I've watched the 2013 top 4 worlds videos, and those guys were almost holding hands. I found it odd for top tier players to be so nonchalant about this higher end event. But does support the statements on how more casual players are with this game. Even the OP wasn't being ***ky about his match, let alone the fact he showed concern about this tactic etc.

We have beaten this to death .. force life it alive and beaten it again!

By the "Official Tournament Rules" neither player can be vaulted for the result of this game nor their conduct during [PERIOD]

Even with the image showing range .. Ywing only had I 2 range 3 attacks, which gives +1 green def die. add to awing AGI 3 = 4, plus action/ptl can add another evade for a total of 5 def vs generic 2 attack?

Now, either turret has only range 1-2 .. that cuts his range by 1/3 giving the awing much more space to zoom around.

It was a vanilla tactic for a vanilla match. Further usage won't make any popularity in matches, let alone viable for tourneys as well.

as for a wing, 2 of 3 missles are gone, That was his only heavy hitter, like most, would have spread out the y wings enough to corner them, i'd rather go down burning that play cat and mouse w/ 2 kings

I hope the irony of this statement coming from VanorDM wasn't lost on anyone else.

Wow your either suffering from delusion or a simple lack of reading comprehension... But I'm sure most people will see the irony here.

I at least have the rules and logic to back up my "opinion" something you have to provide. The best you can do is try and play the gotcha game with "win at all costs".

So basically, you confirm you didn't read all my posts where I explain that the OP was running the clock and stalling and that was why I consider this behaviour poor sportsmanship and toxic.

I explain that the OP was running the clock and stalling

No I disregarded those posts for the same reason everyone else has. Because you're wrong. What he did isn't stalling and the fact that you keep saying it is just proves just how clueless you really are.

But hey thanks for providing even more proof to my statements about how you operate.

Wars not make one great.

I explain that the OP was running the clock and stalling

No I disregarded those posts for the same reason everyone else has. Because you're wrong. What he did isn't stalling and the fact that you keep saying it is just proves just how clueless you really are.

But hey thanks for providing even more proof to my statements about how you operate.

So...you're just mad that I don't agree with you? Is that's the meat of the matter? You're unreasonably upset and you need to take a step back, at this point you're coming of as a silly rager.

OP's intention was to avoid combat until the time ran out, this is running the clock, this is stalling, this is not conductive to a positive game experience. If you don't agree, that's fine, but don't turn into a rager over it and don't cry "troll troll!!11!" because someone doesn't agree with your opinion.

loaded dices are not part of the FFG standard components and hence by definition cannot be used and are therefore already not legal, according to the official FFG rules

Please quote the exact rule that says this.

If you are playing the game at a reasonable pace, how can you be stalling?

Because you're attempting to generate extra time-wasting turns and reach the time limit. Seriously, how can you possibly ask how this is stalling when the OP proudly admits that they were stalling? You can debate whether or not stalling should be punished, but no reasonable person can claim that this wasn't stalling.

Is the Y-wing player also stalling since he tried to maintain his formation instead of breaking it to more adequately track down the A-wings?

No, because the y-wing player was using a strategy that could eventually win the game based on ship destruction, and was not attempting to deliberately reach the time limit before they could take any damage.

Yet again you say the A-wing must engage the Y-wing player. Why not the other way round?

Both players should attempt to engage each other. The key difference here is that the y-wing player was attempting to engage the a-wing player, while the a-wing player was attempting to stay out of combat until the time limit.

Why should the Y-wing player get to play his strategy of sticking together in formation and require the A-wing player to attack him?

Because the y-wing player's strategy will eventually force combat and allow them to win the game. The a-wing player's strategy has no hope of winning unless they can slow play their way to the time limit.

I mean, if both players had been dancing around the table, in and out of asteroids, never able to connect their shots because of asteroids or whatever, and there was only 5 minutes left in the game, and the OP took out the Y-wing, and THEN decided to evade, would it still be considered cheap?

Yes. Stalling is stalling. If you do it you are breaking the rules and should be kicked out of the event.

