I see a lot of denigration towards "net-decking", which IMHO is completely misplaced. I'm not even really convinced it happens in X-wing, at least not to the extent it does in other games. Fat Han combines what, 6 cards? None of which are even tricky even to act in combo - they're all straight-line effects. The emerging Dash build is a LITTLE trickier, since he uses PtL and Kyle in a dependent way, but that's about it.

X-wing builds aren't rocket science. Fat Han isn't some obscure tricksy thing that would never be imagined if people didn't have the internet.

Honestly, if anything, it's the complete opposite. In discussing X-wing's rules I frequently note how few effects there are - even today I think we've yet to cross the number of unique effects in most LCG's core sets. The number of actual things you can put on a Falcon are relatively small, and resolving good choices is relatively easy. Why is 3PO so popular? It's not because everyone let the internet tell them to run him, it's because he's obvious .

I see a lot of denigration towards "net-decking", which IMHO is completely misplaced.

That's because net-decking or netlists are intended be a term of derision, as a way of either explaining or in someway cheapening someone else winning a game. Only those who play wholly original Decks or Lists really win fairly.

Anyone can go out and download a list, buy the cards/models and win with them, that takes no skill...

/semi-sarcasm

There is a point in which you can just netdesk/list and come up with something that is very hard to beat and winning with it has little to do with your own skills. But there's also a lot of using it as an excuse to getting beat.

Please note I'm not saying Fat Han is a example of netlists, because as you point out, there are only so many options, and it's not at all unlikely many people could see how useful 3-CPO is on a falcon.

Netdecking's a little different for a game with fewer options buildwise. When people say netdecking they're referring to picking your list from the tournament wins, especially when you just assume that means it must be good without putting much analysis of your own into it. It usually is a good list too. Netdecking in of itself isn't a problem, it's when everyone doe it and variety goes through the floor that it's a problem. When it happens en masse other viable builds don't get found and the netdeck staples get called broken. Other good builds are out there, some of the more wildcard National winners prove it.

3PO obviously pairs up with the Falcon really nicely, but without the internet telling you he's single-handedly wrecking the game he's just another nice option rather than an autoinclude.

True, so what do you do with those numbers? Those values don't make any assumptions either way about maneuvering, it's the value of a given statline given everything else is equal. So the best comparison is against similar ships. In this case, I cut it down here to only large base ships with 360 degree turrets...

Fair enough. I'd be a little cautious about describing HLC Outrider as "the closest to broken so far" though. You're a highly respected member of the community and people take what you say very seriously indeed, describe it like that and we're going to see a ****ton of Outriders.

Fair enough. I'd be a little cautious about describing HLC Outrider as "the closest to broken so far" though. You're a highly respected member of the community and people take what you say very seriously indeed, describe it like that and we're going to see a ****ton of Outriders.

I'm not too worried about this. Regardless of what anyone says we're going to have a TON of Outriders and Decimators soon. Wave 6 can't come fast enough in my opinion...

The upshot is that while HLC Outrider might be an actions beast it doesn't have the super durability of Jabba The Falcon.

Netdecking's a little different for a game with fewer options buildwise. When people say netdecking they're referring to picking your list from the tournament wins, especially when you just assume that means it must be good without putting much analysis of your own into it. It usually is a good list too. Netdecking in of itself isn't a problem, it's when everyone doe it and variety goes through the floor that it's a problem. When it happens en masse other viable builds don't get found and the netdeck staples get called broken. Other good builds are out there, some of the more wildcard National winners prove it.

3PO obviously pairs up with the Falcon really nicely, but without the internet telling you he's single-handedly wrecking the game he's just another nice option rather than an autoinclude.

Do we actually have any evidence that this is what's happening? I know it's a common response, but it feels very much like a convenient assumption. Paul didn't run a Fat Han list at GenCon because the internet told him it was broken - he ran it because it's good . So it seems like at least some of the people we consider the top in the game are coming to the conclusion on their own.

Unless they're just mindless servants of the internet too? Where do you draw the line between someone running Fat Han because they think it's a good build, and running it because the internet told them to?

And more importantly, does it really matter? If the build isn't that good, and people are only running it because the internet says it's good, it doesn't last. This is what happened with Stealth Device - prerelease it was super-hot. People got it on the table, and... meh. It faded quickly. But that's not what's happened with Fat Falcons - people identified it, and it rampaged to more than half the top 8 at GenCon. It continues to be a concern, because it really is very, very hard to beat without specific counters.

