The whole casual vs competitive thing, and the spirit of the game are a bit like rights.

Your right to swing your fist ends at my nose.

If someone enjoys X-Wing a given way, that's fine. Up to the point that they either try to enforce their preference on someone else, or ruin someone else's fun.

That does go both ways. If I were to play Joe, knowing what I know I wouldn't bring the most competitive meta stomping list I could. I'd play something fluffy that may or may not be effective.

But likewise if you're a casual player you shouldn't go to a Store Championship and expect let alone demand people not play with strong lists that don't have a lot of thematic to them.

Math is such a powerful tool. Not using it would be outright stupid.

However, I don't use math for list design. There are too many variables and non-quantifiable qualities for it. Rather, I use it in tactical decision-making. Such things as determining whether it is preferable to focus or to boost into range 1 is pretty easy math. Expected damage against specific targets is another example.

Sorry JB. But this is a...

BAD TOPIC!BAD TOPIC!BAD TOPIC!

Even though I agree it can kill the mood. We must always allow for the generation of enjoyable activity of any who come to the table. What we dislike is not the mathwingers in the game, but the ones who don't give us the same courtesy of enjoying the game WE want to. It's a two way road of respect and it takes a bit of tact to navigate. Teach respect. Teach against Suprematism. Infinite diversity, in infinite combination.

Sorry JB. But this is a...

BAD TOPIC!BAD TOPIC!BAD TOPIC!

Even though I agree it can kill the mood. We must always allow for the generation of enjoyable activity of any who come to the table. What we dislike is not the mathwingers in the game, but the ones who don't give us the same courtesy of enjoying the game WE want to. It's a two way road of respect and it takes a bit of tact to navigate. Teach respect. Teach against Suprematism. Infinite diversity, in infinite combination.

Math is great at predicting the outcome of a perfectly artless dogfight. Other than that... meh.

Math for squad building is far less important than geometry is for actual flying that list. Math is the art of actually flying those ships.

Specifically in X-wing, math is an important tool for figuring out the difference between a good list and a bad list. It's more fun to play with good lists, especially if you have regular opponents who play with good lists, and I do. So for me, math makes X-wing more fun, not less.

It is a tool for sure, but I dunno just how important it is particularly for veterans and bright rookies.

I have almost 200 ships and about four years of experience with the game so maybe I use math all the time and don't know I an using it... that is more like skill learned by hands and mind on experience.

A baseball player doesn't consciously use calculus to compute the ideal location for his glove given the initial conditions of a fly ball. But that's okay, because calculus isn't worried about whether you care about it: it's going to keep describing the path of the ball anyway.

I used to hate math. Now it's my job and I kind of love it. It grows on you.

So does funk...

Yes, but funk doesn't save taxpayers millions of dollars.

That's an assertion that isn't really testable.

Of course it is: you'd use a regression-discontinuity design.

Elaborate. I am unfamiliar with squishy social science tools.

Math is great at predicting the outcome of a perfectly artless dogfight. Other than that... meh.

Math for squad building is far less important than geometry is for actual flying that list. Math is the art of actually flying those ships.

I agree 100%. I was a carpenter for about ten years and you sure do use math in the eye to judge things. I have heard a lot of people wonder how PH drives his ships so well. I figure he did or does something that builds that. Pool players are great at this sort of thing too.

You get what I mean prolly. I know Vorps gets it, like many of us here.

Ah, this reminds of a favorite. For the record, I am a math teacher and this is in fun.

Given: Girls require time and money

Girls = Time x Money

Given: "Time is money"

Time = money

Substitution

Girls = Money x Money or money^2

Given: "Money is the root of all evil"

Money = SQRT Evil

Substitution

Girls = (SQRT Evil) x (SQRT Evil)

Therefore,

Girls = Evil

Math is fun. Who said you'd never use proofs after school?

... I mean, x-wing uses math. I like math. I like x-wing.

Saying math kills fun is like saying money is the root of all evil.

Both are simply wrong. Money is not the root of all evil, the correct quote is "the love of money is the root of all evil" Money like Math is not the issue, rather the attitude is the problem.

