Wow. So much &utthurt for this one topic. I played against this exact list in my last tournament, and you know what? I hunted the damned A-wings down.

Granted the list I was running was a HSF list, so I had more offense that the 4 Y-wings. But I didn't have the control aspect that the OP's opponent had.

I was running the Falcon and 2 rookies. In the first turn of our match, my opponent took out one of my rookies from concentrated fire. I was surprised at how quickly it went down. My opponent did the exact same thing, and tried to get away from me, but I did everything in my power to hunt him down with the Falcon's turret. You know what? I managed to take out one of his A-wings. His A-wing with upgrades was worth more points than my Rookie with an R5 on it.

Our game went to time, and I pulled off a modified win. So, don't tell me it can't be done. With those 3 Y-wings, the OP's opponent should have mopped the floor with him. If he chose not to press the attack, then that's his fault.

Me, personally, I couldn't help but marvel at how ridiculously slippery those A-wings were. And I had FUN chasing them down. Grand total ships lost 2. One for me, and one for him. There is no reason - NONE why the opponent in this case couldn't have used those Ion turrets to at least take out one of the A-wings. Hell, the opponent who whined in this case still had a total of 24 hull/shields to be taken out, whereas the OP had 8. Even if he Ioned the OP every turn, it would only have taken 2 turns to take out one A-wing, and 3 turns to take out 2 of them (provided he hit of course), all the while ensuring that the A-wing flew in a nice predictable straight line.

I call sour grapes on the opponent in this matchup. Get over it, get in the fight, and stop complaining. Next time pick a different list, or actually use the one you played to its strengths, just as the OP did.

I did not read past the second or third pages, a lot of your style sucks, no your style sucks.

To the OP, I would say you were the better player. Not only did you win but you won from the get go. The thing about strategy style games is learning strategies. Also finding ways to defeat them. Your opponent was obviously used to one style of play and had formed his list and strategies to that. So when you threw a wrench into the works itmessed with what was normal for him.

You used your list as it was meant to be played. Long ranged weapons are not meant to be used up close but at long distance. When castles and kingdoms in our history were attacked they didn't put their archers in the front ranks, they put their shields and swords up front.

Any poor sportsmanship was on the part of your opponent. He could have graciously lost and said something like, "I never expected a long range duel" or said nothing but "good game".

Lets face it a lot of us if not all of us play games like this not only because it fits in our interests. But, because we like competition as well. I mean why play game like this if not for the thrill of winning or the agony of defeat? You could just get some legos or other toys and pretend to dogfight and have no winners or losers.

Skimmed over a lot of this, especially the parts posted by people who don't actually understand the game, the rules, or how to make civil posts. Ones who I'm becoming more and more convinced are actually trolls based on their posting history here.

What the guy did was completely fair. Maybe not a thrilling victory, but he played to his strengths and the other guys weakness.

The fact that the guy who lost was clearly a bit of poor looser shows who really suffers from poor sportsmanship here.

If it were me, I'd be inclined to take a couple potshots at the Y's, but given the range 3 of them should have, even with turrets would seem to imply that even in the hands of a bad player you're going to have issues getting a clean shot off.

So no the OP did nothing wrong, at least no more wrong the the other guy did by refusing to adapt to the situation and figure out a way to get shots on the A's. Frankly the fact that he couldn't figure out a way, means he should of lost.

I feel everyone is focusing on the just the avoiding fire concept and not to what the OP himself said. He could run around and either the Y-wing player would break up his formation , or he would win. What if it was a falcon fortress list with an xwing and the player blew up the xwing and didn't go near the fortress? The fortress player decides he is going to stay in fortress mode and force the A-wing player to come to him and the A-wing player doesn't. Its the same thing but this time I am pretty sure everyone would agree its the fortress players fault not the a-wing player.

It doesn't matter the game if points are involved and you are down you need to change things up and take some risks its the only way to win at that point because all tournaments everywhere in every thing are timed. A clock is a standard part of all tournaments in every game. I have played magic, I have played a ton of different card games, warhammer both 40k and fantasy, a myriad of sports, and a good amount of video game tournaments they all have one thing in common a clock. Once you are a head you can play it safe because it is the one who is behind that needs to make a move to win.

