If not, it sure as **** will be for next year.

So you work for FFG? because this has happened before and FFG said point blank they were OK with it then. So clearly you know more then us to make such a statement.

The "fortress" mechanic has existed as a "viable" strategy since Wave 2. Guess what, it hasn't caught on. I sincerely doubt it will catch on now. Has no one noticed that he could have very well have lost? 7 blank green dice in a row lead to a dead TIE. What if luck had been more favorable? No dead TIE, and his fortressing tactic backfired. Not too mention, the kill one ship to win is tons more viable in single elimination than it is in swiss. And the "fixes" leads to different imbalances, ones that I don't think you would like to see exploited either. I mean, we have had threads that ranted that purposeful blocking is against the "spirit" of the game before. So let's just strengthen that, then. And can we please get confirmation that this was his strategy for more than this game before we lynch him.

And, there is a burden on his opponent for allowing this to happen. Both players were approaching awfully slowly. This is sadly a side effect of single elimination.

And FTS, this isn't an infinite loop. Hell, this isn't even considered a looping of effects.

You're right, you're totally not flying casual if you don't play to your opponents strengths. A whisper can fly circles around x's and a z. The game you guys play with your imaginary rules might be more fun and fair but the game this weekend allows self bumping.

It doesn't actually matter if it was a friend or not.

If its not in the spirit of the game its not in the spirit of the game.

It is however a viable tactic for now so was bound to happen. I would imagine the player in question may regret it at a later point.

The "fortress" mechanic has existed as a "viable" strategy since Wave 2. Guess what, it hasn't caught on. I sincerely doubt it will catch on now. Has no one noticed that he could have very well have lost? 7 blank green dice in a row lead to a dead TIE. What if luck had been more favorable? No dead TIE, and his fortressing tactic backfired. Not too mention, the kill one ship to win is tons more viable in single elimination than it is in swiss. And the "fixes" leads to different imbalances, ones that I don't think you would like to see exploited either. I mean, we have had threads that ranted that purposeful blocking is against the "spirit" of the game before. So let's just strengthen that, then. And can we please get confirmation that this was his strategy for more than this game before we lynch him.

And, there is a burden on his opponent for allowing this to happen. Both players were approaching awfully slowly. This is sadly a side effect of single elimination.

And FTS, this isn't an infinite loop. Hell, this isn't even considered a looping of effects.

That was the first time Richard used a fortress tactic the entire tournament. But since he knew that Whisper would run circles around his build, he probably thought this was the best tactic to win.

Thank you. One game does not a trend make.

The best way to deal with players who attempt such unsportsmanlike tactics is to immediately concede the match

Even if that means gifting a tournament win to them

Let them have their moment of glory winning a tournament where everyone refused to play along with their pathetic little games

let them bask in the glory of an uncontested win if that's what they really need to float their boat

FFG will quickly take notice then

If not, it sure as **** will be for next year.

So you work for FFG? because this has happened before and FFG said point blank they were OK with it then. So clearly you know more then us to make such a statement.

Nope, but from 4 different people there that have told me the FFG representatives present for the match were DEEPLY unhappy with how that turned out I have a pretty good feeling that something will be changed. Again, what Richard did was perfectly legal. Not arguing that. But it was against the gaming spirit FFG has stated time and again they are trying to promote and they'd be remiss if they didn't address it.

So i guess i do know more than you. /endpettyjab

They could institue a rule such as "If you reveal a maneuver that would result in you ship bumping and not moving, then the opponent gets to choose your maneuver for you." Since space ships (other than shuttle) are not intened to be stationary.

This rule could make blocking much more interesting as a tactic also. Block your opponents movement and get to choose his maneuver for him. Of course that might make blocking too good, so the rule could only apply to hitting you own ships and getting null movement.

And FTS, this isn't an infinite loop. Hell, this isn't even considered a looping of effects.

So I guess you're saying that the Rebel player couldn't stay in that position forever if he wanted to?

It's an infinite movement loop. Once it's in place, each ship can choose the same maneuver every single turn, resulting in none of them ever moving anywhere. All they have to do is wait for the opponent to engage, and then they can follow them out and mop up the pieces when they're inevitably forced to disengage.

No, but one game can quite easily start a trend.

It is totally legitimate from a rules perspective. No arguing that. I understand that it was a gamble and that it paid off for Hsu. Good for him. Next time just ask your opponent if you want to have a coin flip determine the match result. Dallas made a comment last year about turtling with his swarm against Paul and said he felt compelled to play the game lest the crowd turn against him for just K-turning back and forth letting Paul get into a worse position. Its not a RULES decision that players play this way, its a "spirit of the game" decision. I believe it goes against the spirit of the game.

