They don't have to face you to shoot at you, so their maneuvers do not matter.

I'm not sure how many times this has to be said, if either some people can't understand it or choose to ignore it. (Others might not have seen it, but it's been repeated):

Maneuvering turrets matter. You don't want to get shot at. You want to maneuver out of arcs.

I think that's simple enough for most to understand.

Most ships have to maneuver for both offense and defense. Turrets do not. I mean most of the people I see who use turrets and are good players talk about how much easier it is to play over a 6 round tournament with a turret list than, say, a swarm.

When I lose to Fat Han, I step back, look at my list, and usually say "Well, probably should have run brobots." I'm hoping wave 7 gives more options to fling red dice at the turrets, because that's pretty much how you have to beat them. Maybe a tricked out Bossk with HLC can tear through that mitigation.

They don't have to face you to shoot at you, so their maneuvers do not matter.

I'm not sure how many times this has to be said, if either some people can't understand it or choose to ignore it. (Others might not have seen it, but it's been repeated):

Maneuvering turrets matter. You don't want to get shot at. You want to maneuver out of arcs.

I think that's simple enough for most to understand.

Most ships have to maneuver for both offense and defense. Turrets do not.

You mean turrets don't care if they're shot at? I'm not sure how you can possibly say that with a straight face. Are you winking?

Most ships have to maneuver for both offense and defense. Turrets do not.

You mean turrets don't care if they're shot at? I'm not sure how you can possibly say that with a straight face. Are you winking?

No, I mean turrets can maneuver purely defensively. Their offense, even against autothrusters takes a back seat, and honestly the biggest AT threat to a turret is the brobot.

The biggest thing is, a lot of the field, if they make one mistake or they blank their green dice, they're done. With a fattie, it's a few ticks off their 10-16 hp.

This has been said many times before by me and others, but maybe you weren't around:

1. Turrets cost more for their performance. The 360 ability is built into the cost of the ship. In other words, you can buy more arc dodging firepower for the equivalent cost of turret.

2. That's a hp problem and not a turret problem. There are fat ships without turrets. Conversely, 3 hp ships can be one shot killed by non-turrets, so again, this doesn't apply. The arc dodgers have always been high risk, high pay off. Auto thrusters leveled the playing field against turrets.

This has been said many times before by me and others, but maybe you weren't around:

1. Turrets cost more for their performance. The 360 ability is built into the cost of the ship. In other words, you can buy more arc dodging firepower for the equivalent cost of turret.

2. That's a hp problem and not a turret problem. There are fat ships without turrets. Conversely, 3 hp ships can be one shot killed by non-turrets, so again, this doesn't apply. The arc dodgers have always been high risk, high pay off. Auto thrusters leveled the playing field against turrets.

I know what those points are, and I disagree.

1. The turret ships also tend to have strong dials and pay less as a % of their point cost to get boost as an action. The good ones, anyway. I don't think anyone's complaining about Outer Rim Smuggler or Wild Space Fringer(without an HLC and outrider, anyway). The ships that can take autothrusters are a small subset of fighters as a whole: A-Wings, Interceptors, StarVipers, IG-88(lol). A-wings are basically blockers against turrets- their firepower isn't enough to get through the serious mitigation. Interceptors are good- the ability to take a stealth device alongside their autothrusters really helps them. StarVipers are super expensive, a tricked out one comes out to not much less than some of the turrets. IG-88s benefit a ton from autothrusters and while they are expensive, they come with some powerful abilities, both offensive and defensive. They benefit from a lot of things that also help turrets, but they actually have to dogfight a little bit which makes them interesting to play against.

2. The fat non-turrets mostly include Y(the secondary turrets are interesting and fun to play around) and B-wings, well, the viable ones(lol tie bombers, maybe we'll see them with wave 7). 8 HP is good, but neither ship has much mitigation, both have one evade die. Their dials are for the most part worse than the fatties, too, though they are economical, hence the BBBB(Z) and 4x hog lists being a thing in tournaments, and I think 4x ion hog has decent game against fatties, though it's kinda hilarious that it takes 2 ions for it to work.

1. I'm not going to try to convince you because I don't have the math (or time to calculate it--game day about to commence) right now. It's been discussed and the consensus is that there's a premium for turrets. The designers, top winners, bloggers--they all agree. Feel free to claim they're all wrong.

2. Also Lambda, Firespray, IG, Hounds Tooth, and arguably TIE Defender.

re; you pay premium for turrets.

Let's assume this is the case.

Question; why are so many people handicapping themselves* at tournaments?

Including some very, VERY good players.

(*=By paying exactly that premium for fat turrets?)

...

