In a timed game you can play them at their own game. Destroy the open half of their fleet and then turn around and just move around on your side of the board well out of range and let them cone to the realisation that if they don't move you get a victory.

Its not fun but I did that against someone fortressing and they complained I wasn't playing fair by not attacking his fortress, they quickly came to the realisation and the point I was proving. While they still occasionally fortress they now do it to stall before they break

I love opponents who think it's slow playing if you don't blindly rush your ships into their firing arcs. This is a dogfight, not an Old West gunfight in the middle of the street.

I agree. Timing is everything, you only want to engage at the optimal point, however you must always be mindful of the clock

The purpose of the the game is to fly around in your favorite star fighter, blow stuff up while screaming pew pew, and jamming to Intergalactic (Ello Asty). The use of this tactic is just sad and is ruining the game for the player using it. This person is like the Bill Belichick of X-Wing, its a shame really. Grab yourself a cold beer instead playing that person.

The purpose of the the game is to fly around in your favorite star fighter, blow stuff up while screaming pew pew, and jamming to Intergalactic (Ello Asty). The use of this tactic is just sad and is ruining the game for the player using it. This person is like the Bill Belichick of X-Wing, its a shame really. Grab yourself a cold beer instead playing that person.

Be careful about imposing your own definition about the "purpose" of the game onto other players.

The purpose of the the game is to fly around in your favorite star fighter, blow stuff up while screaming pew pew, and jamming to Intergalactic (Ello Asty). The use of this tactic is just sad and is ruining the game for the player using it. This person is like the Bill Belichick of X-Wing, its a shame really. Grab yourself a cold beer instead playing that person.

Be careful about imposing your own definition about the "purpose" of the game onto other players.

Sorry you took that to heart buddy. My bad

Sorry you took that to heart buddy. My bad

Your bad is trying to impose your opinion on other people. Most people don't care for the fortress play style, but we also are not going to try and tell other people what the 'proper' way to play the game is.

Because the truth is, the proper way to play the game is do whatever you can within the rules to win the match. There are no points given for being a nice guy or playing a given way.

Sorry you took that to heart buddy. My bad

Your bad is trying to impose your opinion on other people. Most people don't care for the fortress play style, but we also are not going to try and tell other people what the 'proper' way to play the game is.

Because the truth is, the proper way to play the game is do whatever you can within the rules to win the match. There are no points given for being a nice guy or playing a given way.

I'm not trying too impose anything. All I was doing was giving a little comical relief to some play styles I do not like to play against and offer a little advice" It Happens man, have a beer, I'm with ya on this". I honestly feel sorry for you VanorDM and dbmeboy for getting butt hurt over a supportive comment. Its attitudes like the ones you two are portraying that ruin the game for newcomers and experienced players alike. I'm pretty sure if you were to ask Jay Little the point of the game he would say... " To Have fun" So you and your butt hurt buddy crack open a cold brew, build a fun list, and ENJOY the Wonderful Universe that is Star Wars.

I'm not trying too impose anything.

You are telling us what the proper way to play the game is. How is this anything other than you trying to impose your opinion on others?

All I was doing was giving a little comical relief

You failed miserably.

Its attitudes like the ones you two are portraying that ruin the game for newcomers and experienced players alike.

No, it's attitudes like yours, that tries to enforce your opinion on others that cause the real problem for new players. Because rather than playing the game to best of their ability based on how they understand the rules. They have to take into account the opinion of someone else, and get treated like they did something wrong, and be subject to insults when they break some unwritten rule, that the can't possibly be aware of.

It's people like you who drive new players away. People who feel they have the right to tell other people what the proper way to have fun is.

I'm not trying too impose anything.

You are telling us what the proper way to play the game is. How is this anything other than you trying to impose your opinion on others?

All I was doing was giving a little comical relief

You failed miserably.

Its attitudes like the ones you two are portraying that ruin the game for newcomers and experienced players alike.

No, it's attitudes like yours, that tries to enforce your opinion on others that cause the real problem for new players. Because rather than playing the game to best of their ability based on how they understand the rules. They have to take into account the opinion of someone else, and get treated like they did something wrong, and be subject to insults when they break some unwritten rule, that the can't possibly be aware of.

It's people like you who drive new players away. People who feel they have the right to tell other people what the proper way to have fun is.

Jimmy Buffet wants to give you a ...

