I am firmly of the opinion that the best thing to do is just wait. The list variety is significantly greater than it was even a month ago, and as people have more time to refine lists and strategies it will continue to expand.

Yeah, we have plenty more weeks to wait and see how the overall meta ends up unfolding. I think trying to directly nerf turrets before addressing MoV would be a huge mistake, because it doesn't fix the underlying issue. Unless and until the scoring system is changed though, Point Fortresses are going to remain the New Normal. I think we are well past the point of "wait and see".

I agree that nothing should be done right now. I also don't think turrets need a nerf. Non-tournament games are just fine with them. I see the problem as the scoring system that favors Point Fortresses. I'm sure we will see some more variety in the winner's circle by the end of Regionals, but I am thinking it won't be that many. I think Regionals will be dominated by the Point Fortress builds. I think after Regionals are done and we see how truly lop-sided it is will be a great indicator that something should be done.

I agree that much of the underlying strength of fat turrets has nothing at all to do with turrets and everything to do with the "point fortress" effect in MoV. The 86 point list I put together that was so successful was a point fortress list as well. The lack of a TIE fighter to round out the list was intentional, and it was an ADVANTAGE, not a middle finger/ego thing. Having all of your points tied up in very difficult to kill ships is a very, very big advantage in any system, but it is compounded dramatically in a MoV system.

Thanks guys for taking the time to help educate me. I appreciate it.

For what it's worth, I've been flying Brobots almost exclusively for a couple of months now and I've only had a couple of games where it felt like I had any kind of scoring advantage because of the list I had chosen. I'm just trying to wrap my brain around this particular facet of the competitive scene.

Friendly games don't usually see someone flying their Falcon into the corner for 20 minutes and waiting for the clock to end, either.

I was speaking with an Italian X-Winger who told me his regionals will only be 50 minutes rounds. Crazy!

This is probably a false rumor, as FFG is requiring 75 minute rounds for Regionals this year. If this is actually true, this store will likely lose its ability to host formal FFG events in the future.

As long as i know, ALL four Italian regionals will have this time format

The swarm player who goes 6-0 with an MoV of only a couple hundred points still finishes ahead of a fat turret player who goes 5-1 with 800 MoV.

...but the Swarm player who also goes 5-1 loses out to the fat turret player who goes 5-1. That's the problem.

I don't think it is a problem. Both players have made the cut at this point, and frankly, in this game, it's not necessarily an advantage to hold a higher seed in the elimination rounds. This only matters when both players finish 4-2 and one of the many 4-2 players is going to sneak in to the top 8.

I favor a partial points change because (1) the score more accurately reflects the game state, even if that score doesn't make any substantive difference to the tournament results and (2) partial points can reverse the outcome of a game that goes to time ( e.g. , Han can't run away from a pair of B-wings for the last 45 minutes if he took some good hits early in the game).

The swarm player who goes 6-0 with an MoV of only a couple hundred points still finishes ahead of a fat turret player who goes 5-1 with 800 MoV.

...but the Swarm player who also goes 5-1 loses out to the fat turret player who goes 5-1. That's the problem.

I don't think it is a problem. Both players have made the cut at this point, and frankly, in this game, it's not necessarily an advantage to hold a higher seed in the elimination rounds. This only matters when both players finish 4-2 and one of the many 4-2 players is going to sneak in to the top 8.

It depends how many players and rounds you have. If you have a 60 person tournament with 8 byes, then you will have about 3 5-0's and 9 4-1's. So about half the 4-1's make it and half don't.

Or, like in the West Virginia Regionals, you have 77 players and 13 byes. After 6 rounds of Swiss you have 2 6-0's and about 8 5-1's. Two of those 5-1 won't make the cut because of MoV.

And then you have something crazy like GenCon. 200 players, and probably around 16 byes going in. You'll likely have around 2 7-0's, 12 6-1's, and 33 5-2's. So the top 2 5-2 players make the cut. I'm willing to bet right now that neither will be a swarm.

Personally I think that for a 2-day tournament they should make a slightly wider cut for the 2nd day, but give a 1st round elimination bye for the top players. Like Top 24 and give 8 elimination round byes, for a 5 round elimination for example. But that's another story entirely.

It is pretty rare that MoV doesn't determine at least a couple of people making the cut. In general I have no problem at all with MoV determining tiebreakers, I think it is the ideal system actually. The only question is how to calculate the points in the first place...

100% in agreement with this!

For your gencon example, 2/16 isn't a big deal IMO.

For your gencon example, 2/16 isn't a big deal IMO.

Yeah. Unless you're the 2 or really close to that cut. (or would be with a different scoring system). It's probably why they made it cut to Top 16, although they are guessing at how many Regionals byes will make it.

Edit: although it really doesn't matter too much. 24 byes vs 0 byes is only a difference of 1 more 6-1.

Does the MOV matter due to the number of people it actually blocks out? Or the number of people who change their lists because they don't want to be those 2 people?

I think half dead ships giving up half points would help the mov issues and make fortresses on par with everything else in low time (60 minute) rounds.

I think half dead ships giving up half points would help the mov issues and make fortresses on par with everything else in low time (60 minute) rounds.

This way we can have shield less bandits running instead of falcons!

I make that statement tongue in cheek, but am I wrong in pointing out that any different mov system is going to have a way to game it that will influence competitive list building?

