- TIE Swarm
- BBBBZ
- Panic Attack
- 4x BTL/A4 Y-Wings
- Anything with Push the Limit and Barrel Roll + Boost
- Fat Turrets with Engine Upgrade (low attack dice per points makes them poor at jousting)
Not much mass vs mobility but more of statistics vs positioning.
I heared Maj. Juggler (who favors stats) says if he has a ship with all 1s but every green move vs a ship with 5 across the board but has a 2 green straight 2 white banks and 2 red turns but all 5s he would prefer the 5s.
But I also know Richard Hsu who prefers positioning, knows the best offence is to be at range 1 out of arc but with defender in arc which is also the best defense.
So Positioning or Statistics?
That would be a really good argument: The fight between powerful, efficient ships vs fast, maneuverable and well armed dodgers.
The Swarm/B-Wings are the most stat-strong units around
Pre-nerf Phantoms were the most crazy positioning ships around. Whisper can effortlessly kill 100 points of anything not-PS9+.
Too bad turrets exist that are also fast and maneuverable. So... why not have both, and wreck the metagame?
Edited by KillionaireI think the OP is correct, and provides good analysis, but I'd add a third factor: Area of influence. Area of influence is a combination of firing arc and range effects. For example, a TIE Fighter has good mass for the points, and decent maneuverability, but a pretty small area of influence. 2 Dice isn't very strong at Range 3, and is really only scary at range 1, even for the low points of the TIE fighter. By contrast, a B-wing with HLC costs about 2.5 TIE fighters, but it's 4 dice with no defender's range bonus are generally much scarier than 3 individual 2-dice primary attacks. Combined this with the fact that the range 3 band is the largest band, and the HLC B-wing has a very large area of influence. This category is where primary weapon turrets draw their power from, they have 4 times the area of influence as a ship with fixed guns.
You can read the original 40k article that I adapted this concept from many years ago here. This hidden gem has a lot of great articles about game theory in general that can be applied to most games.
Great article, and good link, I will have to check that out!
Not much mass vs mobility but more of statistics vs positioning.
I heared Maj. Juggler (who favors stats) says if he has a ship with all 1s but every green move vs a ship with 5 across the board but has a 2 green straight 2 white banks and 2 red turns but all 5s he would prefer the 5s.
But I also know Richard Hsu who prefers positioning, knows the best offence is to be at range 1 out of arc but with defender in arc which is also the best defense.
I use statistics and probability in decision making, but I generally prefer positioning squads. I have been playing dual IG88 for a month+ now, and that is certainly not a jousting list!
I am not sure exactly what you are referring to with dial choices, but it sounds similar to an argument I was making in regards to the TIE Defender efficiency, not as a universal "I would rather have this dial for any ship" sort of a rule.
Not much mass vs mobility but more of statistics vs positioning.
I heared Maj. Juggler (who favors stats) says if he has a ship with all 1s but every green move vs a ship with 5 across the board but has a 2 green straight 2 white banks and 2 red turns but all 5s he would prefer the 5s.
But I also know Richard Hsu who prefers positioning, knows the best offence is to be at range 1 out of arc but with defender in arc which is also the best defense.
So Positioning or Statistics?
As you pointed out in your post, positioning is just as important for a list that is jousting (range and blocking) as it is for a list that is trying to arc-dodge. I would say that positioning is an important part of playing any game of X-Wing that doesn't involve a fortress.
You can read the original 40k article that I adapted this concept from many years ago here. This hidden gem has a lot of great articles about game theory in general that can be applied to most games.
Great article, and good link, I will have to check that out!
Not much mass vs mobility but more of statistics vs positioning.
I heared Maj. Juggler (who favors stats) says if he has a ship with all 1s but every green move vs a ship with 5 across the board but has a 2 green straight 2 white banks and 2 red turns but all 5s he would prefer the 5s.
But I also know Richard Hsu who prefers positioning, knows the best offence is to be at range 1 out of arc but with defender in arc which is also the best defense.
I use statistics and probability in decision making, but I generally prefer positioning squads. I have been playing dual IG88 for a month+ now, and that is certainly not a jousting list!
I am not sure exactly what you are referring to with dial choices, but it sounds similar to an argument I was making in regards to the TIE Defender efficiency, not as a universal "I would rather have this dial for any ship" sort of a rule.
Probably was the Defender discussion on Nova Squadron podcast. I forgot which episode though.
Probably was the Defender discussion on Nova Squadron podcast. I forgot which episode though.
Yeah, that was for the Defender discussion. I was making the point that a 360 degree firing solution is fundamentally better than an improved dial with a fixed arc, given the ship cost and all other capabilities remain the same.
That would be a really good argument: The fight between powerful, efficient ships vs fast, maneuverable and well armed dodgers.
