If a ship is good, it's still good, if it was bad, it's still bad. I don't think MOV changes that, because, remember it only matters between people with the same amount of wins. I still think you're gonna see turrets and fat ships because they're still good at winning games- you have to get to that 5-1 and 4-2 point for MoV to matter.

The change does also affect the score of games. There will be cases that the results of matches are the opposite of what they would have been before the change.

Previously, a 59 point Fat Han that had 6 hull left when the game went to time would have beaten a pair of Green Squads (23 points each) and received a full win. After the change the score would be 30 to 46 with the Green Squad player claiming a full win.

this change is needed and long overdue

honestly, I can't imagine why anyone in their right mind would want this to apply to small ships too. They can't soak the same amount of points nor be even nearly as forgiving.

people like pointing out Corran Horn, who is always a bump away from ******, or maybe Miranda who is operating with less speed, health, punch, and points than any large base PWT. Small ships are simply, mechanically not in need of any adjustments

unless you want to tackle green dice, but that's another story

Slow play/stalling is completely enforceable. You just need to call a judge over.

How often have you called a judge over and had your opponent disqualified, or at least given more time to play the match out? In my experience that happens at best 1 time out of 20. Actually it has been exactly zero out of 20+. Your mileage may vary.

Regardless, slow play is fundamentally undefined by the rules and therefore is fundamentally not enforceable.

Slow play to abuse the scoring is still a symptom not the cause.

wait a tic

I thought "slow play" was less farting around with a PWT and more "let me set a four-minute dial"

as much as PWTs are the least interesting things in the game, I can't imagine penalizing someone for not running the clock when it's entirely in their advantage to do so. What's the alternative? joust ?

I was (trying) to refer specifically to taking a long time to place dials etc to burn out the clock, not merely running away.

In practice it is a very grey line and can be difficult to differentiate the two.

Running out the clock by avoiding conflict in the game is a valid tactic. The game is still being played and the possibility of forcing a mistake or setting a trap still exists. The old scoring system just made this too easy for some ships to do. Running out the clock by delaying procedural tasks and stalling is something that is impossible for the other player to combat and is what the rules call out as slow play.

Compare it to football (or hand-egg). Driving down the field making sure that every play ends in bounds to keep the clock running is a legal and valid tactic. The team without possession can still try to force a turn over or penalties. Taking too long to come out of huddle and start the the play is illegal and results in a penalty as there is nothing that the other team can possibly do to regain advantage.

Running out the clock by avoiding conflict in the game is a valid tactic. The game is still being played and the possibility of forcing a mistake or setting a trap still exists. The old scoring system just made this too easy for some ships to do. Running out the clock by delaying procedural tasks and stalling is something that is impossible for the other player to combat and is what the rules call out as slow play.

Running out the clock legally or illegally to force a win in a timed game that you would otherwise lose untimed is an unfortunate but inevitable side effect of any scoring system that scores a large number of points for one particular hit point of damage. Running out of the clock is still a symptom of the underlying problem.

*See below.

5. Any scoring system that has huge amounts of points scored for a single hit point of damage will directly result in skewed tactics vs what you would do in an untimed game, and the scoring itself will sometimes clearly result in the "wrong" player getting the win in a timed game.

If, with less than 10 minutes left in the round you take 5 minutes to place your one dial for your very low health VT-49 while you are winning on points, that is flagrant slow play. This did happen at the MA Regionals in round 5 or 6 at a top-ish table, and it did not get called. Said player did win that round.

* Edit:

Compare it to football (or hand-egg). Driving down the field making sure that every play ends in bounds to keep the clock running is a legal and valid tactic. The team without possession can still try to force a turn over or penalties. Taking too long to come out of huddle and start the the play is illegal and results in a penalty as there is nothing that the other team can possibly do to regain advantage.

The difference is that the clock is not an integral component of X-wing. Games are supposed to go to completion not to time. It is more like baseball that is untimed.

