When I read different articles about different build for tournaments, it seems to always come down to Quantity vs Quality.

A) You want the pilot with a high skill level so you can shoot first and prevent the other player from shooting you or better position yourself out of the opponent’s fire arch.

B) More ships equal more chances to hit the opponent ships and more targets for the opponent to eliminate.

I like have the quality ships (33 points) but when I watch the videos of past Championships it seems as though it is always the bigger squad beating the better ships.

I am curious on the X-wing communities’ opinion of which is better and why, Quantity vs. Quality?

I think quantity is mainly just more forgiving. It relies less on good use of ability synergy and doesn't punish mistakes as harshly. In skilled hands either is about equal, but for newer players a moderate amount of quality that doesn't rely as much on careful positioning and doesn't kill you if you make a mistake is going to play better.

There are two issues at play, actually. The first is that you generally pay a lot for pilot skill: Wedge costs 8 points more than a Rookie Pilot, and his pilot skill is 7 points higher. That is, approximately 1 point pays for his pilot ability and elite pilot talent upgrade slot, and the other 7 points pay for a PS9 pilot. And the problem with that is that you're only getting value for those points if you're flying against other pilots at PS8-9--if your opponent is flying (say) Bounty Hunter/Bounty Hunter/Saber Squadron Pilot, then you only need a PS5 pilot to move last and shoot first. Essentially pilot skill is a bidding system, and because you usually make your "bid" without knowing what your opponent is doing, it's easy to find yourself paying too much.

The second issue is that upgrades are subject to diminishing returns. To illustrate what I mean, think about Bounty Hunter + Recon Specialist as compared to Kath Scarlet + Deadeye + Recon Specialist + Concussion Missiles + Adv. Proton Torpedoes + Slave I . The Hunter costs 36 points to add to your list, and Kath Scarlet costs 52 points. But Kath is just as easy to kill, and she's worth a lot more when your opponent kills her--particularly in a tournament setting, I could conceivably get a full win by killing just Kath. That doesn't mean it's a bad way to play her, but it does mean each additional point I spend on upgrades is harder to justify than the point before it.

inb4 obligatory Stalin quote

As I still do not have enough experience playing outside of my group of friends/family, I may be 100% wrong.

But it seems to me that quantity always has the upper hand. For example:

Player 1: seasoned veteran. Knows the ins and outs of all his ships, has great collection, and frequently plays competitively.

Player 2: noob. Has a bunch of tie fighters, not as skilled, doesn't take the game overly seriously.

If Player 1 fields QUALITY, and Player 2 fields QUANTITY, it should make for a decent match (since P1 is good with his fewer/better ships, and P2's ships are more forgiving). According to what I've read on this forum, and seen elsewhere.

BUT! What if there are two Player 1's? Two evenly skilled players, one fielding QUALITY, the other fielding QUANTITY? In my understanding, the quantity player has quite an advantage, with more ships, more firepower, IN ADDITION TO having a squad that can take more damage and so on.

Is this correct? Can a good player with a few good ships effectively take out an equally good player with lots of little ships (providing the dice gods are not specifically in favor of either)??

There is definitely a fine balancing act going on. Hard to argue either way.

Also, Re: Worlds- happened right after wave 3 was legal. I'd love to see the results of a similar sized tournament right now, including lists. I bet some of the "best" players would play something different at this point than so many months ago.

I think WonderWAAAGH (maybe - he's gonna be the one that saves me, cuz after all, he's my WonderWAAAGH) said, or at least alluded to it best. It's an old cliche but a good one.

Look at it this way. You run 3 X-Wings, and one of them is Wedge. Leave Biggs out of this for a moment. Wedge represents a significant chunk of your expected offensive output. His ability puts a huge "KILL ME FIRST" bullseye on his back. And from a pure numbers standpoint (taking out possible positional advantage from his ps, or ps killing something with a shot at him) he's no harder to kill than a Rookie, for a good chunk more points. Lose Wedge early, and you're probably in a bad way.

