Anecdotal:

- Based on Personal Observation, Case Study Reports, or Random Investigations rather than Systematic Scientific Evaluation.

Anecdotal Evidence is by no means false evidence. It is just not scientific evidence. It may be based on basic simple observations, with only a limited scope, but that does not make it false, it just makes it not rigorous enough.

Anecdotal Evidence can, in fact, be used to drive a Scientific Testing as outlying data - but it is no means automatically wrong or false because it happens to be based on observation.

Being player two and having your objective is just as potent as being player one is...hence why I and most of the others here think the system works, not because we all like imagining things that aren't true, but because from personal factual experience we have seen that many different fleets are viable to win with, and that being player two can be just as big an advantage, again not a story.

I hate having to rely on my opponent bringing objectives that I will like.

Like Advanced Gunnery. . . Who picks that these days. . . or Fire Lanes when I only have 7 red dice total and they have 8 to 12.. . Then there is minefields. . . (if you haven't guessed, this was one of my last store championship games). I like people bringing missions where I can make up any points lost. Like Precision Strike! Then I can make up the loss of a ship or 2 several times over and get a higher score!

If you don't mind the last/first double tap, then I guess it does.

The only time a player gets to go first and last is where he has more ships than you do and has spent fewer points than you have or wins the toss of a coin if he has matched your spend of points.

I quite like the bidding mechanic, it has always been a choice for you to make and it creates an interesting dynamic to fleet building. While it is annoying to make a 15 point bid and lose it to a coin toss or a 16 point bid, that annoyance is not lost on me. Complaining that my 400 point fleet just lost to a 385 point fleet because my opponent deliberately set aside those 15 points as to go first and last is not a great argument for change.

The game is called chicken, just how low do you go before you can go no further?

Funny in the store championship game i jusy played in Demolisher was not a factor even with him going 1st.

When i played him i saw which was his targets and had bwings in place. Yes he got the long range and up close shot. But then the b wings chewed him up. 1st caused him to burn his redirect and lost his port and aft shields. Second scores 3 dmg again and he spends brace. But the crit selected by gen dodanna was the one where he cant use spent defense tokens. So two hull points dmg.

His tie interceptors moved in, but the hwk made them heavy and she fired a blue for a miss, followed by the last b wing for 3 more. And i still had 2 x wings and 2 a wings in range

Nice, very nice.

Ancedotal means made up, not factual.

Oh matey, no, that's no what it means.

In shorthand, it's just a story. It might be real, it might be false, and it's relevance is always questionable but the key factor is that it's not verifiable fact. It's just something you tell people.

Yes, there are many different ways to win. Some people win against the last/first activation as well.

That doesn't mean that it's not a valuable, powerful tool.

I think the question of "Is Demolisher broken?" can be summed up as this - if it were so broken as to be unbeatable, every tournament would have top three filled with people that have a Demolisher list. Is that happening? No. Both tournaments I have been to saw Rebel players on top (although, admittedly the first only had four players, and I was the only one with Demolisher, and those were my first non-intro games). Everyone arguing against Demolisher being broken have cited multiple instances where this has not happened. Hell, even the people arguing for Demolisher being broken have given no testimony as to it cleaning house at tournaments. It certainly is powerful, but it seems like the competitive scene has found a way to counter it. So if you're talking about Demolisher being so unbalanced, I think what you're really saying is "Demolisher is unbalanced against my list/play style." And if that's the case, it's on you to change.

If I like to take all-ship lists, can I complain that bombers are broken, since I have no reliable way to counter them? No, I have to adjust the way I play if I want to win. B-Wings double-tapping with Yavaris can burn down a ship in a single activation, and double-tapping with bombers is not an option the Imperials have. Avenger with Gunnery Teams can destroy two 8-hull ships in a single activation. No other ship can do that. But that's not broken.

I've been mulling the idea of the rebel transport being the "counter". It's a ship with no weapons and minimal hull and shields. It costs around 10 points (would need to be play tested). Basically, how many points would you spend on a useless ship to ensure activation advantage?

No wonder the rebels brought so many to Endor!

Here's another idea.

Rebel Admiral Joe 20 pts

Ignore player bids. You are first player. If your opponent is also Joe resolve first player as normal.

