You also understand that there have been plenty of 'normal' balanced ships since wave 3 like the Z-95 and Defender and M3-A Interceptor and Starviper that would be playable in this meta should they not have to deal with a 13 health turret behind a wall of damage mitigation or ships that can gunner their HLC blasts.

I went 4-0 vs fat turrets with TIE Defenders in a Regional Championship. Three of them were undefeated before they played me, the other one I faced in the top 8. The fact of the matter is, if you maneuver better than a Turret to consistently draw arcs on them, then you'll have a large advantage in the ensuing dice-off. Ion Weapons also let you set up turns of predictability, where you can bring much more firepower to bear than you could just trying to guess where they'll be every turn. Fast blockers like TIE Fighters and especially A-wings can do similar things. There are lots of tools to deal with turrets. If you chose not to use them, that's your choice.

If you really want to get a sense of good and bad moves a turret can make, set up a table with your squad and a fat turret squad. If you've got Vassal, do it there, because it's a lot faster and easier. Make the moves for "your" squad, then look at all the moves for the fat turret. There are good ones and bad ones based on asteroid location and possible maneuvers by your squad. Do this a bunch of times, and you start getting a sense of where your squad wants to be in relation to a turret. Throw in an Ion Cannon or Ion Pulse Missile, and restrict optimal turret positions even further. Yes, the turret will almost always get a shot, but if you do it right that shot will be a consolation prize. To be fair, fast ships are much better at this than slow ships, because they offer more choices in blocking and drawing shots on a eluding turret. To bring it back to the OP, this is one of the reasons why BBBBZ doesn't seem to be having widespread success, It's not very good at bringing its firepower to bear on the most common tough targets.

Points aren't equal in this game. Some points spent will be worth well more their their cost against certain targets, but be worthless against other targets, such as Gunner vs high or low AGI targets. If your squad doesn't have some points spent that are good against fat turrets, you can't really expect to beat fat turrets most of the time.

What is the number from MajorJuggler's regional results thread? 55% won by fat game ruining no skill turrets? People having to face fat turret based 2 ship lists 7 times in a day?

So barely half? That seems really not horrible considering 'fat turret' is an archetype rather than a single ship. I'm not sure that saying 'the most popular meta archetype won 55% of regionals' is saying much. If it was 'the exact same fat Han build won 55% of regionals' that would feel more problematic to me.

I started playing very early wave 4, before everyone caught onto Phantoms.

My 'distorted' view of the game prefers a nuanced one where maneuver dials actually matter, and whether or not you get actions, and where it was harder to straight up autolose in the list building phase. Nuanced PS bidding was more of a thing also. It prefers a meta where you couldn't stack 4 dice and gunner and FCS except on a Lambda because ships had certain quirks and limitations, like not being able to ignore asteroids and fire their HLC as a turret and ruin the game.

You also understand that there have been plenty of 'normal' balanced ships since wave 3 like the Z-95 and Defender and M3-A Interceptor and Starviper that would be playable in this meta should they not have to deal with a 13 health turret behind a wall of damage mitigation or ships that can gunner their HLC blasts.

I don't care if the meta is fluid or not. If it starts off good and then is fluid and changes to absolute **** then I'd rather it be stagnant.

I have a feeling that if turret haters keep on complaining about this game that was ruined by them, we'll eventually have a turret nerf just like the Phantom nerf. What is the number from MajorJuggler's regional results thread? 55% won by fat game ruining no skill turrets? People having to face fat turret based 2 ship lists 7 times in a day?

Wave 7 will do absolutely nothing to the meta, just as wave 6 changed absolutely nothing except added dual IG's.

Dual IG is actually pretty significant as they are NOT turrets.

You realise autothruster/stealth Super Fel is a very effective counter to Dash? It's the reason Corran/Dash is dropping in popularity right now.

edit: At least in the tournament circuit. I don't know what individual metas are playing in casual games.

I started playing very early wave 4, before everyone caught onto Phantoms.

My 'distorted' view of the game prefers a nuanced one where maneuver dials actually matter, and whether or not you get actions, and where it was harder to straight up autolose in the list building phase. Nuanced PS bidding was more of a thing also. It prefers a meta where you couldn't stack 4 dice and gunner and FCS except on a Lambda because ships had certain quirks and limitations, like not being able to ignore asteroids and fire their HLC as a turret and ruin the game.

