I think the current meta is extremely boring to watch...

...and play against! Even if you are good at beating big, turreted ships, do you want to face them for how many matches out of a day? Maybe it's not as bad as it was, but it is still pretty boring.

Going through the winners posted, I counted 16 big ship turrets.

I see 15 in the list you posted there.

I think it's 15 out of 18. I was missing one when he quoted me an hour ago.

I think the current meta is extremely boring to watch and it'll do more harm letting things stay stagnant than it will doing something to change things up.

It's also bad for business if new players come in see people only using two ships and copy them it drives down sales if people really think there's no other option.

It was when it was just swarms, and non unique pilots, and Phantoms ruled the roost, too.

Things will change. Autothrusters have brought Interceptors back into the game. There's no need to make 2 ships unplayable just because of 1 season's regional results. Moving from fat turrets to Soontir-wing would be even more boring.

New players aren't at each regional watching each winner play his last game.

What beats big, turreted ships is usually at the mercy of Soontir Fel and the bro bots. That's what I'm facing.

I think the current meta is extremely boring to watch...

...and play against! Even if you are good at beating big, turreted ships, do you want to face them for how many matches out of a day? Maybe it's not as bad as it was, but it is still pretty boring.

we seem to have gotten very good variety at many of the regionals' top 8s

the only stagnate bit was the #1 spot, which was ridiculously saturated with turrets

It's also bad for business if new players come in see people only using two ships and copy them it drives down sales if people really think there's no other option.

It's definitely not only two ships. VT-49, YT-1300, YT-2400, Z95s, Aggressors, TIE Interceptors are all having a lot of play right now. A-wings, HWK-290 (what!?), B-Wings, Y-Wings are all seeing some play as well, looking at regionals. I'm likely forgetting a few on that second list. I'm actually surprised at how few B-Wing swarm lists there are. They seemed like the best counter to turrets we have at the moment but looking at the regional reports I'm not as sure of that.

Every one of the ships I mentioned above got to at least top 4 at regionals.

It would be nice to see more variety and see more unusual ships like the rebel HWKs, TIE Bombers, TIE Advanced (well, we all assume it won't be long before they're everywhere), TIE Fighters (serious dearth of them in the Regionals lists), etc.

As ficklegreendice mentions above, there's actually quite a bit of variety right now. It's just that fat turrets seem to be winning a majority of the regionals. I look forward to seeing the complete list of winners later on.

Going through the winners posted, I counted 16 big ship turrets.

I see 15 in the list you posted there.

I think it's 15 out of 18. I was missing one when he quoted me an hour ago.

I swear I counted 16 multiple times. Are you counting the orphaned UK winner list and the Iceland list? They seem to be easy to skip to me.

I think the current meta is extremely boring to watch...

...and play against! Even if you are good at beating big, turreted ships, do you want to face them for how many matches out of a day? Maybe it's not as bad as it was, but it is still pretty boring.

And if turrets are completely gone there will still be top tier lists and tons of people bringing them? You do not play tournaments for variety. The top people are using bring the same lists or slight variations. You play tournaments to test your skills and sometimes ya gotta play the same thing over and over. If that is upsetting why put yourself in that position?

Normally, I would't care what happens at most Regionals, Nationals, and Worlds. I live too far away to attend those. What I have found, though, is that whatever wins these events gets played quite a bit in the local tournaments, Store Championships, and regular game nights. It bubbles down to the general populace that wants to play a winning list. The overall meta for tournaments has a direct impact on my weekly game night. It sucks. I like variety. Lack of variety equates to me playing less variety in non-tournament events.

I think the current meta is extremely boring to watch...

...and play against! Even if you are good at beating big, turreted ships, do you want to face them for how many matches out of a day? Maybe it's not as bad as it was, but it is still pretty boring.

And if turrets are completely gone there will still be top tier lists and tons of people bringing them? You do not play tournaments for variety. The top people are using bring the same lists or slight variations. You play tournaments to test your skills and sometimes ya gotta play the same thing over and over. If that is upsetting why put yourself in that position?