To illustrate this, I don't think that the op did anything really wrong but I also feel like its a little beardy just because it detracts from the fun of the game a little bit because playing a whole game where one ships blows up isn't very fun (I know that the op says if he split his squad up a bit he would of attacked but his opponent doesn't know that). Convincing me that reaction is wrong is kind of a lost cause because the rules and how I perceive you are different by their nature.

As you yourself noted sportsmanship can be subjective, but what is fun is even more subjective.

Another player may consider the tactical exercise of chasing down the A-wings, while not exposing himself, to be far more fun then just having the A-wings attempt to plow into his formation. While I love winning, tournaments would be no fun for me if my opponents didn't confront me with tactical quandaries I need to overcome.

While it's clear in this case case the Y-wing player did not find that fun, that isn't on the A-wing player. When you are entering an event you a signing up to play a serious of competitive games. You have to assume your opponent, within the boundaries of the rules, is going to attempt to beat you. Hell they are going to attempt to beat you as badly as dice will allow. If you squadron is going to open up or force play styles on your opponent that you might not find fun to play against, then that's on you for running that squadron. If competitive play isn't for you, then it's on you for entering an event, not on your opponent for operating under the understood social contract.

Calling legal play beardy or unsportsmanlike is really a low blow. In fact the only action unsportsmanlike in the original game was on the Y-wing player.

Potato, Poh-tat-o.

At this point 22 pages later - does anyone care?

Just agree to disagree. Some think he was purposely stalling, and others think it was purely tactical. The fact is he won, and out flew his opponent either because his opponent didn't know any better, or hoped that eventually he'd get a shot, which he obviously didn't.

End of story.

Can we now make it the END of this thread?

Please quote the exact rule that says this.

Page 1 of the tournament rules.

All components other than ship models must remain unaltered. Cards may be sleeved for protection. Sleeves for Damage cards must be identical and unaltered.

Proxies are not allowed during tournament play. Each player must use only the components included in official X-Wing products. Each ship must have the official ship base, official Ship and Upgrade cards, and the correct, official ship model.

Perhaps you should try reading them...

but no reasonable person can claim that this wasn't stalling.

Actually every reasonable person here has claimed exactly that. It's only the unreasonable ones who are saying otherwise. In fact it's pretty much you and HunterEste who are saying this is stalling, some may think that it wasn't fair or even poor sportsmanship, but it's pretty much just you two who think he broke the rules.

No, because the y-wing player was using a strategy that could eventually win the game based on ship destruction

If you do it you are breaking the rules and should be kicked out of the event.

And again here you go confusing your opinion for the actual rules.

loaded dices are not part of the FFG standard components and hence by definition cannot be used and are therefore already not legal, according to the official FFG rules

Please quote the exact rule that says this.

You know, when your argument has degenerated to "The rules don't stop me from using loaded dice!" you've pretty much reached the point of self-parody. You probably need to step away from the computer for a day, come back tomorrow, reread everything you've written and have a solid dose of "WTF was I thinking?"

But just for fun, the exact rules which prohibit loaded dice:

So yes, pretty much explicitly prohibited. Now please, stop making yourself look silly. It's getting uncomfortable for everyone.

If you are playing the game at a reasonable pace, how can you be stalling?

Because you're attempting to generate extra time-wasting turns and reach the time limit. Seriously, how can you possibly ask how this is stalling when the OP proudly admits that they were stalling? You can debate whether or not stalling should be punished, but no reasonable person can claim that this wasn't stalling.

Every reasonable person in this thread is claiming exactly that, with the exception of you and HunterEste. Is he really the sort of person you want to be associated with?

Potato, Poh-tat-o.

At this point 22 pages later - does anyone care?

Just agree to disagree. Some think he was purposely stalling, and others think it was purely tactical. The fact is he won, and out flew his opponent either because his opponent didn't know any better, or hoped that eventually he'd get a shot, which he obviously didn't.

End of story.

Can we now make it the END of this thread?

I hoped to get to page 42, I hear there the answer to life the universe and everything can be found there.

we need side topics, this one is dying a fiery death we need more page material

...how about, can a to scale star destroyer circle the epic map board - avoiding action with a CR90, and if so is fair to the CR90?