Also the OP from what he said didn't come to the tournament with the intent of running away as a lot of people seem to think. It wasn't just a, I can avoid combat for the whole game and I will win. It wasn't a, I am going to come to the tournament and blow up one ship every game and run away for the rest of it and win the tournament. He did decide that this one time he could avoid combat to force his opponent to break up his formation making it easier to destroy all his ships, and if the opponent didn't do that he would win anyways because he was already winning.

Interesting. I'm in the "not going to catch up on 13 pages of this" camp, but I look at it from a different side. You know what's not fun in a game? Facing 4 ion turrets that hit you once and then stay behind every ship you've got for the next 4-8 turns as everyone just does 1 aheads and drops dice to see what happens.

Seriously. In all this, the "good guy" is the über ionizer? That's irony. 4 ions is pretty much the paragon of a "not fun" match. It's perfectly legal, and something you have to know how to deal with, but you really don't get to bring it and then cry about how unfun it is when the counter to your troll list refuses to just line up so you can start the ion train.

I feel everyone is focusing on the just the avoiding fire concept and not to what the OP himself said. He could run around and either the Y-wing player would break up his formation , or he would win. What if it was a falcon fortress list with an xwing and the player blew up the xwing and didn't go near the fortress? The fortress player decides he is going to stay in fortress mode and force the A-wing player to come to him and the A-wing player doesn't. Its the same thing but this time I am pretty sure everyone would agree its the fortress players fault not the a-wing player.

It doesn't matter the game if points are involved and you are down you need to change things up and take some risks its the only way to win at that point because all tournaments everywhere in every thing are timed. A clock is a standard part of all tournaments in every game. I have played magic, I have played a ton of different card games, warhammer both 40k and fantasy, a myriad of sports, and a good amount of video game tournaments they all have one thing in common a clock. Once you are a head you can play it safe because it is the one who is behind that needs to make a move to win.

Also the OP from what he said didn't come to the tournament with the intent of running away as a lot of people seem to think. It wasn't just a, I can avoid combat for the whole game and I will win. It wasn't a, I am going to come to the tournament and blow up one ship every game and run away for the rest of it and win the tournament. He did decide that this one time he could avoid combat to force his opponent to break up his formation making it easier to destroy all his ships, and if the opponent didn't do that he would win anyways because he was already winning.

Once again, I have to repost this picture I took with a potato to show you how ridiculous it is for the Ywing to NOT be able to catch even a single Awing, even if you assumed all 3 Ywings combined with each other into a single Ywing-zord or something

EDIT: seriously, whatever argument anyone can think about in defense of the Ywing player is instantly voided by the reality of how excruciatingly easy it is for the Ywing to catch any Awing within the boundaries of a 3x3

Case in point, does MTG have a rule about how many rounds you are allowd to play before initiating an attack? You know it doesn't.

If you're deliberately taking repetitive actions which don't help you win the game, with the clear intent of reaching the time limit before the game can end, you can expect a slow play penalty. And you're going to get it even if the individual actions are done at a reasonable pace.

Many aspects of X-Wing may be similar to Magic, but not in regards to the situation that the OP describes.

There are ways in Magic to pad out a turn and effectively 'do nothing'. Magic is a far more complex game than X-Wing will ever be. Magic has infinite loops along with other convoluted sequences that can take a while to resolve. Think of the 'Eggs' deck that got nerfed in Modern... each turn would take ages to complete. Magic does have provisions for players to 'advance the game state' and failure to do so may result in warnings.

Flying defensively is not stalling (provided that the player is progressing through the turn sequence at a reasonable pace) and can not be compared to any similar situation to Magic. Every turn the A-Wing player is setting his dial and moving his ship. He is advancing the game state. At some point he will need to hard turn away from a board edge, or K-turn back into play. It is then up to his opponent to capitalise on that window of opportunity to engage. The geometry of the play area ensures that ships must engage in future turns. You can't run forever!

This thread demonstrates why it might be useful for TOs to have access to common definitions and examples of what FFG deem to be (not)/acceptable. It's been debated in other threads about the merit for some kind of FFG 'Judge/TO' program. We can see how easy it is for some opinions to differ about a very simple, valid game tactic of flying defensively for a timed win.

