If you think quantity beats quality, watch the 2013 championship video that was just posted on FFG. The guy won because he shot first. PS matters.

There's quite a bit more than quality to that win. Pretty gnarly luck swings, piloting error, lucky crits... yah.

I don't think the rock-paper-scissors mentality is that bad, nor is it likely avoidable without watering down the game. There are plenty of other cases where an "auto win" (advantage) can happen. Just think of what happens when you run Dark Curse vs Blaster turret, basically an auto win. Or you build a solid 4 ship PS2 rebel squad, only to get matched up against a 4 ship PS4 rebel squad, a VERY difficult matchup for the PS2. You can then match your PS4 squad against a PS6 Swarm, and get stomped due to PS. This sort of bad matchup scenario is going to happen in a game with so many decisions.

I think avoiding the term "auto win" would be a very good start for any informed discussion.There are good match ups and bad match ups for any squad. Every squad is going to have strengths and weaknesses, and come up against squads that seem tailor made to beat it. Is that an advantage? Yes. Is it an auto win? Far from it. That's where player skill, smart flying, and luck of the dice can all affect the outcome of the game. If two players of similar skill meet up and one of them has a list tailor made to beat the other, yes; more often than not he probably will. But he might make a mistake the other player capitalizes on. He might get outflown that day. The dice may turn against him. Any number of things can have an impact on the final result. But I guarantee you, that there's some other squad out there tailor made to beat that one. A lot of it comes down to smart squad building. Most good squads are pretty well balanced. They don't rely on a single ship or combo of abilities to succeed. They're geared to beat a variety of squads, rather than one particular 'nemesis' squad. And a smart player knows both the strengths and weaknesses of his squad, and flies them to maximize their strengths and minimize their weaknesses, whatever those may be. That goes a long way towards having a chance at defeating an unfavorable matchup.

I agree. Hence, the quotations and parentheses

Sorry, I'm with you - I thought someone else earlier in the thread used auto-win un-ironically. ;)Ah - they were saying auto-lose, and then you flipped it around and I kind of mixed the two together.

I WAS gonna say, "You are forgiven until we meet in the HILO tourney" but it looks like we won't be matched until the finals, and that road, though only a handful of games away, seems rather distant...

If you think quantity beats quality, watch the 2013 championship video that was just posted on FFG. The guy won because he shot first. PS matters.

There's quite a bit more than quality to that win. Pretty gnarly luck swings, piloting error, lucky crits... yah.

But you have to get there. In order to make it to the top, your squadron has to weather all of those same issues. Probability suggests that it will all even out, so if he had a lucky match at the end, he likely had some hellish issues along the way. The key to the game is being able to outlast the swings.

Rock paper scissors?

Okay maybe the swarm is nigh unbeatable by a 3-ship built.

But the real issue is not that fact, but that the swarm has very few bad matchups, if any. It's not unbeatable nowadays and some squads have a fair chance against it. However I have in fact never seen any game of X- wing where i felt that the swarm player had such a disadvantage through the other players squadbuilding that one could consider it a bad matchup.

And therefore i would not say that there is a rock paper scissors system here.

Rock paper scissors?

Okay maybe the swarm is nigh unbeatable by a 3-ship built.

But the real issue is not that fact, but that the swarm has very few bad matchups, if any. It's not unbeatable nowadays and some squads have a fair chance against it. However I have in fact never seen any game of X- wing where i felt that the swarm player had such a disadvantage through the other players squadbuilding that one could consider it a bad matchup.

And therefore i would not say that there is a rock paper scissors system here.

Well, saying it's rock, paper, scissors is too simplified. There are lists that have a nice advantage against a swarm, but they aren't very good against other lists and don't get a lot of tournament play.

I love running low ship count squads. I have an Imperial 3-ship build that has won it's share of events. As well as a 2-Ship rebel build that has beat everything from 8-Tie swarms to elite 3 ship builds.

This game comes down to flying and predicability. Crunching numbers only goes so far...

I love running low ship count squads. I have an Imperial 3-ship build that has won it's share of events. As well as a 2-Ship rebel build that has beat everything from 8-Tie swarms to elite 3 ship builds.

There is no end-all-be-all strategy. That's what makes the strategy and squad building aspects so much fun. I've beaten a HSF with 3 TIEs and Darth Vader in a 100 point match.

I love running low ship count squads. I have an Imperial 3-ship build that has won it's share of events. As well as a 2-Ship rebel build that has beat everything from 8-Tie swarms to elite 3 ship builds.

It's worth pointing out that there's a huge difference between "I've beaten both large swarms and elite builds with a 2-ship Rebel build" and "there's a 2-ship Rebel build that can consistently beat both swarms and elite builds in the hands of any reasonably skilled player". I'm perfectly willing to grant you the existence of the former; the latter is a stretch at best unless you're talking about double Falcons, and even then I'd call that a toss-up against a swarm.

My two ship build is Han and Wedge...