True, so what do you do with those numbers? Those values don't make any assumptions either way about maneuvering, it's the value of a given statline given everything else is equal. So the best comparison is against similar ships. In this case, I cut it down here to only large base ships with 360 degree turrets...

Fair enough. I'd be a little cautious about describing HLC Outrider as "the closest to broken so far" though. You're a highly respected member of the community and people take what you say very seriously indeed, describe it like that and we're going to see a ****ton of Outriders.

Well, you know me, I just throw caution to the winds when I make my next-wave meta predictive calls...

I'm just one voice, and a lot of people have said the same thing about Dash. I just quantify the "what if" aspects with some hard numbers. Looking at the Team Covenant lists, it seems that quite a few people have already been trying out the Dash HLC Outrider.

Regardless of what anyone says we're going to have a TON of Outriders and Decimators soon. Wave 6 can't come fast enough in my opinion...

Exactly. Phantoms were the new shiny in wave 4 for a while too, but I think that's cooled down slightly from its peak. Related, I'm still holding to my pre-wave 4 prediction that Z-95's will change the long-term meta more than Phantoms. I think we are finally getting past the "shiny object" phase so this is becoming more clear.

With the addition of new high PS turrets, Phantoms are going to feel more like TIe Interceptors did in wave 2 and 3: ships that require high player skill to perform well, but still have some very bad matchups.

I do believe pretty strongly that HLC Outrider, Dash in particular, will change the long-term meta more than Phantoms. It's got the most firepower for its cost of any turreted ship, by far. A good player will be able to set up the obstacles and play cat and mouse with Dash to force the opponent into making difficult decisions.

The upshot is that while HLC Outrider might be an actions beast it doesn't have the super durability of Jabba The Falcon.

That's.... actually surprisingly hard to tell calculate either way, because C-3P0 has a non-linear effect. Negating C-3P0, the YT-2400 is slightly more durable than a YT-1300. Then you also need to consider that 1) it'll usually be at longer range and 2) the triple action variety is more likely to have focus for defense.

Paul didn't run a Fat Han list at GenCon because the internet told him it was broken - he ran it because it's good . So it seems like at least some of the people we consider the top in the game are coming to the conclusion on their own.

Unless they're just mindless servants of the internet too? Where do you draw the line between someone running Fat Han because they think it's a good build, and running it because the internet told them to?

+1. The competitive meta is going to self-optimize to the most efficient squads and strategies. It just is what it is.

That's.... actually surprisingly hard to tell calculate either way, because C-3P0 has a non-linear effect. Negating C-3P0, the YT-2400 is slightly more durable than a YT-1300.

Only one crew slot on an Outrider. If it's got 3PO it doesn't have Kyle. Plus, any PTL-based ship is going to be much more vunerable to stress effects, especially come Wave 6 but we've got plenty now too. If the thing from the interview about a HWK that can "jam you" does what it sounds like...

No more than any other hypothesis on it. We'd need the full tournament results (rather than just the Top 8) to verify either way and that's just not practical to get.

I'm not saying everyone who flies a Fat Falcon is a mindless internet slave, what I'm saying is it's more likely than not that a very sizable chunk of people look to the tournament rankings for where to start with their list. The Falcon is good, nobody contests that, but a lot of people look at it's excessive prevalence and from there jump to it being some sort of WAAC list. What I'm suggesting is two things: firstly, once a list gets a tournament win if it's good it'll stay up there until a new release shakes things up.

Why? Because people will copy it and there'll be more of it. More copies of a good list mean that archetype much more likely to hit the top of the rankings again because it's got more chances to. Repeat over and over and it will not get off that top 8 throne. If half the lists are TIE swarms you'll almost certainly see several in the Top 8. GenCon had a lot of Falcons in the Top 8, but what I hear it had a ton of Falcons throughout the rankings. The winning Falcons weren't the only Falcons.

Secondly, that that the belief so many spread about it being overpowered is just as much, if not more, a contributor to its popularity as its actual quality. It's as if the people posting such threads think that if they convince everyone it's overpowered they'll stop playing it out of respect for game balance. Like hell they will. If FFG released an obviously broken new ship that had the stats of a Firespray and cost 11 points for the PS1 who's going to refuse to play it and who's going to jump at the I Win button? That's just what humans are like.

Fat Han is a thing - we all have to deal with it. Does that mean I'm going to build directly to counter it every single time? HELL NO! That isn't fun - for me or for my opponent. I personally want to know that I'm doing the best I can with the list I bring rather than bringing the best LIST I can. That's not to say I'm not building a strong list, it just says that I'm not building to counter X.

