The simplest fix is just to have all ships move into the play area from the board edge instead of having deployment zones. Place the chosen maneuver template with one end touching the edge of the board and continue moving as normal. This would also fix the minor problems with large and huge ship deployment where they are not necessarily completely in the deployment zone at the start of the game.

Now that I think is the first possible fix I have read that might actually work. Still wouldn't prevent falcon or other turret fortressing, but would probably provide enough out of arc lines of approach to any other fortress to completely kill it as a viable tactic.

Self Bumping is critical to blocking and lambda play.

Spirit of the game is subjective.

http://www.tfw2005.com/boards/attachments/transformers-3rd-party-discussion/27418159d1392048258-fans-toys-ft-04-scoria-not-slag-move-along-troupers.jpg

Blocking is usually hitting enemy ships.

Blocking your own shuttle isn't the same as stopping it outright for multiple turns.

Actually, you know what would be the best option. Add a square of "no set up" in the set up area. Set up within Range 1 of one side of the board, but not within 1 of the other edges. That pretty much kills this fortress. It would prevent the Falcon Fortress from setting up in the corner. Also makes those Asteroids a bit more of a consideration for approach.

Or they could outright ban fortressing. It's not exactly subjective if it's being done or not.

Also makes sense considering with the asteroid placement errata FFG doesn't seem to want people hugging the sides of the map.

You know, I wonder how different this thread would be if the Imperial player didn't have the initiative. . .

The player with the least squad points has the initiative choice.

You know, I wonder how different this thread would be if the Imperial player didn't have the initiative. . .

Or if it were a four phantom fortress.

It's still dirty fortressing either way.

I would just tell my opponent to concede and save us the 75 minutes because I would refuse to engage that.

I think Wave 6 offers lots of options to counter this: Force Feedback Array, Dead Man's Switch and the Firespray with multiple bombs (all you need is 2 proton bombs). These things really punish your opponent for flying that close and not moving.

Actually, you know what would be the best option. Add a square of "no set up" in the set up area. Set up within Range 1 of one side of the board, but not within 1 of the other edges. That pretty much kills this fortress. It would prevent the Falcon Fortress from setting up in the corner. Also makes those Asteroids a bit more of a consideration for approach.

I think I would rather disallow deploying in the corners, so your deployment zone would be within range 1 of your edge but outside of range 1 of the sides of the board.

But again... Objectives.

16 pages in eh? wow this is a hot topic of conversation. wonder if FFG is taking notice? Only if fortressing as a setup tactic is used lots and is effective i guess.

So if I make a shuttle never move the whole game by doing a 0 maneuver each turn (using wing man to clear stress each turn) would that be any different?

So if I make a shuttle never move the whole game by doing a 0 maneuver each turn (using wing man to clear stress each turn) would that be any different?

How is the Wingman not moving?

So if I make a shuttle never move the whole game by doing a 0 maneuver each turn (using wing man to clear stress each turn) would that be any different?

How is the Wingman not moving?

By forcing him to bump into the lambda every turn.

But to be honest, it is not even needed to use the 0 maneuver all game

The tactic is nothing overpowered, just requires patiente to engage it, which most players seem not to have, and in tournament play (time) it can be frustrating for sure.

Anyways, i still don't understand why people, instead of focusing in what they perceive as a non intended mechanich, put adjetives on people who may or may not use it.

Time for a "how to be more inclusive towards fortress players ..." thread

Ok ok, i will show myself the door.

The issue is just like Richards use of the rules to stall his ships. It's As people are saying " Cheese " and in the spirit of pointing out what is cheese we should just make a list and wipe it from any game play so everyone is happy vs learn how to deal with change and tactics.

Also, The only reason to ever us Richards tactics was due to the phantom it self and how it can stay out of a non 360 ships attack angle. That and it's almost broken abilities to attack with 4+ dice breaking the bell curve built into the game based on defense dice and total Hall and shields of each ship. In the spirit of fly casual great players like Richard Hsu refused to play ships like Phantom and fat Han. Instead of people talking about his skill and sportsman like play using basic x-wings and making it to the top 8 is becoming a pinata of personal feelings about how he used the rules to squeak out a win. Again this is all based on personal feelings about 2 build types boarding on being unsportsmanlike about it.

people's idea of what is smart play vs unsportsmanlike is based on feeling vs the strong knowledge of the game mechanics and rules. Part being the rule say you must move. Well moving is when you place your dial. This can be modified if you're using the rules for ion ect. The playing surface is a 3 by 3. As long as you move action keeps you on the 3 by 3 you're playing the game. How you feel about the other person style of play is a personal problem and you should deal with it without being rude. I played in 3 regional championships and saw this kind of play from so many lambda players I lost count. One had 2 black squadron ships with wingman to pull off stress so they could park and go red 0 forever. So we had to practice vs this zone defense until we knew how to beat it. Vs cry. Maybe because I come from the generation that only the winners got a trophy. It's OK to win. Just fly casual.