Long story short: Fortressing is a contentious issue. It's a valid tactic, but is ineffective if its the only trick in your bag.

One of the most potent things that Fortressing can do in a tournament is frustrate your opponent.

Also, frustrate their ability to maneuver behind you, as was seen when someone Fortressed at Worlds a few years ago, to stymie the opponent's at-the-time overpowered Tie Phantom.

Again, if you want a lesson in proper fortressing, PM me. This is also useful if you want to learn how to beat it.

If you want to argue about whether it should be banned from play, you clearly haven't learned how to outfly something that's sitting still. I can help with that, if you like.

Long story short: Fortressing is a contentious issue. It's a valid tactic, but is ineffective if its the only trick in your bag.

One of the most potent things that Fortressing can do in a tournament is frustrate your opponent.

Also, frustrate their ability to maneuver behind you, as was seen when someone Fortressed at Worlds a few years ago, to stymie the opponent's at-the-time overpowered Tie Phantom.

Again, if you want a lesson in proper fortressing, PM me. This is also useful if you want to learn how to beat it.

If you want to argue about whether it should be banned from play, you clearly haven't learned how to outfly something that's sitting still. I can help with that, if you like.

yep i agree its easily beatable but for me does take some of my fun away. However that is not the say the other person is not having fun.

I like to play in a way that is fun for both players. I feel like we have a social contract in regards to gaming where both parties need to be taken into account.

Long story short: Fortressing is a contentious issue. It's a valid tactic, but is ineffective if its the only trick in your bag.

One of the most potent things that Fortressing can do in a tournament is frustrate your opponent.

Also, frustrate their ability to maneuver behind you, as was seen when someone Fortressed at Worlds a few years ago, to stymie the opponent's at-the-time overpowered Tie Phantom.

Again, if you want a lesson in proper fortressing, PM me. This is also useful if you want to learn how to beat it.

If you want to argue about whether it should be banned from play, you clearly haven't learned how to outfly something that's sitting still. I can help with that, if you like.

yep i agree its easily beatable but for me does take some of my fun away. However that is not the say the other person is not having fun.

I like to play in a way that is fun for both players. I feel like we have a social contract in regards to gaming where both parties need to be taken into account.

I completely agree with you Jedi Master. Completely beatable

Favoring one play style or avoiding another is a personal choice, one which we are all entitled to make and be afforded the same amount of respect for using. The only convenant that bind us, however, are the rules. To expect anything else is to set oneself up for dissapointment.

It is by far easier to learn and adapt than it is to try and change the mind of every opponent that one faces.

For all's viewing pleasure/hatred here is my idea of a strong fortress build.

Colonel Jendon (26)

+Advanced Sensors (3)

+Heavy Laser Cannon (7)

+Mercencary (2)

+Rebel Captive (3)

+ ST-321 (3)

+Tactical Jammer (1)

Kath Scarlet (38)

+Homing Missilies (5)

+"Mangler" Cannon (4)

+Wingman (2)

+Tactician (2)

+Hull Upgrade (3)

Because rather than playing the game to best of their ability based on how they understand the rules. They have to take into account the opinion of someone else

Wait, you mean we might have to start considering the feelings of the people we're playing AGAINST? How appalling!!

There's certainly the option for differing opinions, but those defending the "winning is the only thing that matters" opinion really need to listen to themselves.

Indeed. The primary objective when playing this game is to have fun. Simple as that.

I watched the game Darth Emphatic mentioned. What I took from the game is the Lamda player was using the tactic as a delaying action until his opponent committed his forces rather than a true 'fortress' maneuver. That kept the great white whale from being out flanked early in the round.

I watched the game Darth Emphatic mentioned. What I took from the game is the Lamda player was using the tactic as a delaying action until his opponent committed his forces rather than a true 'fortress' maneuver. That kept the great white whale from being out flanked early in the round.

I would argue that is a true 'fortress' maneuver. Or, at least, how it's used well.

I use it for good effect in epic but not in casual play.

Jendon+ St-321 + weapons engineer for a few rounds to give everyone locks is fine. Hide the shuttle in the corner and circle back to it when you need new locks... Works for 300pt + games pretty well

Having tried the Evo Moral + M-3A wingman combo to do exactly what everyone is saying in this thread, I can tell you it's not something I would run at a tournament. You don't want to have half your points stationary on one side of the map while the rest of it is being focused fired somewhere in the middle of the map. I would only consider it to prolong my moving forward one two turns maximum till my flankers move into position after which he also moves to engage.

