Wait. So now we have levels of players? Scrubs? Wow. Someone is high and mighty on their opinion of how much their X-Wing ability matters in life.

Some people are bad at the game, this is fact.

I always find the, "but I love to fly Fel or the Inquisitor" crowd. Duh! Who doesn't like driving the Ferarri? It's no special accomplishment that you win a few games flying a netlist with the best ships. Unfortunately many of that group couldn't produce a winning list from their own brain if their life depended on it. There's a huge difference between beating plebes with a top tier list you've worn out because you "like to fly Fel" and beating top level players. Too many players think they're better than they are. Especially given, occasionally a top build covers bad mistakes. Know your role. Until you've got victories vs half a dozen different SC level players or higher you likely aren't that great even if you're good "your" list that you "love flying". What Ive seen is that the best players I know are always experimenting and changing lists. If you haven't won a large tournament, SC, Regional or better you're most likely one of the unwashed masses like the rest of us, don't kid yourself. If you aren't kidding yourself play for fun. If you're playing for fun why not try something different or new?

There is another thread somewhere in this forum where original poster asked: "What do you want in X-Wing?"

And reading this post I want to say: "I want X-Wing to be the game where there will be no dudes trying to tell me how should I play or how should I have fun."

P.S. What do you mean "playing for fun"? Because I am pretty sure people playing for win are exactly playing for fun - except they found satisfaction not in playing with suboptimal list but in outsmarting oppononent. I always try to build the best lists and if by that it means they will mimic 95% of other competitive lists so what? What is so bad about it?

I'm not tying to tell you how to play the game. I'm telling you that if you're a 95% netlister you're not as good as you think you are and you're likely incapable of original thought (at least when it comes to X-Wing) so you'd better enjoy it cause it's all you've got. It's the difference between an automaton and a genius. You can copy, others can conceive. Which is better? Try it man. Step down off you safety ledge and create an original list. If and when you win with it you'll enjoy it much more. The fun of winning is subject to diminishing returns. When you play a top tier netlist you expect to win, therefore you don't have as much joy when you do.

I recently played against a local player who won the tournament of store champions held in our area (for reference a top 16 player at worlds last year didn't even make the top 8 cut in that tournament). He flew a powerful top tier list (to his credit he was one of the first to develop it). I flew my own funky take on BroBots. Frankly, we both thought he would win. I'm certain the satisfaction I got out of beating him was exponentially higher than he would have got out of beating me. I know this because I have played hi and lost to him before. I'm a decent player but I've come up with some very fun competitive original lists. I enjoy the game much more as a 50-60% winner with my own lists then I would as an 80% winner with all the best toys and someone else's ideas. But maybe you enjoy being a soulless robot with a good record?

First off I suggest that you learn reading with comprehension. I didn't say I don't build my own lists, I just said my own lists are more often than not similiar to top builds.

Believe me, it is not so hard to "solve" the most optimal lists on your own. For example, my anecdotical evidence - shortly after Tie Advanced came out I figured out Imperial Squad based on three Aces - Soontir, Vader and Inquisitor. And you know what? Soon after that I found out that this type of list is already present and is considered top pick.

I won't take some exotic or subotimal list just to differentiate myself from other players - it doesn't presents ANY value for me. But if YOU want to handicap yourself with this kind of attitude or feel some special kind of satisfaction by playing this way, then you are free to do this.

I won't take some exotic or subotimal list just to differentiate myself from other players - it doesn't presents ANY value for me. But if YOU want to handicap yourself with this kind of attitude or feel some special kind of satisfaction by playing this way, then you are free to do this.

I believe the whole point of the Original Post was to say that:

1) If you develop your own list and practice with it, it won't necessarily be "sub-par". Look at the World's winner last year and he didn't take a netlist and won. He did know how to fly against netlists, though.

2) He's not against netlisting, but would prefer to see some variety in lists at tournaments (opinion)

3) He's encouraging other people who do find value in playing other lists to do so. He's not saying anything about people who play netlists.

I think all that matters is you have fun.

when you are playing you take a list that you want to play. you might like to play uboats, well go ahead.

it's all a game you can fly what you want and when you play someone who is super serious who is using the top tiers builds you just have to fly differently.

being aggressive doesn't help anyone. In all the time I've been playing the game I've meet a lot of good people and maybe I've been lucky maybe and haven't have to worry caring if you are top tier or not.