To some people, in some lists, that's going to be worth it. To others, not so much.

One of the squads I like to run is a 4B list. One of my very favorite things about it, and there are several, is that it doesn't matter to me which one you kill, or which one winds up in my endgame. It often causes people to split their fire between ships rather than focusing on taking them out one at a time, and it frees me up to fly them very aggressively because I'm not desperate to keep any particular one of them alive at all costs.

You lose Wedge early, bad news. I lose a B-Wing early, I've got more where that one came from.

It's just two different schools of thought. One offers higher PS and some nifty abilities, but you can afford the loss of each ship less and less, the fewer ships you have. And there's usually going to be one that you really want to keep alive, or one that you really do NOT want to be the last ship standing on your side when the game comes down to the wire. Nobody wants to field an engine-less shuttle as their last hope with the game on the line. That immediately makes that ship a very low priority target, because I will pit basically anything against that ship 1 on 1 with quite a bit of confidence.

As I still do not have enough experience playing outside of my group of friends/family, I may be 100% wrong.

But it seems to me that quantity always has the upper hand. For example:

Player 1: seasoned veteran. Knows the ins and outs of all his ships, has great collection, and frequently plays competitively.

Player 2: noob. Has a bunch of tie fighters, not as skilled, doesn't take the game overly seriously.

If Player 1 fields QUALITY, and Player 2 fields QUANTITY, it should make for a decent match (since P1 is good with his fewer/better ships, and P2's ships are more forgiving). According to what I've read on this forum, and seen elsewhere.

BUT! What if there are two Player 1's? Two evenly skilled players, one fielding QUALITY, the other fielding QUANTITY? In my understanding, the quantity player has quite an advantage, with more ships, more firepower, IN ADDITION TO having a squad that can take more damage and so on.

Is this correct? Can a good player with a few good ships effectively take out an equally good player with lots of little ships (providing the dice gods are not specifically in favor of either)??

Quantity has a quality of its own.

For a newbie to have a chance I'd rather see it playing with a good degree of quality provided that quality can be forgiving. The problem with flying quantity is that it often requires good flying skills otherwise a lot of its benefits are lost. Give a newbie an 8 TIE swarm and then watch as they bump into each other losing action and getting out of position which really hurts the potential advantage of them. Give that same newbie a HSF squadron and it may have a much easier time flying and fighting with that.

I think there is value in having a few high value targets with various abilities to make it harder for your opponent to decide which target to focus on.

As I still do not have enough experience playing outside of my group of friends/family, I may be 100% wrong.

But it seems to me that quantity always has the upper hand. For example:

Player 1: seasoned veteran. Knows the ins and outs of all his ships, has great collection, and frequently plays competitively.

Player 2: noob. Has a bunch of tie fighters, not as skilled, doesn't take the game overly seriously.

If Player 1 fields QUALITY, and Player 2 fields QUANTITY, it should make for a decent match (since P1 is good with his fewer/better ships, and P2's ships are more forgiving). According to what I've read on this forum, and seen elsewhere.

BUT! What if there are two Player 1's? Two evenly skilled players, one fielding QUALITY, the other fielding QUANTITY? In my understanding, the quantity player has quite an advantage, with more ships, more firepower, IN ADDITION TO having a squad that can take more damage and so on.

Is this correct? Can a good player with a few good ships effectively take out an equally good player with lots of little ships (providing the dice gods are not specifically in favor of either)??

I disagree. The skilled player will win in either case. In the event of skilled quality vs skilled quantity it will be an even fight that will likely come down to who makes a mistake first and/or dice.

That said, it is more forgiving to have more ships in general for obvious reasons, but having higher PS/skills etc presents a significant advantage itself, since it allows you to even the odds more quickly and easily since the lower PS pilots will likely be dead prior to firing, reducing the perceived offensive advantage. I think less skilled players find it easier to win with quantity since it can be very difficult to handle without a plan, but that doesn't mean quality doesn't have a place.

