I feel the a-wing fix kinda fell flat two ept sounds good but they still hit like a damp squid.

Damage output on A-Wings would still be low, but Chips would no longer compete with AT so you'd see more than just Prockets when they carry missiles...

I feel the a-wing fix kinda fell flat two ept sounds good but they still hit like a damp squid.

I wonder if the A-Wing and Interceptor fixes might have gone better the other way 'round; 2 mods to the A-Wing, +1 EPT to the Interceptor.

Damage output on A-Wings would still be low, but Chips would no longer compete with AT so you'd see more than just Prockets when they carry missiles...

I doubt it would have at the time. The Mods and Missile options back then weren't as enticing as they are now.

Also with Dual-EPT the A-Wing could take Expose and/or Opportunist to achieve R1 5A for a total of 6pts (refit) and attack with it multiple times in a match. Depending who you talk to the perception of Refit is that taking PRockets on an A-Wing is viewed as 5pts and not 3pts because Refit allows you to allocate those 2pts elsewhere even not towards the A-Wing itself.

I don't know, sometimes I feel like this is what happens:

1. Forum groupthink declares Ship X useless

2. People read that Ship X is useless, don't use it

3. Forum groupthink points to Ship X not being used as proof it's useless.

Balanced and present aren't one and the same. Integrated Astromech sorted out the X-wing mathematically,

Where did this myth come from, and why won't it die? The numbers are literally out there to prove that no, the X-Wing is still worse at jousting than a B-Wing.

Sure, you could take the more common 'x-wing is fine guyz' approach and say the dial somehow propels the X-Wing above the B-Wing, but anyone saying that 'mathematically, the X-Wing is fine' is clearly talking out of their ass.

Munitions Failsafe is the clear winner here.

Munitions Failsafe is the biggest non-event in my perspective. I love ordnance and even I don't use it. Maybe if it were free....

I won my regional bye using Wedge without an EPT and Jake without PTL.

Three top 10 finishes, 2 cuts, and an over all record of like 23-9.

The ships are good. I keep saying this, but at some point you just have to get better at the game.

Balanced and present aren't one and the same. Integrated Astromech sorted out the X-wing mathematically,

Where did this myth come from, and why won't it die? The numbers are literally out there to prove that no, the X-Wing is still worse at jousting than a B-Wing.

Sure, you could take the more common 'x-wing is fine guyz' approach and say the dial somehow propels the X-Wing above the B-Wing, but anyone saying that 'mathematically, the X-Wing is fine' is clearly talking out of their ass.

Then kindly cite them, lest I accuse the X-wing still being significantly worse than the B-wing in le joust of being the myth.

Juke.

fixed Omega Leader to be a boss; don't see what it failed to do

Juke.

fixed Omega Leader to be a boss; don't see what it failed to do

I don't think it was a suggestion of a fix that failed, rather a thing that made previous fixes work better. Double EPT's, on a-wings.

Munitions Failsafe is the clear winner here.

Munitions Failsafe is the biggest non-event in my perspective. I love ordnance and even I don't use it. Maybe if it were free....

At least MF paved the way for making Chips and LRS free.

Its one card you can just throw in the trashcan.

I don't know, sometimes I feel like this is what happens:

1. Forum groupthink declares Ship X useless

2. People read that Ship X is useless, don't use it

3. Forum groupthink points to Ship X not being used as proof it's useless.

I came here to post that exact sentiment. IMO this is exactly why the T-65 is not seeing play.

Balanced and present aren't one and the same. Integrated Astromech sorted out the X-wing mathematically,

Where did this myth come from, and why won't it die? The numbers are literally out there to prove that no, the X-Wing is still worse at jousting than a B-Wing.

Sure, you could take the more common 'x-wing is fine guyz' approach and say the dial somehow propels the X-Wing above the B-Wing, but anyone saying that 'mathematically, the X-Wing is fine' is clearly talking out of their ass.

The numbers I remember seeing had the X-Wing and the B-Wing almost tied for efficiency with the B-Wing having a slight advantage. The math didn't take into account that the last crit proof point of "shield" on the X-Wing could be used in place of any of its hull points.

If a 0 point Astromech is released, the X-Wing would pull ahead of the B-Wing.

