Again with the sweeping statements and conclusions! Objectively, all we can say is that there are certain ships which are underused given the available data. Subjectively, you can draw your own conclusions based on that observation. Since ships cannot be judged in this matter (there isn't enough exhaustive data), then the only "good" and "bad" element in the game are the players themselves. We can observe that data and draw pretty good probabilities. A win-loss record, for instance, especially at the top level of play, will give a good indicator of how "good" a player is. That information does not directly correlate to the same quality in a ship (ie: Fels Wrath is not the outstanding pilot. I am.) Don't fall into the trap, remember, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Argumentum ad populum...grrrrrr.

Objectively, all we can say is that there are certain edible things which are undereaten given the available data. Subjectively, you can draw your own conclusions based on that observation. Since edible things cannot be judged in this matter (there isn't enough exhaustive data), then the only "good" and "bad" element are the people eating things. We can observe that data and draw pretty good probabilities. A vomit-no vomit record, for instance, especially at the top level of eating, will give a good indicator of how "good" a person is at digesting things. That information does not directly correlate to the same quality in a food (ie: fried crickets are not the outstanding food. I am the outstanding eater.) Don't fall into the trap, remember, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Argumentum ad populum...grrrrrr.

I am pretty sure some edible things are terrible, regardless of how many people have succesfully eaten them.

Yeah, I'm really looking forward to those Mandalorians.

Yeah, I'm really looking forward to those Mandalorians.

Me too! The generic Bounty Hunter is probably my best ship in the game, all things considered. The more expensive Mandalorian is really exciting, I wasn't expecting an Elite Talent slot. I think that will make it more versatile, overall, but I'm not as confident in potentially fielding two in the same list; unless I'm utilizing the EPT and/or Illicit slots, I would worry I'm not getting the best mileage out of it.

I think the case for the badness of the TIE Advanced and pilots like Arvel and the Wrath has been well-made whether I regurgitate it or not.

Except it hasn't. All that "case" supports is the utilization of certain ships. The empirical data does support that ships are used and under used. Even MajorJugglers mathwing data, while fascinating, can't absolutely (emphasis on absolutely) prove a ships "badness" because his number values are based on his own presuppositions of what is more powerful/desireable in a model...Bowww-WOOOOOOOH!

Yet, if the data was questionable, there would be other data that would show an opposite picture.

Would you mind showing us?

Data can also be made to fit one's needs. MajorJuggler has done a great job in collecting the data. The data is an interesting to look at. But it is only part of the picture. Looking at how often a ship is used fails to see the larger picture of the squads used. Surprises popped up, even the winning squad at Gencon was fairly surprising, but people just see Phantom and or Falcon, and write off the rest of the squad. Which is a terrible way to analyze a ships usefulness or the state of the meta. Again, I respect his work, I just don't fully agree with the full analysis.

The analysis goes far beyond just the ships used. I also track squad archetypes. At one point I had to stop using a google spreadsheet and moved to Excel because I ran out of columns to track all the different permutations of ships that showed up in Regionals.

I haven't run numbers on Nationals though. Just Regionals, and soon Worlds.

Yeah, I'm really looking forward to those Mandalorians.

Me too! The generic Bounty Hunter is probably my best ship in the game, all things considered. The more expensive Mandalorian is really exciting, I wasn't expecting an Elite Talent slot. I think that will make it more versatile, overall, but I'm not as confident in potentially fielding two in the same list; unless I'm utilizing the EPT and/or Illicit slots, I would worry I'm not getting the best mileage out of it.

Or, for one point, you can switch to Eman, who is also better at throwing things out of his butt.

Where has it been said you can't use off-faction dials in tournaments?

Again with the sweeping statements and conclusions! Objectively, all we can say is that there are certain ships which are underused given the available data. Subjectively, you can draw your own conclusions based on that observation. Since ships cannot be judged in this matter (there isn't enough exhaustive data)

Yet this whole thing started because you declared there are no bad ships - which is certainly a judgement of the ships in exactly the manner you say is impossible. Funny how you only got all "Prove it to five-nines certainty with scientific certitude!" when someone called you on it.