The Swarm/B-Wings are the most stat-strong units around
Pre-nerf Phantoms were the most crazy positioning ships around. Whisper can effortlessly kill 100 points of anything not-PS9+.
Too bad turrets exist that are also fast and maneuverable. So... why not have both, and wreck the metagame?
You have to have all three, because any ship or ability without a significant weakness is too good. You have to have Dodgers to balance swarms, swarms to balance turrets, and turrets to balance Dodgers. The best lists often feature two of the three approaches. Generally, anyway.
Increasing your mobility in X-Wing will cost you a premium in points. Any ship that has a superior dial or increased mobility options like boost or barrel roll pays for it in points. A good example is the A-Wing compared to the Z-95. Both ships have almost identical jousting stats, but the Prototype Pilot pays extra over the Bandit for its superior dial and boost action.
There's also a non-trivial improvement in Agility.
This is what makes action economy so important in X-Wing, as it often has the ability to increase both your mobility and your jousting power for a single investment.
I don't understand what you mean here. A ship that barrel rolls isn't focusing or acquiring a target lock, so surely the importance of the action economy is that it (typically) forces you to choose between increasing your mobility or your mass?
And if you notice that your list seems to have less mass AND less mobility than your opponent’s, that might be a sign that your list is not efficient enough and you may need to take it back to the drawing board.
I agree with a lot of your analysis here, but I think people who are attempting to use it as a tool need to remember to keep an eye on the action economy and on upgrades that can give a list very different looks.
For instance, does Gunner on a Large turret make it more massive, more mobile, both, or neither? The answer depends on what the player is planning to do with Gunner, which may depend on context. The very old-fashioned Han + Marksmanship + Gunner is spending five points to make itself more massive against high-Agility targets. A more modern Han + Gunner + Engine Upgrade is using exactly the same upgrade to break the action economy, allowing Han to boost without losing the ability to make accurate attacks--meaning Gunner's net effect is to make the ship more mobile.
As an even more powerful example, I played against a Chiraneau/Whisper build recently that ran Chiraneau + VI + Gunner + Vader, but used it (unexpectedly, to me) as a massive suicide bomber against anything that seriously threatened Whisper. In that case, the Gunner + Vader combo enhanced both the advantages and drawbacks of mass, allowing Chiraneau to punch above his weight class at the cost of taking extra damage. That, in turn, made him (temporarily) more massive than my Firesprays, which turned the game.
But against a swarming/jousting list, my opponent wouldn't have had to trigger Vader at all. That would have given him a PS9 arc-dodger and a PS10 turret with a good dial, which is a highly mobile list rather than a massive one.
Well put! i think this will be a good resource for people to understand the competitive portion of this game better, or to refresh some list building aspects that may have been forgotten. I don't think I could've said it better myself.
Vorpal Sword
Tvboy, on 13 May 2015 - 3:56 PM, said:This is what makes action economy so important in X-Wing, as it often has the ability to increase both your mobility and your jousting power for a single investment.
I don't understand what you mean here. A ship that barrel rolls isn't focusing or acquiring a target lock, so surely the importance of the action economy is that it (typically) forces you to choose between increasing your mobility or your mass?
Increased action economy means that instead of a ship having to choose between a focus token and a barrel roll, it can do BOTH, thus increasing both its mobility and its mass in that turn. Ships with a variety of actions can use 2 mass increasing actions or 2 mobility increasing actions as well, depending on what is needed that turn, For example an Interceptor can boost and barrel roll if it needs to be somewhere in a hurry, or it can focus + evade when it needs to brace for an attack. Which is the reason action economy seems so much better on ships that have repositioning actions, they have much more flexibility in how they use their action economy, and thus can increase either their mass or mobility.
For instance, does Gunner on a Large turret make it more massive, more mobile, both, or neither? The answer depends on what the player is planning to do with Gunner, which may depend on context.
I very much agree with you here, and I pointed out in the article that determining who is more massive and who is more mobile is dependent on context and cannot be determined solely in a vacuum. In regards to Gunner, as it does not add anything to your mobility and instead increases the floor on your attacks, I would say it definitely adds mass to your list. How much mass it adds is dependent on what you are facing. Against lists with high agility, it adds a significant amount of mass by putting an extreme amount of pressure on your opponent's green dice and green actions and helping you to push damage through to the soft hull behind the green dice. Against ships with low agility, Gunner will rarely trigger and so the mass added is negligible.
And as you pointed out in your two examples, the same list can be the massive list in one match-up and the mobile list in a different match-up. Determining who has more mass and who has more mobility is determined on a match-by-match basis. As I said in the article, a list that seems like it would be more mobile might be more massive depending on the match-up.