That said, I'm for any system that increases competitive list diversity, I just don't know what that would look like. I am not in favor of punishing turret builds just because I don't like that game play.

A system that doesn't favor any builds would be ideal, but is it possible?

I think half dead ships giving up half points would help the mov issues and make fortresses on par with everything else in low time (60 minute) rounds.

This way we can have shield less bandits running instead of falcons!

I make that statement tongue in cheek, but am I wrong in pointing out that any different mov system is going to have a way to game it that will influence competitive list building?

That said, I'm for any system that increases competitive list diversity, I just don't know what that would look like. I am not in favor of punishing turret builds just because I don't like that game play.

A system that doesn't favor any builds would be ideal, but is it possible?

Has been discussed at length elsewhere -- if you went to partial points (not just half points) then it would be fine, but the problem is actually doing the math and running the tournament with the lowest common denominator software and TOs.

I.e. points scored per ship = rounddown[ (starting cost) * (damage inflicted) / (starting hull + shields) ]

No need to further derail this Regionals results thread too much more though... at least not until we can get all the data into List Juggler and I can run some detailed stats on it, but that will likely be a while.

...

It depends how many players and rounds you have. If you have a 60 person tournament with 8 byes, then you will have about 3 5-0's and 9 4-1's. So about half the 4-1's make it and half don't.

Or, like in the West Virginia Regionals, you have 77 players and 13 byes. After 6 rounds of Swiss you have 2 6-0's and about 8 5-1's. Two of those 5-1 won't make the cut because of MoV

....

The empirical evidence told me that I was forgetting something. It was the byes. In a tournament where all of the one-loss players will not advance, partial points would make a meaningful difference.

...So the top 2 5-2 players make the cut. I'm willing to bet right now that neither will be a swarm.

Low margin lists are never going to be the the ones that sneak in with a (relatively) poor win/loss record. I'm just arguing that you shouldn't expect to make the cut with two losses anyway, so it is best to take a list that will win the most games, even if that hurts your margin.

The other case that would benefit from a partial points rule is a Swiss-only tournament where you need to rank players for the purpose of prizes. I didn't bring it up before because it's outside the scope of this thread, but since we've gone down the rabbit hole, here it is.

Has been discussed at length elsewhere -- if you went to partial points (not just half points) then it would be fine, but the problem is actually doing the math and running the tournament with the lowest common denominator software and TOs.

I think the only realistic way is to make it simple. Full points for killing it. Half points (rounded down) for knocking off 1/2 of total hull/shield. No points for damage above half. Simple and does the job. No mess. No fuss.

Has been discussed at length elsewhere -- if you went to partial points (not just half points) then it would be fine, but the problem is actually doing the math and running the tournament with the lowest common denominator software and TOs.

I think the only realistic way is to make it simple. Full points for killing it. Half points (rounded down) for knocking off 1/2 of total hull/shield. No points for damage above half. Simple and does the job. No mess. No fuss.

Again, has been discussed at length elsewhere - it doesn't do the job in many scenarios. Consider the matchup in my Store Championship season. My 60 point Fat Han vs his 62 point Fat Han. If I'm half dead then he still wins on time even with 1 HP remaining on his ship, half points does nothing to fix the problem.

And if the 62 point Fat Han goes up against a 64 point Fat VT-49, then the VT-49 wins instead. Half points is better than what we have, but it only moves the goalpost.

Full-out partial points would be much better, but would require a better scoring sheet, and ideally tournament software built in to support it. The latter is unlikely to happen from FFG.

Ok i am changing my sig to the inevitability of partial points for majorjuggler and turrets for ficklegreendice.

Ok i am changing my sig to the inevitability of partial points for majorjuggler and turrets for ficklegreendice.

Also, you can add probability of "bacon" being mentioned in any given thread approaches 1 as the thread length approaches infinity.

// back on track

I got a couple private messages / emails, hopefully we can get most of the results for this weekend's Regionals later this week.

Breaking news! We have a new tournament that was not listed on FFG's list. Siggi from the Outer Rim Smugglers won a small 13-person Regionals, and the details have been uploaded to List Juggler. Congrats Siggi!

http://lists.starwarsclubhouse.com/get_tourney_details?tourney_id=433

( Of course, it's another Fat Turret list -- a dual turret list no less -- the internet is just trolling us now, ha ha ha. )

Siggi's winning list:

Go siggi go

a small 13-person Regionals

I can't decide if I'm appalled such a small community got a regional*, or aghast at how hard it must be to find a game at the FLGS X-Wing night.

Congrats Siggi!

*Not actually appalled. Was this international?

Yea given where it was turnout seems good.

Grey, yes, it was in Iceland. The details are in the linked List Juggler tournament entry! ;-)

Breaking news! We have a new tournament that was not listed on FFG's list. Siggi from the Outer Rim Smugglers won a small 13-person Regionals, and the details have been uploaded to List Juggler. Congrats Siggi!

http://lists.starwarsclubhouse.com/get_tourney_details?tourney_id=433

( Of course, it's another Fat Turret list -- a dual turret list no less -- the internet is just trolling us now, ha ha ha. )

Siggi's winning list:

Han Solo + Lone Wolf + Millennium Falcon + Engine Upgrade + C-3PO + R2-D2

Wild Space Fringer + Mangler Cannon + Outrider + Intelligence Agent

I'm not even pissed. Past a certain point Turretwing just becomes funny.

Maybe someone will take notice that basically no list whatsoever includes torpedoes?