I play for the fun and I play competitive or casual builds equally.

ITT: Scrubs, scrubs everywhere.Keep putting these self imposed limitations on yourself and cry about things being broken and wonder why you keep losing.

Play some Epic, we'll see who's a scrub then.

???

You reckon you're the ducks nuts, why not try playing some alternative formats and see how you stack up?

I'm not a fan of epic at all. I'm notoriously slow when it comes to putting away 100 points of ships and doing the same for 300 points is awful. I do like team epic though that's quite fun and I do pride myself and my partner on being undefeated with it! Some of you need to learn what a scrub is. If I played him in epic and lost I would only be a scrub if I put self imposed limitations on myself and then proceeded to complain.

I'm not a fan of epic at all. I'm notoriously slow when it comes to putting away 100 points of ships and doing the same for 300 points is awful. I do like team epic though that's quite fun and I do pride myself and my partner on being undefeated with it! Some of you need to learn what a scrub is. If I played him in epic and lost I would only be a scrub if I put self imposed limitations on myself and then proceeded to complain.

Have you ever played Epic (or Team Epic) with all Generic ships? If you haven't, I'll suggest it. It's awesome to just have a ton of ships flying around the board and everyone dying. It becomes more about playing smart as you don't have the special toys to pull out a win.

Just a suggestion.

I'm not a fan of epic at all. I'm notoriously slow when it comes to putting away 100 points of ships and doing the same for 300 points is awful. I do like team epic though that's quite fun and I do pride myself and my partner on being undefeated with it! Some of you need to learn what a scrub is. If I played him in epic and lost I would only be a scrub if I put self imposed limitations on myself and then proceeded to complain.

Have you ever played Epic (or Team Epic) with all Generic ships? If you haven't, I'll suggest it. It's awesome to just have a ton of ships flying around the board and everyone dying. It becomes more about playing smart as you don't have the special toys to pull out a win.

Just a suggestion.

I've played with using the most amount of z's and a wings as possible. I hated it. I had to get out too much stuff and tear down was way too long. Not to mention the game just became super dicey since bumps were happening all over the place. Not my cup of tea. I'm just not a fan of epic. I bought the rebel ships thinking I'd be but I'm not.

Have you ever played Epic (or Team Epic) with all Generic ships?

I've played with using the most amount of z's and a wings as possible. I hated it. I had to get out too much stuff and tear down was way too long. Not to mention the game just became super dicey since bumps were happening all over the place. Not my cup of tea. I'm just not a fan of epic. I bought the rebel ships thinking I'd be but I'm not.

I totally get the hassle of pulling out all the ships. It's one of the reasons why I use Plano cases with all the ships still on stands for easy in and out. Even that is a pain with Epic.

I think there are also tricks you can do to speed up game play overall, though. Flying like ships in little squads is one way. Spreading out the PS of all the ships is another. Gets boring when one guy has to move 12 Academy Pilots. Better to set up 4 Academy, 4 Obsidian, and 4 Black. Not the most efficient in points, but efficient in game play. Flying them like little units also helps avoid bumping.

I don't mean maximizing your list with as many cheap generics as possible. I really just meant that each side can't take any unique characters. Fly X-wings and Y-wings and Tie Fighters and Tie Interceptors, but just all the generic guys. If you did it 150 pts doubles then you can just get something like 3 X-wings, 3 Y-wings, and 3 A-wings out.

Then again, it's totally fine if you don't play Epic. I'm just offering suggestions to save on the frustration with Epic. I just love it for the few times when I can play. I figured I'd give some helpful advice in case you wanted to try it again.

1) If you develop your own list and practice with it, it won't necessarily be "sub-par". Look at the World's winner last year and he didn't take a netlist and won. He did know how to fly against netlists, though.

I find this argument a bit misleading. You (the average x-wing player) are not as good as Paul Heaver. People like him or KineticOperator are the exception. For every Paul Heaver that wins with a revolutionary list, there''s 999 regular players who finish bottom half because their revolutionary lists didn't work.

I'm not saying don't innovate, but rather don't expect too much to come out of it results-wise.

1) If you develop your own list and practice with it, it won't necessarily be "sub-par". Look at the World's winner last year and he didn't take a netlist and won. He did know how to fly against netlists, though.

I find this argument a bit misleading. You (the average x-wing player) are not as good as Paul Heaver. People like him or KineticOperator are the exception. For every Paul Heaver that wins with a revolutionary list, there''s 999 regular players who finish bottom half because their revolutionary lists didn't work.

