Don't forget that some aspects of tournament play favor certain ships over others. Just listen to Nova Squadron's discussion on partial points for tournaments. Right now, the rules favor large ships that are hard to kill. In 60 minutes, it is optimal to lose as few points as possible.

There is high level tournament play and then there is normal people playing the game for fun. I enjoy being in the latter.

::sigh:: I wish more people around here were interested in playing for fun. I'm SICK TO DEATH of 100pt tournament format. Just tired of playing the same game, with the same objectives against the same builds over and over again.

If you're playing over and over again against the same builds, you're doing it wrong (or rather your opponents are).

Please elaborate; I'm interested in what you said, but I don't quite grasp the meaning. How is it the opponent's fault if they play their favorite list repeatedly, especially if they keep winning with it?

If they keep bringing the exact same list it should be fairly easy to design a list that eats it for lunch. (Unless it's whisper/mini-swarm!)

My weekly game night is really good. It's been a lot of fun as the guys are just out to have a good night. The only problem is when I do try to make it to a tournament, I am not really prepared for the crazy. Still, did good at my SC. Thinking of going to Regionals, but am also tempted to not go. I kind of want to play my 4 Tie Bomber list just to be a spoiler for those guys with large, turreted ship lists. If I only ruin a few Fat Hans and Decimators, I'll be happy.

you should take a tie defender list just to make people sad when you kill them all and to prove that the defender is the best lol

If they keep bringing the exact same list it should be fairly easy to design a list that eats it for lunch. (Unless it's whisper/mini-swarm!)

wouldnt a bunch of SD AT PtL interceptors do well against a whisper mini swarm cuz the fighters have trouble hitting 4 agil + tokens?

If they keep bringing the exact same list it should be fairly easy to design a list that eats it for lunch. (Unless it's whisper/mini-swarm!)

Well, it's like the guy who always brings a Falcon. Sure, you can build a counter-list...but you're still flying against a Falcon. It just gets boring. I often throw together really crazy lists just for something different...but I'm really starting to burn out on X-Wing.

Don't forget that some aspects of tournament play favor certain ships over others. Just listen to Nova Squadron's discussion on partial points for tournaments. Right now, the rules favor large ships that are hard to kill. In 60 minutes, it is optimal to lose as few points as possible.

There is high level tournament play and then there is normal people playing the game for fun. I enjoy being in the latter.

::sigh:: I wish more people around here were interested in playing for fun. I'm SICK TO DEATH of 100pt tournament format. Just tired of playing the same game, with the same objectives against the same builds over and over again.

If you're playing over and over again against the same builds, you're doing it wrong (or rather your opponents are).

Please elaborate; I'm interested in what you said, but I don't quite grasp the meaning. How is it the opponent's fault if they play their favorite list repeatedly, especially if they keep winning with it?

Because--from my perspective, anyway--that's a recipe for making the game boring.

I don't mind 100-point dogfights at all, although I'd leaven them with Epic play if I knew anyone else who was interested in Epic play. But knowing that every time I play John Doe he's going to be using the same Whisper/Chiraneau list he's had on the table for the last five months, I'm pretty rapidly going to lose interest in playing against him.

Part of the point of casual play, for me, is to experiment with stuff you might like or that you think might be successful. If you play the same list over and over again, you're not learning anything new and neither are your opponents.

My weekly game night is really good. It's been a lot of fun as the guys are just out to have a good night. The only problem is when I do try to make it to a tournament, I am not really prepared for the crazy. Still, did good at my SC. Thinking of going to Regionals, but am also tempted to not go. I kind of want to play my 4 Tie Bomber list just to be a spoiler for those guys with large, turreted ship lists. If I only ruin a few Fat Hans and Decimators, I'll be happy.

you should take a tie defender list just to make people sad when you kill them all and to prove that the defender is the best lol

I'm much better with my 4 Tie Bomber list. I was the only undefeated going into Final Four at my SC. Lost to a 3 generic Phantom list. I think I can take a Phantom & Deci list as I use my missiles for the Phantom and my pea shooters can actually damage the Deci. It was 3 Phantoms that I couldn't handle.

Also, people usually have no idea how to face Bombers, so it's a lot of fun. It's great to win a lot of games with them as 1) Tie Bombers are considered bad, and 2) Ordnance is considered bad. So, when I win using both, it's a significant moral victory. I also just want to knock all the big, turreted ships out of the running. Just to change the meta one game at a time.

I took

Rexlar w/ predator

Howlrunner w/ swarm tactics

Backstabber

Academy x2

To worlds and did quite well (for my limited skills) with it.

Did I make top ten? No. Did I tear up a bunch of phantoms and fat Hans with it? Hell yes.