“Did you ever hear the Tragedy of Darth iPeregrine the Wise? It’s a Sith legend. He was a Dark Lord of the Sith, so powerful and so wise that he could use the Force to influence the midi-chlorians to create life in dead forum threads. He also sold a fortune's worth of microwave popcorn..."

- Emp. Orville Palpatine

Potato, Poh-tat-o.

At this point 22 pages later - does anyone care?

Just agree to disagree. Some think he was purposely stalling, and others think it was purely tactical. The fact is he won, and out flew his opponent either because his opponent didn't know any better, or hoped that eventually he'd get a shot, which he obviously didn't.

End of story.

Can we now make it the END of this thread?

I hoped to get to page 42, I hear there the answer to life the universe and everything can be found there.

we need side topics, this one is dying a fiery death we need more page material

...how about, can a to scale star destroyer circle the epic map board - avoiding action with a CR90, and if so is fair to the CR90?

We could easily get this thread locked, if it wasn't so much fun to watch the trolls make absolute fools of themselves.

To illustrate this, I don't think that the op did anything really wrong but I also feel like its a little beardy just because it detracts from the fun of the game a little bit because playing a whole game where one ships blows up isn't very fun (I know that the op says if he split his squad up a bit he would of attacked but his opponent doesn't know that). Convincing me that reaction is wrong is kind of a lost cause because the rules and how I perceive you are different by their nature.

As you yourself noted sportsmanship can be subjective, but what is fun is even more subjective.

Another player may consider the tactical exercise of chasing down the A-wings, while not exposing himself, to be far more fun then just having the A-wings attempt to plow into his formation. While I love winning, tournaments would be no fun for me if my opponents didn't confront me with tactical quandaries I need to overcome.

While it's clear in this case case the Y-wing player did not find that fun, that isn't on the A-wing player. When you are entering an event you a signing up to play a serious of competitive games. You have to assume your opponent, within the boundaries of the rules, is going to attempt to beat you. Hell they are going to attempt to beat you as badly as dice will allow. If you squadron is going to open up or force play styles on your opponent that you might not find fun to play against, then that's on you for running that squadron. If competitive play isn't for you, then it's on you for entering an event, not on your opponent for operating under the understood social contract.

Calling legal play beardy or unsportsmanlike is really a low blow. In fact the only action unsportsmanlike in the original game was on the Y-wing player.

Look at it this way. When you ask if someone is a good sport, you don't ask about how they flied or even ask them directly. You ask the people they played. I know that can be bothersome but when it comes to sportsmanship the details about the game itself are just the backdrop to how your opponent perceives you. when we talk about competitive play and sportsmanship, I've always found it bothersome that tournament play and casual play have become so separated. Around me there is no difference with tourney play most of the time. #1 objective in a tourney: have fun. #2 win.

I pointed out that, personally, I think it would be kind of beardy to play keep away for 7 turns. I pointed out that was my personal opinion and why. But I can't call the OP beardy directly because I don't know him as a person or how he plays the game. That wouldn't be fair.

What I did learn today is that some people don't like the term beardy. Apologies to all if you don't like it but conversely I can't for the life of me think of a synonym that someone somewhere wouldn't find some offence.

A big part of the problem here is that in tabletop gaming, "unsportsmanlike" has become synonymous with "tactics I don't like". Have you ever heard anyone complain about how unsportsmanlike it is to run down the clock in the NFL? Or thought it was beardy to take 3-point shots in basketball? If a player is running out of time on an inbounds pass and bounces it off the back of an unwary opponent, it's not a technical foul, it's highlight reel material.

But for some reason, playing smart in a tabletop game is unsportsmanlike. I honestly blame bad game design for a lot of that, and GW for most of it. GW's games are so horrible, if you played them at all competitively it was a miserable experience for everyone. Hence the growth of idiocy like sportsmanship scoring. Games have started to move past that, but the mentality has become pervasive. Sadly, it's inconsistent - which is to be expected, because it's a very subjective thing. The amount of ink, electrons, and blood spilled over arguments on things like comp systems is crazy. And it's why we get 20+ page threads arguing over perfectly legal tactics.

