Would you expect the Tour de France winner to not use the best bike money can buy? ;-)
There are definitely great players who will bring creative lists very far at major tournaments (Sable, DarkTemplar, etc...), but there's nothing wrong if your goal is to win as repeat champion to make sure you have the best equipment (list) one can design.
If Paul was really great, he'd win the Tour de France on a unicycle.
Congratulations to Paul.
He took the strongest list out there at the moment and tailored it to fit his personal play-style.
There's nothing wrong with that.
Give a very good player a strong list and he will likely do very well with it, simple really.
Don't be that guy/a hater and try to diminish his accomplishments.
Personally speaking, here is to hoping for a fat Falcon counter in future releases, the game could do with one or more of those at the moment.
Edited by KeffischThe fact that he fell to the same combo (Falcon/R2D2/C3PO) at the Nationals might have a lot to do with it. That list was different but Paul Heaver spoke at length after the tournament how he found that Falcon setup incredibly hard to take down unless winning on time.
From reading tourney reports it sounds like part of Paul Heavers success is his opponents fearing him. He isn't an intimidating guy in general and even by his set-up and the way he organizes his stuff, but knowing he is great at the game and is the world champ puts up a bit of pressure to the point where even his semi-final opponent stated "his heart wasn't in it" in his tourney report.
I went to worlds and there was a certain intimidation factor when I played against someone who had all official acrylic tokens or templates and/or even would start talking about how high they finished at certain regional events etc.. as opposed to playing someone that looks like a newer player or has their stuff all disorganized. Playing against Paul has to get in the heads of players to some degree and plays into how he was able to repeat.
And let’s not discount how huge match-ups are! Paul’s build was strong in general and against most of the more popular builds, but playing against a Wedge would have ruined Paul’s day. Imagine Richard Hsu’s squad going against Paul. We most likely would not have had a repeat champ.
This is a huge point. Whenever I go to a tournament, I know I am at least intimidating. I don't plan on it, but I know it comes that way, even if I am super-friendly. I play swarms/mini-swarms, so there are always a lot of minis on the table, some of them painted. I sport acrylic tokens, range ruler, maneuver templates, all won. I have super worn dials for some of the wave 1-2 ships, the 2 cardboard range rulers are also worn out (for reference check Paul Heaver's Falcon dial). I don't know how much this has affected my opponents though.
I'm trying to say a nicer thing than, "well this just means he's ace of the cheese builds". he built a custom version of a fat falcon but it's still a fat falcon isn't it? So is he really that skilled when he's flying a list that some are calling broken anyway? If people want to claim he's some kind of community legend he'd be taking a build without falcons and Phantoms and defeating all of them.
But that takes merit away from Paul, and I didn't want to be that harsh, but that's essentially what I was thinking with that afterthought comment.
Besides, getting that high on the list must have required one of those "cheese" builds anyway right? I don't blame Paul for taking a powerful list when it's obvious the powerful lists flown by great pilots would be in the top ranking. I'm just saying it would have been more impressive if he topped without resorting to them. But, that may not have been possible I suppose.
Your comment sounded harsh because it was. Have you actually seen the final? Have you seen that he could have won with an Outer Rim Smuggler instead of Han? He won with positioning and tactics, not with Han.
You, like many other people I see here, look at X-wing quite one-dimensionally, only seeing the list. Have you watched the play? Have you seen those tight maneuvers, along asteroids that *he* placed so precisely? Have you seen that brilliant pincer, how he forced Morgan into worse and worse positions? How he basically won the game on turn 3-4, before any ship was destroyed? He is the community legend because he keeps pulling moves like that and amazes all of us, you're just not looking where you need to.
But I guess it's easier to discount all his hard practice, his well prepared openers, his asteroid placement, just because he didn't have a list someone could just copy and use effectively against the boogiewoman Whisper!
Well-said Chill. His list is out there for everyone who thinks they can just auto-win with it, lol.
Despite a few people who just don't get it, I think Sunny is right. It should be encouraging to players who are on the fence about where to point blame for their losses.
Edited by TasteTheRainbowGood job to Paul. Repeating isn't an easy thing.
Haters gonna hate. If your best answer is "well, he should have used a weaker list so he's not really that good" then you are part of the problem and I hope that you are soooooo very offended that you never show up to a tournament.
I´m a big-time amateur but I have played around with the Worlds winning list enough to realize it´s not so easy to handle. It trades Luke for R2-D2 so it´s much more tricky to get hits against high agility targets. In fact the final matchup should have been somewhat unfavorable because Whisper is hard without gunner/Luke or VI, and then there was a tie swarm which should be a direct counter to the Falcon.
Edited by SixterI also hope no one misconstrues my comment earlier about the build. I view building your squad as one of the skills required to win the game.