Fortresssing is the best way to lose a game in a tournament that time is limited.

I watched the game Darth Emphatic mentioned. What I took from the game is the Lamda player was using the tactic as a delaying action until his opponent committed his forces rather than a true 'fortress' maneuver. That kept the great white whale from being out flanked early in the round.

I would argue that is a true 'fortress' maneuver. Or, at least, how it's used well.

I was going to disagree but reconsidered. You're right, that pretty much defines fortressing. Make the enemy come to you. Before watching that game I always thought that fortressing in a corner was just a variation of two PWTs, nose to tail, hugging one edge of the board. Not exactly a fun way to play the game. Interesting tactic.

Not worth it.

Indeed. The primary objective when playing this game is to have fun. Simple as that.

I agree, up to the point that I'm supposed to somehow know what someone else thinks is fair and what is considered cheese or against the spirit of the game.

I mean I agree the game should be fun, but who gets to decide what is fun for someone else? If playing competitively and doing my best to win is what I consider fun, then exactly what am I doing wrong?

“If playing competitively and doing my best to win is what I consider fun, then exactly what am I doing wrong? “

I’d argue, in my opinion, that the answer to that question would be: “Life.” Or at the very least, “playing a game,” but please bear with my explanation before you lash out.

There are too many things wrong socially to go into here, a light hearted game made for people to enjoy (meaning have fun), is the point of this conversation, but sufficed to say the point of any game is indeed to enjoy the game. I am not aware of any game where the point is to win, or lose, or draw, it is to have fun, and winning is a result of the human condition to do better than one’s peers.

When I play a list that I consider unfair, I am not having fun, when a person of the win-only mindset (Winning = fun) plays a list that they lose against (no matter how it is formatted) they then would not be having fun. That environment breeds negative feelings, specifically generated by the person responsible for not wanting to lose at any cost because their “enjoyment” is derived exclusively from wining. That, I’d argue, is completely missing the point of the game, (and any game really) and is a growing social and moral issue with our youth today.

The negative balance here is that in most other widely available and televised games there have been conditions that constituted professional and monitorial gains. Winning = good, losing = bad, I don’t have fun if I lose. Fine. Then reconstitute what the term game means, or rename the sport a “contest.” Simple. That I’d consider the spirit of the two differing events. One is to have fun, and the other is to win. I’d just caution that you shouldn’t confuse the two as the same.

I have had some of the most enjoyable games of my gaming “career” ending up as losses. I for one, enjoy a game more when it is close, and when the end result is both gamers coming out of the match-up with smiles on their faces due to a genuinely enjoyable experience had by both parties. With dice rolling this sometimes (possibly very often) is impossible, but I will say that I cannot stress enough how good Fantasy Flight is at making and balancing rule sets. Cheers to those people.

As far as table top games, this is why we have rules balancing. This is why we have games that are not sports-focused, where everyone starts on a level playing field and invests the same (anticipated) time and effort to use their favorite fighters (or whatever mini in whatever game they play) in order to have fun / enjoy playing said game.

That said, there are competitive lists, built for competitive play. My gaming group went through something of a renaissance regarding this very topic, and the answer we came up with is, play what you want, but show your opponent your list first. If this becomes competitive, then he is allowed to build a competitive list, or withdraw from the combat.

As for what you are doing wrong? Well I don’t know you well enough to say that what you are doing is wrong, but I have known many youths in my teaching of miniatures, painting, gaming, playing, tactics etc. from working at a game store to know that those people who tend to think that Winning=Fun never do well, and get a bad reputation as a gamer. It’s hard to win a game when no one wishes to play you. I wish you all the best, and hope that you can find a portion of the game that is fun for you even if you aren’t winning.

Indeed. The primary objective when playing this game is to have fun. Simple as that.

I agree, up to the point that I'm supposed to somehow know what someone else thinks is fair and what is considered cheese or against the spirit of the game.I mean I agree the game should be fun, but who gets to decide what is fun for someone else? If playing competitively and doing my best to win is what I consider fun, then exactly what am I doing wrong?

Its about not being a **** about things. Some of the most fun games I've had I've lost but the opponent was a great guy and was enjoyable to play, even though he took my list apart with ease. Other games I've won but couldn't wait to finish as the opponent was an ass. Playing to win is not mutually exclusive with fun. Don't be 'that guy'