Honestly, I have no tolerance for this. If you take a squad that can't deal with fast, evasive targets, that's a failing in your squad design. Your opponent refusing to charge your ion cannons does not make them unsportsmanlike. Exactly the opposite, in fact - trying to shame your opponent into playing dumb so you can win is far more unsportsmanlike. Deal with the tactics, adapt your build. Don't whine at them until people are scared to play with something you can't beat.

A big part of the problem here is that in tabletop gaming, "unsportsmanlike" has become synonymous with "tactics I don't like".

That's my issue as well, and I agree it's mostly GW's fault. They tried to force a system that wasn't really suitable for tournaments.

But it's become almost a witch-hunt mentality. Just the mere fact that someone is called a poor sport, is half the proof you need that he is, and anytime someone does something someone doesn't like they're accused of it.

Do something clever that someone can't deal with? It's unsportsmanlike and the player needs to be branded with a scarlet C and banished from the community. The fact that what they did is completely with in the rules doesn't matter.

The fact that FFG said they were changing things so such a tactic is now possible doesn't matter either... All that matters is that "I" don't like it and have dubbed it cheap... At that point I can claim the moral and ethical high ground...

Also think that due to years of both bad experiences and horror stories from GW tournaments, have created a kneejerk reaction in some people that anytime someone is accused of being a poor sport or rules lawyer, they're half way convinced it's true.

Exactly the opposite, in fact - trying to shame your opponent into playing dumb so you can win is far more unsportsmanlike.

I'd dare say that as close as you can get to an objective definition of the term would agree with that.

How I perceive the main issues is the vague definition of the rules.

It is not the tactic itself, it is more the sole purpose of intent to avoid engagement at all costs to win by default. As stated and have witness in several tourny videos. Matches averaged 45 mins, one went on to 60. The OP declare his intentions, it wasn't something subconscious or happenstance. He literally got the thought of avoiding the rest of the 60+ minutes to FORCE the game to expire.

Then the OP is the one who proposed if this was "unsportsmanlike".

"This prohibits intentionally stalling a game for time" is what is being referred to. There is no other definition of what "stalling" is.

Hmm, maybe we can check the top 16 from regionals to see if they have this vanillar 1 hit 100% evade report

this tactic could be considered "unsportsmanlike"

The other player could of gone to the TO if he felt he the other guy was stalling.

But the problem is, even if the person playing the A-Wing came right out and said he was going to run for until time, the TO really shouldn't step in.

A TO can't tell someone how to play, or stop someone from using what might be viewed as a cheap tactic. The only time they should step in is when the rules are being broken.

Stalling is not simply avoiding combat, it's taking an excessive amount of time to finish setting your dials or planing actions. Flying without engaging is not and never really can be considered stalling. If that becomes the rule, then you'll see even fewer viable lists out there.

The other issue here is as many of us have pointed out. The person flying the Y-Wings could of quite easily of trapped the A-Wings in those 6 or so rounds if he was willing to adapt to what was going on.

Another thought...

There's a pretty big difference between 'unsportsmanlike conduct' and cheating. While some might be able to make and argument that what the OP did is unsportsmanlike, that's a long ways away from what some are claiming as being cheating.

The only way I see this changing in a tournament setting would be for the TO to act like a ref in wrestling. When 2 opponents square off in an MMA tournament or in a wrestling match, and are dead-locked, the ref breaks them up and sends them back to their respective corners for them to start off again.

Of course if the above were to happen in a game like this, it would take much of the strategy out of this tabletop "strategy" game. Essentially you are then forcing both opponents to square off and joust, and thus taking away from the OP's ability to avoid fire as his ships were designed to do, and likely drawing him right into those Ion turrets.

This whole scenario, the OP stated that his intention was to have his opponent engage. His opponent chose not to, even though he arguably could have done so quite easily, with not only a Hitpoint advantage, but a fire-arc advantage on his side.

My proposal of starting everyone back on their sides of the table would best be suited to like ships. If there were 2 squads of A's, and they were running away from each other, or a squad of A's and Interceptors, then by all means, start back at your deployment, and "Let's get it on!" But with a group of YT's, HWKs, Firesprays or Y-Wings, there should be no reason that one or both of you can't engage. And in that circumstance I would put the onus on the Turreted ship, as they have the advantage of shooting at a ship as it tries to slip past.

