With all the talk about regionals and phat ships I realised that I had become a procrastinator about what list I was going to run at my own recent regionals.

I suspect like most people I don't play competitive events to lose games. Having said that , I come from a 40k background, I have in general played non meta list and winning is not the be all and end all.

So in the end I went with a ad hock style of phat turret arc dodger list, not the RAC & Fel kind though ( keeping the lid on the list as it was not my own concoction and the owner is likely it want to use the list at some stage, you all know him well). I managed to come 5th and went 4 and 1 in the elimination rounds and then bombed out in the first round of top 8. Both games I lost where to hard list for mine and the top 8 game was a direct haaarrrrrd counter to mine ( decimator gunner Vader rebel captive and 4 ties).

My goal was to get my self a nice new set of shiny dice and I was most pleased to get those. But looking back I know I didn't have the best lead up to my regionals as I only had 5 games with the list before hand. My problem was that I didn't realy want to go with a meta list. I have not taken the same list to a tournament twice and they have never been a meta list.

We have a very diverse meta here in perth wa but having said that a lot of the top players do run some type of meta list. There is also always a splattering of meta list with any local tournament out side of the top players as well as the good old 4b wings of some variant.

So yes I know I succumb to a phat turret list and with more games under my belt I may do even better next time. And I guess to some degree its sad that things are the way they are, I recently read a sable griffin article about the hawk and I too think the hawk has a lot of potential, but sadly when I look at these list and I think about what the strong meta list are I can't help but think your gonna have a hard time winning if you play x list or y list. This is why I took so long to decide on a list.

One of the things I love about x wing is how easy it is to have such diverse lists and I do all the time, and maybe this is more of a problem than the state of the meta I can't decided, over think about what if this happens and don't get enough practice. I do believe some list are much stronger than others and it's there game to lose but I want to believe that most list can win

I think we have unfortunately hit a rather bad patch in the game. There has been massive growth in the tournament scene in the last year, and the evolution towards big ships and 2 ship builds has really reached it's zenith. Similar to what the phantom did, you are better off playing the same style of list as everyone else since then it comes down to play skill (Fat Han beats Phantom and has coin flip match up versus itself).

Currently there are not really any small ship builds which are good across the board (control has a chance in a 2 ship dominated meta though) that can handle all the big ships boosting around. Control is weak to high ship count though so doesn't always make it through.

Interestingly it was always action economy that dragged big ships back into the fold, but now that most of them are pulling 3+ "actions" per turn (this includes free things like 3PO) they are more than capable of taking on anything.

Honestly I not really looking forward to Regionals (New Zealand), while numbers will be stronger (good for the game) the list selection is sadly regressing to the mean as people head towards more competitive play.

we're just waiting for an M.O.V partial scoring measure, honestly

now that the phantom's gone, there's no real uber-threat as much as an incredibly obnoxious and poorly conceived primary weapon turret advantage which, when stacked with high PS mobility + guaranteed damage mitigation + dice spikes + lack of partial scoring = easy wins with full m.o.v.

because of lack of partial scoring, 2 ship builds are simply the easiest way to win tournies (Not necessarily individual matches, even if fat PWTs are still easily the most forgiving ships in the game). The pressure is almost always on their opponents to commit to offense.

P.S: gotta say, the diluge of turrets winning regionals is incredibly disheartening because they're boring as **** to play against and really don't belong in this maneuver-centric game, but these showings have NOTHING on the dark age that was wave 5

not that I wouldn't mind seeing them go the way of the phantom, of course. the less we see of the YT-1300 or decimator, the more enjoyable our games will be

Partial scoring and the criticality of MoV are the driving factors, I feel - less the turret than the fact you can make one so tough to kill, and now much of an advantage it is for it to be so when winning 100-0 is viable, and simply superior to anything else.

It's worth noting this is distinct from wave 5's issues - one was a ship that was too capable as a whole; the other is a driving force from external factors.

This bothers me less, even if I really do prefer small ships.

Partial scoring is dumb. All this turret hate. Aggressors are not turrets, but are big ships that are being more successful than any turret ship across the board right now. Partial scoring will just make MORE people play them since an aggressor might only take 3-4 damage in a game compared to a falcon or decimator taking 8+. Just need to give them more time to make more smaller ships viable again (see tie advanced). There will be quite a few 3x imperial ace builds with a mix of ints and tie advance once the raider finally hits. Partial scoring isn't going to suddenly make x-wings etc. viable, it'll just skew the meta MORE than it is now towards things like aggressors and ints.

