Just face it like a man, I outmaneuvered you and you lost period.

Ironically, this is exactly what the evasive player could say at the end of the game.

The difference in my opinion is I don't consider flying faster than someone else outmaneuvering.

If using the dial to your advantage isn't outmaneuvering, then what is? Should you restrict yourself only to slower maneuvers in an attempt to be fair to your opponent? Or should you just not choose that ship in the first place?

Just face it like a man, I outmaneuvered you and you lost period.

Ironically, this is exactly what the evasive player could say at the end of the game.

The difference in my opinion is I don't consider flying faster than someone else outmaneuvering. For instance if you were put into an event where you had 1 hour to ride a bicycle and all you had to do was try and catch a race car driver in his race car. Would you say that race car driver out drove the bicyclist?

If it was a three foot by three foot square where the racecar would lose if it went off the edge, yes.

Just face it like a man, I outmaneuvered you and you lost period.

Ironically, this is exactly what the evasive player could say at the end of the game.

The difference in my opinion is I don't consider flying faster than someone else outmaneuvering.

If using the dial to your advantage isn't outmaneuvering, then what is? Should you restrict yourself only to slower maneuvers in an attempt to be fair to your opponent? Or should you just not choose that ship in the first place?

Not at all what I'm saying is flying away from someone for rounds upon rounds because your dial has greater speed then the opponents is not something I consider outmaneuvering someone or playing better than the other person. Just my opinion. As I stated before ffg has not changed any rules regarding this so while I personally don't like it I know it's part of the game. I just would choose not to employ that tactic and best someone by truly out flying them instead of running away. Shoot if it was me and I saw my only choice was to run away I would give the other guy the win because he deserved the win for out flying me. I wouldn't want to win that way. Just me tho and how I've always played.

Is this "discussion" still going??? Please let this thread die the death it deserves.

If you can't have fun or win unless your opponent deliberately flies his ships across your range 1 arc so you can take pot shots at him then you are playing the wrong game.

Not at all what I'm saying is flying away from someone for rounds upon rounds because your dial has greater speed then the opponents is not something I consider outmaneuvering someone or playing better than the other person. Just my opinion. As I stated before ffg has not changed any rules regarding this so while I personally don't like it I know it's part of the game. I just would choose not to employ that tactic and best someone by truly out flying them instead of running away. Shoot if it was me and I saw my only choice was to run away I would give the other guy the win because he deserved the win for out flying me. I wouldn't want to win that way. Just me tho and how I've always played.

The last question I asked was hinting at a post I made some time ago, now buried deep in this thread. Part of the challenge of this game is assembling a viable squad in the first place, and some matches are lost before they even begin. A-Wings should in no way be considered objectively better than Y-Wings, but in this particular circumstance one list apparently had the advantage - not least of all because the player knew how to use it, and his opponent didn't know how to counter it. Why shouldn't choosing faster maneuvers be considered outmaneuvering, since OP deliberately chose those ships?

So you acknowledge that trying not to get your ships blown up is a viable strategy, and is what is being encouraged. Now the disagreement is whether flying out of arc(in this case range, because of the turrets) is an acceptable way to not be destroyed.

No, the point you keep missing is that taking defensive actions while killing your opponent's ships is a viable way to win the game without stalling. It might be slower than going all-out on offense, but it can still win the game. This is clearly not even close to the same thing as deliberately stalling to reach the time limit with a strategy that has no hope of ever winning the game without the time limit.

Our response to this has been it was a tournament, thus the artificial restrictions of the clock are as good as core rules.

The fact that you found a way to abuse the rules doesn't make it a legitimate strategy.

As well as this "stalling" tactic of not being in range is one easily defeated and that someone unwilling to adapt in order to beat this deserves to lose, because in order to win a strategy game one needs to be flexible.

Obviously it's easily defeated if you have sufficient time . Cornering a fleeing ship and forcing them to fight can take several turns, which means that all the stalling player has to do is make those turns take long enough that they reach the time limit before you can finish catching them. That's not a viable strategy for winning the game, it's just a desperate attempt to delay the inevitable long enough that the time limit saves you from your bad decisions.