I get it that the Y-wing player didn't wish to split his forces, but with the Area of Attack that those Ion cannons had, he could have spread out side by side, and easily covered the entire playing field left to right, boxing in those A-wings.

The OP declare his intentions, it wasn't something subconscious or happenstance. He literally got the thought of avoiding the rest of the 60+ minutes to FORCE the game to expire.

No. This is not what he said.

Here's what he actually said:

At this point, I realized that if I could avoid confronting the remaining Y-Wings in a group , I was pretty much assured of a win. I was already up by enough points for a full win. I knew that my maneuverability could keep me away from their turrets if they all stuck together. The only way my opponent could cover enough board for the turrets to hit me would be if he split the remaining ships apart.

So, I figured my opponent had two choices. He could keep the ships together and I would avoid contact thereby giving me a win when time ran out , or he could split them up in an attempt to engage me and I could pick his ships off one by one.

The OP did not say "Ha HA! I can now stall this game to time and I win!" He said "I can put my opponent up against the wall and force him into a disadvantageous position; if he chooses not to do so, I win because of time."

The Y-wing player was in a disadvantageous position. He was down, and the game conditions meant he would lose if he didn't do something. Rather than taking some risks or trying something creative, he chose to whine about how his opponent wouldn't just throw himself at the ion turrets, and how rude he was not to just play dumb.

But I still think another issue here is whether or not it's acceptable to build a list to be as hyper-evasive as possible after downing the first 12 points of enemy ships. A-Wings alpha-striking the first X-Wing of the enemy list and playing keep-away for an hour, choosing evade or barrel roll each round to stay out of firing arcs or maximize defensiveness.

Yeah it may be legitimate, but is this a fun list to fly against? I don't think so. It's a waste of time and taxing my patience.

If such a list is impossible I'd be glad to hear it, but not all list have access to turrets and balanced ships aren't all going to have things that can catch an experienced A-Wing player who does not want to be hit.

And here I think "sportmsanship" translates into, "Do you piss off your opponent with this petty exercise in futility?" I think we can all agree that everyone wants to have fun playing this game. I don't think the above situation, if I were flying against that list, would be very fun to fly against.

In fact I can understand that Y-Wing player abandoning the game. I don't think he should have, because his turret weapons should have made him compeditive against those A-Wings, but I can understand how he would be frustrated enough to decide it wasn't worth just moving pieces with no advancement to victory.

Again, such a strategy is a bad one. The board is not large enough to allow such a strategy. No matter how well you fly, the opponent will get shots off on you. There is no avoiding it.

Yeah it may be legitimate, but is this a fun list to fly against? I don't think so. It's a waste of time and taxing my patience.

You know what else isn't fun to fly against? 32 HP worth of turrets that remove your movement choice every time they hit you.

Honestly, Dual Falcons isn't much fun to face either.

Have you ever tried to hit turtling Interceptors that end every turn with multiple tokens? Let me tell you, that can be frustrating.

And can I just tell you how my stomach drops every time I see 7 TIE fighters on the other side of the board?

"Fun to fly against" is going to be a very personal thing. Personally, I think that if you're going to harass a list in this discussion, 4 ion turrets is the one we should be discussing. Heck, the A-wing pilot isn't the criminal here, he's the VICTIM! And a few people are giving him no end of grief for taking the only option left to him by the troll and his trolly trolling ion turrets!

I cannot imagine anything worse for the game than enshrining "My opponent approves of my list" as the definition of good sportsmanship. Because it's not just subjective - it's victory-related, which is the worst sort of subjective. If the OP had made a few bad turns and drifted into range of the ion turrets, he wouldn't have been a bad sportsman, and you wouldn't be wondering if we need to ban high-evasion lists - he would have been a good opponent who got beat by the obvious genius of the ion control Y-wings.

But he didn't, so we're discussing whether his use of the time limit to try and pressure his opponent into engaging is appropriate.

The last tournament I was in had someone with a Hsf variation with 2 golds w/ions.. thankfully I didn't face him. 2 controllers and Han ' s punch to the face? No thank you.