(let it sink in)

Perhaps they are simply worth their points?

nah

the turret point issue is an issue of m.o.v. More points used up for this "weakness" = more points denied to the opponent

as for arc-dodgers, that brings up a good point. It's hard to be high risk, high reward when PWTs don't give two ***** nor a single ****. That baffling bit of lazy game design should have been evident long before the release of the interceptor and long before the need for autothrusters, not to mention all the waves in which the poor ships were effectively worthless just by the PWT's simple existence.

the sheer impossibility of dodging a PWT if you want to shoot it, apart from incredibly lucky space peanut interventions or paying 2 points for an auto-include upgrade, sets it apart from every 2ndary turret apart from outrider manglers (and ions/flechettes, but no one uses those) and makes for imo one sh*tty piece of game design.

Personally, I couldn't care less how powerful PWTs are in competitive play; the fact that they are just means I have to suffer their presence more. It's the casual invalidation of my manuevering in exchange for heaping more emphasis on the green dice that gets on my nerves.

FFG have proven that they have at least a bit of an idea of how lazily designed a mechanic it is, given the release of two 2-dice PWTs which make the primary attack less of an asset and more of a desperation move. The problem is that they didn't do the same with the decimator, relying instead of an untouched bomb and torp slot and a tragically underused ability (oicuun!) to force them to care about their facing. Sadly, all of these were all trivially ignored to pump points into the most expensive fatass they could.

For one I'm glad the focus is always on fat PWTs, it means surely FFG won't nerf the real most broken ship in the game - the HWK-290

For one I'm glad the focus is always on fat PWTs, it means surely FFG won't nerf the real most broken ship in the game - the HWK-290

Ho boy don't I wish the HWK was good for anything other than the pilot abilities. It would be interesting if the generic hwks had any use at all.

For one I'm glad the focus is always on fat PWTs, it means surely FFG won't nerf the real most broken ship in the game - the HWK-290

the HWK's pretty fat

you just havn't seen Palob at the focus buffet, yet

re; you pay premium for turrets.

Let's assume this is the case.

Question; why are so many people handicapping themselves* at tournaments?

Including some very, VERY good players.

(*=By paying exactly that premium for fat turrets?)

...

(let it sink in)

Perhaps they are simply worth their points?

They are worth more than their points once a significant number of upgrades are stacked on them. 58 point HLC Kyle Super Dash can reliably beat 60 points of normal ships like TIEs or whatever, 48 point Super Corran can reliably beat 48 points of 'normal' ships, ~ 60 point Han is going to pretty much auto-win against 5 TIE Fighters, etc.

I'm excited for neo-small ship builds like 4 TLT Y Wings, 4x AC Tempests, etc. Might be able to not have to face Super Dash or Soontir/Deci every ******* game.

Fat Han easily loses to 5 TIEs. You just lost all credibility.

re; you pay premium for turrets.

Let's assume this is the case.

Question; why are so many people handicapping themselves* at tournaments?

Including some very, VERY good players.

(*=By paying exactly that premium for fat turrets?)

...

(let it sink in)

Perhaps they are simply worth their points?

re; you pay premium for turrets.

Let's assume this is the case.

Question; why are so many people handicapping themselves* at tournaments?

Including some very, VERY good players.

(*=By paying exactly that premium for fat turrets?)

...

(let it sink in)

Perhaps they are simply worth their points?

They've been paying the premium because of the Phantom. Are you new to the game?

Just FYI; I choose not to be offended by your attempt to insult. (new to the game)

It speaks volumes about you that you resort to this instead of using arguments.

Anyhow. Phantoms were nerfed and no longer dominate the tournament scene.

Fat turrets did not disappear. You have not noticed this?

Kinda clashes with your 'premium prices' for turrets statement.

One would almost think many players *still* think they are worth the points.

Fat turrets are not overpowered but they are just that bit easier in a tournament setting for several reasons stated many times in many threads:

1) They are less taxing to play (well) if you play several games in a row.

2) MOV helps 'fat' ships a lot.

These are the two 'main' reasons IMO.

re; you pay premium for turrets.

Let's assume this is the case.

Question; why are so many people handicapping themselves* at tournaments?

Including some very, VERY good players.(*=By paying exactly that premium for fat turrets?)

...

(let it sink in)

Perhaps they are simply worth their points?

They've been paying the premium because of the Phantom. Are you new to the game?

Why do you always have to be so aggressive? I don't think turrets are broken but you sound like a zealot. You share your highly subjective points but say you can't be bothered to point out the math behind it, because whatever. An insult with every comment. I guess you must be a very frustrated xwing player,and I am sorry if that is the case.

So come on. You are making a fool of yourself, and folks are laughing at your jests.

I'm glad I didn't post in this thread yesterday.

