...I just don't see the point to all of the math wing and jousting values and all that. It's not at all going to help you win games.

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,

Then are dreamt of in your philosophy.

I'm going to jump in with my TLT fix now. I think it is something that needs to happen and there have been many time I wanted this ruling

Attack: Perform this attack twice (even against a ship outside your firing arc).

Each time this attack hits, the defender suffers 1 damage. Then cancel all dice results.

If you roll 3 crits on the first attack however you may forgo your second attack and keep

your dice result. If you roll 3 crits on your second attack and the attack hits deal 1 face up

damage card to your opponent

because I HATE it when my best dice rolls only give 1 damage

I'm going to put my two bits in here. In my opinion, I don't think tlt is broken. Nothing about it makes me feel like pre-nerf phantom did. I'm an all Empire player, I literally play no other faction, so back before the phantom nerf I felt like if I wasn't bringing a phantom then I was doing it wrong.

However, I will say that as an Empire only player, it is a difficult upgrade to deal with. One or two tlt's shooting us Imperials wouldn't feel as bad if our ships had more than on average three hull. Rather than fat turrets the ships that tlt hurts most seem to be the Tie fighter and tie Interceptor. I know that auto thrusters exist but right now I doubt I'd bring Soontir Fel in a squad, because as deadly as he is eventually that one damage will stick, and it only has to happen three times for me to lose 34 to 35 of my 100 points.

However it isn't all doom and gloom for the Empire either, we have pretty good tools in our arsenal to deal with this problem, and if it weren't for tlt the squads you see would be alot less varied. Without tlt's we would see complaints about crack squad being too good and etc. It jist boils down to growing pains in the end.

I'm going to put my two bits in here. In my opinion, I don't think tlt is broken. Nothing about it makes me feel like pre-nerf phantom did. I'm an all Empire player, I literally play no other faction, so back before the phantom nerf I felt like if I wasn't bringing a phantom then I was doing it wrong.

These 'feelings' may or may not be correct. But as someone with no strong opinion either way, it appears that in this thread few others than MJ really brought up a rounded argument. Many are simply trying to make their point in a matter-of-fact way, as if their authority should be enough. That attitude of experienced players was exactly why I thought the Phantom was strong, but not truly OP. Fool me twice, shame on me.

I'm going to put my two bits in here. In my opinion, I don't think tlt is broken. Nothing about it makes me feel like pre-nerf phantom did. I'm an all Empire player, I literally play no other faction, so back before the phantom nerf I felt like if I wasn't bringing a phantom then I was doing it wrong.

Actually, as a Rebels player, I 'feel' I am doing something wrong if I don't bring a tlt or two, or if I outfit my turret ships with anything else (barring the Ghost, probably).

These 'feelings' may or may not be correct. But as someone with no strong opinion either way, it appears that in this thread few others than MJ really brought up a rounded argument. Many are simply trying to make their point in a matter-of-fact way, as if their authority should be enough. That attitude of experienced players was exactly why I thought the Phantom was strong, but not truly OP. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Well one of these TLT ships usually is a Stresshog, right? I think that one is a whole seperate issue.

TLT is no question the best turret slot upgrade, because it is generaly effective, unlike ABTs (who can be good, but often won't be) or others. I agree that what Major Juggler says is incredibly scary and his competence is well documented, but KOs perspective in my opinion also has a lot of weight. Tournament results aren't as alarming as with the Phantom, but that of course doesn't mean that there is no problem at all. I think it is right for FFG to await the impact of the upcoming releases before deciding on any action.

IMHO the problem with TLT is twofold:

1. when asking yourself the question "I have 25pts left, what should I take?" The answer "TLT carrier" is practically automatic. Also, the answer to "what turret should I take?" is, barring a few edge cases, always "TLT"

2. reliable damage at range 3, out of arc.

My defenders don't struggle as the titles let them out pace tlt damage but anything else is screwed I haven't flown a tie fighter since they came out.

You can't rely on three agility protecting you on its own because you are gonna blank out more than once.

My defenders don't struggle as the titles let them out pace tlt damage but anything else is screwed I haven't flown a tie fighter since they came out.

You can't rely on three agility protecting you on its own because you are gonna blank out more than once.

But Crackshot spam is really good against TLTs and in general, why don't you do that? Same thing goes for my Bombers, spike damage is a great way to deal with this upgrade.

He pretty much said as much already in this thread why he won't be publishing it; He's not going to do the work for them for free, as releasing it publicly means FFG has just as much access to it as we do, which is perfectly reasonable.

(...)