You also understand that there have been plenty of 'normal' balanced ships since wave 3 like the Z-95 and Defender and M3-A Interceptor and Starviper that would be playable in this meta should they not have to deal with a 13 health turret behind a wall of damage mitigation or ships that can gunner their HLC blasts.

I don't care if the meta is fluid or not. If it starts off good and then is fluid and changes to absolute **** then I'd rather it be stagnant.

I have a feeling that if turret haters keep on complaining about this game that was ruined by them, we'll eventually have a turret nerf just like the Phantom nerf. What is the number from MajorJuggler's regional results thread? 55% won by fat game ruining no skill turrets? People having to face fat turret based 2 ship lists 7 times in a day?

Wave 7 will do absolutely nothing to the meta, just as wave 6 changed absolutely nothing except added dual IG's.

Dual IG is actually pretty significant as they are NOT turrets.

You realise autothruster/stealth Super Fel is a very effective counter to Dash? It's the reason Corran/Dash is dropping in popularity right now.

edit: At least in the tournament circuit. I don't know what individual metas are playing in casual games.

1.) Not a hard counter, but yes.

2.) I want to be able to play lists based around small based ships other than Soontir or Corran and not have an uphill battle against a player with an HLC turret. I realize that Dash can be countered by a miniscule amount of things that aren't also turrets/IGs, but I don't want to have to play just those ships to avoid pretty much an autoloss vs. Dash.

I don't know how your opponents play Dash, but mine boost and barrel roll with him pretty much every turn. This makes it difficult to get him in arc let alone block him because he's always at some weird angle and/or far away. Like the pre-nerf Phantom, Dash can simply see where your ships have moved and boost and barrel roll the opposite way.

You also understand that there have been plenty of 'normal' balanced ships since wave 3 like the Z-95 and Defender and M3-A Interceptor and Starviper that would be playable in this meta should they not have to deal with a 13 health turret behind a wall of damage mitigation or ships that can gunner their HLC blasts.

I went 4-0 vs fat turrets with TIE Defenders in a Regional Championship. Three of them were undefeated before they played me, the other one I faced in the top 8. The fact of the matter is, if you maneuver better than a Turret to consistently draw arcs on them, then you'll have a large advantage in the ensuing dice-off. Ion Weapons also let you set up turns of predictability, where you can bring much more firepower to bear than you could just trying to guess where they'll be every turn. Fast blockers like TIE Fighters and especially A-wings can do similar things. There are lots of tools to deal with turrets. If you chose not to use them, that's your choice.

...

To be fair, fast ships are much better at this than slow ships, because they offer more choices in blocking and drawing shots on a eluding turret. To bring it back to the OP, this is one of the reasons why BBBBZ doesn't seem to be having widespread success, It's not very good at bringing its firepower to bear on the most common tough targets.

...

I completely agree with your reasoning that BBBBZ is not having widespread success. I feel like it's a very blunt instrument -- great raw stats for the cost but has a lower ceiling. I think it's why we won't see 4 advanced+tie and 5 K fighters doing well. This isn't to say I think they can't be played well or even win larger tournaments if things fall right.

Come on, all I see in forums are people complaining about fat turrets. However some months ago all I saw was people complaining about 4 ship lists. And before that, all I saw was people complaining about swarms.

The meta changes. New skills come into play. Although some tournaments have been won by fat turrets lately many haven't. Just as many weren't won by 4 ship lists some months ago, and many weren't won by swarms before that.

The fact that so many different ship builds win championship tells me that balance exists. What changes is the trend of using different lists. I really don't understand why so much whining happens. And even if a particular build would ALWAYS win, or even more often than not, what is the point complaining? Just use it in the tournament, then... If you really are the best player, you will win. Right?

..

What, you didn't win with a PWT? Oh, there's the luck factor, you say? Ok.

Ok you're going to need to cite some sources there. I have yet to see a single complaint about four ships lists. People were complaining about turrets going into worlds LAST YEAR. Autothrusters came in wave 6 to try and resolve that. There's some mounting evidence that turret players dont perceive reality the way the rest of us do.