Baseball with a clock would be a better comparison. Say the away team is winning by one point in the bottom of the 9th inning. The home team has 3 men on base, 0 outs, 0 strikes, and 3 balls. The pitcher then refuses to throw his next pitch, and the clock runs out and the away team wins on time. That is a better analogy.

Also, what is legal and what is intended or healthy for the game are two different things. I'm certainly not debating what is "legal" or motivated by the rules. You are right, the rules encourage you to do everything you can to maximize your advantage to win the game. This does not however require killing the opposing squad. Now it does not even require killing any ships at all, you just need to get a single large ship at half health, and you can run away. (And kill the clock by slow playing being very careful and meticulous.) This could be a viable tactic with highly defensive PtL Green A-wings, for example.

A friend of mine said, "You guys need to stop being [slang for female genitalia] and just call the TO over." and I halted my complaints, waited a second, and said, "Yep".

If I set dials for 6 ships and my opponent still hasn't set the last dial for his last ship in a two ship list, come on. I'm usually lenient and understand that there are some crucial turns and I haven't had to call a TO over yet, but I sometimes will ask politely if they could make a decision and that speeds things up a bit.

I'm like 99% sure that ParaGoomba Slayer hitting like had nothing to do with my post and everything to do with a PWT losing.

A friend of mine said, "You guys need to stop being [slang for female genitalia] and just call the TO over." and I halted my complaints, waited a second, and said, "Yep".

If I set dials for 6 ships and my opponent still hasn't set the last dial for his last ship in a two ship list, come on. I'm usually lenient and understand that there are some crucial turns and I haven't had to call a TO over yet, but I sometimes will ask politely if they could make a decision and that speeds things up a bit.

Did he say it in an east London accent with proper emphasis on the c?

I'm like 99% sure that ParaGoomba Slayer hitting like had nothing to do with my post and everything to do with a PWT losing.

Christ I miss that old layout

The white hurts my eyes if I stare too long

Judging by my post count, y'all know I do that a lot

I'm like 99% sure that ParaGoomba Slayer hitting like had nothing to do with my post and everything to do with a PWT losing.

Christ I miss that old layout

The white hurts my eyes if I stare too long

Judging by my post count, y'all know I do that a lot

I forgot they even made that change. I changed the theme the day they did it.

Bottom of the page. Change theme. Do it. Never look back.

I'm like 99% sure that ParaGoomba Slayer hitting like had nothing to do with my post and everything to do with a PWT losing.

Christ I miss that old layout

The white hurts my eyes if I stare too long

Judging by my post count, y'all know I do that a lot

I forgot they even made that change. I changed the theme the day they did it.

Bottom of the page. Change theme. Do it. Never look back.

ohhhhhhh

**** thing just blends into the white background

thank you, oh great savior

I disagree with the thread topic. I agree with the FFG decision to change the rulings for large ships only. While some odd/weird theoretical scenarios are possible that seem unbalanced, the ruling will shift the focus for people that play large ships to be more offensive, as many has said. People are now encouraged to play more in line with the spirit and intent of the game. It also encourages more build diversity.

I'm like 99% sure that ParaGoomba Slayer hitting like had nothing to do with my post and everything to do with a PWT losing.

Yes. More specifically the thought of Green Squadron Pilots, second tier generics of all things, robbing a PWT of a win via MoV shenanigans.

Aren't Green Squadron Pilots 19 points though?

I'm like 99% sure that ParaGoomba Slayer hitting like had nothing to do with my post and everything to do with a PWT losing.

Yes. More specifically the thought of Green Squadron Pilots, second tier generics of all things, robbing a PWT of a win via MoV shenanigans.

Aren't Green Squadron Pilots 19 points though?

19 points base. 19-2 (Chardan Refit)+2 (Autothrusters)+3(Push the Limit)+1 (Veteran Instincts)=23 points (I suppose it could be PTL+Outmanuever instead).

I'm not a fan of the new ruling.

Me, either. Half-points for Large ships is, implicitly, a claim that Large-ships are all advantage, no disadvantage. And that's simply not true.