How can we improve Dominator?

How can we improve Dominator?

That's the real question. Devastator, too. Don't get me wrong, if you've discarded some defense tokens, getting extra blue dice is nice. But not for ten points.

And Dominator as a twelve point title?

I think both could be fixed if the points cost were lowered.

Dominator and Devastator. . . Hmmmm I think if Devastator was a once per turn with no drawback it would be great at 10 points.

Dominator could do with a reduction to a single shield

The issue isn't demolisher. It's screed.

The issue isn't demolisher. It's screed.

That... is a speed-4 ram directly into the wall.

smh

The issue isn't demolisher. It's screed.

Screed + Ordnance Experts + etc...

Demolisher + Screed isn't even that evil. It's the total package. The total package that clocks in at 124 points, if you're going full Clon on the thing. That's almost a full Rhymerball.

The issue isn't demolisher. It's screed.

Screed + Ordnance Experts + etc...

Demolisher + Screed isn't even that evil. It's the total package. The total package that clocks in at 124 points, if you're going full Clon on the thing. That's almost a full Rhymerball.

I just don't see how Devastator can singlehandedly destroy something bigger than a Neb-B in one activation. Max damage out the front is twelve with expanded launchers and doubles on all six dice, Braced down to six and three redirected. Next round, another twelve braced down and redirected, three to the hull on a VSD, two on an AF/ISD, zero to the hull on an MC80. Eight out the side, braced to four, even the VSD survives (the AF would be cooked, though). And what's the mathematical probability of rolling max damage three times in a row? Even two Concentrate Fire dials would only add two more damage (again, assuming max damage rolled), and most approach shots would follow a Navigate command for the Engine Techs boost.

Dominator and Devastator. . . Hmmmm I think if Devastator was a once per turn with no drawback it would be great at 10 points.

Dominator could do with a reduction to a single shield

What if crits do not result in shield lost?

I just don't see how Devastator can singlehandedly destroy something bigger than a Neb-B in one activation. Max damage out the front is twelve with expanded launchers and doubles on all six dice, Braced down to six and three redirected. Next round, another twelve braced down and redirected, three to the hull on a VSD, two on an AF/ISD, zero to the hull on an MC80. Eight out the side, braced to four, even the VSD survives (the AF would be cooked, though). And what's the mathematical probability of rolling max damage three times in a row? Even two Concentrate Fire dials would only add two more damage (again, assuming max damage rolled), and most approach shots would follow a Navigate command for the Engine Techs boost.

This thread really isn't about demolisher as many people use it. This thread is once again about the so named "clonisher." That version of Demolisher is just so good because it uses Intel Officer as well, so you are only bracing that first attack. Redo your math with that in mind and you kill nearly any ship in the game with a triple-tap. The list that uses activation advantage to get that triple tap is a very relevant threat. I'd go so far as to say it will definitely shape this part of the "meta's" growth. It's a full exploitation of synergistic cards to create a doomsday cannon. I don't think its unbeatable, its just potent and fairly easy to use (demolisher that is; the maneuvering of your list takes more skill). This is something that will fade as people learn to counter and the meta shifts again.

Now for the original question of the thread. I think Demolisher is slightly undercosted, maybe at 15-20 (high I know, maybe I'm still burning) points it's more of a decision instead of an auto-include. This combined with the over-costing of some other titles makes it seem broken at times. I will admit as a rebel player I wish Demolisher didn't exist, but I'm sure Imperial players feel the same about Yavaris at times as well. It hard to judge Demolisher just because there are ways to make it insanely powerful.

For all my complaints about the big D, Zombie Yavaris is probably stronger (defensively) for its cost than Demolisher is offensively. Especially since Yavaris can do its job with Title and a birthday suit.

Considering that Rieekan destroys Demolisher on a regular, I think it's fine.

Here's another idea.

Rebel Admiral Joe 20 pts

Ignore player bids. You are first player. If your opponent is also Joe resolve first player as normal.

I'm not defecting.

