What did he have again? It looked like XXXZ of some sort.

Bipolar may be referring to the list building stage rather than the gameplay and mean stress mechanics, high pilot skill and Roark.

Stress builds, built for PS bid, hell he had Wedge and PS 10 Cracken. He could have taken another Z instead of that rookie and put R3-A2 on Biggs to stress a Phantom and then put an EU on Wedge to give him a better chance at getting an arc on a Phantom. That leaves him at 97 points, and a pretty unbeatable PS bid.

That means Cracken and Wedge shooting at a Phantom with 1-2 Agility dice, and with the stress and blocking you can eliminate most of a phantoms moves.

What did he have again? It looked like XXXZ of some sort.

Bipolar may be referring to the list building stage rather than the gameplay and mean stress mechanics, high pilot skill and Roark.

But you are asking him to do the impossible.. If he has a rock he has to play a rock he can't make it into scissors. That would be cheating to change his build just to beat one build he runs into. Unless we change the rules?

Stress builds, built for PS bid, hell he had Wedge and PS 10 Cracken. He could have taken another Z instead of that rookie and put R3-A2 on Biggs to stress a Phantom and then put an EU on Wedge to give him a better chance at getting an arc on a Phantom. That leaves him at 97 points, and a pretty unbeatable PS bid.

How many of this build made it to the top 8?

I think it's quite obvious anyone suggesting making changes to the build means changing it before the tournament, not during it.

It's reasonable to expect to encounter several TIE phantoms at Worlds so you'd bring the tools or strategies to combat them.

I think it's quite obvious anyone suggesting making changes to the build means changing it before the tournament, not during it.

It's reasonable to expect to encounter several TIE phantoms at Worlds so you'd bring the tools or strategies to combat them.

yet his build made it to the top 8. Despite all the Phantom cheese and Fat Hans.

Heavy laser cannons would chew that up all day long

Which means it does have a way to deal with phantoms. And if that way is fortressing, that is to say, if fortressing got a build to the Top 8, then FFG may well soon be changing their stance on it.

Which means it does have a way to deal with phantoms. And if that way is fortressing, that is to say, if fortressing got a build to the Top 8, then FFG may well soon be changing their stance on it.

Or change the phantom.. Why not just do like they said.. Learn how to deal with it.. Paul Heaver did. Even thought I think H2H Richards Build would have given Paul a run for his money.

FFG can't change the TIE phantom.

FFG can't change the TIE phantom.

And yet you want them to change the basic heart of the game mechanics to avoid someone using moves so they end up not "moving" their ships?

Richards build was custom designed to take out Fat Han, to the exclusion of all else. He said so himself. If you expect to face 3 things in the "Meta": Fat Han, Phantom, Swarm, and you get destroyed by one of those things because you didnt plan to face it, then your list is simply bad.

My suggested changes to his list would have given him a better chance at combating phantoms without changing the core of his list, i.e. killing Fat Han.

A: They're constantly tweaking the rules in the FAQ and Tournament Rules. It's printed cards they're loathe to go back on, and B: They don't need to change the mechanics to prevent fortressing. They just need to define it as an infinite loop under their existing rules and it's gone.

A: They're constantly tweaking the rules in the FAQ and Tournament Rules. It's printed cards they're loathe to go back on, and B: They don't need to change the mechanics to prevent fortressing. They just need to define it as an infinite loop under their existing rules and it's gone.

Hmm what about phantoms ability to stay in one small zone for ever. Or should we just have every build Bipolar Plotter approved. Even though Richard was able to make a build and fight his way to the top 8 in the world. Not counting his Regional wins and Gen-con standings with it. I guess we will have to see if FFG will use a Knee-Jerk or just see this as a minor valid tactic that can be eliminated by any good play. Knowing you can't make everyone happy 100% of the time.

My memory is not perfect but I do remember something along the line about this with K turn runs on the side of the board. Where people called it cheese and infinite loops ect. My Favorite was.. " Boring "

I feel like FFG made a major mistake when they forbid asteroids on the sides of the play area. As some others have suggested earlier, they probably should have started ships off the field to begin with, but chose not to go that route.

If FFG gets rid of fortressing it's not a knee-jerk. They've been keeping a close eye on it for over a year.

Hmm what about phantoms ability to stay in one small zone for ever.

Any ship can hypothetically green and K over and over or fly in circles but it can leave them in a pretty suboptimal position when the fighting actually starts. The Fortress sets up in such a way that if the other player wants to attack they're forced to approach it and then, due to the edge of the board, turn and fly away, exposing its behind to continued fire from the fortress. A TIE fighter can hard turn 1 all day and just go in circles but it confers no combat advantage to it.

Fortressing isn't about non-engagement.

Anyone notice the lack of conversation about this on teamcovenant.com?

Make your own conclusions from there.

I don't get it.

http://teamcovenant.com/sozin/2014/11/09/2014-world-championships-photo-diary/

If FFG gets rid of fortressing it's not a knee-jerk. They've been keeping a close eye on it for over a year.

Hmm what about phantoms ability to stay in one small zone for ever.

Any ship can hypothetically green and K over and over or fly in circles but it can leave them in a pretty suboptimal position when the fighting actually starts. The Fortress sets up in such a way that if the other player wants to attack they're forced to approach it and then, due to the edge of the board, turn and fly away, exposing its behind to continued fire from the fortress. A TIE fighter can hard turn 1 all day and just go in circles but it confers no combat advantage to it.

Fortressing isn't about non-engagement.

You need to study Einsteins theory about things moving. Example the rock and feathers falling in a vacuum toward the earth. He said the reason they fall at the same time is because they are not moving.

Can't wait for the day I hear a eminent physicist talk about "Einstein's Theory About Things Moving" rather than saying Relativity.

Struggling to see the relevance of that to the fortress strategy though.

Anyone notice the lack of conversation about this on teamcovenant.com?

Make your own conclusions from there.

I'm guessing your conclusion is that we're wrong to be discussing this here since its not being discussed elsewhere?

I think he was making a very different insinuation entirely.