We don't know exactly but I would venture there was at least 30 min left in that game plenty of time to accomplish this, and if the Y-wings split it would have been much faster.

It isn't a rules abuse its acknowledging that if I have 12pts more killed than my opponent that I win after time expires, and if I can't completely kill my opponent's force, (unlikely for Missileless A-wings) then in order for me to win I need to maintain that 12pt lead for when time runs out. Just like my opponent knows if he kills more than me he then wins when time runs out

Finally boost and barrel roll can be taken as "defensive" actions to avoid firing arcs and create distance is that "stalling" too? and an A-wing evading/focusing(and saving the focus for defense) every turn isn't gonna help kill 24 HP worth of Y-wings, and the 3 Y-wings most likely will never kill the A-wings in the 60minute window, so the result would just be the same just the OP felt (and I and many others in this forumn would agree) that cat and mouse flying around the boaard is more enjoyable and in the "spirit" of the maneuver based game then lining up and rolling dice at each other just for the sake of rolling dice even though it won't make a difference

The A-Wing player isn't in the Indy 500. Going around a **** circle isn't evasive .. evading as per game definition

evade ( )

Ships with the icon in their action bar may perform the evade action. To perform this action, place one evade token near the ship. The player can choose to spend the evade token later during the Combat phase to cancel one damage rolled by the attacker (see page 12).

Unspent evade tokens are removed from all ships during the End phase.

Spending an evade token

If the defender has an evade token, he may return it to the action token supply to add one additional result to his defense roll (see “Combat Phase "Example” on pages 14–15).

So you actually have to be engaged w/ the opponents ship in order to considered as evasive.

But if that is your kinda of gameplay, your playing the wrong game

Is this "discussion" still going??? Please let this thread die the death it deserves.

If you can't have fun or win unless your opponent deliberately flies his ships across your range 1 arc so you can take pot shots at him then you are playing the wrong game.

If you want it to die then please stop posting the same idiotic straw man argument. There is a clear difference between killing your opponent's ships while not giving them good shots and avoiding combat entirely while stalling until you can reach the time limit. Nobody is arguing that you have to go all-out on offense or you're cheating, the issue is using a "strategy" that has no hope of winning (or even doing more than delaying your inevitable death) unless you can slow play your way to the time limit before your opponent gets enough turns to kill you.

I'm so confused as to how the Y-wing player has been forgotten about and why all this name calling and shaming is being lumped on the A-wing player.

I say congraulations for out manuvering and evading the Y-wings that i can only assume sat close to stationary in the center of the board hoping the A-wing player would for some reason move towards him to be shot to pieces..

I play Squints myself and i hate Ion turrets and would stay as far away from them as possible especially if i have already done what i needed to do to secure the win.. why risk my mens lives (i know its a game, but its a table too wargame, i always picture my men as alive and play out the moves as movies in my head) when smart play on my behalf and rookie errors on my opponents allows me to win unthreatened?? I would be like sweet free win.. and then wonder why the Y-wing player (with turrets mind you) didnt at least try to get close to me?

TL:DR??? A-wing player, out played Y-wing player who failed to see that his tatics were never going to win him the game.

Is this "discussion" still going??? Please let this thread die the death it deserves. If you can't have fun or win unless your opponent deliberately flies his ships across your range 1 arc so you can take pot shots at him then you are playing the wrong game.

If you want it to die then please stop posting the same idiotic straw man argument. There is a clear difference between killing your opponent's ships while not giving them good shots and avoiding combat entirely while stalling until you can reach the time limit. Nobody is arguing that you have to go all-out on offense or you're cheating, the issue is using a "strategy" that has no hope of winning (or even doing more than delaying your inevitable death) unless you can slow play your way to the time limit before your opponent gets enough turns to kill you.

... which has been demonstrated to be not only legal, but also fully embraced by FFG. Now, can you let it die?

