It's the biggest thing gatekeeping a lot of the random ships/lists that random forum users want to be good but aren't. (Droids gatekeep a little bit too, but: 1. a lot of the reason why droids gatekeep things is because of aces gatekeeping the changes people would otherwise make to deal with droids; and 2. as the least played faction by far and then some of those lists not being the good ones, the odds of hitting droids are drastically lower than the odds of hitting aces except particularly in the top cut of large events)

There's an entire pool of fast, hyper-defensive i4 pilots that triple ace players have basically just never had to even tap into yet. A whole bench just waiting in the wings because they haven't been needed.

This is my take as well, but I think it has less to do than poor pricing for these I4 synergy-defensive pilots and more that A: The initiative structure always disfavors middle initiatives when your encouraged to have only one initiative type on a list, and B: the way list-building works fundamentally disfavors middling ships with upgrades and synergistic abilities.

It is hard to imagine doing things to lift these pilots up and put other pilots closer to them without their points getting very silly, because breakpoints are so critical on any list besides Aces. Because upgrades tend to not be 'worth the points' as a rule unless they are on an ace, it is hard to meaningfully buff these pilots so that 4 of them are better than 3 aces with upgrades without reducing their points so you can cram in another ship, and then your just playing a bunch of naked middle tier pilots rather than a bunch of naked I1s and I2 generics, so unless their abilities are very dynamic its just changing what the swarm looks like.

 

Edited by dezzmont

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  

38 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

While this helps, I don‚Äôt feel like it fully answers my questions. While this round of Hyperspace is looked at favorably by you and others, how are you so sure that it will remain consistent with that? We have an example of one in how well they can curate a ‚Äúdiverse meta‚ÄĚ. Is that really all we need to throw all are eggs into the new Hyperspace basket?
 

As a new point, I rather disagree with your take on a ‚Äúcorrectly priced Extended‚ÄĚ. If things are correctly priced, then things should be in balance, meaning a thoughtfully constructed list of any archetype has a shot at victory. Yes, you can have lists that are seen more because more people fly them, but in this theoretical situation where everything is correctly priced, that doesn‚Äôt mean you have to follow the trend. If people like flying triple aces and you can field a list of your preference with equal chance of victory, why put limits on something just because it‚Äôs popular? This is also assuming that no new content is coming to shake things up. While the OT factions are seen as ‚Äúdone‚ÄĚ by the developers, we can still see pilot packs to add some new options and faces to the meta. We could go down a whole rabbit hole about the possibilities of card packs that could add list options that could inject some new spice into the Extended Meta.¬†
 

I don’t type this with the intent to say that Hyperspace is bad and we shouldn’t use it. I am quite pleased with it thus far and am excited to see how it goes. But, due to its variable nature and limited data on how each wave stacks up on balance (including list diversity), I am very hesitant to embrace it as the primary way forward. On top of that, while there are many who are very much in support of Hyperspace, there are also many who still prefer Extended. Why remove the preferred play style of a portion of the player base as a competitive option when there are ways to satisfy both player bases? Even if your surmise about a correctly priced Extended comes true, why remove it when we aren’t there yet?

 

6 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

I intended the ‚Äúthoughtfully constructed‚ÄĚ part to be an answer to this. I think all lists have a bit of that ‚Äúmore than the sum of its parts‚ÄĚ or at least should.¬†
I do not mean this example to say that Hyperspace doesn’t have things to offer in the long run. Just that I disagree that in this hypothetical situation where everything is priced right (which also in my mind includes how they interact with other ships and archetypes), things aren’t that dire for extended. 
 

I appreciate you taking time to offer up an explanation. I have enjoyed your insight in this and other discussions. Would you mind taking a look at my other points and questions from that post? I have tried to convey why I am concerned about trying to turn Hyperspace into the only competitive mode at this time. Can you see something I’m missing? 

So I'll go through things a bit at a time, but I can't necessarily respond helpfully to everything.

First of all: "If things are correctly priced, then things should be in balance, meaning a thoughtfully constructed list of any archetype has a shot at victory."

I'm afraid in a game this complicated, that may be an impossible balance to even achieve, let alone maintain.  Different archetypes will wax and wane, different ships or pilots will be difficult to price properly to give them exposure without either making them overpowered or underpowered via price, or obscuring something/someone else.  Balancing some combinations will result in their pieces being relatively poor choices in any other combination.  You just can't balance both the pieces and the whole successfully, unless you can ban specific combinations somehow.

In a sense, this is one thing Hyperspace is doing.  I don't think it should be the only thing FFG is doing -- it's still worth dealing with Extended and balancing things as best they can.  But Hyperspace also allows a type of balancing that Extended cannot: banning the combinations that make the pieces impossible to balance fairly.  It gives those pieces a place to play every few months, when giving them that chance in extended may not be possible because of the way things in Extended can combine (as there is no "ban list").

If you're holding out hope that there's some magical price that can be applied to every pilot and upgrade that will make all archetypes and pilots viable and able to compete with each other, no matter what your opponent fields, then we lack any common ground on which to discuss things further, unfortunately.  I just view that as the abstract ideal we strive for, knowing it's not a place we'll ever reach.

 

Next: "This is also assuming that no new content is coming to shake things up. While the OT factions are seen as ‚Äúdone‚ÄĚ by the developers, we can still see pilot packs to add some new options and faces to the meta. We could go down a whole rabbit hole about the possibilities of card packs that could add list options that could inject some new spice into the Extended Meta."

