Just bringing it up for discussion. Are you easily offended? Did you have a bad experience with theory crafting as a child?

Theory crafting has to be based on at least some experimental data. We have ZERO.

I'm not sure I agree with this constraint. Thought experiments are used often when experimental data is impossible to gather. Reason and a basic understanding of the rules is sufficient. I agree, however, that the results of such experiments are less conclusive without experimental data.

It seems like a bit of a waste to get so worked up about someone posting ideas on the practicalities of A-Wings

It seems like a bit of a waste to get so worked up about someone posting ideas on the practicalities of A-Wings

This is about the 1st Amendment ; )

There is no 1st Amendment in space. And if there was, no one can hear the scream you are free to emit.

But let's quickly sidestep politics. Unless they're galactic.

Just bringing it up for discussion. Are you easily offended? Did you have a bad experience with theory crafting as a child?

Theory crafting has to be based on at least some experimental data. We have ZERO.

I'm not sure I agree with this constraint. Thought experiments are used often when experimental data is impossible to gather. Reason and a basic understanding of the rules is sufficient. I agree, however, that the results of such experiments are less conclusive without experimental data.

Certainly, but in this case we don't even know the full framework of the rules in order to even make theoretical determinations. This is like trying to solve a math problem without knowing what base to use.

Just bringing it up for discussion. Are you easily offended? Did you have a bad experience with theory crafting as a child?

Theory crafting has to be based on at least some experimental data. We have ZERO.

I'm not sure I agree with this constraint. Thought experiments are used often when experimental data is impossible to gather. Reason and a basic understanding of the rules is sufficient. I agree, however, that the results of such experiments are less conclusive without experimental data.

Certainly, but in this case we don't even know the full framework of the rules in order to even make theoretical determinations. This is like trying to solve a math problem without knowing what base to use.

Not really, we know how squads activate, when they are engaged, how combat works. We don't know some minor details. It's like trying to solve an equation without knowing e exactly, but we know it is something very small.

If you don't like theory crafting then ignore this thread, it isn't really within your realm of authority to tell people what to do or not to do.

Isn't that what you just did?

Isn't that what you just did?

Heh, amusing

Just bringing it up for discussion. Are you easily offended? Did you have a bad experience with theory crafting as a child?

Theory crafting has to be based on at least some experimental data. We have ZERO.

I'm not sure I agree with this constraint. Thought experiments are used often when experimental data is impossible to gather. Reason and a basic understanding of the rules is sufficient. I agree, however, that the results of such experiments are less conclusive without experimental data.

Certainly, but in this case we don't even know the full framework of the rules in order to even make theoretical determinations. This is like trying to solve a math problem without knowing what base to use.

Not really, we know how squads activate, when they are engaged, how combat works. We don't know some minor details. It's like trying to solve an equation without knowing e exactly, but we know it is something very small.

If you don't like theory crafting then ignore this thread, it isn't really within your realm of authority to tell people what to do or not to do.

Actually, ther'es still some question about that. It's unclear if squadrons become engaged as soon as they enter range 1 of an enemy squadron, or only if they END their movement wtihin range 1 of an enemy squadron. It's an important distinction that we don't have a solid answer to yet.

Not really, we know how squads activate, when they are engaged, how combat works. We don't know some minor details. It's like trying to solve an equation without knowing e exactly, but we know it is something very small.

If you don't like theory crafting then ignore this thread, it isn't really within your realm of authority to tell people what to do or not to do.

Actually, ther'es still some question about that. It's unclear if squadrons become engaged as soon as they enter range 1 of an enemy squadron, or only if they END their movement wtihin range 1 of an enemy squadron. It's an important distinction that we don't have a solid answer to yet.

Actually isn't much doubt on that aspect, FFG have always gone the simplicity over complexity route. If this were 40k then squads would be halting as soon as they came within D1 of an enemy, but for this I'm 95% sure that engagement only occurs after the move is complete.

You can argue that it could go either way, and you'd be right, but based on experience with FFG games I pretty much all but know the direction they are going.

We know enough to theorize, and pretty well. If you don't like it, well I can't help you.

Perhaps you should put the models on the table first before deciding that models already need to be buffed? I mean seriously play at least one game before you decide what models are good or not. Have the complete rules in hand. I don't feel as if that is much to ask is it?

Looks like telling someone what to do to me.

Actually, ther'es still some question about that. It's unclear if squadrons become engaged as soon as they enter range 1 of an enemy squadron, or only if they END their movement wtihin range 1 of an enemy squadron. It's an important distinction that we don't have a solid answer to yet.

Actually isn't much doubt on that aspect, FFG have always gone the simplicity over complexity route. If this were 40k then squads would be halting as soon as they came within D1 of an enemy, but for this I'm 95% sure that engagement only occurs after the move is complete.

You can argue that it could go either way, and you'd be right, but based on experience with FFG games I pretty much all but know the direction they are going.

We know enough to theorize, and pretty well. If you don't like it, well I can't help you.

Then why are you trying to act like it's a known quantity? Just because it works one way in one game does not mean it will work the same way in another game. The biggest mistake I made in my first game of Eldritch Horror was assuming that something worked the same way as it did in Arkham Horror, when it did not.

New game, new system. We don't know anything about how THIS game works until we have the information in front of us, regardless of how any other games work.

Ummm, nothing to get worked up over guys. We don't know how the game is going to play out yet becuase we don't even have the rule book to see how the Fighters will contribute to the game.

So let's stop bickering over who's right or wrong and wait to see what happens. Who knows, fighters as a whole may be not worth their points for all we know. But FFG has proven to be very good writers when it comes to their rules and for now we have to have some hope that they did balance the A-Wing to slide into a role for the Rebels to use.