I think most people try to find a good mix, which is why PS4 is pretty hot right now, as are 4-ship rebel lists. Its a good compromise to have 4 ships with some extra PS/abilities mixed in, but still have a good amount of ships as well.

So is it you need more than three ships to win a tournament but you don’t want one of them to stand out with a lot of points over the other ships, or is it you just don’t want any good pilots because they have a bulls eye on them?

I have won a couple of local tournaments with 3-ship builds, but it's always a tough way to do it. It's not even about avoiding having a bulls-eye on any of them... though that's a good idea. You'll still have the same problem that you can only get 3 shots per turn and lose a ton of your fighting ability when a single ship goes down. So you can pull off 3-ship builds, but you'll need to consider the disadvantage they're starting at.

As I still do not have enough experience playing outside of my group of friends/family, I may be 100% wrong.

But it seems to me that quantity always has the upper hand. For example:

Player 1: seasoned veteran. Knows the ins and outs of all his ships, has great collection, and frequently plays competitively.

Player 2: noob. Has a bunch of tie fighters, not as skilled, doesn't take the game overly seriously.

If Player 1 fields QUALITY, and Player 2 fields QUANTITY, it should make for a decent match (since P1 is good with his fewer/better ships, and P2's ships are more forgiving). According to what I've read on this forum, and seen elsewhere.

BUT! What if there are two Player 1's? Two evenly skilled players, one fielding QUALITY, the other fielding QUANTITY? In my understanding, the quantity player has quite an advantage, with more ships, more firepower, IN ADDITION TO having a squad that can take more damage and so on.

Is this correct? Can a good player with a few good ships effectively take out an equally good player with lots of little ships (providing the dice gods are not specifically in favor of either)??

Quantity has a quality of its own.

Hey, there she is! I knew someone wouldn't be able to help themselves.

Say what you want about Stalin, at least Mussolini would have kept FFG's boats on time.

I disagree. The skilled player will win in either case. In the event of skilled quality vs skilled quantity it will be an even fight that will likely come down to who makes a mistake first and/or dice.

You disagree... with my question?

The skilled player will win against the non skilled player. I understand that.

But I said:

In my understanding, the quantity player has quite an advantage, with more ships, more firepower, IN ADDITION TO having a squad that can take more damage and so on.

So, can you (or anyone else) explain why this may(or may not) be incorrect?

I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong, or be super opinionated about what I think is best or whatever. I'm basically echoing the OP:

which is better and why , Quantity vs. Quality?

Also...

I think less skilled players find it easier to win with quantity since it can be very difficult to handle without a plan, but that doesn't mean quality doesn't have a place.

Noobs can handle quantity because its harder ... Huh?

Say what you want about Stalin, at least Mussolini would have kept FFG's boats on time.

Or at least tell surprisingly durable lies about their punctuality…

So is it you need more than three ships to win a tournament but you don’t want one of them to stand out with a lot of points over the other ships, or is it you just don’t want any good pilots because they have a bulls eye on them?

Let me try framing it another way. The fewer ships you have, the slimmer the margin of error you can afford - be it your own piloting skill, luck of the dice, whatever.

Now absolutely, as someone pointed out, for new players there is a point of diminishing returns, between "lose one ship and you're boned" and "run so many ships at once you're crashing them into each other all game." 3 good ships isn't a terrible bet for a new player - especially if one of those ships is a Falcon, which is at least 1.5 regular ships. Four, MAYBE five is going to be pushing the upper limits of what a new player can probably juggle.

The reason I say maybe 5 is that if you took something like BBBAA, you're not running 5 ships in close formation all game. You can run the As together, or run one up each flank. You can let the Bs have a little breathing room so they're not stepping all over one another's toes, as long as you leave them in range to support one another a bit. You're kind of running it as at worst a 3 ship squad and a couple of solos or a 2 ship squad, so I think it would not be horribly newbie unfriendly.