The half-points rule is a very odd -- popular, but that doesn't make it less odd -- attempt to address the symptoms (high-MoV for ships containing big lists) rather than the disease (primarily Large-Boost, admittedly in lesser collaboration with stuff like C-3PO and Ysanne Isarde).

It's especially odd as it comes so immediately on the heels of the TLT, which is, in itself, one of the worst nightmares Large ships could have conceived of.

At this point, having made these arguments over and over, all I can really do is shrug and watch them borne out in actual play.

I'm like 99% sure that ParaGoomba Slayer hitting like had nothing to do with my post and everything to do with a PWT losing.

Yes. More specifically the thought of Green Squadron Pilots, second tier generics of all things, robbing a PWT of a win via MoV shenanigans.

Aren't Green Squadron Pilots 19 points though?

Refit Greens with Autothrusters, PTL, and 1 point EPT (wired or crackshot) come in at 23.

I'm not a fan of the new ruling. I honestly think it allows weaker players to win matches they shouldn't have won.

Is there some reason stronger players can't adapt to the the new rules?

I'm not a fan of the new ruling.

Me, either. Half-points for Large ships is, implicitly, a claim that Large-ships are all advantage, no disadvantage. And that's simply not true.

The half-points rule is a very odd -- popular, but that doesn't make it less odd -- attempt to address the symptoms (high-MoV for ships containing big lists) rather than the disease (primarily Large-Boost, admittedly in lesser collaboration with stuff like C-3PO and Ysanne Isarde).

It's especially odd as it comes so immediately on the heels of the TLT, which is, in itself, one of the worst nightmares Large ships could have conceived of.

At this point, having made these arguments over and over, all I can really do is shrug and watch them borne out in actual play.

1.) If you would have nerfed large ship boost instead we'd have many more people complaining about how it hurts Lambdas and Firesprays too much than we currently do complaining about large ship half point scoring. "You can't nerf large ship boost, the Lambda would NEVER be able to turn around!"

2.) The thing about Fat Turretwing is that people will fly the list archetype incessantly. The very instant everyone collectively gets bored of quad TLT the Fat Turretwing players will start playing Super Dash again. Really, the only reason I fly Quad TLT is to counter Fat Turretwing. Trust me, I'd rather be playing my XXXX and 4 R7's build. So we need some nerf (that isn't much of a nerf honestly) that will scare bad players into thinking it's no longer good. Like the Phantom nerf.

I'm not a fan of the new ruling. I honestly think it allows weaker players to win matches they shouldn't have won.

The same could be said for the old way. Does it really take skill to randomly set your Falcon dial and then just boost to a good spot if you end up in a bad one and force your opponent to over commit to taking out your point fortress?

At least Soontir doesn't get to shoot at what he's running away from.

1.) If you would have nerfed large ship boost instead we'd have many more people complaining about how it hurts Lambdas and Firesprays too much than we currently do complaining about large ship half point scoring. "You can't nerf large ship boost, the Lambda would NEVER be able to turn around!"

2.) The thing about Fat Turretwing is that people will fly the list archetype incessantly. The very instant everyone collectively gets bored of quad TLT the Fat Turretwing players will start playing Super Dash again. Really, the only reason I fly Quad TLT is to counter Fat Turretwing. Trust me, I'd rather be playing my XXXX and 4 R7's build. So we need some nerf (that isn't much of a nerf honestly) that will scare bad players into thinking it's no longer good. Like the Phantom nerf.

(1) I've explained several times how this is -- literally demonstrably -- not true. My fix actually allows a ship with Large-Boost to have a tighter turn radius. What they won't have is the ability to arc-dodge huge lengths and range out of retalitaory fire.

(2) I don't care about that. As long as the ships are reasonably balanced, what someone else chooses to fly is up to them. My only input is whether I choose to keep playing with them.

I think the last year has shown us that points heavy big ships clearly impart an advantage under the old system.