Normally, I would't care what happens at most Regionals, Nationals, and Worlds. I live too far away to attend those. What I have found, though, is that whatever wins these events gets played quite a bit in the local tournaments, Store Championships, and regular game nights. It bubbles down to the general populace that wants to play a winning list. The overall meta for tournaments has a direct impact on my weekly game night. It sucks. I like variety. Lack of variety equates to me playing less variety in non-tournament events.

I think the current meta is extremely boring to watch...

...and play against! Even if you are good at beating big, turreted ships, do you want to face them for how many matches out of a day? Maybe it's not as bad as it was, but it is still pretty boring.

And if turrets are completely gone there will still be top tier lists and tons of people bringing them? You do not play tournaments for variety. The top people are using bring the same lists or slight variations. You play tournaments to test your skills and sometimes ya gotta play the same thing over and over. If that is upsetting why put yourself in that position?

Normally, I would't care what happens at most Regionals, Nationals, and Worlds. I live too far away to attend those. What I have found, though, is that whatever wins these events gets played quite a bit in the local tournaments, Store Championships, and regular game nights. It bubbles down to the general populace that wants to play a winning list. The overall meta for tournaments has a direct impact on my weekly game night. It sucks. I like variety. Lack of variety equates to me playing less variety in non-tournament events.

That's a problem with your play group then. If 4 x wings were amazing and was what was winning every tournament than everyone in your playgroup would be playing x wings and there would be little to no variety so you'd still have a bad time.

I think his argument is that if there was more variety in what wins, those that parrot regionals winners and netlist would be more varied as well because they wouldn't all parrot the same winners... maybe...

Going through the winners posted, I counted 16 big ship turrets.

I see 15 in the list you posted there.

I think it's 15 out of 18. I was missing one when he quoted me an hour ago.

I swear I counted 16 multiple times. Are you counting the orphaned UK winner list and the Iceland list? They seem to be easy to skip to me.

I was missing the Han + 3Z's from the NJ Regional. It's 16/19 turrets. 17/19 are Fat Lists. 1 is Horn (moderately obese). 1 is triple interceptors.

I think the current meta is extremely boring to watch...

...and play against! Even if you are good at beating big, turreted ships, do you want to face them for how many matches out of a day? Maybe it's not as bad as it was, but it is still pretty boring.

And if turrets are completely gone there will still be top tier lists and tons of people bringing them? You do not play tournaments for variety. The top people are using bring the same lists or slight variations. You play tournaments to test your skills and sometimes ya gotta play the same thing over and over. If that is upsetting why put yourself in that position?

Normally, I would't care what happens at most Regionals, Nationals, and Worlds. I live too far away to attend those. What I have found, though, is that whatever wins these events gets played quite a bit in the local tournaments, Store Championships, and regular game nights. It bubbles down to the general populace that wants to play a winning list. The overall meta for tournaments has a direct impact on my weekly game night. It sucks. I like variety. Lack of variety equates to me playing less variety in non-tournament events.

That's a problem with your play group then. If 4 x wings were amazing and was what was winning every tournament than everyone in your playgroup would be playing x wings and there would be little to no variety so you'd still have a bad time.

I think his argument is that if there was more variety in what wins, those that parrot regionals winners and netlist would be more varied as well because they wouldn't all parrot the same winners... maybe...

What beats big, turreted ships is usually at the mercy of Soontir Fel and the bro bots. That's what I'm facing.

And the Brobots themselves are usually at the mercy of Soontir Fel, which is probably one reason why that combo is so strong in the current meta.

That's a problem with your play group then. If 4 x wings were amazing and was what was winning every tournament than everyone in your playgroup would be playing x wings and there would be little to no variety so you'd still have a bad time.

Not really. It's pretty wide spread.

which isn't a very good argument for changing game balance lol!!

Actually, I think it is. What happens in tournaments affects the normal games, too. So, if there is an imbalance in the tournaments, it affects the normal games.

