Oh dear Scottie, I will certainly try to care what your little opinion is in my next life time.

All this has shown is that FFG is guilty of leaving a loophole in the rules and allow it to be exploited. They simply ignored the issue rather than address it, because they feel it won't be common. It doesn't take a decree by FFG to recognize a rules omission or recognize right from wrong. Well, maybe in your case...

But you feel free to continue your delusional psychoanalysis.

sigh

You did see the interview where one of the designers stated that they have talked about fixes. But, the "fixes" may have other consequences on the game. Looking at some of the "fixes" proposed in these threads, are you willing to put even more power on the Academy Pilot used as a blocker in order to "fix" this loophole?

This is what it boils down to for quite a few people. Some are willing to put up with this loophole because the fixes add another layer of problems, some that would prove to be even more powerful that Fortressing.

Oh dear, I've upset a few spoiled children (not you, Sithborh).

Like I said, you guys have fun with your fortressing. I'm not interested.

If you want to continue to plug your ears be my guest, but you are litteraly staring a video in the face that has the game designer addressing the issue and ignoring it.

Per Alex Davey: "fringe corner case rules" and "certainly not what the rules were meant to portray" are hardly shinning examples of endorsement. FFG simply chose to ignore this error in the rules.

Moving the conversation towards solutions rather than who is holier than who...

A few elegant solutions I've seen/heard:

-Let it be a TO call since the player will not be "advancing the gamestate towards a win condition" (multiple rounds not trying to kill an opponents ship). This has very little if any impact on game play...until we get a blown call at a big event.

-Have ships start off the map. They may only enter to a spot that will not overlap. Adds depth and potential new mechanics for set up. Good players can still "use" fortressing with good set up but it will be telegraphed with an extra round of movement to counter AND be less reliable due to forcing people to go through the movements and lack of precision. Might make games an extra round "longer" or might shorten them up a bit.

-Make the start area a "hyperspace lane". Any ship in at the end of the first round rolls a dice: hit or crit = destroyed. No more Lambda stalls round 1 and no more sideways deployments (nothing a 1 forward and a few hard 1's can't fix for pretty much the same result)

-Simply rule that any ship that overlaps in the first round is destroyed. Similar to "hyper space lane" or starting off map but pretty clear and forces forward movement towards engagement. Puts a little more emphasis on precision set up.

-Make the board "pac man". Not really a fix to anything but if I can suddenly spring to the other side of the board I bet we no longer see this tactic (and invite a bunch of new tactics). [not really a serious solution but this thread needs some humor].

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am pretty sure there can be some pretty elegant fixes that don't negatively impact other parts of the game. I'm confident FFG can come up with more than 1. I hope they don't rush to fix this and do something that will both block this tactic (not because it is wrong/against the rules/intended/unintended/morally wrong/in the spirit of the game or not...etc... but because outside of some very very specific circumstances, I don't see how it adds anything valuable to the game and creates a VERY negative gameplay experience.

That's all I have to say, unless we all want to start talking about breakfast. It's almost time for that if this thread keeps going one of the ways certain posters are pulling.

It's premature to say that FFG is going to take "no action" on fortressing. For one thing, that was recorded almost a week ago. For another thing, Alex didn't say it was going to be ignored.

Give FFG just a little bit of time. And credit. Alex and Frank aren't just awesome designers and good guys ... they love X-Wing. I mean, they love it. Their joy in commenting on games and builds and so on at Worlds just can't be faked. So give 'em a little time and credit.

It's premature to say that FFG is going to take "no action" on fortressing.

Which video did you watch? Because the one posted here today had Alex clearly say they were going to do nothing about it, unless it becomes a problem which he didn't think had any chance of happening.

For one thing, that was recorded almost a week ago.

Again I ask what video you watched because that one was recorded after world's was over.]

And..here..we go...(Heath says hi)

Now that the sky is falling for the cup 1/2 full crowd I have a basic Question. Why couldn't the other player just setup an attack run and wipe him out? I think it was because he had never seen anything like this. Here in the NW we have seen all kinds of parking builds.. and we didn't think much of them. Some times we see stuff like 4 hawks win. And even 4 Lambdas. But they never take top 4.

Tempest in a tea cup.. Funny even the other player Josh finds all of this a bit funny. Richard told him this would make bigger noise out of 10% of the players than the fan fair about Paul winning. Or that 3 of the top 4 last year made it back to the top 8 this year.

Scary how he knows the way the wind blows.

This is a highly contentious issue that is not going to be solved on an internet forum. Thread locked.