But my point is everyone seems to be looking for that magic bullet. 8 ships, 2 ships, it doesn't matter. If half the people spent as much time flying their ships as they do trying to find a win button, people would realize how well balanced the game is, and good flying and a little bit of perception is a far greater asset than any hot build.

My two ship build is Han and Wedge...

But my point is everyone seems to be looking for that magic bullet. 8 ships, 2 ships, it doesn't matter. If half the people spent as much time flying their ships as they do trying to find a win button, people would realize how well balanced the game is, and good flying and a little bit of perception is a far greater asset than any hot build.

I really don't think most people are looking for the "win button" and have a good understanding that this game is more about player skill than an unbeatable list, but list building is a factor, and one that people can most easily discuss and get advice on here.

I understand the game is well balanced and there is no go to build for the sure win.

I have always been a quality player with a 3 ships build, but seem to fall short against swarms. So I asked everyone the question about Quality vs Quantity in tournament play and their reason why. 99% of the post made good points about both sides and I learned a lot from the community. I would like to thank everyone for helping me.

I feel as though my question was answered and this is what I got out of it.

A. You can win with both!

B. More ships can be for giving. You have much to learn young one.

C. If you are good and I mean Jedi Master good, you could win with 3 ships and drink the blue milk at the end.

D. It comes down to flying your ships and dice roles, Hope the force is strong with you

E. Don’t make one pilot stand out with a bulls eye, so Don’t put all your Krayt eggs in one basket.

I will be flying a combo of four ships, not sure about the combo but it will have four ships and no it is not a trap.

I understand the game is well balanced and there is no go to build for the sure win.

I have always been a quality player with a 3 ships build, but seem to fall short against swarms. So I asked everyone the question about Quality vs Quantity in tournament play and their reason why. 99% of the post made good points about both sides and I learned a lot from the community. I would like to thank everyone for helping me.

I feel as though my question was answered and this is what I got out of it.

A. You can win with both!

B. More ships can be for giving. You have much to learn young one.

C. If you are good and I mean Jedi Master good, you could win with 3 ships and drink the blue milk at the end.

D. It comes down to flying your ships and dice roles, Hope the force is strong with you

E. Don’t make one pilot stand out with a bulls eye, so Don’t put all your Krayt eggs in one basket.

I will be flying a combo of four ships, not sure about the combo but it will have four ships and no it is not a trap.

Good take-aways.

All of these points can be expanded on, but that's going to be tactics in how to do it, rather than exceptions of when not to.

But my point is everyone seems to be looking for that magic bullet. 8 ships, 2 ships, it doesn't matter. If half the people spent as much time flying their ships as they do trying to find a win button, people would realize how well balanced the game is, and good flying and a little bit of perception is a far greater asset than any hot build.

Don't get me wrong. I don't have a hatred or fear of swarms. If I know I'll be facing a fair number of swarms I'll build a list that might be able to cope with them. But I regret the lost opportunity to explore quality lists with experienced players flying smaller, quality lists.

So are swarms considered a sort of noob cannon now? I only got enough ships for that in November or so and have been really enjoying it. Learning to fly in the formation is a challenge, as is figuring out what to do once you hit the enemy and the formation explodes. I've seen some videos where one guy just lines them up 4 in front 4 in back and wins through not doing much of anything, but I've been enjoying them a lot more than just flying x-wings and b-wings straight 1 repeatedly, for the same reason I don't really enjoy the Falcon. It feels thematic to have a mess of Ties and action blocking, trying and failing to anticipate where 7 ships are going to have to be when the enemy has one guy move just a little further than I expected, and all the rest make it pretty rewarding. So while I've done well, but not won anything yet, do I need to worry about people thinking I'm gaming the system? Since I don't have a ton of time for fun, my one recent unpleasant match was more than enough for me.

So are swarms considered a sort of noob cannon now? I only got enough ships for that in November or so and have been really enjoying it. Learning to fly in the formation is a challenge, as is figuring out what to do once you hit the enemy and the formation explodes. I've seen some videos where one guy just lines them up 4 in front 4 in back and wins through not doing much of anything, but I've been enjoying them a lot more than just flying x-wings and b-wings straight 1 repeatedly, for the same reason I don't really enjoy the Falcon. It feels thematic to have a mess of Ties and action blocking, trying and failing to anticipate where 7 ships are going to have to be when the enemy has one guy move just a little further than I expected, and all the rest make it pretty rewarding. So while I've done well, but not won anything yet, do I need to worry about people thinking I'm gaming the system? Since I don't have a ton of time for fun, my one recent unpleasant match was more than enough for me.

I think that a swarm is just more forgiving to a player. It matters less if 1/8 ties is destroyed compared to 1/3 or 1/4 rebel ships. While a swarm takes a bit of experience to maneuver correctly, you will most likely have a shot on other ships almost every round. Compare that to 3 or 4 ships that need to maneuver better to avoid getting hit and you may find that you won't always have a shot with the 3 or 4 ship squads. So focus firing is a lot easier with twice as many firing arcs. I can see the appeal of a swarm list but I prefer to play smaller squads that I have some type of strategy behind.