I'm not saying don't innovate, but rather don't expect too much to come out of it results-wise.

I do understand what you are saying, but how many people out there really try alternative lists and practice the heck out of them? I've listened to Paul Heaver in interviews and he spends MONTHS practicing with a list. He plays it against all sorts of netlists. He learns how his list works against other lists. KineticOperator also spends a lot of time practicing it. I think he's just bold enough to try all these things seriously and give it a serious effort. I think back to Biophysical and how he practiced extensively vs. himself or on Vassal as much as he could before going out the the tournament scene with his 2 Tie Defenders list. If you are a decent player and you practice the heck out of your list, then you will probably do awesome. I just don't think a lot of people out there bother really trying with non-standard lists.

I know last summer I practiced a good amount with my Xizor and five Z-95's. I'm a family man and can't practice as much as some people. I practiced vs a lot of Fat Turrets that were out. I got great at them. I went to a tournament a couple hours away with some serious tournament guys and floored them when I beat their fat turret lists. I went to the top table for last game and it was my first time facing Bro Bots. I got creamed. I practiced quite a bit vs them and went to Regionals and destroyed every Bro Bot player I went up against. I never really practiced vs. Phantoms and took my first lose there. I'm sure if I spent a lot of time practicing against them, I would've won that. There was another guy at the event with close to the exact same list, but he ended up a lot further down on the tables. I'm thinking it was due to lack of practice.

It's too easy to say, "Well, you aren't the mighty Paul Heaver or KineticOperator", but those are just regular guys that practice. OK...Paul Heaver surely has some inherent skill that many don't, but he also fully admits to practicing the heck out of his lists. I'm sure many people with fair to good skill would place a lot higher in events if they practiced their lists.

I'll also say that you do end up with an advantage in a tournament when you have practiced vs. all the netlists and no one has practiced vs. your list type. I've destroyed people with my 4 Tie Bomber list, but once they get used to playing against it, it gets a lot harder.

1) If you develop your own list and practice with it, it won't necessarily be "sub-par". Look at the World's winner last year and he didn't take a netlist and won. He did know how to fly against netlists, though.

I find this argument a bit misleading. You (the average x-wing player) are not as good as Paul Heaver. People like him or KineticOperator are the exception. For every Paul Heaver that wins with a revolutionary list, there''s 999 regular players who finish bottom half because their revolutionary lists didn't work.

I'm not saying don't innovate, but rather don't expect too much to come out of it results-wise.

I do understand what you are saying, but how many people out there really try alternative lists and practice the heck out of them? I've listened to Paul Heaver in interviews and he spends MONTHS practicing with a list. He plays it against all sorts of netlists. He learns how his list works against other lists. KineticOperator also spends a lot of time practicing it. I think he's just bold enough to try all these things seriously and give it a serious effort. I think back to Biophysical and how he practiced extensively vs. himself or on Vassal as much as he could before going out the the tournament scene with his 2 Tie Defenders list. If you are a decent player and you practice the heck out of your list, then you will probably do awesome. I just don't think a lot of people out there bother really trying with non-standard lists.

I know last summer I practiced a good amount with my Xizor and five Z-95's. I'm a family man and can't practice as much as some people. I practiced vs a lot of Fat Turrets that were out. I got great at them. I went to a tournament a couple hours away with some serious tournament guys and floored them when I beat their fat turret lists. I went to the top table for last game and it was my first time facing Bro Bots. I got creamed. I practiced quite a bit vs them and went to Regionals and destroyed every Bro Bot player I went up against. I never really practiced vs. Phantoms and took my first lose there. I'm sure if I spent a lot of time practicing against them, I would've won that. There was another guy at the event with close to the exact same list, but he ended up a lot further down on the tables. I'm thinking it was due to lack of practice.

It's too easy to say, "Well, you aren't the mighty Paul Heaver or KineticOperator", but those are just regular guys that practice. OK...Paul Heaver surely has some inherent skill that many don't, but he also fully admits to practicing the heck out of his lists. I'm sure many people with fair to good skill would place a lot higher in events if they practiced their lists.

I'll also say that you do end up with an advantage in a tournament when you have practiced vs. all the netlists and no one has practiced vs. your list type. I've destroyed people with my 4 Tie Bomber list, but once they get used to playing against it, it gets a lot harder.