I'll just say there's a reason that Wedge and Biggs tend to go together like chocolate and peanut butter. If Wedge is on the table, and you are not forced to shoot at someone other than Wedge? You're gonna shoot at Wedge. Smaller squads sometimes rely on close synergy between the ships, which is great when it works, but can quickly fall apart when someone takes the wrong piece off the board. 3 ship builds can be quite good, absolutely. But if and when things go wrong for them, it tends to go more catastrophically bad, and much more quickly.

Say what you want about Stalin, at least Mussolini would have kept FFG's boats on time.

Or at least tell surprisingly durable lies about their punctuality…

What can I say? Il Duce had a better PR guy, and black shirts look better than tan ones.

As its been said earlier, if you are maxing out on abilities you lose ships. Lose ships and you lose both attack dice and hit points (your combined hull and shields).

If I run a Rebel XXBB list I have a total of 12 dice I attack with at range 2-3. Meanwhile I also have 26 total hit points. If you run an XXB list pimped out with named pilots, ordnance, and other upgrades you drop down to only 9 attack dice from those same ranges and a mere 16 hit points.

I don't care what fancy stuff you have going on you aren't going to compete and it has everything to do with a wild disparity in hit points and the number of dice you throw.

This game is all about finding the right balance.

When it comes to "quality vs quantity" I need to wonder what we mean by quantity.

I know when I hear "quantity" I immediately start thinking about 7 or 8 ship swarms and while those certainly have their advantages they also require a bit of skill to fly well. "Quality" can also be a hard thing define because the way things are every point you spend on something is supposed to be for quality. Maybe a question that needs to be answered before judging "quality vs. quantity" is "WHERE IS THE BASE LINE?"

For the Rebels I'd say the baseline will be 4 ships and that if you want to argue "QvQ" you must compare 2 or 3 ship squads to 5 (and soon 6-8) ship squadrons. The may be some difference between 3 and 4 ships but there is often a lot of "quality" in Rebel 4 ship builds even if there is one more ship in them than some of the 3 ship builds.

It's the Imperials where QvQ REALLY matters as they can field 2-8 ships with varying degrees of success across the board. For the Empire a 4 ship squad is going to be seen as going for "quality" although that is really a baseline for the Rebels at the moment. Many tournament reports seem to point to quantity (6+ ships) being better for the Empire but occasionally you see a quality Imperial build show up. A question for the Empire is "where do quantity and quality balance?" Here I wonder if it isn't the 5 ship builds that use one or two "good" ships supported but a group of lesser ships that work well together.

Hida77, on 27 Feb 2014 - 11:43 AM, said:

I disagree. The skilled player will win in either case. In the event of skilled quality vs skilled quantity it will be an even fight that will likely come down to who makes a mistake first and/or dice.

You disagree... with my question?

The skilled player will win against the non skilled player. I understand that.

You asserted that an unskilled player playing quantity will have a 'decent matchup' against a skilled one playing quality. I thought this would be clear, but that's what I disagree with. The skilled player will win a vast majority of the time regardless of list/type. I guess this depends on your definition of 'decent' but I would say its not all that decent if one person has very little chance of losing.

But I said:

Hoosteen, on 27 Feb 2014 - 10:45 AM, said:

In my understanding, the quantity player has quite an advantage, with more ships, more firepower, IN ADDITION TO having a squad that can take more damage and so on.

So, can you (or anyone else) explain why this may(or may not) be incorrect?

I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong, or be super opinionated about what I think is best or whatever. I'm basically echoing the OP:

Portage, on 27 Feb 2014 - 09:23 AM, said:

which is better and why , Quantity vs. Quality?

Also...

Hida77, on 27 Feb 2014 - 11:43 AM, said:

I think less skilled players find it easier to win with quantity since it can be very difficult to handle without a plan, but that doesn't mean quality doesn't have a place.

Noobs can handle quantity because its harder ... Huh?

I did explain why this was incorrect. The quality player has the advantage of pilot abilities and (in general) higher PS. This is a significant factor because it levels the playing field with the lower PS quantity lists. To re-iterate, the higher PS player kills first and never loses that advantage, which mitigates the loss of firepower to some degree.