If the OP played at my tournament (with me as a TO) he would be congratulated for good, intelligent flying.

If the OP played at iPeregrine's tournament (with iPeregrine as a TO) he might be DQd for stalling...

There's something not right about that inconsistency.

Interesting. I'm in the "not going to catch up on 13 pages of this" camp, but I look at it from a different side. You know what's not fun in a game? Facing 4 ion turrets that hit you once and then stay behind every ship you've got for the next 4-8 turns as everyone just does 1 aheads and drops dice to see what happens.

Seriously. In all this, the "good guy" is the über ionizer? That's irony. 4 ions is pretty much the paragon of a "not fun" match. It's perfectly legal, and something you have to know how to deal with, but you really don't get to bring it and then cry about how unfun it is when the counter to your troll list refuses to just line up so you can start the ion train.

Here you go Buhallin, I found a post in this very thread on a topic that I know is near and dear to you heart.

Without having watched the game, I can't say for certain whether the OP tried to engage at all during that time. But, running out the clock in a strategy game is kind of a **** move and definitely goes against the idea of "fly casual."

Winning is good and winning is fun. Winning when removing the "playing" part of the game isn't fun at all.

I am again going to call BS on this line of thinking.

A-wings are flankers with a missile platform. Why would anyone just fly into tanks with 360 degree firing arcs? That's not being sporting... that's being dumb. Given the set up of the two squads and how the alpha round went.... why would the A-wing player do anything other than what he did?

Furthermore, this is a viable tactic that was used over and over again in WW2. Bombers would eventually lose their fighter support due to lack of fuel, and then the bombers themselves could only fly so long if they wanted to have enough fuel to get home. AAs and defending fighters would harass the bombers and force them off flight path. The fighters didn't need to engage directly, just force the bombers to use up fuel.

But back to this game.... Part of the reason why so many people think Interceptors and A-wings are not worth their points is because of the mind set that one always has to be attacking. In a tournament setting this is not the case. The goal is to have scored 12 more points than your opponent by the end of time. Avoiding further losses and not engaging in risky combat is a valid, legal, and sportsman like tactic. Stalling and causing turns to take longer is not.

Furthermore, forcing your opponent off of their original strategy is part of how you SHOULD be playing this game. Not being able to change or being unwilling to change your tactics is how you often lose this game.

And how dare anyone fly the banner of "Fly Casual" as means to call defense-first play unsportsmanlike. Do not tar or sully the beauty that is Fly Casual by demanding that people play the way you "feel" they should. We have our rules and we stick to them. Fly Casual means to continue having fun while playing even in the face of defeat. It means shaking hands with the person you just played and leaving your excuses and hubris at the door.

Defense first is a viable strategy, and you'd better start preparing your lists for it now! A-wings are getting upgraded and the Interceptors already have been. The meta is changing. Swarms and jousting are not the only way to play this game.

I feel everyone is focusing on the just the avoiding fire concept and not to what the OP himself said. He could run around and either the Y-wing player would break up his formation , or he would win. What if it was a falcon fortress list with an xwing and the player blew up the xwing and didn't go near the fortress? The fortress player decides he is going to stay in fortress mode and force the A-wing player to come to him and the A-wing player doesn't. Its the same thing but this time I am pretty sure everyone would agree its the fortress players fault not the a-wing player.

It doesn't matter the game if points are involved and you are down you need to change things up and take some risks its the only way to win at that point because all tournaments everywhere in every thing are timed. A clock is a standard part of all tournaments in every game. I have played magic, I have played a ton of different card games, warhammer both 40k and fantasy, a myriad of sports, and a good amount of video game tournaments they all have one thing in common a clock. Once you are a head you can play it safe because it is the one who is behind that needs to make a move to win.

Also the OP from what he said didn't come to the tournament with the intent of running away as a lot of people seem to think. It wasn't just a, I can avoid combat for the whole game and I will win. It wasn't a, I am going to come to the tournament and blow up one ship every game and run away for the rest of it and win the tournament. He did decide that this one time he could avoid combat to force his opponent to break up his formation making it easier to destroy all his ships, and if the opponent didn't do that he would win anyways because he was already winning.