Also, corran horn laughs at your partial scoring. Do you really want to see games where some critically wounded ship with no chance of winning is left hanging around for 3 rounds until corran can recharge and milk those points before dealing the killing blow?

Yeah I'm not sure about the whole partial points thing either. I mean I have had many games where 2/3 pick your ship of choice has had only a couple of hull points left on them. How will that effect scoring? Eg han left on say 3 hull and 2/3 b wings on 2 or 3 hull out of a 4b z list Over all they have lost more than or as much as a phat han and 3 bandits.

I fall into the group of people who don't want phat turrets to be nurfed. I know that it's not just an auto win like people seem to think they are. Yes you don't need to point at what you shoot but you are putting all your eggs in the basket of predicting correctly and not stuffing up your range estimates, get it wrong and against most lists with any numbers and your ship is dead quick enough. There is a lot of skill involved just like picking the line a phat ship will follow so you can bring all your guns to bere.

I think it's the combination of a phat ship and an arc dodger thats real hard to deal with as the best way to deal with the phat ship is with numbers but those ships have a hard time dealing with the arc Dodgers as they have 3+ evade dice.

One of my favourite ships is the lambda but you try lock down any arc dodger with that ship, it's as bad as trying to chase a turret.

People who say that there is no problem with the game right now just need to look at why all the best players are taking just a few lists and notice that they are winning. Why are the best taking only a specific set of lists? Because they are better than all the rest. Whatever the reason, those lists can reliably win more games with a good player than other lists with a good player. Those lists have an advantage.

That sucks and kills game balance. I left WHFB after 13 years and over $1k investment due to game balance.

I just say a double Defender in the top 4, after going undefeated in Swiss. I feel all complaints about the meta are now invalid.

Look, there was a drastic change right as Regionals were starting. You were not going to see drastic changes right away, considering one of the good squads remained good. Diversification is happening. Just not at the rate many want.

I just say a double Defender in the top 4, after going undefeated in Swiss. I feel all complaints about the meta are now invalid.

Look, there was a drastic change right as Regionals were starting. You were not going to see drastic changes right away, considering one of the good squads remained good. Diversification is happening. Just not at the rate many want.

One person winning with a double Defender does not mean that change is happening. I think we are at the most stale Regional winners in X-wing's history. This is especially true in the US.

agreed about defender, one good placement doesn't invalidate **** and it needs to happen more often. looking forward to the future

but again, these results don't have diddly on the turgid, dark ages of wave 5 that vomited the horrible imperial fattie into the game. Even local tournies were nothing but 60% turrets

In six games at my regional, I fought one decimator. That was the only turret I saw that day. I saw lots of other fun builds that were strong in their own ways and had great counters for just about everything.

The biggest problem with the meta is two things: engine upgrade and damage mitigation. It's super easy to win games when you can outpace the fastest ships in the game. People consider the aggressor fast, but it can't create enough distance to circle around a firespray with engine upgrade. And the decimator is only gonna get worse when the raider hits. Palpatine is an auto include on kenkirk, who (when equipped with isard) will cancel 2 full hits per turn.

Kenkirk, predator, isard, emperor

Vader, title, ATC, predator, proton rockets

99 points

You've got a super defensive fattie, and a powered up Vader that has the potential to land all the damage. And the emperor could even swing out to help Vader if necessary. AND an initiative bid.

I just say a double Defender in the top 4, after going undefeated in Swiss. I feel all complaints about the meta are now invalid.

Look, there was a drastic change right as Regionals were starting. You were not going to see drastic changes right away, considering one of the good squads remained good. Diversification is happening. Just not at the rate many want.

One person winning with a double Defender does not mean that change is happening. I think we are at the most stale Regional winners in X-wing's history. This is especially true in the US.

You have to look at the progression of the Top 8s. Sure, Ohio was a bit of a setback, but look at what kinds of lists are starting to win. Win it all, no. But, the meta is not fully defined by the Regional winners.

A lot more ships are viable than what the doomsayers keep saying.

We meed scenario gameplay. The deathmatches we have now is driving the fat turret, maximum defense thing.

You have to look at the progression of the Top 8s. Sure, Ohio was a bit of a setback, but look at what kinds of lists are starting to win. Win it all, no. But, the meta is not fully defined by the Regional winners.

A lot more ships are viable than what the doomsayers keep saying.

It's true that it's been slowly changing. Very slowly. I do wish it were faster.