The defender is not a top tier meta defining ship, but it's not garbage either. Not seeing it at the top tables at worlds doesn't mean it's bad, last year there were a lot of ships that didn't make the top tables. (Phantoms and fat Hans as far as the eye could see...)

Performing well at worlds isn't necessarily a good indicator of the quality of a ship. Case in point, if Paul Heaver was flying a sub-optimal list and I was running the current hotness I would put money on him beating me.

Also if I remember correctly, the Firespray barely had a showing at Words and the Firespray is an excellent ship.

Just wondering; what *is* a good indicator to you of the quality of a ship?

You argument about Paul heaver means nothing. It says more about him than you.

They are defining effectiveness as their own personal experience. There's no way to argue with someone who makes decisions like that.

But isn't it at its core the most important thing to determine if a ship is effective for you or not? My personal experience showed me that the Defender can be very effective when played correctly; that is exploiting his strengths and avoiding the traps of his weaknesses. Who cares that the math says its overcost if I always had success with it? Should I just stop using it because the math and some guys on a forum tell me so, even though I have personal success with it?

Why is it so hard for some to believe that you can actually have success with the Defender? I don't think I saw anyone says that including a Defender in a list is a recepe for automatic success. They are not as easy to master as some other craft. Why does it seems so important for some, that just because the Defender is not a ship for them, that everyone should automatically hate it and fail miserably with it? Is the math really more important than your personal experience to make a team?

Just like you think that there is no way to argue with someone who use experience over math to make a decision, there is no way to argue either with someone that can't just admit that the ship might work for some people. In Math we thrust. No point experimenting and making your own opinion, Math will show us the way.

If they keep bringing the exact same list it should be fairly easy to design a list that eats it for lunch. (Unless it's whisper/mini-swarm!)

Well, it's like the guy who always brings a Falcon. Sure, you can build a counter-list...but you're still flying against a Falcon. It just gets boring. I often throw together really crazy lists just for something different...but I'm really starting to burn out on X-Wing.

The best cure for this malady is beating some change into your local meta, IMO

Defenders can hang very easily with the meta bad boys, but their well rounded nature isn't suited for beating th m into the ground and stealing their lunch money. For that, you want stress

Once youve Convinced opponents to stop ramming into the brick wall of hard counters, you'll see some variety again

Also defenders hard ball control lists by not giving a ****, so you'll be ready if the meta happens to shift in that direction

Don't forget that some aspects of tournament play favor certain ships over others. Just listen to Nova Squadron's discussion on partial points for tournaments. Right now, the rules favor large ships that are hard to kill. In 60 minutes, it is optimal to lose as few points as possible.

There is high level tournament play and then there is normal people playing the game for fun. I enjoy being in the latter.

::sigh:: I wish more people around here were interested in playing for fun. I'm SICK TO DEATH of 100pt tournament format. Just tired of playing the same game, with the same objectives against the same builds over and over again.

If you're playing over and over again against the same builds, you're doing it wrong (or rather your opponents are).

Please elaborate; I'm interested in what you said, but I don't quite grasp the meaning. How is it the opponent's fault if they play their favorite list repeatedly, especially if they keep winning with it?

Because--from my perspective, anyway--that's a recipe for making the game boring.

I don't mind 100-point dogfights at all, although I'd leaven them with Epic play if I knew anyone else who was interested in Epic play. But knowing that every time I play John Doe he's going to be using the same Whisper/Chiraneau list he's had on the table for the last five months, I'm pretty rapidly going to lose interest in playing against him.

Part of the point of casual play, for me, is to experiment with stuff you might like or that you think might be successful. If you play the same list over and over again, you're not learning anything new and neither are your opponents.

Can't agree with this enough. My wife and friends that play usually have a different list every time we play just for the heck of it. Sticking to the same list over and over because it is "best spec" is IMO the quickest to make a great game very, very boring.

Performing well at worlds isn't necessarily a good indicator of the quality of a ship. Case in point, if Paul Heaver was flying a sub-optimal list and I was running the current hotness I would put money on him beating me.

Also if I remember correctly, the Firespray barely had a showing at Words and the Firespray is an excellent ship.

Just wondering; what *is* a good indicator to you of the quality of a ship?

You argument about Paul heaver means nothing. It says more about him than you.

They are defining effectiveness as their own personal experience. There's no way to argue with someone who makes decisions like that.

But isn't it at its core the most important thing to determine if a ship is effective for you or not? My personal experience showed me that the Defender can be very effective when played correctly; that is exploiting his strengths and avoiding the traps of his weaknesses. Who cares that the math says its overcost if I always had success with it? Should I just stop using it because the math and some guys on a forum tell me so, even though I have personal success with it?