For example: a newer, less experienced player might be tempted to not use Engine Upgrade on a Fat Falcon, or they might build a list of all Y-wings without turrets, or squads in general that just don't have good synergy. There is more to this game than just maneuvering (which is probably the most important, granted). Asteroid placement is also absolutely critical to success as well.
Really what I'm saying is that the best players will be able to recognize and take advantage of the strongest lists, and they be able to fly them on the table to their maximum potential. This is why Paul repeated: best player, arguably best list, best tactics on the table.
So is he really that skilled when he's flying a list that some are calling broken anyway?
Just because some people call it broken doesn't mean it is. Also I don't think anyone considered the XXBB list he won with last year broken.
But yes his list was a sign of skill as much as anything else. Because part of the skill in games like this is knowing what you are likely to face at Worlds and build a list accordingly.
Sablegryphon ran the prox mine list. I think sozin ran a rebel small ship list.
I ran the Spanish Nationals list - Blue + FCS x2, Cracken + VI, Roark + Crewbacca + Moldy Crow + Blaster Turret. Over the tourney I played against:
The list did admirably against everything but the #3 and #7. It has a hard time versus the swarm. Ostensibly the list is designed to beat up on Falcons (the two blues), and zap Phantoms before they move (Roark), and pummel on small ship lists with the high AP advantage (12-12-4-2 or 12-8-8-2 AP). Swarms tend to eat it up though, which is the two games I lost (lost 24-20 in game #3 - I lost a Blue, he lost Howl, and 24-0 in the top 32 match; I lost a Blue). Funnily enough, Roark is there to draw aggro away from Cracken, who is the real heart and soul of the list. With (effectively) 7 hit points, Roark can take a lot of heat, and several of my opponents figured out early that they had to go hell or high water to kill Cracken.
It is a really cool list. Glad a brought it! In hindsight it would be nice to have a swarm tactics buddy for Roark that is a little more beefy, but every point counts in this list, so its hard to fit that in.
Edited by sozinFat Han in the hands of any player, even a rookie is hard to beat. In the hands of an expert? Thats a whole new world of pain.
I've reversed my stance on dice blaming. Last night, I had five solid attacks on Echo. Four times, I had either two hits against two green dice. Two times, three hits against four green dice. Once, five dice against four (the dice rolled one hit).
I scored ONE damage.
None of my other ships could score hits against the rest of his fleet, either. It was a massacre.
For the record, Paul is plenty creative. So creative he sometimes doesn't even win. 
It's kind of messed up to expect a guy who spent money on flights from DC to MN and back, hotel, car rental, food, and various other expenses to play with a list that he knows is sub-par.
And he should do this to make other people feel better about HIS skills??!?!?
I wholeheartedly agree with the article. I love that Paul won, it proves to me that the game is not broken, that strategy and tactics are what makes great players. It means that this game we love is worth playing because we can improve. We can analyze our failures, look past the bad dice roll and ask ourselves, "Was my ship in the right place? How could I improve my situation next time?"
We are a competetive crowd and it is hard to admit when we cause ourselves to lose. Easier to blame the dice and think that luck just wasn't on our side. But we can't do anything about luck and bad rolls happen all the time. We can change how we fly and what we bring to the table so isn't it encouraging that thats what counts?
If this thread has proven anything its that haters will hate. Keep blaming the dice and calling the game broken, I'll be trying to improve how I play.
I've reversed my stance on dice blaming. Last night, I had five solid attacks on Echo. Four times, I had either two hits against two green dice. Two times, three hits against four green dice. Once, five dice against four (the dice rolled one hit).
I scored ONE damage.
None of my other ships could score hits against the rest of his fleet, either. It was a massacre.
Assuming no focus since it's easier to carry between attacks, that's a ~~6.4% chance of happening (*very* approximate). 1 in 20 games?
Never mind that, I still say the same: either learn from a loss, or if it's a case of *really* bad dice (such as the one you described), discount it as an outliner and move on.
I've reversed my stance on dice blaming. Last night, I had five solid attacks on Echo. Four times, I had either two hits against two green dice. Two times, three hits against four green dice. Once, five dice against four (the dice rolled one hit).
I scored ONE damage.
None of my other ships could score hits against the rest of his fleet, either. It was a massacre.
For every story like that, i have numerous times when Echo gets one shot at range 3 behind an asteroid, 3 vs 6 agility. While I do blame dice on those outlier games, i also ask myself how can I improve by NOT letting anyone (besides turrets) shoot Echo at all? That has improved the survival of Echo much more than rolling more evades.
For every story like that, i have numerous times when Echo gets one shot at range 3 behind an asteroid, 3 vs 6 agility. While I do blame dice on those outlier games, i also ask myself how can I improve by NOT letting anyone (besides turrets) shoot Echo at all? That has improved the survival of Echo much more than rolling more evades.
I like to focus on this mind-set too
While dice can and will bend you over on occasion (especially the little green bastards), you can't really learn anything from that. Instead, I try to focus on what I can do which is maximizing the odds via positioning.
