The tournament guide says the MOV table will change when we hit 400 points.

What are people predictions for how the MOV table will shift?

We went from 151 points out of 180 (83%) to 221 points out of 300 (73% & +70points) for a 10-0 victory...

So at 400 points are we thinking 291+ points for a 10-0, that's roughly 73% and follows a 70 point increase pattern.

The shifting of the smaller brackets might make slightly more points heavy ships more usable as they won't cost you a whole MOV bracket if they go down, especially at the 7-3 / 8-2 level.

It's not of massive importance to the game but I think it will be interesting to see, even more so depending on how many ships the average fleet will contain as we shift to 400 points.

Personally I'd rather see it move to a win draw loss system with MOV as a tie breaker, so that you don't get a huge emphasis on tabling and more focus on winning. It's not really fun knowing that if you win a 6/4 your probably out of the running for first place if there more than 8 people

I would say 285 or so. It seems that they are making it so that the cheapest of the biggest ships of that point Era would not cost you a 10-0 win if you lost one of them.

X-Wing uses W/L/D with MOV for strength of schedule right?

Personally I'd rather see it move to a win draw loss system with MOV as a tie breaker, so that you don't get a huge emphasis on tabling and more focus on winning. It's not really fun knowing that if you win a 6/4 your probably out of the running for first place if there more than 8 people

This here. As of right now, objectives can be almost ignored in favor of tabling your opponent as brutally as possible, this would bring back objectives as a more viable tactic, and take some emphasis away from tabling.

Personally I'd rather see it move to a win draw loss system with MOV as a tie breaker, so that you don't get a huge emphasis on tabling and more focus on winning. It's not really fun knowing that if you win a 6/4 your probably out of the running for first place if there more than 8 people

This here. As of right now, objectives can be almost ignored in favor of tabling your opponent as brutally as possible, this would bring back objectives as a more viable tactic, and take some emphasis away from tabling.

For you.

The Meta up here in the Frozen North seems a little different.

Hell, the last Tournament we run, we had a person complaining that, because he tabled the opponent, He lost out on 4 turns of trying to Score at the Outpost.

Personally I'd rather see it move to a win draw loss system with MOV as a tie breaker, so that you don't get a huge emphasis on tabling and more focus on winning. It's not really fun knowing that if you win a 6/4 your probably out of the running for first place if there more than 8 people

This here. As of right now, objectives can be almost ignored in favor of tabling your opponent as brutally as possible, this would bring back objectives as a more viable tactic, and take some emphasis away from tabling.

For you.

The Meta up here in the Frozen North seems a little different.

Hell, the last Tournament we run, we had a person complaining that, because he tabled the opponent, He lost out on 4 turns of trying to Score at the Outpost.

I have a hard time believing he tabled a guy in 3 turns and didn't manage a 9-1 at least, probably cause of the outpost but the issue is there's not just an emphasis on winning, but winning big. If you get 2 10-0s or 9-1s your at a huge advantage compared to a guy who gets 2 6-4s or 7-3s, to where he could lose and still win his event. There shouldn't be a competitive system that allows a 2-1 to win an event over a 3-0

Personally I'd rather see it move to a win draw loss system with MOV as a tie breaker, so that you don't get a huge emphasis on tabling and more focus on winning. It's not really fun knowing that if you win a 6/4 your probably out of the running for first place if there more than 8 people

This here. As of right now, objectives can be almost ignored in favor of tabling your opponent as brutally as possible, this would bring back objectives as a more viable tactic, and take some emphasis away from tabling.

For you.

The Meta up here in the Frozen North seems a little different.

Hell, the last Tournament we run, we had a person complaining that, because he tabled the opponent, He lost out on 4 turns of trying to Score at the Outpost.

Perhaps he should have waited then? It was his choice to kill his opponent after all.

Personally I'd rather see it move to a win draw loss system with MOV as a tie breaker, so that you don't get a huge emphasis on tabling and more focus on winning. It's not really fun knowing that if you win a 6/4 your probably out of the running for first place if there more than 8 people

This here. As of right now, objectives can be almost ignored in favor of tabling your opponent as brutally as possible, this would bring back objectives as a more viable tactic, and take some emphasis away from tabling.

For you.

The Meta up here in the Frozen North seems a little different.

Hell, the last Tournament we run, we had a person complaining that, because he tabled the opponent, He lost out on 4 turns of trying to Score at the Outpost.

I have a hard time believing he tabled a guy in 3 turns and didn't manage a 9-1 at least, probably cause of the outpost but the issue is there's not just an emphasis on winning, but winning big. If you get 2 10-0s or 9-1s your at a huge advantage compared to a guy who gets 2 6-4s or 7-3s, to where he could lose and still win his event. There shouldn't be a competitive system that allows a 2-1 to win an event over a 3-0

He wanted to increase his MOV. Getting 300 points is great. Getting 420 points is better.

I have had that happen where I tabled a guy but because we were playing Opening Salvo and I had 4 ships to his 2. However, since my ships had Savage on them and did not get the last 2 turns to heal up, he got half the points of my fleet dropping my 300 point win to 140ish points.