People claimed quite vehemently they were only taking turrets because phantoms were too strong, phantom movement change was the first attempt to break the two ship meta but it only made it worse.

People won't give up the PWT crutch they've become dependent on willingly so ffg has made this change, if it's not enough they'll make life even harder for pancakes.

1.) If you would have nerfed large ship boost instead we'd have many more people complaining about how it hurts Lambdas and Firesprays too much than we currently do complaining about large ship half point scoring. "You can't nerf large ship boost, the Lambda would NEVER be able to turn around!"

2.) The thing about Fat Turretwing is that people will fly the list archetype incessantly. The very instant everyone collectively gets bored of quad TLT the Fat Turretwing players will start playing Super Dash again. Really, the only reason I fly Quad TLT is to counter Fat Turretwing. Trust me, I'd rather be playing my XXXX and 4 R7's build. So we need some nerf (that isn't much of a nerf honestly) that will scare bad players into thinking it's no longer good. Like the Phantom nerf.

(1) I've explained several times how this is -- literally demonstrably -- not true. My fix actually allows a ship with Large-Boost to have a tighter turn radius. What they won't have is the ability to arc-dodge huge lengths and range out of retalitaory fire.

(2) I don't care about that. As long as the ships are reasonably balanced, what someone else chooses to fly is up to them. My only input is whether I choose to keep playing with them.

1.) Can I see the diagram where your proposed fix to large ship boost is demonstrated again please?

2.) Well then it's my opinion that you have bad taste, my good sir. Surely you'd rather not have to face nothing but Fat Turrets incessantly for the rest of this game's run, correct? This is why we need to make them hemorrhage MoV like most other lists in the game.

For the sake of argument, I'm just going to agree with you that the Lambda and Firespray are now super awful because of the new MoV change. So we've sacrificed the Firespray and Lambda in order to help the every top 8 NOT be 7/8 Fat Turrets. Worth it.

I think the last year has shown us that points heavy big ships clearly impart an advantage under the old system.

People claimed quite vehemently they were only taking turrets because phantoms were too strong, phantom movement change was the first attempt to break the two ship meta but it only made it worse.

People won't give up the PWT crutch they've become dependent on willingly so ffg has made this change, if it's not enough they'll make life even harder for pancakes.

Hah, I used to think that Fat Turretwing would go away once the Phantom did.

The lambda and Spray havnt had terribly amazing showings prior to the shift

Kinda sucks for named sprays (not as much as igs suck for scum sprays or as much as imp sprays suck in general), but really the shuttle doesn't give a ****

What lunatic fat build would you ever try to get away with on a shuttle? What kind of late game powerhouse does anyone expect it to be?

It's a suicide ship or a glorified wheelie chair for old man palpie; it aint hoarding mov one way or the other regardless of the ruling

Then there's the YV. The YV is the scum shuttle. Don't try to make it fat; you will fail

1.) Can I see the diagram where your proposed fix to large ship boost is demonstrated again please?

Perform the (current) Boost, the push the ship straight back 1-base (40mm). It's incredibly simple. No muss, no fuss ... shorter Boost to match the shorter BR that was (rightly) judged to be a problem.

It's just baffling to me ... changing the tournament scoring system would have been laughed off the stage as a suggestion for fixing the advantages of Large-BR. But it's lauded as a great fix for the problems caused by Large-Boost. Just bizarre.

Can't be bothered reading 6 pages but want to know if anyone has pointed out that if small ships have half points as well then how many games will be a modified win if the last ship on the board is a one hit left tie or z95 ask your self of that's a world you want to live in

1.) If you would have nerfed large ship boost instead we'd have many more people complaining about how it hurts Lambdas and Firesprays too much than we currently do complaining about large ship half point scoring. "You can't nerf large ship boost, the Lambda would NEVER be able to turn around!"

Shuttles cap out at around 32 points, so the change doesn't really hurt them that much.

I'll keep EU and my gunshuttles as is thank you very much. A shuttle without EU is just a Palpmobile.