I don't think any mechanical rules need to be put into place. It is really simple. Give the TO the power to call this unsportsmanlike and threaten DQ if the player does not alter his behavior.

Edit: Misread a comment.

Since the movement all happens separately, and not triggered by others, it is not a loop. A loop would be focus that would theoretically be able to be passed around between 2 ships until a final destination was determined, with nothing happening in between. FFG has been pretty clear on what this means in terms of games, and is there mainly there to protect themselves from anything that gets missed in playtesting.

IF anyone used that around here they would be playing by themselves on xwing night

Since the movement all happens separately, and not triggered by others, it is not a loop.

Answer the question, Sithborg - could the Rebel player stay in that position forever if they chose to do so?

It's a perfectly fine and valid tactic, and I don't consider it unsportsmanlike. It's boring, yes, but legitimate. In the game that everyone is getting a huff about, the other player was equally stalling in his own way. It's my understanding he had plenty of time to go over there and blow the fortress up. They both willfully entered into a game of cat and mouse (err. cat and sloth), and the phantom player got outplayed in the end.

If the fortress player was stalling actual time, say taking 10 minutes to assign his dials the same maneuvers, then yes that would be unsportsmanlike, but I haven't heard that was the case.

Yes. But that doesn't follow the game definition of an infinite loop. And infinite loop theoretically stalls the game from continuing at all until a final decision is made (ie, no more choosing of dial).

It is totally legitimate from a rules perspective. No arguing that. I understand that it was a gamble and that it paid off for Hsu. Good for him. Next time just ask your opponent if you want to have a coin flip determine the match result. Dallas made a comment last year about turtling with his swarm against Paul and said he felt compelled to play the game lest the crowd turn against him for just K-turning back and forth letting Paul get into a worse position. Its not a RULES decision that players play this way, its a "spirit of the game" decision. I believe it goes against the spirit of the game.

I don't think any mechanical rules need to be put into place. It is really simple. Give the TO the power to call this unsportsmanlike and threaten DQ if the player does not alter his behavior.

You're right I can see it now. "JUDGE, this man isn't playing in a way I feel is good sportsmanship or in the spirit of the game which I apparently 100% know due to my omniscience. Disqualify him now!"

But it was against the gaming spirit FFG has stated time and again they are trying to promote and they'd be remiss if they didn't address it.

They've never said such a thing that I've seen. In fact they've said that the fortress tactics is completely legit when this came up last time.

Myself I'd be fine if they did change the rules to stop it. But it's not like it's really a viable tactic in the first place. It's easy to beat if you try.

But you don't really know they're going to do anything your just making assumptions.

So... He did this in this ONE game only during the whole tournament to counter a list that would otherwise cause HUGE problems if flown in a "traditional" way? Thinking outside-the-box is what this looks to me.

Also it seems the dice variance was in his favor as well which I think is being overlooked.

Not very entertaining to watch or probably play, but I do not see a reason for all the flak.

It is totally legitimate from a rules perspective. No arguing that. I understand that it was a gamble and that it paid off for Hsu. Good for him. Next time just ask your opponent if you want to have a coin flip determine the match result. Dallas made a comment last year about turtling with his swarm against Paul and said he felt compelled to play the game lest the crowd turn against him for just K-turning back and forth letting Paul get into a worse position. Its not a RULES decision that players play this way, its a "spirit of the game" decision. I believe it goes against the spirit of the game.

I don't think any mechanical rules need to be put into place. It is really simple. Give the TO the power to call this unsportsmanlike and threaten DQ if the player does not alter his behavior.

You're right I can see it now. "JUDGE, this man isn't playing in a way I feel is good sportsmanship or in the spirit of the game which I apparently 100% know due to my omniscience. Disqualify him now!"

Yep. That will happen. It happens now. Doesn't mean Judges are these autonomous robots and can't decide for themselves.

They both willfully entered into a game of cat and mouse (err. cat and sloth), and the phantom player got outplayed in the end.

Watching his opponent blank 7 green dice is "outplaying" your opponent? Is that the standard we use now to define "skill" at X-wing?

My understanding is that this was a specific tactic against a Phantom build. Using traditional tactics probably limits his chances greatly, so he adapted. It's not great-looking, aesthetically, but the outrage is misplaced. He is in a win or go home scenario; is he supposed to line up like the Red Coats under some misguided ethos of "fair play" or is he allowed to use legal moves to try to win? The outrage is way worse than the "crime" IMO.

It's cheesy but it looks like if you came down the side you should be able to focus down the X-Wing holding everything in place while not giving him much of a chance to return fire. One of the guys facing forwads is probably Biggs though which would make that a bit tougher.

Yes.

Well, there we go. We are talking about the same thing.

But that doesn't follow the game definition of an infinite loop.

No one ever said it did.