Less "quit qrying" would be telling people to stop crying less often than they are. From your usage I don't think that is the message you're trying to send.

Also:

More Pew Pew

Less QQ

Actually means "more shooting/playing" and "less stop crying" or play more cry more. From the way its being used, posters seem to mean:

QQ

Go Pew Pew instead.

Er, no. Less QQ, More Pew Pew means cry less, shoot more. "A term directed at whiners to stop crying and start doing something useful instead."

Very straightforward - just like dealing with Falcon builds.

Except for that part about you wanting posters to cry less often by quiting less, therefore crying more...then you're totally straight forward as a hard 3.

X-wing Minatures is not Chess.

It has dice in it.

As for Super Falcons it is sort of mid meta just like how the hunter class is for Hearthstone. A bunch of new pieces are added to the game making everyone re-figure out the meta game. So everyone falls back to a strong easy to play but powerful builds such as Hunter class or in the case of X-wing the Super Falcon.

However when you reach the top tier you don't find the Falcon or the Hunter anywhere as those people already figured out how to beat it and are now working against higher tier metas such as Buzzsaw shuttle or Tie Swarm.

So Falcon is more of a FOO strategy. To learn more about FOO watch this.

Good lord this is a lot of moaning about something that will be invalid in less than five months tops.

We don't know what exactly is coming. Nothing I've seen so far is going to cause major issues, or knock the Falcon out of it's current spot.

Though, I would love to see how it handles 4 HLC.

I hope we'll get that opertunity too... Scyks at 13-14 would be great. 4HLC for 92 would rock. I'm betting one of those other cannons will be cheaper and more trixy though. Couple with Serissu for some AG 4 with a reroll defenses at range 3. Lovely.

So Falcon is more of a FOO strategy. To learn more about FOO watch this.

Oh Man! I was gonna mention First Order Optimals but I thought someone would call me out for quoting EC too much on this forum! Yeah, there's a lot of Counterplay that goes into it too...

X-wing Minatures is not Chess.

It has dice in it.

As for Super Falcons it is sort of mid meta just like how the hunter class is for Hearthstone. A bunch of new pieces are added to the game making everyone re-figure out the meta game. So everyone falls back to a strong easy to play but powerful builds such as Hunter class or in the case of X-wing the Super Falcon.

However when you reach the top tier you don't find the Falcon or the Hunter anywhere as those people already figured out how to beat it and are now working against higher tier metas such as Buzzsaw shuttle or Tie Swarm.

So Falcon is more of a FOO strategy. To learn more about FOO watch this.

I've actually seen this before. Unfortunately, Fat Han is just a FOO strategy. Don't believe me? Check top 8 at GenCon. Many of the indisputable best players were using it (Paul Heaver had a Fan Han). In fact, the second place player had 2 falcons!

You actually just made the point that Falcons, especially Fat Falcons, are FOO strategies and other builds do not over enough power to skill ratio to convince people to try an alternative strategy (read: build).

To be honest I play the Fat Han quite a bit since Gen-Con where I saw its potential instead of just musing to myself what it might do in theory. It hasn't lost. In preparation for a 60pt mini-tourney we tested it out before the event. The set-up was Four players, they all know I'm bringing a fat Han and can bring any counter they want...in three games straight the falcon took 6, 5, and 6 damage. Never had more than 1 damage card on it. Yes the game is balanced to 100pts not 60, but there's some scaled data for you. Notably we canceled the event because it rock-paper-scissored out. (Once the Falcon left, we had to ban the phantom or it won, once that was out, Zwarm had to go before we could consider the 60pt meta safe and that was three bans too many)

It's stupid easy to fly, forgiving as hell, and consistent on damage. As an experienced player I do not consider setting up a chase position for my opponent intentionally to be 'good flying'. PLEASE chase me. Your moves in chasing the falcon either must close the gap or cut an angle to set up for close range later. Very easy to predict or just not care about. I move last so when you get too close and bump, yay for me. And by knowing your dial and target range getting myself somewhere decent is not hard. When I'm winning games by casually flying away from my opponent and my only skill input is really gaming my attack dice and knowing when to use my re-rolls? Not so good.