"We can't know" does not mean "all ships are equal". Nor does "We can't prove it absolutely in a purely scientific manner" mean "We can't know".

We can certainly evaluate ships in an objective manner. We can consider the costs of different stats, the utility of dials, the frequency with which abilities can be used and the impact they have when they are. Is Corran's ability better than Fel's Wrath? Both provide extra attacks, but Corran does it potentially every other turn or so, while Fel's Wrath may get it once per game.

So you're very correct that we cannot make these statements in an absolute sort of way that will raise it to the level of a scientific law. But that's not the same as it being impossible to know, and it certainly doesn't mean that ship quality is a purely subjective thing. If we go all the way to the extreme and I give you a 100 point ship with 1 attack, 1 agility, 1 hull and the shuttle's dial, could we say that's a bad ship? Or is that unprovably subjective too?

Nor does the inclusion of players change the objective nature of the ships. It is certainly possible that different players can make different ships work. But the objective element of the ships remains. A driver is a bad club to try and play mini-golf with, despite that one guy you know who can totally make it work.

I think there was an email from FFG that stated you can't use another faction's dial.

Where has it been said you can't use off-faction dials in tournaments?

Email response from Frank relayed here.

Objectively, all we can say is that there are certain ships which are underused given the available data. Subjectively, you can draw your own conclusions based on that observation. Since ships cannot be judged in this matter (there isn't enough exhaustive data), then the only "good" and "bad" element in the game are the players themselves. We can observe that data and draw pretty good probabilities. A win-loss record, for instance, especially at the top level of play, will give a good indicator of how "good" a player is. That information does not directly correlate to the same quality in a ship (ie: Fels Wrath is not the outstanding pilot. I am.) Don't fall into the trap, remember, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Argumentum ad populum...grrrrrr.

I'm sympathetic to the main idea here. This forum has two major sources of data, both maintained by MajorJuggler. I have some technical concerns with his objective model, and the problem with the aggregated tournament data is that it can only draw defensible conclusions about ships/lists that are run relatively often.

But your post sort of veers off the beaten path. A narrow interpretation of your post might be that ship quality is inextricable from player skill, but it's trivial to demonstrate that's untrue: you can hold ships constant across players by looking at people who run the same (or very similar) lists, and you can hold players constant by looking at how a single player performs with multiple lists.

A broader interpretation of your post is even worse, because you imply an odd relativism: as benbaxter's parody suggests, you seem to be saying that there's no possible set of criteria and standards on which we can judge the quality of a ship or pilot. If that were true, design and playtesting would be impossible (or at least a waste of time)--and since those things happen, it seems that at least FFG disagrees with you.

I can't agree with either version, and I can't figure out what else you might have meant.

I can't wait to see what Autothrusters do!

Where has it been said you can't use off-faction dials in tournaments?

Email response from Frank relayed here.

Well that sucks. That may mean they could have changed movement dials, though that seems unlikely.

Looks like I'll have several minis for sale without their dials, then.

Well that sucks. That may mean they could have changed movement dials, though that seems unlikely.

From the first Most Wanted preview article:

Though these starfighters look quite different than their Rebel counterparts, they feature the same stats and the same maneuver dials.

Well that sucks. That may mean they could have changed movement dials, though that seems unlikely.

From the first Most Wanted preview article:

Though these starfighters look quite different than their Rebel counterparts, they feature the same stats and the same maneuver dials.

Yeah, I thought I had read that then. I wonder why they won't let us use them then.

Yeah, I thought I had read that then. I wonder why they won't let us use them then.

Depending on your viewpoint, it's either to maintain the aesthetics of the game by having consistent components, avoid any possible confusion during gameplay, or because FFG are a bunch of evil money-grubbing bastards who invented the rule solely to exploit anyone who really wanted to fly a mixed Bandit/Tala 8Z swarm without having to buy extra ships just to have the correct dials.

Take your pick.

FFG is totally money grabbing bastards. They just tend to put a nicer face on it than other companies...

Yeah, I thought I had read that then. I wonder why they won't let us use them then.