So Whisper just dodged all of Wedge's shots. Sucks. Where was the rest of my squad and could they have been better positioned to throw more dice? (the answer is sadly "yes" a lot of the time 
)
Likewise, Wedge gets obliterated because...green dice. Why was he in a position to get obliterated in the first place?
I've found that bad dice rolls just exacerbate a player's faults to the point where it seems like they were the cause of death when, in reality, that player's assets should not have been in a position where dice skews could have devastated them so.
Now, sometimes **** just happens that's simply completely outside of one's control, which is why I've put Tie Fighters aside until I become more comfortable with green blanks and the inevitable drawing of Direct Damage 
Things that I've started doing in my flying and decisions to mitigate, and it has helped my game tremendously (Echo focused):
1. Keep the focus for defense instead of offense, even if it looks like I'll have a huge attack (unless I can kill the target if I used the focus).
2. Bring FCS to boost offense so I can use my focus token for defense
3. Really work on staying in R3, even though that gives the opponent 1 green dice. The only exception is if I can be out of arc
4. if I'm not sure I have a shot and will have to use my action to cloak (instead of take a focus or evade), then don't move into a position where anyone can potentially get a R3 shot on Echo after Echo moves.
5. unless I'm running out of time or can kill a ship, it's better to give up a shot for a turn rather than get into the firing arc of more than 1 attacker (since my focus/evade token can be used up by the 2nd attack). Lost Echo too many times to TIE Fighter or Bandit 2 dice R3 attacks.
Considering putting Lone Wolf on Echo instead of VI (and bring a high PS buddy like Chiraneau+VI) to increase attack and defense.
Just a few examples of how very bad dice lost me games but also taught me how to fly and think better. 
I wonder if Paul stayed out all night partying after the big win. Strippers... Tequila... Complimentary buffet. God, it must be great to be the best. I need to up my game.
Things that I've started doing in my flying and decisions to mitigate, and it has helped my game tremendously (Echo focused):
1. Keep the focus for defense instead of offense, even if it looks like I'll have a huge attack (unless I can kill the target if I used the focus).
2. Bring FCS to boost offense so I can use my focus token for defense
3. Really work on staying in R3, even though that gives the opponent 1 green dice. The only exception is if I can be out of arc
4. if I'm not sure I have a shot and will have to use my action to cloak (instead of take a focus or evade), then don't move into a position where anyone can potentially get a R3 shot on Echo after Echo moves.
5. unless I'm running out of time or can kill a ship, it's better to give up a shot for a turn rather than get into the firing arc of more than 1 attacker (since my focus/evade token can be used up by the 2nd attack). Lost Echo too many times to TIE Fighter or Bandit 2 dice R3 attacks.
Considering putting Lone Wolf on Echo instead of VI (and bring a high PS buddy like Chiraneau+VI) to increase attack and defense.
Just a few examples of how very bad dice lost me games but also taught me how to fly and think better.
Running Echo sometimes means that you can get away with not using VI because let's face it, you're not winning any PS battles with her.
I also run a squad with a Sigma and I do the same, even more careful actually, because the Sigma is also much more predictable and can't backstep (shadowstep?) to keep its enemies at range 3.
Running Echo sometimes means that you can get away with not using VI because let's face it, you're not winning any PS battles with her.
I also run a squad with a Sigma and I do the same, even more careful actually, because the Sigma is also much more predictable and can't backstep (shadowstep?) to keep its enemies at range 3.
True, but having played against enough Keyans, Corrans, and Lukes (without VI), being at PS6 still kind of sucks. Especially with Super Dash (PTL version) in Wave 5, I think Echo almost *needs* VI to be able to be the hard counter to Super Dash that she is.
Running Echo sometimes means that you can get away with not using VI because let's face it, you're not winning any PS battles with her.
I also run a squad with a Sigma and I do the same, even more careful actually, because the Sigma is also much more predictable and can't backstep (shadowstep?) to keep its enemies at range 3.
True, but having played against enough Keyans, Corrans, and Lukes (without VI), being at PS6 still kind of sucks. Especially with Super Dash (PTL version) in Wave 5, I think Echo almost *needs* VI to be able to be the hard counter to Super Dash that she is.
I don't mind Keyan, as he's pretty predictable, albeit less than an ordinary B-wing. Wave 5 is a whole other matter though, so VI might be warranted for that.
I don't mind Keyan, as he's pretty predictable, albeit less than an ordinary B-wing. Wave 5 is a whole other matter though, so VI might be warranted for that.
Keyan with AdS, PTL, and Engine has given Echo some problems when I didn't take VI, and since I do like to take Rebel Captive for the Whisper, Han, and Soontirs out there, it just feeds Keyan with stress tokens so he just has to PTL boost/BR and then use my stress to hit hard. ****...
just wondering did he win with the same lists both times? and were they Falcon builds?