If you find that thinking too hard about the math behind your list makes the game less enjoyable then don't think so much about the math.

But it's immensely naive to think other people won't or shouldn't take advantage of math to figure out what the optional squad is. Especially when you're looking at tournaments.

Ah, this reminds of a favorite. For the record, I am a math teacher and this is in fun.

Given: Girls require time and money

Girls = Time x Money

Given: "Time is money"

Time = money

Substitution

Girls = Money x Money or money^2

Given: "Money is the root of all evil"

Money = SQRT Evil

Substitution

Girls = (SQRT Evil) x (SQRT Evil)

Therefore,

Girls = Evil

Math is fun. Who said you'd never use proofs after school?

... I mean, x-wing uses math. I like math. I like x-wing.

Saying math kills fun is like saying money is the root of all evil.

Both are simply wrong. Money is not the root of all evil, the correct quote is "the love of money is the root of all evil" Money like Math is not the issue, rather the attitude is the problem.

If you find that thinking too hard about the math behind your list makes the game less enjoyable then don't think so much about the math.

But it's immensely naive to think other people won't or shouldn't take advantage of math to figure out what the optional squad is. Especially when you're looking at tournaments.

I had seen that "proof" before, but just realized that the statements "Time is money" and "Money is the root of all evil" can be used to form another, extremely cynical proof.

Time is the root of all evil..... There's a scary thought.

Specifically in X-wing, math is an important tool for figuring out the difference between a good list and a bad list. It's more fun to play with good lists, especially if you have regular opponents who play with good lists, and I do. So for me, math makes X-wing more fun, not less.

It is a tool for sure, but I dunno just how important it is particularly for veterans and bright rookies.

I have almost 200 ships and about four years of experience with the game so maybe I use math all the time and don't know I an using it... that is more like skill learned by hands and mind on experience.

A baseball player doesn't consciously use calculus to compute the ideal location for his glove given the initial conditions of a fly ball. But that's okay, because calculus isn't worried about whether you care about it: it's going to keep describing the path of the ball anyway.

I used to hate math. Now it's my job and I kind of love it. It grows on you.

So does funk...

Yes, but funk doesn't save taxpayers millions of dollars.

That's an assertion that isn't really testable.

Of course it is: you'd use a regression-discontinuity design.

Elaborate. I am unfamiliar with squishy social science tools.

Specifically in X-wing, math is an important tool for figuring out the difference between a good list and a bad list. It's more fun to play with good lists, especially if you have regular opponents who play with good lists, and I do. So for me, math makes X-wing more fun, not less.

It is a tool for sure, but I dunno just how important it is particularly for veterans and bright rookies.

I have almost 200 ships and about four years of experience with the game so maybe I use math all the time and don't know I an using it... that is more like skill learned by hands and mind on experience.

A baseball player doesn't consciously use calculus to compute the ideal location for his glove given the initial conditions of a fly ball. But that's okay, because calculus isn't worried about whether you care about it: it's going to keep describing the path of the ball anyway.

I used to hate math. Now it's my job and I kind of love it. It grows on you.

So does funk...

Yes, but funk doesn't save taxpayers millions of dollars.

That's an assertion that isn't really testable.

Of course it is: you'd use a regression-discontinuity design.

Elaborate. I am unfamiliar with squishy social science tools.

Lol. This has quite a few hard applications as well. Can't get Saudi's to periodically stop cloud seeding, you know?

Honestly, I don't. Perhaps this speaks ill of me.

X-wing has so many mathy dice modifications now. Gotta catch them all here.

-- X-wing Probability Calculator --

http://xwingcalculator.x10host.com/diceuilm.html

These maths are so useful, and there are so many different kinds. There are small maths and HUGE maths.

This is where you find out how much crazy damage cluster missile N'dru Suhlak does.

Also, Zuckuss crew can end up being a crazy good value.

I hate* people who call it math. It's maths** damnit!

*This may be an exaggeration.

**This it true.***

***This is because it's British and therefore correct.

Yes, but funk doesn't save taxpayers millions of dollars.

That's an assertion that isn't really testable.

Of course it is: you'd use a regression-discontinuity design.