Also, I'm tired of people claiming Large Base Turreted ships are easy mode. If they were easy mode why would I lose to other builds ever? I'm a half decent player, so playing an easy mode list should mean I never lose, right?

I'm especially tired of being told that by someone flying a dual IG with Autothrusters list. Then having them claim that 'those every move dials' are the reason why, while the IG dial is superior, and they have autothrusters and then go on to table me without losing their ships. Yeah, easy mode all right.

Jacob

there's a difference between easy-mode and auto-win. Easy-mode is always relative, i.e having to worry about the same things as every other ship minus making any difficult decisions regarding maneuvering defensively versus maneuvering to get shots off.

for example, the IG dial is superior, but it actually has positions in which it cannot fire at the opponent (quite a few, in fact) which, turns out, is actually a major weakness (especially when its fat base gets stuck on obstructions) that requires a lot of forethought to play around, especially when captive cheri denies them their loops and k-turns.

Auto-win is auto-win, and that doesn't exist in the game unless the PWT makes it to late game at enough health. X-wing isn't 40k, after all

there's a difference between easy-mode and auto-win. Easy-mode is always relative, i.e having to worry about the same things as every other ship minus making any difficult decisions regarding maneuvering defensively versus maneuvering to get shots off.

for example, the IG dial is superior, but it actually has positions in which it cannot fire at the opponent (quite a few, in fact) which, turns out, is actually a major weakness (especially when its fat base gets stuck on obstructions) that requires a lot of forethought to play around, especially when captive cheri denies them their loops and k-turns.

Auto-win is auto-win, and that doesn't exist in the game unless the PWT makes it to late game at enough health. X-wing isn't 40k, after all

I agree that easy-mode and auto-win are different and I'm not talking about auto-win. Although lots of people are certainly accusing Large Base Turreted ships of being overpowered, which would suggest they feel they're auto-win.

I am talking about easy mode accusations though. My Chewbo list against a dual Aggressor list is very challenging. I have to be very, very precise with my movements. Make one mistake and it costs you the game. That's not 'easy mode' or forgiving. It's very difficult to be perfect.

I agree that in other match ups there are lots more forgiving situations to be in. But a list like mine is not easy mode, it's perhaps easier for a beginner, and more forgiving in many situations, but to fly it to a championship is very difficult.

Jacob

I should add that the 'easy-mode' accusations are also fairly tiring because it also implies an superiority/inferiority in terms of pilot skill from the accuser. It often can feel like "If you were a real player you wouldn't use these ships" which is absolutely unfair. It suggests also that the opponent or forumite in question often would feel they're the 'better' player, and it's not very kind, respectful, or even in the 'fly casual' mentality. It takes away from the enjoyment of the game. Yesterday it nearly ruined my experience of my first regional.

The point is, when one claims 'easy mode' they throw your opponent under the bus of a potential variety of misconceptions and display a rather unfriendly attitude.

For the record, a big part of the reason I fly a Chewbo list is because I love both the characters and starships from the Star Wars universe. Chewie is the hero of the EU for me, and I really enjoy the Outrider's role in the EU as well. When I acquired these ships, they are the ones that make me feel most like I'm 'playing star wars' and the big kid in me gets a real kick out of working these ships. I'm not using them because I found some forum posts that said 'these ships are well paired' I'm playing them because when I got them, Chewie and Leebo seemed a natural fit just looking at the cards and the points allowed me.

I'm tired of people accusing me of taking the ships and upgrades I take because it's 'easy mode'. I don't find it easy to win with them. I often come down the wire with them, and it can sometimes be extremely difficult. Just like any other list, where some match ups are preferable and some are nightmares.

Jacob

there's a difference between easy-mode and auto-win. Easy-mode is always relative, i.e having to worry about the same things as every other ship minus making any difficult decisions regarding maneuvering defensively versus maneuvering to get shots off.

for example, the IG dial is superior, but it actually has positions in which it cannot fire at the opponent (quite a few, in fact) which, turns out, is actually a major weakness (especially when its fat base gets stuck on obstructions) that requires a lot of forethought to play around, especially when captive cheri denies them their loops and k-turns.

Auto-win is auto-win, and that doesn't exist in the game unless the PWT makes it to late game at enough health. X-wing isn't 40k, after all

I agree that easy-mode and auto-win are different and I'm not talking about auto-win. Although lots of people are certainly accusing Large Base Turreted ships of being overpowered, which would suggest they feel they're auto-win.

I am talking about easy mode accusations though. My Chewbo list against a dual Aggressor list is very challenging. I have to be very, very precise with my movements. Make one mistake and it costs you the game. That's not 'easy mode' or forgiving. It's very difficult to be perfect.