That said, even though I understand why, and I greatly appreciate MJ's contributions to the community, including 2.0, it does get a bit tiring to see his name for the last year or so and be able to guess the post will contain some variation of "mathwing 3.0 predicts such and such, but I won't be publishing it to demonstrate what I mean." Don't get me wrong, like I said I understand the reasoning completely, I'll gladly take his word for it as he clearly knows what he's talking about. It's just a bit of a tease sometimes that this tool is out there that we keep hearing about which is basically a black box: input goes in, a prediction comes out and so far every prediction it's made has been right, but that doesn't mean we don't necessarily want to see the inside. (...)

As we have not seen Mathwing 3.0 I can't say anything about its quality, probably it is good. But one cannot ever so often point to it and say I have the "evidence". Please do not take it as attack, but as a Ph.D. one should be familiar with scientific conduct, one cannot point to a source which cannot be verified. It is the same as "I have this fusion experiment at home, and it is a perpetuum mobile, my data and my models prove it. Sorry, you cannot see it, company want to have the IP on it, so I am not showing it".

Then 2.0 precicts basic jousting value (and I appreciate surely all the effort which has gone into it!), which gives some hints on ship effectivity, but the game is much more than this.

As for it predicting sooo much of developments, difficult to attribute, might be correct, might not. Would be correct if the model would have been developed in a black box without any news and influences from the tournament results (which it was not).

3.0 is said to incorporate more (PS effects), but it probably cannot predict much of the synergies, or can it? As we have not seen it...

Every model is only as good as the person(s) behind, and the data fed into it. Data can be missing, and with one person behind, there is a risk not everything gone into it, the human mind tends to ignore things sometimes without being aware of it.

Depending on how it is build, it might have problems with whole new mechanics popping up, like tractor beam and the interactions thereof, needing a new build or major revison (costly in time and effort, and money if FFG bought it).

But without publishing it (and if it is in a scientific paper, giving you the IP), it is a slightly bit wearying that it is used as a "source" of "evidence" again and again.

He pretty much said as much already in this thread why he won't be publishing it; He's not going to do the work for them for free, as releasing it publicly means FFG has just as much access to it as we do, which is perfectly reasonable.

(...)

That said, even though I understand why, and I greatly appreciate MJ's contributions to the community, including 2.0, it does get a bit tiring to see his name for the last year or so and be able to guess the post will contain some variation of "mathwing 3.0 predicts such and such, but I won't be publishing it to demonstrate what I mean." Don't get me wrong, like I said I understand the reasoning completely, I'll gladly take his word for it as he clearly knows what he's talking about. It's just a bit of a tease sometimes that this tool is out there that we keep hearing about which is basically a black box: input goes in, a prediction comes out and so far every prediction it's made has been right, but that doesn't mean we don't necessarily want to see the inside. (...)

As we have not seen Mathwing 3.0 I can't say anything about its quality, probably it is good. But one cannot ever so often point to it and say I have the "evidence". Please do not take it as attack, but as a Ph.D. one should be familiar with scientific conduct, one cannot point to a source which cannot be verified. It is the same as "I have this fusion experiment at home, and it is a perpetuum mobile, my data and my models prove it. Sorry, you cannot see it, company want to have the IP on it, so I am not showing it".

You're perfectly entitled to take the opinion that if you've not had a chance to get elbow-deep in the maths and verify for yourself whether it hangs together you're going to give it no credence. But in what's basically a discussion of opinions, there's nothing wrong with MJ saying "I can't tell you exactly how I got to this conclusion but here's what I believe to be true" and people judging for themselves what weight to give that opinion based on his track record. From my point of view Mathwing is akin to something like DVOA - I don't need to know exactly how it's formulated to acknowledge that it's a useful tool with predictive value.

My defenders don't struggle as the titles let them out pace tlt damage but anything else is screwed I haven't flown a tie fighter since they came out.

You can't rely on three agility protecting you on its own because you are gonna blank out more than once.

But Crackshot spam is really good against TLTs and in general, why don't you do that? Same thing goes for my Bombers, spike damage is a great way to deal with this upgrade.

No list without defenders is worth taking.

My defenders don't struggle as the titles let them out pace tlt damage but anything else is screwed I haven't flown a tie fighter since they came out.

You can't rely on three agility protecting you on its own because you are gonna blank out more than once.

Really? In my experience a 16 point Zeta Squadron Pilot is basically a winning matchup vs a 24+ point TLT carrier. Obsidians usually don't have much trouble point-for-point in my experience as well.

My defenders don't struggle as the titles let them out pace tlt damage but anything else is screwed I haven't flown a tie fighter since they came out.

You can't rely on three agility protecting you on its own because you are gonna blank out more than once.

But Crackshot spam is really good against TLTs and in general, why don't you do that? Same thing goes for my Bombers, spike damage is a great way to deal with this upgrade.