Sorry if my post came off as harsh. After six hours of grading sub par assignments that can happen. :-P

Portage all good points. But if I can add a little...

A. Absolutely, anything can win in this game.
B. Generally yes, but they can also be less forgiving if you're not flying well. Bumping and losing actions can be devastating, and/or flying into rocks is easier with more ships.
C. Don't forget the Sith manipulations of their opponents. A lot of this game is a mind game. :-)
D. Flying your ships is the upmost importance. Dice rolls matter less than most people think...

E. Having a pilot stand out is sometimes a good thing, you just have to use that to your advantage. If you can lose a turn or two of shooting with Wedge to pull your opponent out of formation or make him chase one ship through rocks, it might be a beneficial trade.

So are swarms considered a sort of noob cannon now? I only got enough ships for that in November or so and have been really enjoying it. Learning to fly in the formation is a challenge, as is figuring out what to do once you hit the enemy and the formation explodes.

There are all sorts of lists that become vogue and then you see them bubble up to a majority (albeit maybe a slim majority) of lists faced in tournaments for a while. Then the next wave comes out and the meta shifts. I'm sure many Dark Side players are bemoaning the prevalence of B lists at the moment.

The single-most enduring list I can think of is the Howlrunner swarm. Why? The answer is evident: it throws a lot of dice to even out the odds. Plus a bunch of other factors as discussed here and in other threads. Perhaps the upcoming Z-95 swarms may make Howlrunner swarms less common. I don't know. A large part of the fun in this game comes from exploring lists.

Exploring lists. Do tournament lists "suffer" due to swarms? IOW, can we look at the majority of proposed lists for this upcoming championship season and say, "This list will suffer because it has too few ships?" I think that is a pretty easy "yes". I can't think of many current lists actively discussed in the last two months that have 3 or 4 named pilots only. The common response to such proposed lists is: you have too many points into only a few ships, and that will hurt your chances in the tournament.

Yes, it will hurt your chances. However, I don't believe that FFG organized events, including the Store Championships, should limit, in any way, what lists to fly, with the exception of which ships are permitted by FFG. What I would love to see are some, not all local events that DO limit lists in some fashion. Pirate events (flying no named pilots) seem to be popular. What is wrong with the opposite: you may play named pilots only?

A named pilots only event would naturally limit all lists: TIE Fighters could field a max of 5 named pilots but give you room for upgrades. I think a named pilots only event would see some interesting lists that we rarely dare to fly except in casual play. But it could be cool to have a local tournament that pits a broad range of players with such diverse non-generic lists. Who knows what kind of things we might see with a bunch of experienced players flying such lists?

In my opinion, this is an argument as old as the game and as old as table top games in general. FFG has given us a thoroughly designed, strategic, and well- balanced game to play. It all depends on the player and his or her specific skill set. Just this month, I saw a TWO SHIP rebel list make third place in a store championship. It didn't win, but Han and Wedge held their own against nearly all of his opponents. A small list flown with skill and careful decisions can be powerful, but each mistake ifs highly punishing. When either of these ships died, he lost half of his six attack dice. If one of seven TIE fighters dies, you lose 2/14 attack dice. Small lists are flown by brave and occasionally foolish players, but can be dangerous with the right player. A swarm list can be equally deadly, and is arguably more survivable. It simply gives you more room for mistakes, but it doesn't decide that your list is superior.

In my opinion, this is an argument as old as the game and as old as table top games in general. FFG has given us a thoroughly designed, strategic, and well- balanced game to play. It all depends on the player and his or her specific skill set... but it doesn't decide that your list is superior.

Note... my position is not about making a list that is superior. It's about (occasionally) providing an environment that allows exploration of lists promoting quality over quantity.

There are definitely a lot of pilots I've wanted to use and not gotten to. Ten Numb and Horton Salm for instance. I'm sometimes rotating in sub-optimal choices into my swarm. Substituted Night Beast for Dark Curse, and am going to make a point to use Winged Gundark too. Maybe foregoing the usual fun with Backstabber to pair him with Mauler so there's some more choice for who to keep from getting to range 1? Still trying to think of an environment in which poor old Marek Steele will do well.

Still trying to think of an environment in which poor old Marek Steele will do well.

Two words: Epic Play. Maarek + Marksmanship will be key. Throw in a Lambda with 2x Merc Copilots for added pain.

But you have to get there. In order to make it to the top, your squadron has to weather all of those same issues. Probability suggests that it will all even out, so if he had a lucky match at the end, he likely had some hellish issues along the way. The key to the game is being able to outlast the swings.

When getting there is only 10-12 matches (and not even the same squad required) it won't even out. Needs many many many more games.

There might not be RPS but Maybe Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock. Of course it's more than that but as far as advantage from list building only, that's fairly acurrate.