I just don't see how Devastator can singlehandedly destroy something bigger than a Neb-B in one activation. Max damage out the front is twelve with expanded launchers and doubles on all six dice, Braced down to six and three redirected. Next round, another twelve braced down and redirected, three to the hull on a VSD, two on an AF/ISD, zero to the hull on an MC80. Eight out the side, braced to four, even the VSD survives (the AF would be cooked, though). And what's the mathematical probability of rolling max damage three times in a row? Even two Concentrate Fire dials would only add two more damage (again, assuming max damage rolled), and most approach shots would follow a Navigate command for the Engine Techs boost.

This thread really isn't about demolisher as many people use it. This thread is once again about the so named "clonisher." That version of Demolisher is just so good because it uses Intel Officer as well, so you are only bracing that first attack. Redo your math with that in mind and you kill nearly any ship in the game with a triple-tap. The list that uses activation advantage to get that triple tap is a very relevant threat. I'd go so far as to say it will definitely shape this part of the "meta's" growth. It's a full exploitation of synergistic cards to create a doomsday cannon. I don't think its unbeatable, its just potent and fairly easy to use (demolisher that is; the maneuvering of your list takes more skill). This is something that will fade as people learn to counter and the meta shifts again.

Now for the original question of the thread. I think Demolisher is slightly undercosted, maybe at 15-20 (high I know, maybe I'm still burning) points it's more of a decision instead of an auto-include. This combined with the over-costing of some other titles makes it seem broken at times. I will admit as a rebel player I wish Demolisher didn't exist, but I'm sure Imperial players feel the same about Yavaris at times as well. It hard to judge Demolisher just because there are ways to make it insanely powerful.

Ah, I gotcha. I think I missed the inclusion of Intel Officer in this build. That definitely makes a huge difference.

I've written some MATLAB code to simulate attacks from ships and calculate the probability to reach a certain amount of damage.

The following is for a "Clonisher" (without CF) against any ship with 1 brace token. Extra curves compare the damage probabilities when removing any one of the upgrades (including demolisher). Each curve is generated from 100 000 attacks.

Calling ~90% confidence of success "reliable", we can say that:

• A Clonisher can reliably deal 14 damage against ships with a brace token.
• Removing Screed orOrdinance Expert reduces the reliable damage by 2
• Removing Expanded Launchers or Intel Officer reduces the reliable damage by 4
• Removing Demolisher reduces the reliable damage by 6

Assumptions:

EDIT:

For those discussing the MC30 as an alternative, here's a chart comparing a fully equipped Demolisher, Gladiator and MC30 (100 000 attacks simulated for each). Note that the listed damage is total damage dealt. XI7 on MC30 will reduce the number of available shields on the target, but not the total damage, so it is NOT reflected on these curves.

Its not demolisher that is the issue. Demolisher only adds one volley after moving, which most (corvettes and raiders excluded) ships can absorb. If you have a decent unactivated ship to respond after his attack run you can squash him.

The thing that makes it lethal is first turn and activation superiority.

Having said that, any MC30 or Gladiator with first turn and activation superiority can be almost as lethal. That's what you guys need to find a counter for.

I had a suggested errata to make, but it's probably too snarky, so I'll just say I agree with this.

I've written some MATLAB code to simulate attacks from ships and calculate the probability to reach a certain amount of damage.

The following is for a "Clonisher" (without CF) against any ship with 1 brace token. Extra curves compare the damage probabilities when removing any one of the upgrades (including demolisher). Each curve is generated from 100 000 attacks.

Calling ~90% confidence of success "reliable", we can say that:

• A Clonisher can reliably deal 14 damage against ships with a brace token.
• Removing Screed orOrdinance Expert reduces the reliable damage by 2
• Removing Expanded Launchers or Intel Officer reduces the reliable damage by 4
• Removing Demolisher reduces the reliable damage by 6

Assumptions:

1. Attack sequence is front, front, side (skip the first front if not using Demolisher)

2. Target has one brace token

3. If there's a ready Intel Officer, it always targets brace

4. Accuracies are accounted for only to the extent that they stop the target from using brace tokens

5. Target is assumed to not have ECM

6. Rerolls on black dice are done on all non hit+crit results

7. Damage card face up effects (such as structural damage) is not accounted for

Now with math, because it was needed?