Fly what you enjoy. Don't give me the argument that the game is over before dials are set. The game is over before YOU even hit the tournament floor with that attitude. There are plenty, PLENTY of alternative ways to shut down Fat Han, and Phantoms, and Swarms, and Flankers. We've seen countless suggestions. JUST. PICK. ONE. When a 3 point card (Outmaneuver) can ruin Fat Han's day, I say that the Chicken Littles of the world don't have a leg to stand on. When the first ship firing on Fat Han causes 3PO to activate, and the 7 others are able to take him on unmolested, I say the Chicken Littles of the world don't have a leg to stand on. There are countless other options.

Fat Han won't go away. We all need to learn to fly better though, so it becomes less of a deciding factor in our tournament lives. I guarantee that while it won't disappear, it WILL fade. Until then, consider it practice. Learn how to outmaneuver and outfly it. And stop hopping around on your one 'leg to stand on'.

This argument can die any time now... 3 x 7 is what? 21...yep, totally spend 21pts on this upgrade for every ship in my list. 17x7 is what again? Oh 119. Outmaneuver is not the answer. There was an anticipated falcon meta and outmaneuver didn't make a showing. Hard to be an answer when the call was never made.

When your example is "fly better" or "spend 9-18pts on upgrades to counter it" I'm thinking you might be leaning pretty heavily to one side at this point.

You don't take outmaneuver on all your ships because it's not useful. However, one of them with it at endgame IS useful against goldenrod. Vessery is a nice candidate for it.

You don't take outmaneuver on all your ships because it's not useful. However, one of them with it at endgame IS useful against goldenrod. Vessery is a nice candidate for it.

Because a single ship with Outmaneuver totally works as a "Don't shoot me first!" sign, right?

You don't take outmaneuver on all your ships because it's not useful. However, one of them with it at endgame IS useful against goldenrod. Vessery is a nice candidate for it.

If Han is still alive at end game, then chances are you ain't taking him out, with or without any particular upgrades.

That's.... actually surprisingly hard to tell calculate either way, because C-3P0 has a non-linear effect. Negating C-3P0, the YT-2400 is slightly more durable than a YT-1300.

Only one crew slot on an Outrider. If it's got 3PO it doesn't have Kyle. Plus, any PTL-based ship is going to be much more vunerable to stress effects, especially come Wave 6 but we've got plenty now too. If the thing from the interview about a HWK that can "jam you" does what it sounds like...

To clarify: a naked YT-2400 is slightly more durable than a naked named YT-1300.

I'm not saying everyone who flies a Fat Falcon is a mindless internet slave, what I'm saying is it's more likely than not that a very sizable chunk of people look to the tournament rankings for where to start with their list. The Falcon is good, nobody contests that, but a lot of people look at it's excessive prevalence and from there jump to it being some sort of WAAC list. What I'm suggesting is two things: firstly, once a list gets a tournament win if it's good it'll stay up there until a new release shakes things up.

The problem with this is that the Falcon didn't get a win. It didn't win a major event (and still hasn't, as most of the apologists love pointing out). It evolved rather naturally. By your logic, the emergence of the Falcon should never have happened.

If half the lists are TIE swarms you'll almost certainly see several in the Top 8. GenCon had a lot of Falcons in the Top 8, but what I hear it had a ton of Falcons throughout the rankings. The winning Falcons weren't the only Falcons.

Of course you will. But this ignores the main point I was making: If the Falcon weren't good, and it was nothing but baseless internet hype that was pumping it up, then 60% of builds flying Falcons would not have meant 60% of the top 8 being Falcons. Top spots are not just a proportional distribution of what people played - if you play a bad build because the internet says it's good, it's still a bad build, and you lose.

That's not what's happening here. You try and dismiss a lot of people as mindless internet drones, and say the only reason we see so many Falcons is because the internet tells people to fly it. But that's a straw man, at best - the internet told everyone that Stealth Device was going to be incredible, and people did that - until it stopped working.

Bad builds don't survive internet hype.

I've been away from my computer for a few days and I don't have time for the fuller reply that I'd like while on my phone, but I really don't think that things are categorically different. I've only been playing since the end of Wave 2/start of Wave 3, but lists have always been what you call 'reactive.'

Every time I flew a squint, I had to have a plan for Han or a swarm. How would I chew through their HP before they wear me down? This discouraged picking elite pilots and upgrades, generally, because the points were always better spent on red die and HP.

Wave 4 made elite pilots viable, breaking up the swarm and bloody daggers formation flying out of Phantom fear. This is a unqualified Good Thing for the game. List building now has choices beyond just cramming in HP and attack dice.

