No, I don't think that's Mathwing. Mathwing is about producing models of efficiency to predict the strongest combos of lists to play with.

What you're talking about is good old fashioned data collection and anaylizing. I'm pretty sure that that's not mathwing's primary goal...

I think that you are also conflating jousting values with the larger effort. People latch onto jousting values because it's a single number, but jousting values are not the be-all, end-all of MathWing.

Nope I don't think I'm confusing jousting values with the larger effort, but I do feel that what did in your post I commented on was inflate what Mathwing is. Mathwing is the analysis of data collection. So don't say that Mathwing is "giving the devs accurate, relevant feedback' (the words I spoke to). Mathwing might be a tool that could be used by the devs, but the reality of Mathwing is that it's a tool players are using to make decisions on which lists they're going to use.

I understand Mathwing. I'm just not a proponent of it, and I don't like seeing it be claimed to be something it's not. Data collection is data collection. Mathwing is analysis done by players based on data collection. It's not providing feedback to the devs thats at the heart of mathwing, the heart of mathwing is choosing efficient lists to win games.

Jacob

(edit for spelling)

...and all this brings me back to and makes me think that do all ships need to be balanced. If fat turrets, BBB whatever and TIE swarms are the best in a 100 pt death match so be it. Does the x wing need to be improved to balance up and make it competitive in the 100pt death match?

In my small opinion no. In the fluff star wars universe perhaps x wings are cheaper to build, easier to maintain hence if you had a choice you'd take B wings every day but Admiral Akbar didn't have the choice and fielded what he had.

To me that is what the game is about. Field what you want and don't be upset that a bomber is not as good in a dogfight as a dedicated fighter, it shouldn't be. Max the point efficiency for a 100 pt competitive match, of course, you want to win and try every trick to keep competitive. I often fly my in efficient lists in a 97, 105, 155 or whatever point game because on the day that fitted what I wanted to fly or the scenario fluff we gave our little battle.

I follow the math a little but only use it briefly in my head so when I look at my opponents set up in our little shindigs I think: 1. Nailed this one I should easily win, 2. This will be close or 3. I am gonna get wiped. Any which way it will be fun and probably go against the form due to bad dice, inept dial choice or down right stupidity on my part.

Hmm bit of a rant, sorry all. Bad day and several beers.

Math is hard.

I think overall it depends on what your playing. Regionals? I would never take 3 defenders. Casual? Screw math wing.

I don't care what I fly in casual play, it's my personal list, my squadron, and I'm going to have fun flying it no matter what.

Now regionals, there are list that will make my builds point efficient, which will maximize my chances of winning? sure, i'll look at it. But I don't think relying just on math wing is Beniefical.

Math is hard.

Let's play X-Wing!

Math is hard.

Let's play X-Wing!

****, now I have to add to 100

Math is hard.

:lol:

Math is hard.

Let's play X-Wing!

:D

I hope FFG gives us some news soon so that the forum has something worthwhile to complain about. People complaining about other people using math is just not fun to read.

whatever happened to fun?

It's overcosted by about 3 points

OK. Best response ever!

MathWing tells us what 3 months of play testing would already tell us. The difference is players who don't spend the time to "figure it out for themselves" now have access to this knowledge thanks to MathWingers (particularly Major Juggler, of course).

It didn't take long for players to realize the X Wing was outclassed by the B Wing in most aspects, and that was during Wave 3, before any major MathWing was involved. And people really only moved to MathWinging to actually understand WHY some ships seemed to perform better than others.

The tournament results pages sure have had an interesting impact on the community though. A lot of people could start to "net list", which some people think is bad. However, it does allow players to try and win tournaments with lists that are "outside of the meta", which is a great thing itself. People seem praise those who win with an uncommon squad, which is amazing, and helps bolster the creativity of the community. It has its upsides and downsides, but overall I think it adds more depth and fun to the game!

Also, I am still of the mind that 4 x B + neat upgrades (2 x FCS and 2 x SJ being my favorite, or 4 x FCS) is a superior build to BBBBZ, but I suppose the tourney results don't lie, though BBBBZ appears to be picked much more often. But heck, Wave 3, people were non-stop playing 4 x B with great success, we just didn't record the results nearly as often.

Math is hard.

Maths.

Math is hard.

I'm aware of the existence of the jousting efficiency listings, but I've never even glanced at them.

Nobody told me TIE Advanced, and X-wings, and Defenders, and Heavy Scyks were bad ... I play the game a lot, and I noticed they just don't win as often as other ships.

I'm a firm believer in math, though, so it hasn't surprised me when my observations are backed up by the numbers.

The thing is, I'm a mediocre player. If I noticed, then I'm sure that the huge number of players better than me noticed. And I'm not a serious competition player. If I adjusted, so did more serious competition players.

The OP is giving too much meta-shaping credit to Major Juggler's numbers, IMO.

They thing about math in X-wing is the type of math. Now there are 2 types of math that can be applied in X-wing. The first is arithmetic which is required in squadron building that is very easy. The other type of math is statistics, and using math to predict probability.

Now I like math but here is my opinion on statistics. You ever heard of the 3 types of lies?

1. Lies
2. Damned Lies
3. Statistics

As we all know statistics while can consistently predict outcomes results do not necessarily reflect the predictions which is of course the 2nd half of statistics in analyzing data from results. Still I hate it because in predictions I could go for an 80% chance and still get that 20% that makes me a loser, and also statistical results can be altered by outlying modifiers. Still statistics has proven to be a useful tool in helping interpret data into simple to understand numbers.

Math is hard.

Maths.

My list = ((what I want)+(hope)-(math/meta))×(optimism+luck)

This is the only math I use when building lists

It explains why I'm using Opportunist a lot lately

whatever happened to fun?

It's overcosted by about 3 points

OK. Best response ever!

I dunno about that. Your ability to ignore 5 pages worth of refutation only to post this is pretty darned impressive.

How exactly do you refute an opinion?

With words.

That's not refuting it, that's disagreeing with it. Something inherently subjective can't really be proved nor disproven. It's a matter of convincing rather than proving or refuting.

With words.

Given the context of my statement, I'm quite obviously not talking about proving or disproving anything. I'd say something snide about derailing a thread over petty semantics, but it has been 5 pages already, and I'm not sure the OP was really worthy of any serious consideration anyways.

Mathematics are hard, but do know what else is hard? The Y-Wing.

Play Y-Wings, run turrets off the board, still lose, but win on morale and hilarity.

No, what kills/killed diversity in this game are things like super Phantoms and fat boosting turrets. Mathwing doesn't take into account mobility.

Jousting hasn't been relevant since the Phantom came out. If a fat turret player or a Phantom player lets you joust his fat turret or Phantom with your conventional list like XXBB or swarm he's doing it wrong, albeit super Whisper is invincible with 2 defensive focuses against 2 dice attacks so might as well park it in front of the swarm lol, it'll surely piss your opponent off when your Whisper takes 6 shots and only takes one damage. Jousting data just points out that X Wings are inferior B Wings, and that Defenders are overpriced, and that ordnance blows. Stuff that's kind of just common sense.

One point more and one less agility for 3 shields? Sign me up.

One point more and one less agility for 3 shields? Sign me up.

Don't forget the ability to reposition with barrel roll, hard 1 on the dial, cannon and system upgrade slots and mod to add a crew. Plus it can take extra munitions next wave.