Still, I do think winning it does matter. People look to the winning lists of events, not as much to those that didn't win.

Kenkirk, predator, isard, emperor

Vader, title, ATC, predator, proton rockets

99 points

You've got a super defensive fattie, and a powered up Vader that has the potential to land all the damage. And the emperor could even swing out to help Vader if necessary. AND an initiative bid.

Id ditch prockets on vader and predator on kenkirk to pick up ptl and engines on kenkirk. A combat phase boost is great for arc dodging, it's like a ps12 action.

"The meta is fine, it's only 50% Fatties!"

50% of the lists being obnoxious 2 ship super shenanigan builds that aren't fun to fly against is still too much. I wish I could face someone flying the 3 autothrusters starviper and 1 Z list, that seems fun.

"The meta is fine, it's only 50% Fatties!"

50% of the lists being obnoxious 2 ship super shenanigan builds that aren't fun to fly against is still too much. I wish I could face someone flying the 3 autothrusters starviper and 1 Z list, that seems fun.

Except that it's not %50 fatties. Define 'fatties' as 'large base ship' and you might have an argument. There's an incredibly large diversity of large base ships right now, and not all of them would be defined as fat. Some of them yes.

I'd put my estimates (based on a few hours spent at list juggler) at somewhere around %25-30 'phat' lists. There is another %25-30 large base inclusion in the remaining lists (IG, Firespray, non-fat deci/2400/1300). There is also a huge number of interesting anomalies. My recollection is that the previous two regional seasons held NOWHERE NEAR the diversity it has, and the issue of 'fatties' is diminishing as time moves forward.

Yes, they're still winning some regionals. I still hold out hope, because the longer this game runs, the more diversity will be available for various options other than 'fat' ships. It's just taking time for people to make the choice to try out the new things, use different strategies, and make the decision to leave the 'safe and comfortable' ships they've been playing for longer.

Jacob

The meta was indeed 50%+ "Fat turrets" at the 4 regionals I attended. That is because posts like these, and especially HeyChadwick (not being personal, you are just the most vocal example in recent threads so you're a good example) are driving the perception that Fat Turrets are somehow more powerful and/or easier to play than other lists. This constant reinforcement combines with the natural human tendency to stick with what you know and we get a meta that shifts very slowly.

However, it doesn't take much to look at the tournament results starting with the pre-cloak changes Store Championships and following through the Regional season to see that not only are the overall numbers of fat turrets in decline, they are also showing a decline in relative effectiveness. More, they are being replaced by a variety of lists, brobots perhaps being the most common but they are certainly not the only contenders.

It takes time for changes to occur. Even the fat turrets took months to rise to the top after all the pieces were in place, for the same reasons it is taking months for them to decline.

I'll never understand this, there is a part of the game that a very vocal minority says it's incredibly boring and unfun to play against at tournaments. If it's so boring and unfun then why pay in tournaments?

cause without PWTs, they're very fun

But they'll always be there?

hence the problem

the less of an overall presence they are, however, the less chance you'll run into one

and there are definitely less now than there were during wave 5, which means the tournament scene is improving

People who say that there is no problem with the game right now just need to look at why all the best players are taking just a few lists and notice that they are winning. Why are the best taking only a specific set of lists? Because they are better than all the rest. Whatever the reason, those lists can reliably win more games with a good player than other lists with a good player. Those lists have an advantage.

That sucks and kills game balance. I left WHFB after 13 years and over $1k investment due to game balance.

I think one could argue it's not as simple as those being the "best" lists, so much as they're often:

1. Proven to be effective

2. Easy to fly

3. Watching all the other players who use em' first is a handy guide on how to use them.

4. Well, yeah, two-ships lists make for a MoV advantage.

5. Conversely, swarms suffer from MoV disadvantage.

But anytime you see an "oddball" list (like a bunch of Ys or anything with a TIE Defender or TIE Bomber) place highly in a competitive environment, I think it's fair to say it's because it's actually a solid list. Truly bad lists, even flown by a great player, would struggle to reach the top 8 in a regional tournament. Don't get me wrong, the lists we frequently see in the meta are all great lists, I just don't think it's fair to say they're definitive "best". There's other great lists out there, just waiting for a player to design and learn to play them.

We meed scenario gameplay. The deathmatches we have now is driving the fat turret, maximum defense thing.

This would be very cool if the scenarios were done properly. But that begs the question of whether or not the community would stand for it.