I have to Quote what Richard said :

Richard Hsu Keith Wilson, the Phantom player is probably the best player in Pensacola, FL where he dominates the tournament scene, which is why I suggested that he should go to Worlds. I've never beaten a Phantom squad without at least one turret in my squad. Because I'm facing a superior squad and highly skilled player, I used the best strategy for me to try and win since he won the initiative toss, which was having killed more points as time expired. The best way to do that was to avoid combat until that last possible moment in the game when my opponent has to shoot at Biggs if possible and to fight on my terms by limiting my opponent's approach to my left side of the board, bottom, or through the rocks. With Airen shooting, I could give any of my other ships an action, while my opponent must shoot Biggs. My squad's synergy is efficient with Wedge using Draw Their Fire like you had on your Black Squadron Tie fighter, but I had R2-D2 to regain the shields. Wedge's ability of minus 1 defense agility die gives me a fair shot against Whisper when cloaked and has a Focus. Also, my opponent must be extra cautious to avoid flying Whisper off the board after decloaking, like my opponent did at Nationals. Andrew David Harding, who is a very good player and also at Worlds this year and last year. I used the edges of the board and rocks as additional defenders. I thought he would eventually make an attempt with his 5 Academies and keep Whisper just outside range 3 to after my ships when I had to leave my defensive position. Since he never did, I took a huge gamble by timing his moves and split my forces going around the rocks to have a chance to kill 1 Academy as time expired. I really didn't think it would work so when it did, I let out a celebratory cheer, which I immediately realized I shouldn't have done and did feel bad. One of judges did make a comment to me and I immediately said I'm sorry quitely, but there was a large crowd around our table since all of the other matches were done already. I could tell that my opponent became very emotional afterwards, but we discussed this match later that evening. This is and was a one-trick pony that will probably never work again.

I have to agree now that this tactic is out of the bag good players will learn how easy it is to destroy it.

It's so obviously an unintended flaw/exploit of the maneuver system that even though it's not very effective it feels just so... wrong. That I think is why so many people have very strong objections to it, it doesn't feel at all in the spirit of the game.

If he was flying the 3 holy cows " lambdas " he would be held by many outraged by this as a Genus.

It's so obviously an unintended flaw/exploit of the maneuver system that even though it's not very effective it feels just so... wrong. That I think is why so many people have very strong objections to it, it doesn't feel at all in the spirit of the game.

What is "the spirit of the game"?

It's so obviously an unintended flaw/exploit of the maneuver system that even though it's not very effective it feels just so... wrong. That I think is why so many people have very strong objections to it, it doesn't feel at all in the spirit of the game.

Why exactly this people have zero problem with it when it comes to lambdas ?

Or when you bump your own swarm to get the most ships into arc of fire of one ship you want to focus down ?

This kind of game mechanichs allow for creative play, and it adds depth to the playing field. Whenever people try to justify their zealotry against whatever doesn't seem to be "spirit of the game" in their subjective opinion, they should think if the game is better with it or withouth it first, because it definitly is a better game with it.

Now, instead of creating threads about banning it, why don't we give it a go, try it, try against it, and make a more responsible assesment of the tactic ?

It's so obviously an unintended flaw/exploit of the maneuver system that even though it's not very effective it feels just so... wrong. That I think is why so many people have very strong objections to it, it doesn't feel at all in the spirit of the game.

What is "the spirit of the game"?

To about 30% of the post, to march out and die without thinking or trying to out play your opponent with the ships you have.

It's so obviously an unintended flaw/exploit of the maneuver system that even though it's not very effective it feels just so... wrong. That I think is why so many people have very strong objections to it, it doesn't feel at all in the spirit of the game.

What is "the spirit of the game"?

Most likely something you'll pretend never to understand, that reportedly made FFG officials present at the game in question quite unhappy with what they saw. With a little luck we can expect changes to the game to further this strange phenomenon.

It's so obviously an unintended flaw/exploit of the maneuver system that even though it's not very effective it feels just so... wrong. That I think is why so many people have very strong objections to it, it doesn't feel at all in the spirit of the game.

What is "the spirit of the game"?

Most likely something you'll pretend never to understand, that reportedly made FFG officials present at the game in question quite unhappy with what they saw. With a little luck we can expect changes to the game to further this strange phenomenon.

Funny when they saw people do with with Lambdas .. and you can watch the film on Youtube they gushed out how great it was.

I would just tell my opponent to concede and save us the 75 minutes because I would refuse to engage that.

I think Wave 6 offers lots of options to counter this: Force Feedback Array, Dead Man's Switch and the Firespray with multiple bombs (all you need is 2 proton bombs). These things really punish your opponent for flying that close and not moving.

I'm another guy who actually likes Richard a lot. He was one of those who helped teach me the game, and I'm a better pilot in Part thanks to flying against him and his crazy builds.