No list without defenders is worth taking.

Thank you for this useful and non-biased input.

My defenders don't struggle as the titles let them out pace tlt damage but anything else is screwed I haven't flown a tie fighter since they came out.

You can't rely on three agility protecting you on its own because you are gonna blank out more than once.

Really? In my experience a 16 point Zeta Squadron Pilot is basically a winning matchup vs a 24+ point TLT carrier. Obsidians usually don't have much trouble point-for-point in my experience as well.

Eww you know how I feel about the fo to even suggest I'd ever use one...bad bio go to your corner.

My defenders don't struggle as the titles let them out pace tlt damage but anything else is screwed I haven't flown a tie fighter since they came out.

You can't rely on three agility protecting you on its own because you are gonna blank out more than once.

Really? In my experience a 16 point Zeta Squadron Pilot is basically a winning matchup vs a 24+ point TLT carrier. Obsidians usually don't have much trouble point-for-point in my experience as well.

Eww you know how I feel about the fo to even suggest I'd ever use one...bad bio go to your corner.

Go ahead. Try the FO in a casual game. You might like them.

I know they surprised me more than a bit.

Now I look at a way to fit in at least one FO in each and every Imp. list I create.

They are not going to nerf TLT's or Regen or Stressbot. Not unless the Empire gains access to them. If that happens they will reign those things in but not until then.

My defenders don't struggle as the titles let them out pace tlt damage but anything else is screwed I haven't flown a tie fighter since they came out.

You can't rely on three agility protecting you on its own because you are gonna blank out more than once.

Really? In my experience a 16 point Zeta Squadron Pilot is basically a winning matchup vs a 24+ point TLT carrier. Obsidians usually don't have much trouble point-for-point in my experience as well.

A lot of ships wont have trouble defeating a single gold 1vs1, even at less than 24points. This is also true for the stresshog. In fact a single green squadron with ptl/At would probably be able to dispatch both of these ships if flown correctly (and given a lot of time).

But it's not a useful comparison since this isnt a 1vs1 game and TLT for sure isnt a strong 1vs1 weapon. It's strength comes from being a formidable force multiplier.

My defenders don't struggle as the titles let them out pace tlt damage but anything else is screwed I haven't flown a tie fighter since they came out.

You can't rely on three agility protecting you on its own because you are gonna blank out more than once.

Really? In my experience a 16 point Zeta Squadron Pilot is basically a winning matchup vs a 24+ point TLT carrier. Obsidians usually don't have much trouble point-for-point in my experience as well.

Eww you know how I feel about the fo to even suggest I'd ever use one...bad bio go to your corner.

Go ahead. Try the FO in a casual game. You might like them.

I know they surprised me more than a bit.

Now I look at a way to fit in at least one FO in each and every Imp. list I create.

He isn't talking about the game representation, it is a dogmatic anti-disney thing if i remember correctly.

My defenders don't struggle as the titles let them out pace tlt damage but anything else is screwed I haven't flown a tie fighter since they came out.

You can't rely on three agility protecting you on its own because you are gonna blank out more than once.

Really? In my experience a 16 point Zeta Squadron Pilot is basically a winning matchup vs a 24+ point TLT carrier. Obsidians usually don't have much trouble point-for-point in my experience as well.

Eww you know how I feel about the fo to even suggest I'd ever use one...bad bio go to your corner.

So you're just ignoring the Obsidian then?

My defenders don't struggle as the titles let them out pace tlt damage but anything else is screwed I haven't flown a tie fighter since they came out.

You can't rely on three agility protecting you on its own because you are gonna blank out more than once.

Really? In my experience a 16 point Zeta Squadron Pilot is basically a winning matchup vs a 24+ point TLT carrier. Obsidians usually don't have much trouble point-for-point in my experience as well.

An endgame with a TLT carrier or 2 vs. 2-3 TIEs is something I can manage as the TIE player, especially with dat FO dial. Unless it's a K-Wing, in which case at range 1 it's still throwing 3 dice. Even then though, as long as there isn't Miranda regen it's a fair fight. Would much rather fight 2 TLT's in the endgame than a Soontir in the end game.

They're easier to play around than a 65 point delete a ship a turn (DaSaT) Rear Admiral and Soontir. Yes, all 4 of them throwing 8 TLT shots at you is hard to deal with, but so is a Dasat RAC only allowing you 6 turns with your 6 ship list, leaving you with 2.5 TIEs at best vs. endgame Soontir if you kill the Decimator.

My defenders don't struggle as the titles let them out pace tlt damage but anything else is screwed I haven't flown a tie fighter since they came out.

You can't rely on three agility protecting you on its own because you are gonna blank out more than once.