I agree that in other match ups there are lots more forgiving situations to be in. But a list like mine is not easy mode, it's perhaps easier for a beginner, and more forgiving in many situations, but to fly it to a championship is very difficult.

Jacob

A thing doesn't have to be an auto-win to be overpowered or bad for the game. I do agree that there are lists that can beat up turrets(and dual turrets) but I feel like the scum meta is basically shoved into Dual IGs because of the need to match mitigation with mitigation and bring a lot of raw power to the game. I don't believe it's auto-win, I do believe it's a bit over the top.

Flying any list to a championship is difficult, though, and I give big kudos to whoever manages it. Even if turrets are a bit degenerate, you still gotta play through other turrets to get there. I think games can survive and even still be good with balance issues, and I still like the game despite it.

I'm just frustrated that, I look at some interesting list builds and have to throw them out because they don't have enough firepower to kill Chewie/Fat Han/Dash after brawling with the escort.

While I don't believe pwts are op and do believe they're the most forgiving ships in the game, I do think Jacob might be onto something

Perhaps we should restrict the terminology to something more appropriate, because "easy-mode" does carry a variety of negative connotations.

A forgiving element in any game isn't necessarily a bad thing because there will always have to be varying levels of difficulty to account for various players and their various play styles. In a well balanced game, being on the bottom rung of "difficulty" should really only mean "easy to use; difficult to master" because the difficult ships should be a challenge to defeat and almost impossible to beat if utilizing only basic tactics.

Autothrusters already provides a measure of this by allowing the relevant ships to heavily mitigate the PWT advantage and force the pwt to care about its front arc; naturally demanding more out of the player flying it. There is also the fact that pwts should get outdiced by jousters, but the reliability of this fact in a competitive setting is obscured by the number of rounds one needs to play in + m.o.v leading to the 2-ship skew.

Of course,"forgiving" fails to capture my gripe with pwts which is that they invaldiate the manuevers of non-thruster opponents and replace them with green dice, leading to some incredibly depressing no-win scenarios outside both players' control. I'm not sure how to properly express that in a simple term, especially since it doesn't break the game as much as dumb it down unless you have access to select upgrades.

This is why I try as much as possible to direct expressed hatred of the PWT to the mechanic itself and not the people using it. It is an issue fixed squarely on a lazy implementation of a technology several starwars ships have access to; difference being many either use 2ndary turrets with actual restrictions any ship can play around (range limits) or have such a puny PWT that just the act of getting it to do much of anything requires skillful maneuvering (title-less yt-2400 and upcoming k-wing).

It is an issue that ultimately must be resolved by ffg, preferably at the level of an errata so we aren't stuck with just a few ships that won't get dicescrewed as often by pwts. Until then, best one can do is continue to point out the problem and the logical fallacies that surround it (such as pwts somehow being necessary to counter arcdodgers by just throwing the concept out the window; especially when everyone but the phantom can be blocked, impeedeed by obstructions, or otherwise controlled) (or that the current incarnation of PWT is somehow the only way we'd see beloved characters like han solo and the falcon included in the game)

PWT fatties are indeed easy-mode at the moment because its simply easier to win a game with one. That doesn't mean auto-win or unstoppable, but its a hell of a lot harder to win a tourney with 3 Interceptors or A-wings or even a swam than with a Fat Han. Win, lose, or draw, its just not fun to play against a ship you can't out-maneuver, but can easily out-maneuver you. Ever see 2 dual YT lists play? X-wing instantly becomes purely a dice game...why even bring models? Not to mention: Fat Han and Cheery are the best Arc-dodgers in the game at the moment due to having 10+ PS and being able to shoot regardless of where they end up after boosting/barrel-rolling.Think about that. Autothrusters were added to the game because even the Devs realized how ridiculous PWTs were against arc-dodgers, and PWT-reliers screamed bloody-murder when they were announced. It'll be nice to go back and laugh at these threads when PWTs inevitably get nerfed in the near future, be it by FAQ or X-Wing 2.0.

Until then, Ill stick with my mantra from another thread:

Playing Interceptors:

Playing Fat Turrets:

It's those sorts of posts that are most disrespectful and honestly go against the mentality of fly casual. To use GIFs that essentially make people who fly turrets look like children and people who fly interceptors out to be geniuses is exactly what I'm talking about. I'm reporting you Stilgod.

Jacob

It's those sorts of posts that are most disrespectful and honestly go against the mentality of fly casual. To use GIFs that essentially make people who fly turrets look like children and people who fly interceptors out to be geniuses is exactly what I'm talking about. I'm reporting you Stilgod.

Jacob

You seem awfully sensitive about anyone who thinks the game is anything other than 100% perfection.