I have a hard time believing they would never make any game balance or mechanics changes for that reason. Who cares if people want to keep running the same lists? Maybe they really like it? Maybe they're practicing for tournaments? Maybe they want to have a better understanding of the game and see how this list is able to win? If you're unhappy with people running certain lists then ask them to run a different list. If you don't want to do that then just play them or don't.

I can't imagine in the next car and rules update they say that in order to increase variety in heychadwick's game nights we've made x changes to y ships.

I'm sure that they aren't going to address anything directly to my game night. Of course not. I do believe, though, that the latest results show that the meta is stale. I am sure they are concerned about that. If you want a game to grow, you have to show that it is balanced, at least to a certain degree. Having results with a huge number of big turreted ships winning the large majority doesn't look good for that viewpoint. If you want game longevity, you need to make sure people aren't put off by this. These forums clearly show that people are put off by it. It's not just a few highly vocal people complaining. I talk to people all over and I see it on the forums. I've also seen other game systems go the same road without fixing it. They usually don't grow further and tend to start declining as a game system.

EDIT: I will add that I'm not a radical reactionary that thinks massive changes need to be done to the game. I just think that there clearly is an imbalance and it should be adjusted in a conservative fashion to keep the game interesting.

I disagree. The game is growing in the competitive scene. Gencon will have more players this year and sold out. That's even with a worse schedule than last year. I'm sure world's will do the same. These forums are not a good representation. Many people don't even bother or care to talk about it. A ton of people use the forums to whine on. The vast majority of high level players hardly ever post on here if at all. This game is healthy and strong. The simple fact of the matter is people are upset there favorite ship and squads aren't able to win. Maybe there squad isn't very good or they just aren't there yet as a player. Instead of fixing there squad or play style they'd rather whine about how this squad is so broken.

The simple fact of the matter is people are upset there favorite ship and squads aren't able to win. Maybe there squad isn't very good or they just aren't there yet as a player. Instead of fixing there squad or play style they'd rather whine about how this squad is so broken.

So you're saying the people who aren't running fat turrets aren't winning because they aren't good enough? So, by inference, the people who are all good enough to win also happen to coincidentally be running fat turrets? There's no correlation there whatsoever?

Once again....I've seen other game systems that have gone down this road. Their tournaments grow....and then the decline happens. The tournaments get bigger than ever before, but the same types of lists become the winners....and the scene dies.

I'll also state that I've talked with a lot of people. I've seen some people post that don't post a lot. I've gotten PMs. I've chatted with a lot of local players. It's not just some whiny players on these forums. I'm not saying that there aren't whiny people on these forums, just that they aren't the sole voice here (just the loudest). There are a number of people who don't have a fix, but think that something is wrong when only la certain ship type wins everything. They aren't arguing for x, y, or z. They just know somethings broken.

I don't have a fix. I was thinking partial points might do it, but I'm not fully vetted in anything. I do think something should be done, though.

The simple fact of the matter is people are upset there favorite ship and squads aren't able to win. Maybe there squad isn't very good or they just aren't there yet as a player. Instead of fixing there squad or play style they'd rather whine about how this squad is so broken.

So you're saying the people who aren't running fat turrets aren't winning because they aren't good enough? So, by inference, the people who are all good enough to win also happen to coincidentally be running fat turrets? There's no correlation there whatsoever?

The point is not winning doesn't equal that you're bad. They're are reasons you aren't winning. Yes this game has good and bad match ups and of course it's a dice game so luck is involved. But if you want to become a better player you can't say oh I lost because fat turrets and bad dice. I assume we have all won matches against fat turrets and won games where we had some terrible god awful dice rolls.

You're way more likely to see them change the boost mechanic than take away red dice or have changing facing be an action. If they did the boost mechanic like they did the barrel roll where you use the side of the template I could see that wokring. Well boosting straight would be easy idk how you'd use the 1 bank.

That might be enough to make some arc dodges impossible and to make EU an overpriced upgrade on large ships.

I would however even like them to make EU totally unavailable to large ships because that way you don't nerf the Agressor that has it naturally.

I agree however that any nerf to firepower, cost should be totally out of question for turret ships. They pay their fair price and have an advantage for it.