Once again, I have to repost this picture I took with a potato to show you how ridiculous it is for the Ywing to NOT be able to catch even a single Awing, even if you assumed all 3 Ywings combined with each other into a single Ywing-zord or something

EDIT: seriously, whatever argument anyone can think about in defense of the Ywing player is instantly voided by the reality of how excruciatingly easy it is for the Ywing to catch any Awing within the boundaries of a 3x3

I think some people may need you to add the other 2 Y-wings though.

I feel everyone is focusing on the just the avoiding fire concept and not to what the OP himself said. He could run around and either the Y-wing player would break up his formation , or he would win. What if it was a falcon fortress list with an xwing and the player blew up the xwing and didn't go near the fortress? The fortress player decides he is going to stay in fortress mode and force the A-wing player to come to him and the A-wing player doesn't. Its the same thing but this time I am pretty sure everyone would agree its the fortress players fault not the a-wing player.

It doesn't matter the game if points are involved and you are down you need to change things up and take some risks its the only way to win at that point because all tournaments everywhere in every thing are timed. A clock is a standard part of all tournaments in every game. I have played magic, I have played a ton of different card games, warhammer both 40k and fantasy, a myriad of sports, and a good amount of video game tournaments they all have one thing in common a clock. Once you are a head you can play it safe because it is the one who is behind that needs to make a move to win.

Also the OP from what he said didn't come to the tournament with the intent of running away as a lot of people seem to think. It wasn't just a, I can avoid combat for the whole game and I will win. It wasn't a, I am going to come to the tournament and blow up one ship every game and run away for the rest of it and win the tournament. He did decide that this one time he could avoid combat to force his opponent to break up his formation making it easier to destroy all his ships, and if the opponent didn't do that he would win anyways because he was already winning.

Once again, I have to repost this picture I took with a potato to show you how ridiculous it is for the Ywing to NOT be able to catch even a single Awing, even if you assumed all 3 Ywings combined with each other into a single Ywing-zord or something

EDIT: seriously, whatever argument anyone can think about in defense of the Ywing player is instantly voided by the reality of how excruciatingly easy it is for the Ywing to catch any Awing within the boundaries of a 3x3

I think some people may need you to add the other 2 Y-wings though.

but the Ywings' ion turret AoEs would cover the entire play area.

but the Ywings' ion turret AoEs would cover the entire play area.

Fantastic illustration Duraham. There is a counter for everything. The Y-wings had the ability to win this game. They are tanks, with a dial that isn't far off from an X-wing. Add a turret, and that list should have given the A-wings hell after they had fired all of their missiles.

Hah...this thread is still going.

To think outside the box...maybe the Y-Wing played needed to take a dump? Sounds like a reasonable excuse to end an un-fun game early.

Without having watched the game, I can't say for certain whether the OP tried to engage at all during that time. But, running out the clock in a strategy game is kind of a **** move and definitely goes against the idea of "fly casual."

Winning is good and winning is fun. Winning when removing the "playing" part of the game isn't fun at all.

I am again going to call BS on this line of thinking.

A-wings are flankers with a missile platform. Why would anyone just fly into tanks with 360 degree firing arcs? That's not being sporting... that's being dumb. Given the set up of the two squads and how the alpha round went.... why would the A-wing player do anything other than what he did?

Furthermore, this is a viable tactic that was used over and over again in WW2. Bombers would eventually lose their fighter support due to lack of fuel, and then the bombers themselves could only fly so long if they wanted to have enough fuel to get home. AAs and defending fighters would harass the bombers and force them off flight path. The fighters didn't need to engage directly, just force the bombers to use up fuel.

But back to this game.... Part of the reason why so many people think Interceptors and A-wings are not worth their points is because of the mind set that one always has to be attacking. In a tournament setting this is not the case. The goal is to have scored 12 more points than your opponent by the end of time. Avoiding further losses and not engaging in risky combat is a valid, legal, and sportsman like tactic. Stalling and causing turns to take longer is not.