This is the unanimous opinion of our group of a half dozen experienced X-wing and other wargame players after a sit down talk about it last night: The Fat Falcon is not invincible but it is overly strong, with very few and dictated counters to it in both flying an squad building. It does for us tend to create un-fun games with alarming regularity. Would have posted earlier but wanted to make sure I had our groups opinion accurate before posting.

Now am I/are we railing off against FFG? Hell No. These things happen. I come from a long M:TG/other tcg background and occasionally games break and create really un-fun situations. Thats pretty much 40k in a nutshell. Magic pretty much does it on purpose now so FFG is at least doing better than that. Will it phase out? Yeah, the above video clearly shows that they understand the problem and there is a fix en-route. Note the key part of that is that they recognize it as a problem! Enough to put in a specific counter too it as well. That says volumes about how bad it is. The interview has them casually shrugging it off with a well planned argument and some design talk. But the data still shows how strong it is in it's tournament postings. Be good critical thinkers guys! Look at your data! It is okay to say something when the data shows it to be true. Get out of the group think. Free your mind!

Just remember what the Rock said and don't think that way. "Scissors are okay but Paper needs a nerf." -Rock

In the same interview I posted earlier, the X-Wing designers revealed that Interceptor fans (and presumably others) will be happy to find an anti-turret upgrade in the Star Viper expansion. Even the most pessimistic viewpoints of Fat Han won't remain forever.

If there wasn't something wrong with the falcon you would not get constant QQ, now I've killed and been killed by the falcon it's not indestructible by any means but turret ships in general invalidate good maneuvering.

Which is frustrating when you show to the store with a group of Tie Ints with PTL or any other build that requires actual skill when moving your ships across the board. Turrets make arc dodging an impossibility. Arc dodging is one of the few aspects of the game that actually require tactics and skill.

Also:

More Pew Pew

Less QQ

Actually means "more shooting/playing" and "less stop crying" or play more cry more. From the way its being used, posters seem to mean:

QQ

Go Pew Pew instead.

Er, no. Less QQ, More Pew Pew means cry less, shoot more. "A term directed at whiners to stop crying and start doing something useful instead."

Very straightforward - just like dealing with Falcon builds.

True in today s market one could always go do something else. The people who say things like more pew pew less QQ always end up QQing the loudest when the game they helped kill finally dies.

This is the challenge game designers face.

I dislike the fat falcon builds. I can, have, and will continue to beat them. Here is what I know about the game,Fat falcons, and more than a knee jerk reaction to them:

If 2 players of equal skill sit down at a table and play to thier ability with 2 lists of equal power and the dice are even, each player is 50/50 to win. The rock/paper/scissors dynamic (one emerging aspect of the game I also dislike) is in effect the game might swing 60-40 or 65-35 at extremes (mathematically impossible match ups even theoretically becoming real is another emmergance I worry about). If the dice aren't even the odds of any one player winning vary by the amount that the dice favor one or the other. If one player simply outflys the other thier odds also improve.

Turrets serve a similar function: at the lowest player skill ability it does make things easier. 2 poor players facing off, the one that brings turrets wins. 2 average players facing off, again I'll put money on the one packing turrets (especially falcon). An average player with turrets vs. a good player? That's a pretty even match. Good player vs. average player with turret? Pretty **** even again. Great player vs. good player with fat falcon? I'd put money on the great player but the good player will likely win 30-35% of the time. Turrets, and especially the 3 and soon 4 dice turrets with dfense stacking puts the odds ever in your favor. Now give the great player the fat falcon and watch him win 8+/10 games vs. a good player if the list doesn't directly counter the falcon.

Fat falcons neutralize the dice variance. Now a player can be outflown and still pull off a win. Now a player can have dice go against them (to a certain extent) and still have a better than average chance at the win. Now a good player can beat a great player with more reliability (still not 50/50 but closer!). That is the power of the fat falcon. It does feel like a rigged slot machine more often than it should.