But this difference is one of degree, not category. We have more viable choices available than before, but they're the same kind of choices. Do I pay for speed or hull? Numbers or power? Han is particularly effective when he has less targets to snipe and when they can't concentrate their fire. He's a strong piece based on the choices that we have been making, but not because of a fundamental shift in game balance. Swarms still work (unless we take Innocent's one game as proof) and Wes + Opportunist support has been effective for me. They would both struggle vs Phantoms, but that's ok. Lists can have weaknesses.

Fat Han is a thing - we all have to deal with it. Does that mean I'm going to build directly to counter it every single time? HELL NO! That isn't fun - for me or for my opponent. I personally want to know that I'm doing the best I can with the list I bring rather than bringing the best LIST I can. That's not to say I'm not building a strong list, it just says that I'm not building to counter X.

Am want to haves your babbies.

You don't take outmaneuver on all your ships because it's not useful. However, one of them with it at endgame IS useful against goldenrod. Vessery is a nice candidate for it.

If Han is still alive at end game, then chances are you ain't taking him out, with or without any particular upgrades.

One of my sweetest memories from playing x-wing is getting three hits on a falcon with rexler and using his ability to reduce firepower remove his agility and lower his pilot skill, same turn mini swarm finished him off.

One of my sweetest memories from playing x-wing is getting three hits on a falcon with rexler and using his ability to reduce firepower remove his agility and lower his pilot skill, same turn mini swarm finished him off.

-shudder- oh god those feels...

I've done something very similar to that before. I believe it was discussed in my "rexler brath shots" thread. I believe one of the cards removed Chewwie's ability, then Winged Gundark got the killing blow with a Direct Hit (that the wookie could no longer avoid).

As much as anyone, I came up with the Fat Han / Super Chewie build. I wasn't influenced by the meta, because at the moment I designed it the various components were not even released yet much less talked about. I did not "netdeck", I know/knew what was upcoming and have practiced and anticipated the changes in the meta as it evolves. I pulled Super Chewie off of the shelf once the ships became legal, and ran the first incarnation of it at the FFG Regionals until being stopped by a league mate running a true 7 TIE Swarm (which is the major counter list for Super Chewie, by the way).

I specifically designed Super Chewie to be able to absorb one large hit every turn, anticipating a Chewie vs. Phantom end game. Super Chewie as designed has a good chance of either destroying the Phantom or going to time, at which point it will win due to points (which is why I put Super Chewie at a point cost of 52, it should be 12 points higher than a typical Phantom). I chose Super Chewie over Han because it wins in the mirror. I ran it in the Denver Regionals because Phantoms were released, and because the major components were all legal.

This is not fundamentally different than what I do for all tournaments. I prepare ahead of time for what I anticipate the meta shifting to, and I have good enough league mates and enough experience to be pretty nearly 100% accurate predicting these shifts. I get some practice in with my planned list, and then make a point to play all the "outliers" in an attempt to discover hidden gems that only become visible on the table. For example, my wife has been running a 3 Defender list that is far more effective than it seems like it ought to be. I have yet to really pin down what exactly makes it so good, but in the meantime I have a fun and effective rogue list to pull out for an interesting challenge.

Buhallin is 100% spot on in his OP. This is exactly what is happening in X-Wing. In the past, despite knowing the meta I would often take lists I just wanted to play. I have won tourneys with 4 bombers, 4 Interceptors, Rebel Convoy, high-PS swarms, just to name a few. Every one of those has strengths and weaknesses, but no matter what list I was running or what I ran into I had a path to victory available to me. For example, up against a Falcon of any sort I know to concentrate fire during the first pass on the Falcon, since your first pass offers the most effective shooting by far and bringing the Falcon to within 3 or 4 hull of destruction makes the end game winnable. Unfortunately, the Phantom is a different sort of beast. Some lists simply cannot win against it, barring a major mistake by my opponent. Note that I am assuming I play well, as poor play on my part will cost me a game regardless. I no longer have a mechanism available to me, but rather must put myself in a position to win and hope for a mistake on my opponents part. There is a subtle but very real difference between out flying an opponent and banking on him making a mistake.

I don't believe Fat Han / Super Chewie or any sort of buffed Falcon offer the same sort of hard counter. While challenging, they all fail when faced with concentrated fire and they are not anywhere near as difficult to get shots at as a Phantom (specifically Echo). I do get sick to death of facing them, however, so at least as far as that goes I understand the QQ. If you want a quick suggestion, take it on with a super tight pinwheel formation, so that all/most of your ships are shooting back whenever any of them take fire from the Falcon. The effectiveness of C3P0/Evade degrades dramatically with even a single additional shot after the first. Third/Fourth shots are pretty much auto-damage. In a Phantomless meta, Fat/Super Falcons would quickly dissipate to a much more reasonable level because there are multiple effective counters to it.