Furthermore, forcing your opponent off of their original strategy is part of how you SHOULD be playing this game. Not being able to change or being unwilling to change your tactics is how you often lose this game.

And how dare anyone fly the banner of "Fly Casual" as means to call defense-first play unsportsmanlike. Do not tar or sully the beauty that is Fly Casual by demanding that people play the way you "feel" they should. We have our rules and we stick to them. Fly Casual means to continue having fun while playing even in the face of defeat. It means shaking hands with the person you just played and leaving your excuses and hubris at the door.

Defense first is a viable strategy, and you'd better start preparing your lists for it now! A-wings are getting upgraded and the Interceptors already have been. The meta is changing. Swarms and jousting are not the only way to play this game.

I think you misunderstood my post.

I don't have a problem with how the OP played (based on his description, which is all we have to go on)

I was commenting on someone who's sole tactic is to get 12 points and has no intention of ever really playing after that. For those that know Blood Bowl, it's like you're playing a team who's ahead by a point in the second half. They have possession of the ball and half your team is off the pitch due to KO's, injuries or whatever. The player then doesn't try to score and just runs out the rest of the match giving you no chance no matter how good or poor a player you are.

Based on the OP's description, he should have won. My comment was more aligned to stalling tactics in general which is also kinda trolling. There're people in this thread who say an all ion list is trolling, but an all-evade list isn't. Both of them CAN be but that doesn't mean they are. It all comes down to how they are being flown and everything in this thread is based on a second-hand account.

Also, this is from someone who loves all A-Wing and Interceptor lists.

Again, I think people are overblowing the threat of the "kill one ship and run till time" strategy. Not a super fun game if it happens, sure. But it is such a horrible, horrible strategy, you really shouldn't be worrying about it too much. Even if someone tries it, you should be able to do some corralling.

It also seems to me that people are forgetting that asteroids are part of a standard tournament setup. That means the A-Wing player couldn't just pick 5 forward every time.

Because it was mentioned, I used Vassal to look at the area 3 Y-Wings could cover with Ion's, and it's about 75% of the board if you put them into a triangle.

If any of you have played against a 4 ion turret list that's just as not fun as chasing 4 A-wings with the Y-wings. So the opponent expects you to just fly into his turrets and get constantly ioned? How is that any more fun? The 4 ion guy got what he deserved.

Without having watched the game, I can't say for certain whether the OP tried to engage at all during that time. But, running out the clock in a strategy game is kind of a **** move and definitely goes against the idea of "fly casual."

Winning is good and winning is fun. Winning when removing the "playing" part of the game isn't fun at all.

I am again going to call BS on this line of thinking.

A-wings are flankers with a missile platform. Why would anyone just fly into tanks with 360 degree firing arcs? That's not being sporting... that's being dumb. Given the set up of the two squads and how the alpha round went.... why would the A-wing player do anything other than what he did?

Furthermore, this is a viable tactic that was used over and over again in WW2. Bombers would eventually lose their fighter support due to lack of fuel, and then the bombers themselves could only fly so long if they wanted to have enough fuel to get home. AAs and defending fighters would harass the bombers and force them off flight path. The fighters didn't need to engage directly, just force the bombers to use up fuel.

But back to this game.... Part of the reason why so many people think Interceptors and A-wings are not worth their points is because of the mind set that one always has to be attacking. In a tournament setting this is not the case. The goal is to have scored 12 more points than your opponent by the end of time. Avoiding further losses and not engaging in risky combat is a valid, legal, and sportsman like tactic. Stalling and causing turns to take longer is not.

Furthermore, forcing your opponent off of their original strategy is part of how you SHOULD be playing this game. Not being able to change or being unwilling to change your tactics is how you often lose this game.

And how dare anyone fly the banner of "Fly Casual" as means to call defense-first play unsportsmanlike. Do not tar or sully the beauty that is Fly Casual by demanding that people play the way you "feel" they should. We have our rules and we stick to them. Fly Casual means to continue having fun while playing even in the face of defeat. It means shaking hands with the person you just played and leaving your excuses and hubris at the door.

Defense first is a viable strategy, and you'd better start preparing your lists for it now! A-wings are getting upgraded and the Interceptors already have been. The meta is changing. Swarms and jousting are not the only way to play this game.