I think we may be talking about different concepts?  Extended is intended to be constantly shifting and changing with new content.  Hyperspace shifts and changes both with new content, and with its rolling invitations that change who's participating in Hyperspace games for the next 4 - 6 months.

I don't view Extended as dead nor ever want it to be so, and I suspect @theBitterFig doesn't either.  Rather, we're saying Hyperspace grants an opportunity to make different pilots, upgrades, and archetypes viable compared to the same time period in Extended.  It's a second outlet, a second meta that's more finely tune-able.  Extended isn't ever abandoned, but the way it has to be balanced in order to prevent absurd problems will naturally push some options out of its meta.  Things just have to be priced high so they don't explode in power in available combinations.  Hyperspace might take those same pilots and give them a meta where they matter because the combination isn't there, and they work reasonably well against the other stuff there because they can fill a role.

Or, in Extended the meta might be balanced around a certain few powerhouse pilots/fleets with not a lot of room to maneuver in prices (e.g. Vader with PS + Afterburners and 2 ace allies).  Hyperspace takes some options away from those fleets and suddenly they're more balanced with the other stuff in Hyperspace, such as Vader without Afterburners, Soontir, Grand Inquisitor, etc.  Vader is still a valuable piece in Hyperspace, but its meta is a different experience for Vader than is Extended; he can be played totally differently there.

Every bit of new content can either shake up the meta, or be dead on arrival, based on how Hyperspace and Extended are currently balanced and what's dominating there.  And importantly, the smaller and more curated meta of Hyperspace gives the devs a test area for new content that lets them compare new card/ship performance there against performance in Extended and draw valuable conclusions about what's making something too strong, not effective enough, or just redundant.

 

Finally: "I am very hesitant to embrace it as the primary way forward"

That's fine, I'm the same way.  I don't think theBitterFig is arguing it as the primary way forward, rather that it is a very valuable tool in FFG's belt and to the community's benefit because of what it does differently.  I think maybe there's been a misunderstanding with the "Why should we make this new Hyperspace the primary (or only) competitive game in town now when we’ve only had one rotation?" question.  Frankly, we're expecting the next points balance to be a small, targeted response to the data we've has so far, mainly focused on bringing Boba in line.  And you may be reading further than necessary into what theBitterFig has actually said.

1 hour ago, theBitterFig said:

Depends on how we use the word balance.

If we're talking about "correct points cost," there is no reason Hyperspace would be any more or less balanced than Extended.  The whole reason I think Hyperspace is good is because it adds some more distance between the topics of being correctly priced and being too popular.

If by balance we mean a diverse whole, I mean, there's no guarantee, but it's a lot easier to keep frustrating or overly ubiquitous archetypes in check by "banning" out a piece of them.  First Order is more vibrant without Quickdraw, for example.  There will be times when a Maul Boba slips through, but the thing is: presuming we get to a point where things are priced correctly, then there is literally NOTHING that can be done in Extended to help a healthy meta develop.  You'd have to make things deliberately unbalanced in order to break up a log-jam, and that's bad.  Hyperspace can be a breath of fresh air, without arbitrary nerfs and buffs.  That's a major upside.

Extended has everything in it, which means certain stuff will just dominate the **** out of it unless they're specifically targeted with the types of nerfs that severely rancor fans of such archetypes and the specific lists being nerfed.  As I've explained, this is the unavoidable, natural consequence of having everything together with no new rules on what can be combined.  Extended tournaments continue being run and played, and are going to be dominated by whatever powerful fleet has risen to the top based on the most recent points balances.  There's not much that can be done in that design space other than continuous, slow tweaking.  And that's all fine!

Hyperspace isn't the only competitive format, but there's good reason FFG pushes it as the main one: it's a much more curated environment that removes components that make ships like Vader go nuclear, so that both the Vader player and his opponent can explore different (and more targeted/curated) forms the meta can take.  Soon it will address the components that are allowing Boba to be too strong.  And what's happening in Hyperspace also informs FFG's understanding of what can happen in Extended if certain points-rebalances were to create a similar power vacuum etc.

I've detailed all that above and in my previous post, so I won't hammer those points further right now.

 

Speaking to what @dezzmont said, we don't want to leave Extended to rot, especially players like me who love extended.  But there are deep problems in extended that Hyperspace can gloss over but not solve.  They can, in fact, only be solved with a deeper, more structural change.  It remains to be seen whether FFG and the community would have a stomach for that.

Extended will continue to be tweaked to try to put more pilots and playstyles in the sun, and FFG recognizes it's the main way to play for their core audience.  Hyperspace will continue to be the curated tournament format that changes significantly twice or so a year to keep things fresh.  Tournament players are important because they're both dedicated fans, and highly visible for drawing more people into the game.  But I share your desire to keep improving Extended so we can fly our favorite pilots and have a good time.  It's just... given the sheer size of Extended and the massive, intractable problems with keeping it balanced, us casual players usually go for the communal agreement that just seems to work better than waiting for fixes from on high: "Hey man, that's way too strong for casual night and my themed list has no chance against it.  Do you mind playing something a lot less powerful?"

It's not elegant, but it works in the ways 6-month-spaced top-level points balances never can.

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...