Depending on your viewpoint, it's either to maintain the aesthetics of the game by having consistent components, avoid any possible confusion during gameplay, or because FFG are a bunch of evil money-grubbing bastards who invented the rule solely to exploit anyone who really wanted to fly a mixed Bandit/Tala 8Z swarm without having to buy extra ships just to have the correct dials.

Take your pick.

I'd also say though.. in casual games amoung friends.. it probably won't matter. I know I wouldn't care much as long as the card on the stand and the one for the ship you are using match.. use a S&V y wing, with a dutch card and stand card.. you're fine, so what if the dial is S&V.. friendly game.. no worries..

I do see their point in tourney play. I dont get into those yet so not a problem for me.. I'll worry about it if I get into them.

FFG is totally money grabbing bastards.

To a point all companies are (which I think is your point. ). Every company out there has as it's primary goal to maximize profits. In the case of public companies they're legally required to do so.

I have never understood why anyone would consider a company greedy by trying to sell you as much stuff as they can, especially when we're talking about luxury items.

Is it really unreasonable for FFG to want to sell as many copies of Most Wanted as possible? Even going to the point of making a ruling that realistically only affects a very small number of cases towards that goal? Plus there are other reasons for this, as Buhallin once more lists.

Consider that the only time this is an issue is if you want to run more Z-95's in a Rebel or S&V list then you own, in some sort of official sanctioned event, or other even that says they'll follow this rule.

It makes me think of when it was announced that the last Harry Potter movie would be 2 parts. People got all bunched up about that, and how JK and the studio were just doing it to make more money because they were greedy...

To which I thought "Yeah how dare those rotten bastards give me even more of something I enjoy!!!"

Or, when, you and the opponent have z-95 swarms, and your rebel / scum dials and their rebel dials get confused, not that this doesn't happen with mirror matches already, but there's no confusing your dials with others if the factions are different

Again with the sweeping statements and conclusions! Objectively, all we can say is that there are certain ships which are underused given the available data. Subjectively, you can draw your own conclusions based on that observation. Since ships cannot be judged in this matter (there isn't enough exhaustive data), then the only "good" and "bad" element in the game are the players themselves. We can observe that data and draw pretty good probabilities. A win-loss record, for instance, especially at the top level of play, will give a good indicator of how "good" a player is. That information does not directly correlate to the same quality in a ship (ie: Fels Wrath is not the outstanding pilot. I am.) Don't fall into the trap, remember, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Argumentum ad populum...grrrrrr.

Think you're barking up the wrong tree here Red.

If you want to take player skill out of the game (and therefore take all tactical actions you could choose and maneuvers you could choose as the player and all upgrades as well) then how bad the Advanced is becomes pretty clear.

2/2/3/3/2 for 21pts vs. 2/3/2/3/2 will always be worse because of the way that red dice are set up in this game vs. the way green dice are set up. In fact, you can calculate out exactly how much worse each ship is in relation to each other if you were so inclined since you know what the stats represent and the statistics that go with them.

You can create situations that make your point all day or, as you have chosen to do so, wait for others to provide you with situations to tear down. So go ahead, provide your "evidence" that ships are all perfectly balanced or "just underused" and we can tear it down too. Or, listen to what the majority of players are saying and watch what and how often they play ships AND consider the context you want to talk about (the majority of the time we're talking about semi-competitive to competitive play here) ships in and suddenly there are a few really bad pilots and pretty bad ships. It's not a usage issue, it's a stat, cost, or ability issue (or multiple).

I can't wait to see what Autothrusters do!

From the last paragraph:

In the coming weeks, we’ll continue to look at the Scum faction, its ships, and its distinctive personality within your X-Wing battles, resuming our Wave VI previews with a look at the StarViper Expansion Pack!

Wait. Since when did Kath have a big butt?

Well apparently I killed this topic! Oops

Well apparently I killed this topic! Oops

I'm just trying to decide if TasteTheRainbow is liking the fact that you killed the topic, or the fact that you feel remorse for what you've done

Back on topic, I'm still torn between happiness that bombs are getting some love as of late, and sadness that my bombers seem to be quickly becoming one of the worst options for actual bombing.