I think you misunderstood my post.

I don't have a problem with how the OP played (based on his description, which is all we have to go on)

I was commenting on someone who's sole tactic is to get 12 points and has no intention of ever really playing after that. For those that know Blood Bowl, it's like you're playing a team who's ahead by a point in the second half. They have possession of the ball and half your team is off the pitch due to KO's, injuries or whatever. The player then doesn't try to score and just runs out the rest of the match giving you no chance no matter how good or poor a player you are.

Based on the OP's description, he should have won. My comment was more aligned to stalling tactics in general which is also kinda trolling. There're people in this thread who say an all ion list is trolling, but an all-evade list isn't. Both of them CAN be but that doesn't mean they are. It all comes down to how they are being flown and everything in this thread is based on a second-hand account.

Also, this is from someone who loves all A-Wing and Interceptor lists.

I do understand your point, and my previous comments were not solely directed at you.

What is wrong with going into the game with the original game plan being win the alpha strike and avoid risky combat and any losses thereafter? Also, why would that not be fun to play against?

I'll answer both questions. 1) Nothing. It forces people to play in a different mind set and there are some players that think there is only one way to play this game.

2) I would have loved to step in and take those 3 Y-wings in an attempt to hunt those A-wings down! An opponent forcing me to change gears is not "unsportsmanlike" nor does it cause me to stop having fun. I'm having fun every time I push a little piece of my childhood around the table. I also know that there is NOTHING inside of the rules that an opponent can throw at me that I can't find a counter for. Finding the counter is PART OF the fun!

So yes... BS on both counts.

To address your "trolling" concern. There is no (let me repeat that) THERE IS NO "troll", "newb", "unfair" list in this game. ANY 100 point squad has a chance of beating any other 100 point squad. Those who wave the flag of "Fly Casual" will tell you this and will certainly NOT use any such language as to suggest a player is [insert name here] based on their list.

If any of you have played against a 4 ion turret list that's just as not fun as chasing 4 A-wings with the Y-wings. So the opponent expects you to just fly into his turrets and get constantly ioned? How is that any more fun? The 4 ion guy got what he deserved.

100% agreed. Anyone who whines about sportsmanship when their opponent doesn't play to his list's strengths is being a sh*tty sportsman. I love when Min/Max players get owned.

Without having watched the game, I can't say for certain whether the OP tried to engage at all during that time. But, running out the clock in a strategy game is kind of a **** move and definitely goes against the idea of "fly casual."

Winning is good and winning is fun. Winning when removing the "playing" part of the game isn't fun at all.

I am again going to call BS on this line of thinking.

A-wings are flankers with a missile platform. Why would anyone just fly into tanks with 360 degree firing arcs? That's not being sporting... that's being dumb. Given the set up of the two squads and how the alpha round went.... why would the A-wing player do anything other than what he did?

Furthermore, this is a viable tactic that was used over and over again in WW2. Bombers would eventually lose their fighter support due to lack of fuel, and then the bombers themselves could only fly so long if they wanted to have enough fuel to get home. AAs and defending fighters would harass the bombers and force them off flight path. The fighters didn't need to engage directly, just force the bombers to use up fuel.

But back to this game.... Part of the reason why so many people think Interceptors and A-wings are not worth their points is because of the mind set that one always has to be attacking. In a tournament setting this is not the case. The goal is to have scored 12 more points than your opponent by the end of time. Avoiding further losses and not engaging in risky combat is a valid, legal, and sportsman like tactic. Stalling and causing turns to take longer is not.

Furthermore, forcing your opponent off of their original strategy is part of how you SHOULD be playing this game. Not being able to change or being unwilling to change your tactics is how you often lose this game.

And how dare anyone fly the banner of "Fly Casual" as means to call defense-first play unsportsmanlike. Do not tar or sully the beauty that is Fly Casual by demanding that people play the way you "feel" they should. We have our rules and we stick to them. Fly Casual means to continue having fun while playing even in the face of defeat. It means shaking hands with the person you just played and leaving your excuses and hubris at the door.