The other thing the fat falcon does is neutralize your filler. A 2 dice ship at range 2-3 even with modification probably can't scratch it. Even with mods at range 1 it's rough. Soon we'll be seeing DR 3-4 falcons and those 2mred dice packing ships will have NO CHANCE to win (without 6-8 ships). Meanwhile the Falcon can 1 shot any 4 HP ship in the game on any given turn without help and with the 2-3 other guns that still fit in the list they can reduce your ship count by 2 in a round. NOTHING YOU CAN DO about it (again, fly better means nothing. You will end up in arcs, if you're not ending up in arcs you're playing subpar competition and should win anyway or should be crowned world champ any time now).

Swarms can beat falcons more often than not. Swarms can even beat phantoms a good deal of the time if flown well. We're getting 3 more cheap swarmable ships any day now (refit awings, scum Zs, M3-As). But if a fat falcon can ignore even more damage a round (I think new chewie can be crit proof and ignore up to 4 damage a round), it's going to require 3-4 dice to touch it or 4+ 2 dice attacks to be meaningful. That's not a meta I'm looking forward to.

This has been REALLY long. But I hope it makes sense. Fat falcons aren't "easy mode" but are tilting the game so that other options are much less useful. Pay for maneuverability and you're punished. Don't pay for 3 or more red dice? Punished. Don't account for it in squad building and tactics? Punished. No other ship does this and I hope the 2 new large turret ships don't share that characteristic.

I can, have, and will continue to beat it. I don't like what it does to the game state nor enjoy most of my matches against it. I'm not sure that DR 3-4 falcons will be a thing, but they could be, and they could lead to game states where it's not just choose between 2 poor choices, but that before you even sit down and roll a single dice, you've already lost with ~80% certainty.

One last thing: I didn't mention list familiarity earlier. That is one more game factor that tips the scales. With FFG's current release rate I feel that has been nearly neutralized.

Every word true.

To be honest I play the Fat Han quite a bit since Gen-Con where I saw its potential instead of just musing to myself what it might do in theory. It hasn't lost. In preparation for a 60pt mini-tourney we tested it out before the event. The set-up was Four players, they all know I'm bringing a fat Han and can bring any counter they want...in three games straight the falcon took 6, 5, and 6 damage. Never had more than 1 damage card on it. Yes the game is balanced to 100pts not 60, but there's some scaled data for you. Notably we canceled the event because it rock-paper-scissored out. (Once the Falcon left, we had to ban the phantom or it won, once that was out, Zwarm had to go before we could consider the 60pt meta safe and that was three bans too many)

It's stupid easy to fly, forgiving as hell, and consistent on damage. As an experienced player I do not consider setting up a chase position for my opponent intentionally to be 'good flying'. PLEASE chase me. Your moves in chasing the falcon either must close the gap or cut an angle to set up for close range later. Very easy to predict or just not care about. I move last so when you get too close and bump, yay for me. And by knowing your dial and target range getting myself somewhere decent is not hard. When I'm winning games by casually flying away from my opponent and my only skill input is really gaming my attack dice and knowing when to use my re-rolls? Not so good.

This is the unanimous opinion of our group of a half dozen experienced X-wing and other wargame players after a sit down talk about it last night: The Fat Falcon is not invincible but it is overly strong, with very few and dictated counters to it in both flying an squad building. It does for us tend to create un-fun games with alarming regularity. Would have posted earlier but wanted to make sure I had our groups opinion accurate before posting.

Now am I/are we railing off against FFG? Hell No. These things happen. I come from a long M:TG/other tcg background and occasionally games break and create really un-fun situations. Thats pretty much 40k in a nutshell. Magic pretty much does it on purpose now so FFG is at least doing better than that. Will it phase out? Yeah, the above video clearly shows that they understand the problem and there is a fix en-route. Note the key part of that is that they recognize it as a problem! Enough to put in a specific counter too it as well. That says volumes about how bad it is. The interview has them casually shrugging it off with a well planned argument and some design talk. But the data still shows how strong it is in it's tournament postings. Be good critical thinkers guys! Look at your data! It is okay to say something when the data shows it to be true. Get out of the group think. Free your mind!