Balanced and present aren't one and the same. Integrated Astromech sorted out the X-wing mathematically,

Where did this myth come from, and why won't it die? The numbers are literally out there to prove that no, the X-Wing is still worse at jousting than a B-Wing.

Sure, you could take the more common 'x-wing is fine guyz' approach and say the dial somehow propels the X-Wing above the B-Wing, but anyone saying that 'mathematically, the X-Wing is fine' is clearly talking out of their ass.

Myth? I believe this came from MJ and his math. I could be wrong. He showed the the B-Wing vrs the X-Wing with IA was withing a percent or so of each other in jousting.

The issue was that this doesn't take into account the dial or available upgrades which make the B-Wing actually better.

I hope I am not incorrectly correcting you while you are incorrectly correcting someone else. That is what was explained to me when I pointed out what the actual jousting (I hate the current use of that word) stats were nearly the same for the X-Wing and B-Wing.

I don't know, sometimes I feel like this is what happens:

1. Forum groupthink declares Ship X useless

2. People read that Ship X is useless, don't use it

3. Forum groupthink points to Ship X not being used as proof it's useless.

This 100 times over, "u heard it sucks so I think it sucks and the post that it sucks" infinit loop with the next guy.

Balanced and present aren't one and the same. Integrated Astromech sorted out the X-wing mathematically,

Where did this myth come from, and why won't it die? The numbers are literally out there to prove that no, the X-Wing is still worse at jousting than a B-Wing.

Sure, you could take the more common 'x-wing is fine guyz' approach and say the dial somehow propels the X-Wing above the B-Wing, but anyone saying that 'mathematically, the X-Wing is fine' is clearly talking out of their ass.

Here is what you are calling the myth from MJ. I will let you tell him his math is wrong.

I deleted the stuff that didn't directly relate and both bolded and increased the font size for the B-Wing and X-Wing to make them easy to see.

I think from looking below, MJ is stating that the X-Wing with IA is only 2 tenth's of a percent different that the B-Wing in jousting. Of course as already stated that may not include re-positioning, available upgrades, etc.

[...]

I had some numbers in an earlier post from Dec 14... I'll just re-post and add a couple more *cough* TIE Defender *cough* that should raise some eyebrows. Occasional color commentary included.

These are absolute jousting efficiencies from in-progress MathWing 3.0. PS greater than 1 (when applicable) is not factored in.

Disclaimer: these are all still using legacy meta assumptions. They will change once I model a wave 7/8 TLT-heavy environment. (i.e. Fel is way better than these numbers show)

TIE-Defender/x7: 102.0% would still be solid w/o white-K

Z-95: 100.0% (reference)

TIE Fighter: 99.3%

Vessery/x7 97.7% worth his points at PS1 w/o a white-K

X-wing + I.A -1pt: 95.6% (3/2/2/4 @ 21) should have been this

B-wing + FCS: 95.3%

Y-wing + TLT + BTL: 94.2%

X-wing + free hull: 94.0% (3/2/4/2 @ 21) my suggestion >1yr ago

TIE Adv + ACC: >93.9% final number pending

A-wing + Refit: 93.1%

B-wing: 92.5%

X-wing + I.A: 92.3% (3/2/1/5 @ 22)

Whisper + VI/ACD/FCS 92.0% assuming shoots first

TIE-Defender/D + Ion 91.8% nothing to see here, move along...

X-wing + I.A: 91.3% (3/2/2/4 @ 22)

Vader + ATC: 90.4%

Kihraxz: 89.7% better than garbage but still DOA

X-wing: 86.3%

Y-wing + TLT: 85.7% assumes always has a shot

Whisper + VI/ACD 85.6% assuming shoots first

Fel + PtL + SD + AT: >85.5% pending wave 7 TLT meta analysis

Corran + FCS/R2-D2: 83.2% (R2-D2 = +3S) final number pending

E-wing: 78.8% less efficient than Corran, and only PS1

TIE Defender: 77.2% FFG valued 4K about same as a full turret

[...]

Just gonna leave this here. Already voiced myself in another thread.