Defense first is a viable strategy, and you'd better start preparing your lists for it now! A-wings are getting upgraded and the Interceptors already have been. The meta is changing. Swarms and jousting are not the only way to play this game.

I think you misunderstood my post.

I don't have a problem with how the OP played (based on his description, which is all we have to go on)

I was commenting on someone who's sole tactic is to get 12 points and has no intention of ever really playing after that. For those that know Blood Bowl, it's like you're playing a team who's ahead by a point in the second half. They have possession of the ball and half your team is off the pitch due to KO's, injuries or whatever. The player then doesn't try to score and just runs out the rest of the match giving you no chance no matter how good or poor a player you are.

Based on the OP's description, he should have won. My comment was more aligned to stalling tactics in general which is also kinda trolling. There're people in this thread who say an all ion list is trolling, but an all-evade list isn't. Both of them CAN be but that doesn't mean they are. It all comes down to how they are being flown and everything in this thread is based on a second-hand account.

Also, this is from someone who loves all A-Wing and Interceptor lists.

Excellent analogy, because in Blood Bowl that's a completely acceptable tactic as well, even if it is for a draw. In one of the best leagues of anything I played in of any game in terms of BOTH fun and competitiveness, no one wanted to give my pro elves the ball back, and doing so was a bad move, so I had to provide them reason to do so by picking on loners or taking high risk plays. Or, I simply accepted my losses and called it a day moving to the other end of the pitch.

Without having watched the game, I can't say for certain whether the OP tried to engage at all during that time. But, running out the clock in a strategy game is kind of a **** move and definitely goes against the idea of "fly casual."

Winning is good and winning is fun. Winning when removing the "playing" part of the game isn't fun at all.

I am again going to call BS on this line of thinking.

A-wings are flankers with a missile platform. Why would anyone just fly into tanks with 360 degree firing arcs? That's not being sporting... that's being dumb. Given the set up of the two squads and how the alpha round went.... why would the A-wing player do anything other than what he did?

Furthermore, this is a viable tactic that was used over and over again in WW2. Bombers would eventually lose their fighter support due to lack of fuel, and then the bombers themselves could only fly so long if they wanted to have enough fuel to get home. AAs and defending fighters would harass the bombers and force them off flight path. The fighters didn't need to engage directly, just force the bombers to use up fuel.

But back to this game.... Part of the reason why so many people think Interceptors and A-wings are not worth their points is because of the mind set that one always has to be attacking. In a tournament setting this is not the case. The goal is to have scored 12 more points than your opponent by the end of time. Avoiding further losses and not engaging in risky combat is a valid, legal, and sportsman like tactic. Stalling and causing turns to take longer is not.

Furthermore, forcing your opponent off of their original strategy is part of how you SHOULD be playing this game. Not being able to change or being unwilling to change your tactics is how you often lose this game.

And how dare anyone fly the banner of "Fly Casual" as means to call defense-first play unsportsmanlike. Do not tar or sully the beauty that is Fly Casual by demanding that people play the way you "feel" they should. We have our rules and we stick to them. Fly Casual means to continue having fun while playing even in the face of defeat. It means shaking hands with the person you just played and leaving your excuses and hubris at the door.

Defense first is a viable strategy, and you'd better start preparing your lists for it now! A-wings are getting upgraded and the Interceptors already have been. The meta is changing. Swarms and jousting are not the only way to play this game.

I think you misunderstood my post.

I don't have a problem with how the OP played (based on his description, which is all we have to go on)

I was commenting on someone who's sole tactic is to get 12 points and has no intention of ever really playing after that. For those that know Blood Bowl, it's like you're playing a team who's ahead by a point in the second half. They have possession of the ball and half your team is off the pitch due to KO's, injuries or whatever. The player then doesn't try to score and just runs out the rest of the match giving you no chance no matter how good or poor a player you are.

Based on the OP's description, he should have won. My comment was more aligned to stalling tactics in general which is also kinda trolling. There're people in this thread who say an all ion list is trolling, but an all-evade list isn't. Both of them CAN be but that doesn't mean they are. It all comes down to how they are being flown and everything in this thread is based on a second-hand account.

Also, this is from someone who loves all A-Wing and Interceptor lists.