Just remember what the Rock said and don't think that way. "Scissors are okay but Paper needs a nerf." -Rock

You're absolutely correct.

FTS Gecko should tell the very best players in the world that there is no reason to play a Falcon!

After all; they are gimping themselves. And the counter is easy! Simply more pew-pew!

Top 8 from GenCon 2014: two falcons in the top 4, five falcons in the top 8...

Winner - Rick Sidebotham (#1 Swiss, 23 pts, 754 MoV, flight 1): Whisper + Veteran Instincts + Fire-Control Systems + Advanced Cloaking Device + Gunner; Soontir Fel + Push the Limit; Captain Yorr

2nd place - Jeff Berling (#3 Swiss, 20 pts, 802 MoV, flight 1): Chewbacca + Millennium Falcon + C-3P0 + R2-D2 + Draw Their Fire; Lando + Nien Nunb + Han Solo + Draw Their Fire

Top 4 - Paul Heaver (#2 Swiss, 21 pts, 763 MoV, flight 1, lost to Jeff): Han Solo + Luke Skywalker + Veteran Instincts + C-3P0 + Millennium Falcon + Engine Upgrade; Biggs; Tala Squadron Pilot

Top 4 - Nick Jones (lost to winner, #4 Swiss, 20 pts, 758 MoV, flight 1): Howlrunner + Push the Limit; 6x Obsidian Squadron Pilot

Top 8 - David Pontier (lost to Nick, #5 Swiss, 20 pts, 745 MoV, flight 2): Han Solo + Determination + Luke Skywalker + Millenium Falcon; Corran Horn + Push the Limit + R2-D2 + Fire Control System

Top 8 - James Elhardt (lost to 2nd place, #6 Swiss, 20 pts, 694 MoV, flight 1): Han Solo + C-3P0 + Mercenary Copilit + Veteran Instincts; 4x Bandit Squadron Pilot

Top 8 - Matt Baxter (lost to Paul, #7 Swiss, 20 pts, 691 MoV, flight 1): Han Solo + C-3P0 + Mercenary Copilit + Veteran Instincts; 4x Bandit Squadron Pilot

Top 8 - Dominic Cairo (lost to winner, #8 Swiss, 18 pts, 650 MoV, flight 1): Bounty Hunter; 2x Omicron Group Pilot + Fire-Control System; Omicron Group Pilot

Top 8 lists... 2 falcons in the top 4 five falcons in the top 8... yeah....

I think there is no denying the Falcon is a very tough cookie.

Unless these so-called top players are stupid and gimp themselves. (I doubt that)

But having seen the designers about this I am more than willing to wait it out for what they have planned.

[edit] For the record; Falcons can be beaten with skill and a good build. But they dominate the tournament scene WAY too much to my liking. (note: I am an organiser). Same goes for Phantoms but that *might* be because it is the last new thing and it could blow over.

I think the keener issue with the Fat Han is it's effect on the game states overall. Putting aside power/balance for the moment, when we fly against another list, there's a fundamental attrition element to each list. Damage vs Defense.

Defense can be hull/shields, evades, or maneuvering to avoid shots entirely. This is where the Interceptors gain most of their defense, though also a fair bit from evades and agility dice too.

Over the course of the game, each player's wing decreases, as they exchange opportunistic shots, and the amount of incoming fire dwindles.

Part of the problem with the Falcon, is that if it can make it to mid->late game, it's relative resilience increases dramatically. Having 2 guaranteed evades early game is really not that great against 3-7 ships throwing dice at you. Late game, when there are 1-2 ships left, suddenly that's igoring 50-70% of total damage inflicted. It's more or less immune to 2 Attack ships (remember we have 2 or 3 now, not 6 or 7), unless they get in range 1, but the chance of them doing any meaningful damage vs the chance of them dying at that point is pretty low.