This is just my opinion, shared by some and rejected by others, but it isn't based on irrational fear of ships or an inability to innovate or understand the game. The tournament scene has changed dramatically. Before, while there were good and bad matchups there was nowhere near the dramatic level of rock/paper/scissors that we have seen since the introduction of the Phantom. The Phantom, Echo specifically, both begs for the Falcon as one of a very small number of effective answers and hard-counters most of the lists a Falcon fears. It narrows the meta from both sides because of this.

I dont agree with the notion that getting shots against the Falcon is easy, since most such Falcons are equipped with engine upgrade. Gets even worse when you are facing PTL engine title C3P0 (R2D2)

Eh, I agree completely with the OP. The phantom in particular has basically taken all base level ships out of the game... I know that is what they were aiming for (before the phantom it seemed that everyone took a lot of cheaper ships with few upgrades) but man, it seems just impossible now.

A little part of me wishes I never got a falcon or phantom. I think the game is the most fun with interceptors and x wings and a wings all dodging arcs and hitting hard.

This is just my opinion, shared by some and rejected by others, but it isn't based on irrational fear of ships or an inability to innovate or understand the game. The tournament scene has changed dramatically. Before, while there were good and bad matchups there was nowhere near the dramatic level of rock/paper/scissors that we have seen since the introduction of the Phantom. The Phantom, Echo specifically, both begs for the Falcon as one of a very small number of effective answers and hard-counters most of the lists a Falcon fears. It narrows the meta from both sides because of this.

We've talked about this before, on other boards and briefly in person--I'm Robert M. elsewhere. I think you're right in many parts of your post, but with a couple of big caveats.

The first is that you're perfectly capable of innovating, but lots of other people aren't doing so. Contra Buhallin, Falcons did win some Regionals and even, IIRC, a Nationals event. There's plenty of evidence--in the form of posts on this board--from people who essentially said "I went to GenCon (or whatever event), saw how many Falcon builds made it past the cut, and started flying them myself". There is absolutely a positive feedback effect in the metagame: people see a particular list flown successfully, and then they start playing it. If it's a reasonably good list then more and more people see it being flown successfully and steal it.

The metagame is a highly competitive ecology of memes, if you want to borrow that language instead of talking about netdecking. And successful memes (that is, lists or list elements) reproduce.

The second is that--and I'm being careful with my language here--I think you're right that the Phantom is very powerful and it's something you need to be aware of when you build your list, and I think you're right that pressure from the Phantom is playing a role in the current metagame far larger than its actual participation, and I think you're right that its role in the metagame is to push out some lists.

But I also think that the Phantom needs to exist. Or, at least, something needed to be introduced to break players of the habit of running lists based on pure baseline efficiency, and the Phantom accomplished that goal. Maybe upgrades like Predator would have been enough; maybe the effect of cloaking could have been to add +2 Agility or to change position, rather than incorporating both.

And my last and final caveat is that I expect things to change very substantially by the end of the year. We're getting two more 360 pancakes very soon, which will at least diversify the set of easy/obvious/foolproof Phantom counters; soon after that, we'll be getting the promised upgrade that lets highly maneuverable ships compete against turrets, which ought to really shake things up.

I dont agree with the notion that getting shots against the Falcon is easy, since most such Falcons are equipped with engine upgrade. Gets even worse when you are facing PTL engine title C3P0 (R2D2)

Depends on what you run yourself. It physically pains me to run ships without the boost action, so I've never had any trouble taking down a falcon.

Alternatively, if I'm not running quick ships, you can bet I'm running at least a couple that can turn on a dime (B's, for example). When faced with any hyper-mobile opponent, I resign myself to range three shots and do my best to cover as large a swath of the board as possible (okay, Echo--you're fast and annoying... but go anywhere in this dinner-plate sized chunk of the board and you're going to be rolling green dice, beyotch!).

As the Great One once said, "Don't go where the puck is--go where the puck is gonna be."

And my last and final caveat is that I expect things to change very substantially by the end of the year. We're getting two more 360 pancakes very soon, which will at least diversify the set of easy/obvious/foolproof Phantom counters; soon after that, we'll be getting the promised upgrade that lets highly maneuverable ships compete against turrets, which ought to really shake things up.

I can vouch firsthand for the effectiveness of a decimator with vader & gunner vs phantoms...