Really? In my experience a 16 point Zeta Squadron Pilot is basically a winning matchup vs a 24+ point TLT carrier. Obsidians usually don't have much trouble point-for-point in my experience as well.

Eww you know how I feel about the fo to even suggest I'd ever use one...bad bio go to your corner.

Go ahead. Try the FO in a casual game. You might like them.

I know they surprised me more than a bit.

Now I look at a way to fit in at least one FO in each and every Imp. list I create.

He isn't talking about the game representation, it is a dogmatic anti-disney thing if i remember correctly.

Nope I think the in game fo is over priced garbage, I've nothing against the film version even though I'm not a fan of the laziness it represents.

Some of the named pilots could have their uses but I have tie fighters, tie interceptors and tie advanced to cover any role I'd use the fo for.

And I don't hate Disney I hate jj.

I have waited to speak in this thread again for a reason.... I played my triple TLT scum Y-wings last night again.... you can talk about them being OP all you want, but I run the 3 as bombers with a total of 5 proxy mines and those mines are where the damage comes from, not the TLTs,

I wanted to try this to counter the fallacies within the TLT (lack of dmg and range bubble specifically)

This list is now 6-1 and the loss was to a B-wing list, damned cannons anyway

The list:

Kavil, PTL, TLT, unhinged, bomb loadout, Proxy mines and engine upgrade

x2 Syndicate Thugs, TLT extra munitions, bomb loadout, proxy mines

100 points

You can't just run into range 1 and fight them, because with their low PS they will be dropping a bomb on you before you get to move again, in 3 fights yesterday I dropped 5 mines on top of opponents ships while the others were dropped in rapid succession in front of enemy ships with no chance to evade them...

Note that I took on the bomb loadout to combat the weaknesses of the TLT specifically

Your mileage may vary, but this take me light years on a single fuel cell

Ah, I see. The generics are indeed rather underwhelming for their price, but with Crackshot they have some value. I do doubt, though, that you have any good replacement for Omega Leader at 26 points. He also is the single best Vessery enabler, so your Defender-desires work with it.

Want to demoralize a TLT player? show up with sensor jammier auto thrusters guri and leatin. Or comm relay,juke Tie/fo's shuts them down so hard.

Actually - Sensor Jammer is only partly an answer - Recon Spec TLT does incredibly well against Sensor Jammer - and the TLT Recspec HWK does really well against Y-wing TLTs. I think we're going to see the crittastic boba builds punching TLT out pretty quickly in wave 8. Especially with the Guidance chips / LRS ordnance revival, and the super mean controlling Tie/D tie X7 titles. BTW - those defenders are also a natural counter to R3-A2 , as they don't mind being stressed quite so much. The Meta will shift again in Wave 8 - there's a good chance it will be more diverse than it is now.

I'll accept TLT is slightly undercosted, a point or so. Agree with what others have said about Generics being pushed out by a large number of things - and the P.S. cost curve shouldn't be linear (Especially when P.S. 1 can be more valuable than P.S. 2, and P.S. 5-6 is worth much less than P.S. 2-3 or 8-9.

My question is - Ignoring power creep - can you add infinitely to a game and maintain balance? If that answer is no - then what is the breaking point.

I think many people bring this Rock Paper Scissors idea to the table with X-wing, we heard a lot about it - aces kill swarms, kill turrets kill aces. Now Rock Paper scissors may be balanced, but - you're going to lose 1/3rd of the time. If we look at that in list format - that's pretty horrible - the trick is with rock paper scissors to stay balanced we need to be able to choose what we through each game - but consider an x-wing tournament - I'm going to bring rock, and hope I face nothing but rocks and scissors.

X-wing Is really much more like a fighting game - Street Fighter - Soul Calibur. And there are favorable and unfavorable matchups. They're not going to be perfectly balanced, and you're going to need to master your list vs all of it's different matchups - or the core parts of those matchups. If you live in a meta where everyone plays Chun-Li - you better learn how to fight her with E. Honda - or you need to switch characters and start playing Fei Long.

If TLT is not full on meta warping to the point of breaking overpowered, we need to learn how to play around it. TLT has bad matchups - and if TLT is your bad matchup - it's still beatable. Turn 0 placement, Line of Approach (attack line) and targeting priority generally make for a much bigger swing than a few % difference in cost efficiency. Especially with the stacked noise of RNG from dice luck. Remember that Juggler's Jousting numbers tell us also when we need to make up for that efficiency by not straight up jousting.

You can't just run into range 1 and fight them, because with their low PS they will be dropping a bomb on you before you get to move again, in 3 fights yesterday I dropped 5 mines on top of opponents ships while the others were dropped in rapid succession in front of enemy ships with no chance to evade them...