The biggest complaint I have against the falcon that I've yet to see vocalized is not that it's unbeatable, or that it's overpowered. The problem is there is 1 and only 1 strategy to deal with it. Burn it down quickly, because you don't have a hope late game.

Now, if there's a strong strategy to deal with Fat Han, why doesn't everyone use it? They do, but because there is only one way to deal with it, Fat Han's opponent becomes really predictable, and so very easy to build a counter with the rest of the list to support it.

Biggs can make an appearance here, essentially giving Han another 5 hull. Bandit swarms I've also seen because they've an amazing damage/points ratio but also because they can block. B-Wings can also work well. They take a beating under normal circumstances and while you're pouring all your fire into the Falcon, the B-Wings get to late game relatively unscathed. Or you can take on the B-Wings first but I think anything that doesn't target the Falcon first is a losing strategy.

Keep in mind, I don't think the Falcon is overpowered or inappropriately costed, but I definitely see the argument that it's boring to play against. It ignores many of the core firing rules with the turret, it can ignore 1-2 points of damage every turn, which as I've mentioned is negligible early game but *really* good late game, and there's only 1 viable strategy to deal with it. It's a DPS race, more or less.

Games need to be fun the whole way through, and if a game can be effectively decided early (your primary damage dealer(s) are dead and no one else can hurt my ship) then it ceases to be a game. It's just one guy rolling dice and the other guy removing his ships at random intervals.

Ah you see I just go cold at the idea of games where its 'rebel vs rebel' or 'imperial vs imperial' or even worse two players taking han solo in his falcon and facing off each other.

It just seems really 'Unstarwars'

I think if i ever run an event it will be one where you sign up and bring a 100 point list of both sides and before each game you either decide between you which will be which or toss a die for it.

If there wasn't something wrong with the falcon you would not get constant QQ, now I've killed and been killed by the falcon it's not indestructible by any means but turret ships in general invalidate good maneuvering.

Which is frustrating when you show to the store with a group of Tie Ints with PTL or any other build that requires actual skill when moving your ships across the board. Turrets make arc dodging an impossibility. Arc dodging is one of the few aspects of the game that actually require tactics and skill.

Turrets require skill. You pay a lot for 360 and have only 1 attack. You therefore have to maneuver out of your opponent's arc to not get shot up, since you're probably outgunned.

Your counter-arguments are weak.

if you'd have tagged 'old man' on to the end of that it would have sounded much more 'darth'

Your counter-arguments are weak.

Tell me why, specifically.

FTS Gecko should tell the very best players in the world that there is no reason to play a Falcon!

After all; they are gimping themselves. And the counter is easy! Simply more pew-pew!

No, no I should not. As far as I'm concerned, people can play whatever they like, whenever they like, however they like. It's a game, after all. And a great one, at that.

I'm simply telling the constant whiners, whingers and moaners (in this case, you) to stop crying about what other people want to field, and learn to

Your counter-arguments are weak.

Guess what kiddo? Your entire premise is weak.

So many problems here.

To be honest I play the Fat Han quite a bit since Gen-Con where I saw its potential instead of just musing to myself what it might do in theory. It hasn't lost. In preparation for a 60pt mini-tourney we tested it out before the event. The set-up was Four players, they all know I'm bringing a fat Han and can bring any counter they want...in three games straight the falcon took 6, 5, and 6 damage. Never had more than 1 damage card on it. Yes the game is balanced to 100pts not 60, but there's some scaled data for you.

I do not care in the slightest about the 60-point game, since balance there is all but irrelevant to balance at 100 points.

It's stupid easy to fly, forgiving as hell, and consistent on damage. As an experienced player I do not consider setting up a chase position for my opponent intentionally to be 'good flying'. PLEASE chase me. Your moves in chasing the falcon either must close the gap or cut an angle to set up for close range later. Very easy to predict or just not care about. I move last so when you get too close and bump, yay for me. And by knowing your dial and target range getting myself somewhere decent is not hard. When I'm winning games by casually flying away from my opponent and my only skill input is really gaming my attack dice and knowing when to use my re-rolls? Not so good.