Why is it so hard for some to believe that you can actually have success with the Defender? I don't think I saw anyone says that including a Defender in a list is a recepe for automatic success. They are not as easy to master as some other craft. Why does it seems so important for some, that just because the Defender is not a ship for them, that everyone should automatically hate it and fail miserably with it? Is the math really more important than your personal experience to make a team?

Just like you think that there is no way to argue with someone who use experience over math to make a decision, there is no way to argue either with someone that can't just admit that the ship might work for some people. In Math we thrust. No point experimenting and making your own opinion, Math will show us the way.

I'd like to second Red Castle.

When it comes to the Defender, I feel like people suffer from a Plato's idea of unattainable perfection. We like to think we have an idea of what is perfect, therefore everything else short of that idea is completely faulty. Say, your perfect ship would be an Interceptor, anything not an Interceptor is imperfect because it won't do what an Interceptor does, or falls short of it. From there, we have this idea that if it's a Defender (or X-Wing, B-Wing, Bomber etc..) it won't be as good as an Interceptor, therefore it being imperfect in comparison. The in comparison part should be heavily emphasized, because I'm pretty sure that is what MathWing does when assigning point values to ships.

However, as I've learned in my artistic and philosophical studies, we have to let go of any preconceived idea of perfection and let go of comparing things, such as ideas or works of art, to others in order to recognize better the currently viewed idea or art piece's potential. We can apply that idea anywhere, our body image, our paychecks, movies, games, etc. But here we can even apply it to the Defender. What we see in this thread is a constant comparison to other ships' dials, point values and mathematics.

We hear statements such as "The 4k isn't worth the cost", but in comparison to what, exactly? Every other ship in the game? No other ship in the game can boast a white 4k. But even then, were still comparing ships to ships. If we forget about the comparisons and think of the advantages the Defender has, such as being the fastest moving small-based ship that can carry a cannon, it being able to reposition even after a 4k, or the 3-3-3-3 startline, we have a freakin' beast of a ship. We also have to remove our preconceived ideas of flying the Defender.

You can't simply put "fly it like an X-Wing" or "fly it like a Firespray" and expect it to do what an X-Wing and Firespray does. You have to fly it like a Defender, utilizing its wider hard 3 turns, being able to bank 1 with a barrel roll, or even just green 5'ing the hell outta dodge to regroup and reposition, and, most importantly, combating conventional enemy strategies with its white 4k. It's a fast ship. Fly it like a fast, white 4k'ing, HLC-carrying ship with a barrel roll.

And on towards what Red Castle said, I think many of us are just simply afraid of the Defender. Yes, we are afraid that its points cost are not worth it or overpriced. We're afraid that its hard 1's and 2's aren't worth the stress. We're afraid that it doesn't fly like an Interceptor or the "super-uber-mega-alpha-superiority fighter" it was in the videogames (<---again, a preconceived idea people bring to the Defender, hindering them from recognizing its full potential). And we're afraid of bringing it to competitive play because soooooo many people have this mutual preconception of what the Defender is and does that they aren't willing to invest the time, effort or fees necessary to try being good at it.

Even with MathWing involved, there is still a chance every die you roll on any given day will be blank, or the 7 crits you draw is a Direct Hit!, or the 47 point Rexler gets blown up by 2 range 1 Z-95s. But you can say that about pretty much every game and every ship. If you prefer to, or at least try to, fly a Defender, you should strive to do so with the intention of flying the Defender unlike any other ship in the game. That's what people do with IGs, Phantoms and Falcons, idk why were so quick to fling mathematical hatred towards the Defender when it comes to the actual style of play.

I hope what I said makes sense. I've never been a math kinda guy, I'm more of a maneuverability/tactile kind of guy.

Indeed. The TIE Defender is a hit and run ship that (given it's cannon slot) really likes to engage at long range, where it (usually) gets a benefit but it's target doesn't. It excels at the straight line combat game.

Slow roll in, take some long range shots, then zoom away and turn for another pass. It can turn efficiently enough with it's 3turn and barrel roll actions, but usually it's better off just adjusting the angle of it's approach with a bank.

It can do a 180 better than any other ship in the game, and prefers to be at long range. So why the hell does it need a white 1-turn?

Well said Spike!

I just want to make sure that people understand that I have a lot of respect for all the math behind the game. It is a very important aspect of the game that everyone should at least understand if they are serious about being competitive. But, it is not the be-all-end-all of everything. Take it into account, but don't base all your choices solely on them when evaluating if a ship will perform or not for you. Your personal skills, preference and style are also very important things to consider. Don't fly a ship just because math says it's good, fly a ship because you're comfortable with it.

Because (and no offense to anybody when I say this) hurt fans wanted a super squint at the cost of a b-wing, and got a defender priced and performing like a defender.