Posted 12 March 2016 - 10:27 AM

On topic, Munitions Failsafe is probably the epitome of "Fixes that didn't"

Balanced and present aren't one and the same. Integrated Astromech sorted out the X-wing mathematically,

Where did this myth come from, and why won't it die? The numbers are literally out there to prove that no, the X-Wing is still worse at jousting than a B-Wing.

Sure, you could take the more common 'x-wing is fine guyz' approach and say the dial somehow propels the X-Wing above the B-Wing, but anyone saying that 'mathematically, the X-Wing is fine' is clearly talking out of their ass.

Here is what you are calling the myth from MJ. I will let you tell him his math is wrong.

I deleted the stuff that didn't directly relate and both bolded and increased the font size for the B-Wing and X-Wing to make them easy to see.

I think from looking below, MJ is stating that the X-Wing with IA is only 2 tenth's of a percent different that the B-Wing in jousting. Of course as already stated that may not include re-positioning, available upgrades, etc.

[...]

I had some numbers in an earlier post from Dec 14... I'll just re-post and add a couple more *cough* TIE Defender *cough* that should raise some eyebrows. Occasional color commentary included.

These are absolute jousting efficiencies from in-progress MathWing 3.0. PS greater than 1 (when applicable) is not factored in.

Disclaimer: these are all still using legacy meta assumptions. They will change once I model a wave 7/8 TLT-heavy environment. (i.e. Fel is way better than these numbers show)

TIE-Defender/x7: 102.0% would still be solid w/o white-K

Z-95: 100.0% (reference)

TIE Fighter: 99.3%

Vessery/x7 97.7% worth his points at PS1 w/o a white-K

X-wing + I.A -1pt: 95.6% (3/2/2/4 @ 21) should have been this

B-wing + FCS: 95.3%

Y-wing + TLT + BTL: 94.2%

X-wing + free hull: 94.0% (3/2/4/2 @ 21) my suggestion >1yr ago

TIE Adv + ACC: >93.9% final number pending

A-wing + Refit: 93.1%

B-wing: 92.5%

X-wing + I.A: 92.3% (3/2/1/5 @ 22)

Whisper + VI/ACD/FCS 92.0% assuming shoots first

TIE-Defender/D + Ion 91.8% nothing to see here, move along...

X-wing + I.A: 91.3% (3/2/2/4 @ 22)

Vader + ATC: 90.4%

Kihraxz: 89.7% better than garbage but still DOA

X-wing: 86.3%

Y-wing + TLT: 85.7% assumes always has a shot

Whisper + VI/ACD 85.6% assuming shoots first

Fel + PtL + SD + AT: >85.5% pending wave 7 TLT meta analysis

Corran + FCS/R2-D2: 83.2% (R2-D2 = +3S) final number pending

E-wing: 78.8% less efficient than Corran, and only PS1

TIE Defender: 77.2% FFG valued 4K about same as a full turret

[...]

I didn't say anything about the efficiency being an issue and no one said I did. I'm jumping in to point out a very important fact and you happen to have this quoted so I am going to use it.

This goes to show that points efficiency isn't everything. I have NEVER seen a Z-95 swarm (not that NOBODY runs them but they are hardly prevalent.) Rarely do I see a TIE swarm.

But I see TLT Y-wings. I see that Whisper build. I see that Corran build. And I see Soontir a lot.

Did IA make the X-wing better for the points? Duh. If you argue that it didn't you are entitled to your opinion but it is incorrect.

Did IA make the X-wing a competitive, tournament level, ship? No. It didn't. Argue group think, argue resistance to change, argue whatever point you want to make. If it was more competitive you would see it at tournaments. You don't (frequently not even on at the whole tournament.) If it were competitive people would run it casually. They don't. And I don't care about "Your buddy at your local game shop" that runs them because he is a closet case. When most people have a buddy that runs them we know it is a ship that is viable to a degree of reasonable success. At present that is not what we have in the T-65.

Maybe one day

when the rainbow pink ponies of love and compassion roam the green meadows

X-wing fans will understand, fathom the simple fact that X-wing is fine, it's just a jouster in a world where you need to be 3-3-4-4 beast and still you'll struggle.