I think less skilled players tend to win more with quantity lists because there is less room for error. Skilled players can win regardless of whether the chose quantity or quality or some mixture thereof because they can assess the risks and mitigate the weaknesses of both play styles..

When it comes to "quality vs quantity" I need to wonder what we mean by quantity.

I know when I hear "quantity" I immediately start thinking about 7 or 8 ship swarms and while those certainly have their advantages they also require a bit of skill to fly well. "Quality" can also be a hard thing define because the way things are every point you spend on something is supposed to be for quality. Maybe a question that needs to be answered before judging "quality vs. quantity" is "WHERE IS THE BASE LINE?"

For the Rebels I'd say the baseline will be 4 ships and that if you want to argue "QvQ" you must compare 2 or 3 ship squads to 5 (and soon 6-8) ship squadrons. The may be some difference between 3 and 4 ships but there is often a lot of "quality" in Rebel 4 ship builds even if there is one more ship in them than some of the 3 ship builds.

It's the Imperials where QvQ REALLY matters as they can field 2-8 ships with varying degrees of success across the board. For the Empire a 4 ship squad is going to be seen as going for "quality" although that is really a baseline for the Rebels at the moment. Many tournament reports seem to point to quantity (6+ ships) being better for the Empire but occasionally you see a quality Imperial build show up. A question for the Empire is "where do quantity and quality balance?" Here I wonder if it isn't the 5 ship builds that use one or two "good" ships supported but a group of lesser ships that work well together.

You're overthinking this a fair bit. There's no hard and fast rule - the fact that the idea of "quantity" will differ between factions is precisely the point. To a Rebel player, pre-wave Four, 4 ships is quantity. Five ships is practically a swarm. To an Imperial player, quantity can mean something more like a 7-8 ship swarm, versus a shuttle and 4 TIEs.

There don't need to be specifics assigned to this. It's a very simple question of "do I try and squeeze in the maximum number of ships that I can?" versus "do I choose to fly fewer ships but make each one more valuable?"

I'm not overthinking it as much as I'm trying to put the QvQ debate into perspective. If ONE ship is all it takes to move from "Quantity" all the way over to "Quality" then I think there is a problem. Going from 4 ships to 3 does mean increasing the average cost from 25 or less to under 34 (upping it 33%) but going from 5 to 4 is a 25% in average ship value.

The QvQ debate could also be related to any kind of "what point value should I play at" debate. It has been pointed out how just going to 105 points instead of 100 points can turn squadron building upside down with what then becomes available.

With Rebel squads it's not a problem - it's a simple matter of math.

You can take 3 named pilots with a few goodies. You can take 4, MAYBE 5 generic pilots - in the case of 5, all naked.

There are certainly no hard and fast numbers for what equals Quantity versus what equals Quality - it's just a philosophy, not a mathematical formula.

I would say that "quantity" is generally better since the basic values of ships don't change (except on the Outer Rim Smuggler). Expensive pilots are just as easy to kill and don't have more firepower except for what their Pilot abilities offer them. And that rarely makes up for an additional ship.

If you look at some tournaments you will see lots of low PS pilots with very few selected equipment on them in most lists.

But certainly there are exceptions to this. There was Han shoots first that preoccupied the competitive scene for a while, also elite combos around Biggs are still played and successful. But they are less numerous than the maximized low PS lists as far as i can see it.

The reason why you see quantity over quality is fairly simple, and is largely a product of the meta caused by a single list, the TIE swarm. If you field three small ships with quality pilots versus a swarm, the following will happen:

You will both meet, the TIE swarm will be in a blob. Regardless of what you do, the TIE swarm will get to focus their fire on at least one of your ships. With three ships, you will kill one TIE, possibly two if you get lucky. In return, the TIE swarm will kill one of your ships. Int following turns, you're now killing about one TIE a turn, and they still have enough firepower to probably drop another one of your ships. The simple fact is that you will lose ships faster than they do.

The exception to this being quality builds that feature large ships that will take several turns to destroy and so can weather the storm whilst still putting out damage.