Is this "discussion" still going??? Please let this thread die the death it deserves. If you can't have fun or win unless your opponent deliberately flies his ships across your range 1 arc so you can take pot shots at him then you are playing the wrong game.

If you want it to die then please stop posting the same idiotic straw man argument. There is a clear difference between killing your opponent's ships while not giving them good shots and avoiding combat entirely while stalling until you can reach the time limit. Nobody is arguing that you have to go all-out on offense or you're cheating, the issue is using a "strategy" that has no hope of winning (or even doing more than delaying your inevitable death) unless you can slow play your way to the time limit before your opponent gets enough turns to kill you.

For the 25th page time, what the Awing player did was not stalling, by any definition outside of your own

Is this "discussion" still going??? Please let this thread die the death it deserves.

If you can't have fun or win unless your opponent deliberately flies his ships across your range 1 arc so you can take pot shots at him then you are playing the wrong game.

the issue is using a "strategy" that has no hope of winning (or even doing more than delaying your inevitable death) unless you can slow play your way to the time limit before your opponent gets enough turns to kill you.

I like this Quote..

6/7 turns is enough to kill a few A-wings..

His "strategy" that had no hope of winning, Won him the round.

There is no proof that he was slow playing.

as i stated above Y-wing player failed to do anything to help himself.

A-wing player capitalised on the Y-wing players lack of abillity to adapt to the situation.

Case and point A-wing player nets himself a victory and moves on to the next round. whilst the Y-wing player is sitting there licking his wounds with one less ship than he started with.

Is this "discussion" still going??? Please let this thread die the death it deserves.

If you can't have fun or win unless your opponent deliberately flies his ships across your range 1 arc so you can take pot shots at him then you are playing the wrong game.

If you want it to die then please stop posting the same idiotic straw man argument. There is a clear difference between killing your opponent's ships while not giving them good shots and avoiding combat entirely while stalling until you can reach the time limit. Nobody is arguing that you have to go all-out on offense or you're cheating, the issue is using a "strategy" that has no hope of winning (or even doing more than delaying your inevitable death) unless you can slow play your way to the time limit before your opponent gets enough turns to kill you.

Please explain to me how you can set up shots on a Y-wing without exposing the A-wing to return fire, when the Y-wing player is trying to prevent it. If the A-wings turns to engage the Y-wings the Y-wing will either A) Have an arc on the A-wing and fire back, or B) be in range 2 and be able to use the Ion turret to fire back, thus leaving the A-wing player the only viable way to win C) do not engage at all.

If we survey players I would bet a majority would probably prefer a game that allows players to win by avoiding a direct engagement, versus one where players could just take turreted tanks and never have to do anything but 1 forwards.

... which has been demonstrated to be not only legal, but also fully embraced by FFG. Now, can you let it die?

It is technically legal, just like using loaded dice. And just like using loaded dice you're still a {censored} if you do it.

Also, FFG hasn't fully embraced stalling at all. What we have here is some "win at all costs" types seeing what they want to see in a statement that does not in any way approve of stalling. In fact, the X-Wing tournament rules explicitly ban stalling.

Please explain to me how you can set up shots on a Y-wing without exposing the A-wing to return fire, when the Y-wing player is trying to prevent it.

Ion turrets are only range 2, and a y-wing's primary weapon is unlikely to ever do any damage at range 3. Your inability to maneuver well enough to avoid having your ships destroyed is your problem and only your problem. The fact that you can't figure out how to win the game legitimately doesn't mean you're entitled to cheat so that you don't have to lose.

If we survey players I would bet a majority would probably prefer a game that allows players to win by avoiding a direct engagement, versus one where players could just take turreted tanks and never have to do anything but 1 forwards.

Fortunately X-Wing, when played without a time limit, is not a game in which you can just take turret tanks and never have to maneuver. There are plenty of legitimate defensive strategies, and strategies that rely on out-maneuvering your opponent. The only thing that is excluded here is using a strategy that has absolutely no hope of winning the game unless you can slow play your way to the time limit and end the game before your stupid decisions cost you the game.