Elaborate. I am unfamiliar with squishy social science tools.

Regression-discontinuity designs are an alternative to random assignment. Essentially, you establish a cutoff score on a particular latent trait, and assign those below the cutoff score to the treatment group. (Those above the cutoff form the comparison group.) You measure the value of the same trait once the intervention has been completed, and conduct a regression analysis for each of the two groups. The treatment effect will appear as a discontinuity in the regression function between the experimental group and the comparison group.

Under ideal circumstances, regression-discontinuity provides an unbiased estimate of the treatment effect--just as a randomized experimental design would. Of course we don't often encounter ideal circumstances, but even then RD typically provides reasonable estimates of the treatment effect, and is an excellent choice when, for either practical or ethical reasons, you're unable to accomplish random assignment to treatments.

This example is a bit complex because "taxpayer savings" can be difficult to define, and because we're positing a funk-based intervention in order to realize a benefit on a different axis, but RD can handle it. Suppose you identify individuals who cost the federal government a lot in comparison to the taxes they pay--say, Medicaid recipients, oil-industry lobbyists, or defense contractors. You then use some procedure, perhaps a dance-off, to determine which members of that population have the greated need for more funk in their lives. Then you give them that funk, perhaps by paying for their attendance at George Clinton concerts (did you know he's still touring with the Parliament?!)

Then, after an appropriate amount of time has elapsed, you again measure both how funky they are and how much they cost the government versus how much they put in. If the cost/benefit ratio has improved, you've demonstrated the efficacy of funk on taxpayer savings! And you can even get an effect size, using the size of the gap in funk at the discontinuity.

I don't really mind Maths being used to indicate the given value of a ship in a hypothetical situation.

The thing I dislike is that the assumptions one makes to arrive at the given value are often overshadowed by the resulting numbers which can stifle innovation and leads to a self fulfilling prophecy.

Can you image if Aaron Bonner had looked at the Math-Wing on K-Wings and not bothered to innovate the Danger Zone list?

The assumptions that are made when doing the math are, in my opinion more important than the resultant number as you need experience to know how accurate your model is and a good number of people just look at the end results, never questioning how we got there.

Kris

The assumptions that are made when doing the math are, in my opinion more important than the resultant number as you need experience to know how accurate your model is and a good number of people just look at the end results, never questioning how we got there.

Kris

100% This.

A model is only as good as the assumptions. In X-wing, even accurate "average" assumptions can be misleading because you change the way you engage based on the specific opposing squad.

I despise doing math.
I despise using math.
I despise even thinking about math.

That said? It's useful as hell. Makes the world a better place when applied correctly. Probably what we'll use to contact other intelligent species if we encounter them, and the world could not exist as it does today without it.

I f**king hate math.

But damned if I'll ever say it's useless.

Man I was definitely using the OTHER definition of funk.

Like, "Hey, my two-year old hasn't had a bath for 72 hours and he's been playing in the backyard. Look at that funk between his toes."

The assumptions that are made when doing the math are, in my opinion more important than the resultant number as you need experience to know how accurate your model is and a good number of people just look at the end results, never questioning how we got there.

Kris

100% This.

A model is only as good as the assumptions. In X-wing, even accurate "average" assumptions can be misleading because you change the way you engage based on the specific opposing squad.

I hate* people who call it math. It's maths** damnit!

Actually it isn't.

Maths is short for Mathematics which isn't actually the plural of anything, but because of the way the greeks spelled it, they added a s to it when it was translated into english.

But since it's not the plural of anything including a S on the end of an abbreviated word isn't actually correct.

This is some seriously regressive thinking...

I hate* people who call it math. It's maths** damnit!

*This may be an exaggeration.

**This it true.***

***This is because it's British and therefore correct.

Mathematics. I have to insist. *

*Never try to be the gobshite in a forum full of nerds.

This game IS math, though!

Geometry determines the delicate dance of ships.

Basic addition determines how many and what ships you bring in.

More complicated formulae determine the value of each ship and the upgrades - just because we don't see what goes into the game under the hood, does not mean it doesn't exist.

Do you... hate X-Wing?

Do you... hate X-Wing?

Sometimes

Kris