/rant

Seriously it is NOT overcosted. If it was cheaper, it would be overpowered.

The ship is a monster that is underrated because it is playing in a meta where people think that 30 points is the most you can sink on a small ship.

I have taken a 43+ point small base ship to every tournament. Won a good chunk of them too. I don't mind spending half my points on one small base monster. But the domination and frustration of facing another end-game opponent with better maneuverability(phantom, interceptor, E-wing), better dice modification(virtually every closer ship in the game) and better regen(R2-D2 crew and astro) make it very unlikely that I would be willing to spend the same on an HLC Rexlar at a real tournament.

Lol better maneuverability?

This statement right here proves my point that you CAN'T fly it normally. I know very few ships with better maneuverability than a Defender. YOU FORCE THE ENEMY TO JOUST. You don't just constantly make turns and crap like you do with say a Squint. You have to fly unorthodoxly. Dice modification is average, but the Defender doesn't need regen. It is the 2nd most durable ship in the game (and only barely not the most).

The Defender isn't about trying to play conservatively, you've got to shoot fast and big, and you'd be surprised much of a monster it is in the end game.

The Defender isn't about trying to play conservatively, you've got to shoot fast and big, and you'd be surprised much of a monster it is in the end game.

Pretty much this. Rexler Brath is insane with Lone Wolf, whether he's the last one on the table or not.

Sometimes, I wonder how many of those brutal matches and incredible maneuvering feats of the defender happen in the real boards, and how many in the players heads.

Sometimes, I wonder how many of those brutal matches and incredible maneuvering feats of the defender happen in the real boards, and how many in the players heads.

I brought down full health Wedge and Keyan Farlander with a Lone Wolf HLC Rexler with 1 hull left. X-Wings can keep up with a Defender, but once you blow up Wedge, B-Wings can't compete with a white 4k and 4 red dice with a reroll.

Sometimes, I wonder how many of those brutal matches and incredible maneuvering feats of the defender happen in the real boards, and how many in the players heads.

they have to start in the head before they can make it to the table

that's how ideas work

Sometimes, I wonder how many of those brutal matches and incredible maneuvering feats of the defender happen in the real boards, and how many in the players heads.

Thumbs up!

Sometimes, I wonder how many of those brutal matches and incredible maneuvering feats of the defender happen in the real boards, and how many in the players heads.

Well that's really nice isn't it calling anyone who enjoys using the defender a liar when they say they do well with them.

Sometimes, I wonder how many of those brutal matches and incredible maneuvering feats of the defender happen in the real boards, and how many in the players heads.

I wonder precisely the same thing about how many of these misgivings and doubts are from flying the ship many times, and how many are 1 and dones or just in player's heads.

It is the 2nd most durable ship in the game (and only barely not the most).

How are you arriving at that conclusion? What I'm looking at does list the Defender as the most durable small base ship but it gets beaten out by every large base ship other than the Outer Rim Smuggler and the Shuttle.

Sometimes, I wonder how many of those brutal matches and incredible maneuvering feats of the defender happen in the real boards, and how many in the players heads.

I wonder precisely the same thing about how many of these misgivings and doubts are from flying the ship many times, and how many are 1 and dones or just in player's heads.

The math goes one way. The tournament results go the same way. I enjoy playing the defender in quite a few lists. I've played them and I've played against them a lot. I would not take one to a tournament I wanted to win. That doesn't mean I would have to take some boring net-deck list either. Only that the points I sunk into the defender would be better spent elsewhere.

Because (and no offense to anybody when I say this) hurt fans wanted a super squint at the cost of a b-wing, and got a defender priced and performing like a defender./rantSeriously it is NOT overcosted. If it was cheaper, it would be overpowered.The ship is a monster that is underrated because it is playing in a meta where people think that 30 points is the most you can sink on a small ship.

I have taken a 43+ point small base ship to every tournament. Won a good chunk of them too. I don't mind spending half my points on one small base monster. But the domination and frustration of facing another end-game opponent with better maneuverability(phantom, interceptor, E-wing), better dice modification(virtually every closer ship in the game) and better regen(R2-D2 crew and astro) make it very unlikely that I would be willing to spend the same on an HLC Rexlar at a real tournament.

Lol better maneuverability?This statement right here proves my point that you CAN'T fly it normally. I know very few ships with better maneuverability than a Defender. YOU FORCE THE ENEMY TO JOUST. You don't just constantly make turns and crap like you do with say a Squint. You have to fly unorthodoxly. Dice modification is average, but the Defender doesn't need regen. It is the 2nd most durable ship in the game (and only barely not the most).The Defender isn't about trying to play conservatively, you've got to shoot fast and big, and you'd be surprised much of a monster it is in the end game.

The defender is in no way the second most durable ship.