... which has been demonstrated to be not only legal, but also fully embraced by FFG. Now, can you let it die?

It is technically legal, just like using loaded dice. And just like using loaded dice you're still a {censored} if you do it.Also, FFG hasn't fully embraced stalling at all. What we have here is some "win at all costs" types seeing what they want to see in a statement that does not in any way approve of stalling. In fact, the X-Wing tournament rules explicitly ban stalling.

Nope, we covered that. Next.

Guys, he is repeating points that have already been proven false. I'm done.

... which has been demonstrated to be not only legal, but also fully embraced by FFG. Now, can you let it die?

It is technically legal, just like using loaded dice. And just like using loaded dice you're still a {censored} if you do it.

Also, FFG hasn't fully embraced stalling at all. What we have here is some "win at all costs" types seeing what they want to see in a statement that does not in any way approve of stalling. In fact, the X-Wing tournament rules explicitly ban stalling.

WAIT!!!! Using loaded dice is legal????

I've been doing it wrong all this time.. ****.

... which has been demonstrated to be not only legal, but also fully embraced by FFG. Now, can you let it die?

It is technically legal, just like using loaded dice. And just like using loaded dice you're still a {censored} if you do it.Also, FFG hasn't fully embraced stalling at all. What we have here is some "win at all costs" types seeing what they want to see in a statement that does not in any way approve of stalling. In fact, the X-Wing tournament rules explicitly ban stalling.

Nope, we covered that. Next.

Multiple times, eloquently, clearly, logically and convincingly. iPeregrine, you've been outclassed at every single step. But keep going, it's kind of interesting just to see how hilarious you can get.

Please explain to me how you can set up shots on a Y-wing without exposing the A-wing to return fire, when the Y-wing player is trying to prevent it. If the A-wings turns to engage the Y-wings the Y-wing will either A) Have an arc on the A-wing and fire back, or B) be in range 2 and be able to use the Ion turret to fire back, thus leaving the A-wing player the only viable way to win C) do not engage at all.

If we survey players I would bet a majority would probably prefer a game that allows players to win by avoiding a direct engagement, versus one where players could just take turreted tanks and never have to do anything but 1 forwards.

The A-Wing can move 6 increments w/ 5 Defense dice, really?

Why not just make the rules first to score 12 points .. a hit .. move their maneuver dial. I would have never thought of gaining the lead, then running like ... just to score a cheap win. 6/7 rounds .. i mean even 3 per turn, 36/42 mins. Wow what a bore!

Nope, we covered that. Next.

You "covered" it by claiming that a rule exists, without quoting it like I asked you to do.

I really dont think that game would have been boring..

Must have been intense at least for the A-wing player attempting to guess what the Y-wing player would do to counter his moves.. (even though it seems he didnt do anything).

I would have loved to watch / play this game.

What may have made it boring is that due to the Y-wings not attempting to make a game of it the A-wings where left free to fly around unobstructed for the remaing of the game.

How can 4 (well 3 now really, since one got alphaed) Ion turrets not manage to score a hit, and mess with the A-wings all day.

I know Ion turrets have been the bane of my Tie/ins

Maybe we (myself included) should stop feeding the trolls?

Nope, we covered that. Next.

You "covered" it by claiming that a rule exists, without quoting it like I asked you to do.

We covered it by quoting actual rules text and official statements from FFG, pages ago. You've ignored them time and again, why should I bother repeating it?

Nope, we covered that. Next.

You "covered" it by claiming that a rule exists, without quoting it like I asked you to do.

We covered it by quoting rules text and official statements from FFG, pages ago. You've ignored them time and again, why should I bother repeating it?

Whilst this is true mate, Honestly dont bother. It has become obvious that all a certain few people want to do is prolong the disagrement and troll the forum.

Honestly though, this has been a fun read and kept me entertained fully during the work day.

Thankyou all who where involved much appreciated.