Look at Evan Klassen's regional list. He's not just banking on it being a good list. He's banking on it being a list they haven't had to deal with before.

Wait. So now we have levels of players? Scrubs? Wow. Someone is high and mighty on their opinion of how much their X-Wing ability matters in life.

Some people are bad at the game, this is fact.

And who cares? That's a big deal? I am genuinely confused here. The impression I get with some of the commentary is that those bad players should never sully the good players game. It'd be hilarious if I didn't see the exact same arguments made for FPS and MOBA games. Sometimes the back and forth on this board really is an "Us versus Them" issue.

I won't take some exotic or subotimal list just to differentiate myself from other players - it doesn't presents ANY value for me. But if YOU want to handicap yourself with this kind of attitude or feel some special kind of satisfaction by playing this way, then you are free to do this.

I believe the whole point of the Original Post was to say that:

1) If you develop your own list and practice with it, it won't necessarily be "sub-par". Look at the World's winner last year and he didn't take a netlist and won. He did know how to fly against netlists, though.

2) He's not against netlisting, but would prefer to see some variety in lists at tournaments (opinion)

3) He's encouraging other people who do find value in playing other lists to do so. He's not saying anything about people who play netlists.

All of Paul's worlds lists are just netlists that are tweaked a little to be anti-meta. His list was Regen Poe, Stresshog, TLT Y-Wing, and a Z-95 because 12 points were left over.

The year before it was a fat Han with R2-D2 crew instead of gunner.

Year before that it was B-Wings and X-Wings, except at PS 4 to beat out PS 2 rebels.

If you want to get to the top, your best chance to do that is with a meta list that has all the benefits thatcome with flying a power list, but tweaked a little so you have the advantage against other meta lists.

Ryan Fleming's 3 point initiative bid in his U-Boat list, for example.

I don't believe in this whole oh if you bring a new list people won't know what to do. Good players will know. We've all read the cards and have the ability to read the cards and see the synergies. Maybe the bad and not so good players. Xizor and 5 z's for example without knowing the upgrade cards I know I'd be a moron to shoot at xizor. I need to clear out the z's first so that way you're left with a terrible anchor that wasted points on his ability. Part of being a good player is being able to find lists strengths and weaknesses and adapting.

I don't believe in this whole oh if you bring a new list people won't know what to do. Good players will know. We've all read the cards and have the ability to read the cards and see the synergies. Maybe the bad and not so good players. Xizor and 5 z's for example without knowing the upgrade cards I know I'd be a moron to shoot at xizor. I need to clear out the z's first so that way you're left with a terrible anchor that wasted points on his ability. Part of being a good player is being able to find lists strengths and weaknesses and adapting.

Like Xizor and 5 Z's, many new lists are based around easy to see gimmicks. So when you see Brobots with Accuracy Corrector and Autoblaster I immediately understand what you're trying to do.

I don't believe in this whole oh if you bring a new list people won't know what to do. Good players will know. We've all read the cards and have the ability to read the cards and see the synergies. Maybe the bad and not so good players. Xizor and 5 z's for example without knowing the upgrade cards I know I'd be a moron to shoot at xizor. I need to clear out the z's first so that way you're left with a terrible anchor that wasted points on his ability. Part of being a good player is being able to find lists strengths and weaknesses and adapting.

It's not like a new list magically stuns good players or something. It does only give them a little bit of time to think about the list. They only get to think about it for the time they see who they are playing to the time we set up. That's often not too much time in many cases. So, the ability to analysis can be smaller.

There is also the under-estimation of said lists. I played the guy who won the Atlanta Regionals the year before at a small tournament with my Xizor list vs Chewbacca and Outrider. He read the internet and he didn't rate Xizor. He also made a bit of a comment about how he was surprised I had beaten my last opponent. I don't think he thought too much about it. It wasn't the Xizor aspect that ruined him. It was me knowing exactly what he was going to do and blocking him. I knew his whole goal was to get me to commit my Z's and he would 2 hard turn and then Boost out of the way. That's what you do with swarms in a fat turret. Well, I flew one Z-95 way out there to block his 2 hard turn. It turned into a bump and I destroyed Chewbacca in 2 turns. After that, it was just the Outrider. It came down to Xizor being behind the Outrider and moving last. He couldn't shake me and Xizor just burnt him down.