Besides they are totally anchored in the fluff of Star wars and should always remain viable options.

But having a turret, free evades and arc dodging more efficiently than any other ship is perhaps a bit much. So if they take away some arc dodging that might be the best option available and would not require much change!

The simple fact of the matter is people are upset there favorite ship and squads aren't able to win. Maybe there squad isn't very good or they just aren't there yet as a player. Instead of fixing there squad or play style they'd rather whine about how this squad is so broken.

So you're saying the people who aren't running fat turrets aren't winning because they aren't good enough? So, by inference, the people who are all good enough to win also happen to coincidentally be running fat turrets? There's no correlation there whatsoever?

That's putting some serious words in my mouth lol. Winning regionals says that you were the best player there that day. If you're winning it's because you have good skill and most likely a good list to help support those skills. If you're losing its because something is lacking. Maybe you're squad doesn't have the best synergy. Maybe you don't have a good selection of upgrades. Maybe you have too many points and really need initiative or to guarantee they have initiative. Maybe you're not good at flying through a dense asteroid field. Maybe you have a hard time visualizing where all of the maneuvers will put your ship and your opponents. Maybe you have a tough time flying in formation. Maybe you need to work on target priority. Maybe you need to play more aggressive or defensive. Maybe you need to rethink your overall strategy. Sometimes maybe you just got unlucky.

The point is not winning doesn't equal that you're bad. They're are reasons you aren't winning. Yes this game has good and bad match ups and of course it's a dice game so luck is involved. But if you want to become a better player you can't say oh I lost because fat turrets and bad dice. I assume we have all won matches against fat turrets and won games where we had some terrible god awful dice rolls.

The simple fact of the matter is people are upset there favorite ship and squads aren't able to win. Maybe there squad isn't very good or they just aren't there yet as a player. Instead of fixing there squad or play style they'd rather whine about how this squad is so broken.

So you're saying the people who aren't running fat turrets aren't winning because they aren't good enough? So, by inference, the people who are all good enough to win also happen to coincidentally be running fat turrets? There's no correlation there whatsoever?

That's putting some serious words in my mouth lol. Winning regionals says that you were the best player there that day. If you're winning it's because you have good skill and most likely a good list to help support those skills. If you're losing its because something is lacking. Maybe you're squad doesn't have the best synergy. Maybe you don't have a good selection of upgrades. Maybe you have too many points and really need initiative or to guarantee they have initiative. Maybe you're not good at flying through a dense asteroid field. Maybe you have a hard time visualizing where all of the maneuvers will put your ship and your opponents. Maybe you have a tough time flying in formation. Maybe you need to work on target priority. Maybe you need to play more aggressive or defensive. Maybe you need to rethink your overall strategy. Sometimes maybe you just got unlucky.

The point is not winning doesn't equal that you're bad. They're are reasons you aren't winning. Yes this game has good and bad match ups and of course it's a dice game so luck is involved. But if you want to become a better player you can't say oh I lost because fat turrets and bad dice. I assume we have all won matches against fat turrets and won games where we had some terrible god awful dice rolls.

This does not mean that they are suddenly totally overpowered, it just means they are one if the best options available. There are others but the best players probably chose them because they are perhaps more consistent.

And then because X-Wing is a game of skill (and luck) these people win regionals. Not onky because they play that kind of list, but because they are just very good!

I believe that fat turrets do well because they can recover from mistakes better than other ships. Remember the pre-nerf Phantom? Someone guessed where you were going to be and set you up? Well, you just decloak the other way and get out of it. It was a built in mistake corrected that irked everyone about that ship. With fat turrets, they can recover from mistakes easier than other ships. They are the fastest and most maneuverable ships out there, especially with EU. The turrets then also make it so that if you mess up and don't guess where they would go, you will still most likely have a shot. You also don't usually have to make the decision to run or fight. You do both at the same time. It's just an optimal set up for the game. Your mistakes don't mean so much with these ships when compared to others.

So, if you are a good opponent, you can recover better and take more advantage of the situation than any other ship type. It still take skill and you have to be good, but if you mess up, it's better than other ships.