BUT for now let us witness their moans and teeth grinding sounds as they pray to the allmighty Printer God and his Boat Prophet that they receive a gamebreaking upgrade that makes X-wing a top dog that's seen in every rebel list

the problem with "did IA make the t-65 competitive" is that we're citing numbers for the rookie pilot

the rookie pilot is a huge problem, because the X-wing has nothing other than its ability to move and take one of two actions. It's a pure jouster, capable of doing literally nothing else, and it simply isn't efficient enough to do that.

Thinking of the X only in those terms, however, completely fails to take into account the pilots' ability to transcend these restrictions, ala Biggs' amazing and game-changing ability or Wedge's "rail-gun-on-a-roomba" bb8 + PTL etc. Note, not arc-dodger but "Rail-gun-on-a-roomba." The barrel-roll + limited greens don't dodge squat (unless you do "Rebel arc-dodging" aka bumping into your opponent), but the combo allows for full mods every turn

I don't personally see Wedge as super ultra mega triple-X competitive, but far be it from me to say he doesn't belong on the table due to inefficiency. Dude is the textbook definition of glass cannon, hits like a truck with rocket engines and shatters like a soap bubble sculpture. He's terrifying, and priority #1 in any game he's in. IA certainly helped him there

Biggs, meanwhile, is just Biggs+ that much more durability. Dude is a massive pain in the ass, a direct counter to the Stress Y, and probably something we're going to have to start looking at once Ordnance becomes a thing.

do note, however, that I believe FFG really ****** up here but not with IA. Targeting Astromech is perhaps one of the most disappointing missed opportunities in the game that could've propelled both the T-65 and T-70 generics to new heights. It just needed to be a 2 point k4 clone, that's it.

it would've rewarded the positioning prowess of those skilled enough to utilize the limited green maneuvers on either dial and still end up in a good enough position to focus for fully modified shots. Combined with IA, we might've seen a highly competitive X

a man can dream

The generic T-65 doesn't see much play- it being better at jousting doesn't help a whole lot when it's still worse at jousting than the B-wing and the Z-95, and the B-wing can fill other roles. But Integrated got the named T-65's some play- Biggs is pretty solid right now, the only downside I see with him is he occupies the same points a stresshog does (26) and a stresshog does serve a similar purpose- a lot of the time people are going to try and shoot that before anything else, and if they don't you can make them pay pretty hard-core for it. Hobbie with Targeting is pretty good, Tarn with R7 would be great if he wasn't virtually useless against TLT (Forcing them to reroll once per round doesn't help a lot).

Integrated is better than it looks- having a floating shield that you can throw in front of lethal damage or a crit is very effective at keeping those ships on the board. I'm kind of suspecting, but hoping not, that the final "fix" for the x-wing will be a limited 0-pt Astromech that gives you an extra Astromech slot, since they made sure to word Integrated in a way so that it's technically not used up after the astromech is discarded. That would get the X-wing on the table, but it's such a boring fix.

As for fixes that were DOA, I'm kind of thinking virtually any of the ordinance fixes up through wave 7. None of those missiles or torpedoes see much play- bombs see some use, but I haven't seen anyone seriously running a Punisher or...well, any missiles or torpedoes at any tournament, so the AHM or APT guys that just came out are floundering pretty hard, although I see Advanced Homing Missile getting some play when Boba Fett Crew comes out.

Did IA make the X-wing a competitive, tournament level, ship?

IA was unfortunately released at the same time that B-Wings stopped being seen as a competitive, tournament level, ship. If B-Wings were still considered worth running competitively, I'd imagine that IA X-Wings would be seen much more frequently as well.

Balanced and present aren't one and the same. Integrated Astromech sorted out the X-wing mathematically,

Where did this myth come from, and why won't it die? The numbers are literally out there to prove that no, the X-Wing is still worse at jousting than a B-Wing.

Sure, you could take the more common 'x-wing is fine guyz' approach and say the dial somehow propels the X-Wing above the B-Wing, but anyone saying that 'mathematically, the X-Wing is fine' is clearly talking out of their ass.

Here is what you are calling the myth from MJ. I will let you tell him his math is wrong.

I deleted the stuff that didn't directly relate and both bolded and increased the font size for the B-Wing and X-Wing to make them easy to see.