What you're saying is that as long as your opponent does what you want and expect, and knowing the dial and target range of your opponent, and presumably as long as you don't run out of room on the board or into an asteroid, it's pretty easy to make good choices.

But for what ship is that not true?

The Fat Falcon is not invincible but it is overly strong, with very few and dictated counters to it in both flying an squad building.

Then where are those counters in the metagame? If Fat Falcons are (as someone upthread claimed) 60% of top-tier lists, and there are only a few counters, why aren't those very specific (and therefore easily identifiable) counters showing up and knocking the stuffing out of it?

That's not a rhetorical question, by the way: I genuinely don't know why a list with known weaknesses and known counters has taken over the metagame.

If there wasn't something wrong with the falcon you would not get constant QQ, now I've killed and been killed by the falcon it's not indestructible by any means but turret ships in general invalidate good maneuvering.

I'd argue with this, but I'm getting tired of repeating myself. Turrets require good maneuvering, which is the opposite of invalidating it.

Which is frustrating when you show to the store with a group of Tie Ints with PTL or any other build that requires actual skill when moving your ships across the board. Turrets make arc dodging an impossibility. Arc dodging is one of the few aspects of the game that actually require tactics and skill.

Why are so many players convinced that arc-dodging is the epitome of skill in X-wing? If you move late in the round, and you have PTL and access to boost and barrel roll, an eight-year-old who's new to the game can figure out how to reliably dodge firing arcs. (Not hyperbole: I've taught two kids how to do it.)

Every word true Vorpal Sword.

That's not a rhetorical question, by the way: I genuinely don't know why a list with known weaknesses and known counters has taken over the metagame.

Well, a lot of players believe the Falcon is a tough, forgiving, user-friendly ship - that it's less of a gamble, as it were (and to a very limited extent, they're right).

A lot of people are fearing going up against high PS arc-dodgers at the moment - specifically, the Wave 4 Imperial ships. Falcon builds are seen as "insurance" against these particular builds.

Then we have a lot of new players currently entering the game, and they're seeing this, and they're thinking it's a great go to build for beginners. (and they're wrong - it's a crutch, and flying it doesn't teach them the essentials of the game).

And of course there's the rule of cool - the Falcon is one of THE most instantly recognisable and iconic ships in the Star Wars Universe, and captures the imagination of players. All things being equal, not a huge number of people would want to fly a HWK over the Falcon.

So what we've here got is a trend. Nothing more than that. And as players continue to shut down Falcon lists with all the other tools at their disposal, and as the newbies who erroneously believe Falcon = EZ moad find out there's better and more enjoyable options out there, and as people start to worry less about facing high PS arc dodgers, the trend will pass and something else will take over.

Are Falcon builds competitive? Of course they are - we have a well balanced game after all. But they're far from the problem certain people in this and similar threads insist they are.

FTS Gecko should tell the very best players in the world that there is no reason to play a Falcon!

After all; they are gimping themselves. And the counter is easy! Simply more pew-pew!

No, no I should not. As far as I'm concerned, people can play whatever they like, whenever they like, however they like. It's a game, after all. And a great one, at that.

I'm simply telling the constant whiners, whingers and moaners (in this case, you) to stop crying about what other people want to field, and learn to

1) Funny. We agree on something. It is a great game. People should pay what they like.

2) Nope. I do not cry or moan. You claim it time and time again but this does not make it true.

3) Stop insulting people and post "funny" quotes/ pictures. Really. It would help people to sway them to see the validity of your arguments. Try it. You might like it. Odds are I still think the Falcon is boring and overrepresented and you do not care about that. So be it.

[edit; your last post. Exactly what I mean. Hell; I liked it. Liked your post. We might end up as mates. ]