I do understand your point, and my previous comments were not solely directed at you.

What is wrong with going into the game with the original game plan being win the alpha strike and avoid risky combat and any losses thereafter? Also, why would that not be fun to play against?

I'll answer both questions. 1) Nothing. It forces people to play in a different mind set and there are some players that think there is only one way to play this game.

2) I would have loved to step in and take those 3 Y-wings in an attempt to hunt those A-wings down! An opponent forcing me to change gears is not "unsportsmanlike" nor does it cause me to stop having fun. I'm having fun every time I push a little piece of my childhood around the table. I also know that there is NOTHING inside of the rules that an opponent can throw at me that I can't find a counter for. Finding the counter is PART OF the fun!

So yes... BS on both counts.

To address your "trolling" concern. There is no (let me repeat that) THERE IS NO "troll", "newb", "unfair" list in this game. ANY 100 point squad has a chance of beating any other 100 point squad. Those who wave the flag of "Fly Casual" will tell you this and will certainly NOT use any such language as to suggest a player is [insert name here] based on their list.

Lulz. For someone who seems to act as the authority on "Fly Casual", you have an interesting definition of "casual". As you seem to have the definition of, "as long as something isn't strictly forbidden, it's totally cool." There is such a thing as violating the spirit of the rules you know. I have a feeling that you would whip out a Star Fortress against a new player and shrug your shoulders if they made a comment that it isn't fair.

What a novel concept! The rules of a game establishing the parameters a game is played under. Not some subjective ambiguous social pressure from an overly vocal minority. Who would have thought...

I have a feeling that you would whip out a Star Fortress against a new player and shrug your shoulders if they made a comment that it isn't fair.

I just love it when someone tries to say that a Tournament and teaching a newbie how to play are the same thing... Because clearly if you do something in one situation you'd do exactly the same thing in the other.

I have a feeling that you would whip out a Star Fortress against a new player and shrug your shoulders if they made a comment that it isn't fair.

I just love it when someone tries to say that a Tournament and teaching a newbie how to play are the same thing... Because clearly if you do something in one situation you'd do exactly the same thing in the other.

New player can't play in tournaments. Gotcha. I'll remember to tell that to someone the next time they ask.

What a novel concept! The rules of a game establishing the parameters a game is played under. Not some subjective ambiguous social pressure from an overly vocal minority. Who would have thought...

"Hey, it's totally cool to act like a jerk! The rules don't say I can't!"

Some people play the game for fun and this thread is full of people dumping all over the Y-Wing guy. That game probably wasn't fun for him and he conceded. To him, it wasn't very sporting. Then, the OP comes to the forums to make a thread to drudge up people to agree with him to support his theory that he is right. Without even hearing the other side of the story, you dump all over him and congratulate the other guy for doing a good job and following the rules. But hey, he's not here to defend himself is he?

New player can't play in tournaments.

If they can't deal with things like a YT Fortress or A-Wings running away then they aren't going to win and should understand that before hand.

If I'm playing in a tournament, I'm not there to teach a Newbie how to play the game. Unless you happen to think that's the proper place to learn how to play the game...

I have a feeling that you would whip out a Star Fortress against a new player and shrug your shoulders if they made a comment that it isn't fair.

I just love it when someone tries to say that a Tournament and teaching a newbie how to play are the same thing... Because clearly if you do something in one situation you'd do exactly the same thing in the other.

New player can't play in tournaments. Gotcha. I'll remember to tell that to someone the next time they ask.

No offense dude, but get your head out of your you-know-what. Vanor didn't say that new players weren't welcomed to tournaments, or that they wouldn't be helped. Tournaments ARE a different beast than a casual pick up game though. I just entered my first tournament a while ago, and I found everyone there to be VERY helpful. That doesn't mean they weren't out to win though. We also had time between games, so that most of the players there helped de-brief me, and told me what I could be doing better, and what I had done wrong as well as right.

This community is generally very gracious and helpful. I imagine that most tournaments are much the same. If I see someone who is in need of help, I'd throw him a bone. I may want the win, so I would probably give out advice during the match only sparingly, and then after the match in much more detail. I dare you to find someone here who wouldn't.