I think from looking below, MJ is stating that the X-Wing with IA is only 2 tenth's of a percent different that the B-Wing in jousting. Of course as already stated that may not include re-positioning, available upgrades, etc.

[...]

I had some numbers in an earlier post from Dec 14... I'll just re-post and add a couple more *cough* TIE Defender *cough* that should raise some eyebrows. Occasional color commentary included.

These are absolute jousting efficiencies from in-progress MathWing 3.0. PS greater than 1 (when applicable) is not factored in.

Disclaimer: these are all still using legacy meta assumptions. They will change once I model a wave 7/8 TLT-heavy environment. (i.e. Fel is way better than these numbers show)

TIE-Defender/x7: 102.0% would still be solid w/o white-K

Z-95: 100.0% (reference)

TIE Fighter: 99.3%

Vessery/x7 97.7% worth his points at PS1 w/o a white-K

X-wing + I.A -1pt: 95.6% (3/2/2/4 @ 21) should have been this

B-wing + FCS: 95.3%

Y-wing + TLT + BTL: 94.2%

X-wing + free hull: 94.0% (3/2/4/2 @ 21) my suggestion >1yr ago

TIE Adv + ACC: >93.9% final number pending

A-wing + Refit: 93.1%

B-wing: 92.5%

X-wing + I.A: 92.3% (3/2/1/5 @ 22)

Whisper + VI/ACD/FCS 92.0% assuming shoots first

TIE-Defender/D + Ion 91.8% nothing to see here, move along...

X-wing + I.A: 91.3% (3/2/2/4 @ 22)

Vader + ATC: 90.4%

Kihraxz: 89.7% better than garbage but still DOA

X-wing: 86.3%

Y-wing + TLT: 85.7% assumes always has a shot

Whisper + VI/ACD 85.6% assuming shoots first

Fel + PtL + SD + AT: >85.5% pending wave 7 TLT meta analysis

Corran + FCS/R2-D2: 83.2% (R2-D2 = +3S) final number pending

E-wing: 78.8% less efficient than Corran, and only PS1

TIE Defender: 77.2% FFG valued 4K about same as a full turret

[...]

Soo... You aren't looking at the same numbers as everyone else then if you think this proves the X-Wing is fine. The X-Wing is still worse at jousting than the B-Wing even with the '''''''''''fix'''''''''''', and THE B-WING CAN DO THINGS EXCEPT JOUST, AND DOESN'T NEED TO GIVE UP BOTH ITS MOD AND ASTRO SLOT TO STILL BE SUB-PAR AT JOUSTING.

Other things that MJ himself admits about those numbers:

1) The price is calculated with a 1 point droid, so if you take a 2+ point droid that jousting efficiency plummets from 'worse than a B-Wing' to 'much worse than a B-Wing'

2) The X-Wing is a pure jouster. The B-Wing and TIE Fighter are much more efficient than it, and they both have a better dial for arc dodging and the barrel roll action. Meaning to out joust them, you're going to have to outfly them in a less maneuverable ship.

So far the only arguments against this are 'the Warpman' aka 'The X-Wing is fine because I say it is', and the 'nikk whyte' aka 'git gud'.

Meaning to honestly think IA fixed the T-65, you have to deny reality or pretend you are the best player in the world because you won a store championship with a single T-65 in your list.

Munitions Failsafe has one good use, and it seems to work better on FCS TIE Punishers. If you have a ship with Ordnance, and your opponent has a high-agility ship, he will just turtle up until your Ordnance runs dry, and you lose all your offensive punch. With Munitions Failsafe that never happens; you retain your threatening weapons. I think the big scary ones are Plasma Torpedoes and Homing Missiles, depending on the target.

Think of it this way, if your Guidance Chips let you roll 4 hits, and your opponent manages 4 evades, you're out of luck. Munitions Failsafe gives you a second chance...provided you live that long. And that, I think, is what makes Guidance Chips better - higher chance to do your damage before you're blown away.

EDIT: incidentally, I think timed tournaments also hurt Munitions Failsafe because you don't have time to keep missing with your shots, hoping for a lucky break.

Juke.

and crackshot

Advanced Homing Missile as a Major Rhymer fix.