I demolished a lot of Bro Bots at last year's Regionals with the list as I figure out their trick and how to stop them. They were very similar to the fat turret bait and run away tactic. No one expected the Flechette Torpdeo to stress out the IG-88 at just the wrong time. No one flew Torpedoes then and no one expected it.

You would be surprised at how many people used to forget about Bombs. I would bomb someone in a game....and later on they would completely forgot about it and I'd pull off the same move against them. I once got an Outrider to land on 4 Seismic Charges in one round. My Bombers had the TL and just did a K-turn and blew him up with 2 missile shots to burn down an Outrider in 1 turn.

I've had good players recognize the threat of the alpha strike a year ago when I faced them, but if they make one mistake, then it can be game over. AJ is a local champ, but he hadn't played vs. my Bomber list a lot. He recognized what it could do and was trying to maneuver into position, but guessed wrong. I caught his Keyan Farlander (back when he was a thing) and nuked him in one turn with missiles.

I'm not saying that players magically become stupid when you present them with an unusual list, but they might not get the time to fully develop a good strategy against that list and one mistake is often all it takes. If you get to the high tables at big events and start facing really good and experienced players, then it might be another thing. There are some people that play so much X-wing that they have probably played vs. lots of different types of lists. They might know what to do vs. your odd list. That can happen. I'm not saying it's not possible. At that point it becomes an even game.

1) If you develop your own list and practice with it, it won't necessarily be "sub-par". Look at the World's winner last year and he didn't take a netlist and won. He did know how to fly against netlists, though.

I find this argument a bit misleading. You (the average x-wing player) are not as good as Paul Heaver. People like him or KineticOperator are the exception. For every Paul Heaver that wins with a revolutionary list, there''s 999 regular players who finish bottom half because their revolutionary lists didn't work.

I'm not saying don't innovate, but rather don't expect too much to come out of it results-wise.

Know what else is true? For every 1 person who wins a regional with a netlist there are 999 who look it up and think it's an auto win and get destroyed.

I don't believe in this whole oh if you bring a new list people won't know what to do. Good players will know. We've all read the cards and have the ability to read the cards and see the synergies. Maybe the bad and not so good players. Xizor and 5 z's for example without knowing the upgrade cards I know I'd be a moron to shoot at xizor. I need to clear out the z's first so that way you're left with a terrible anchor that wasted points on his ability. Part of being a good player is being able to find lists strengths and weaknesses and adapting.

You are taking an extreme example here though. Xizor + Zs has an obvious strategy to anyone who is familiar with the cards. It's gimmicky, but even if players know the strategy, it remains effective because the opponent is forced in to shooting less than optimal targets. That's why it's effective.

I agree that most gimmick lists or "synergy" lists often struggle competitively, and unless you find something that really, really works, like Xizor + Zs does in the right hands, you are better to field a list where ships can stand on their own. But not every non-meta list is gimmicky in a way that there is an obvious target or an obvious strategy that is simple to counter.

Say you show to a tournament with a typical Palp aces build- Inquisitor, Vader, Palp. Your opponent is fielding Dengar w/ Deadeye, RecSpec, R4 agro, Plasma torps, Munitions, Chips, title, and Bossk with Crackshot, K4,Concussion missiles, 4-LOM, Chips.

What is the obvious strategy here?

I'm gonna go ahead and say whatever strategy is effective against this list, you aren't going to figure it out in the 5-8 minutes of set up considering it just won a 65 player regional.

Well, I find the meta boring. You don't have to deal with me, though, as I don't go to tournaments. So, your pretty aggressive stance against Casual X-wing gameplay is noted. You don't have to be such a jerk.

1) If you develop your own list and practice with it, it won't necessarily be "sub-par". Look at the World's winner last year and he didn't take a netlist and won. He did know how to fly against netlists, though.

I find this argument a bit misleading. You (the average x-wing player) are not as good as Paul Heaver. People like him or KineticOperator are the exception. For every Paul Heaver that wins with a revolutionary list, there''s 999 regular players who finish bottom half because their revolutionary lists didn't work.

I'm not saying don't innovate, but rather don't expect too much to come out of it results-wise.

Know what else is true? For every 1 person who wins a regional with a netlist there are 999 who look it up and think it's an auto win and get destroyed.

There are however more regionals won by netlists, so from a pure numbers perspective it's a stronger choice.

Personally, I feel you can't win if you play bad no matter how good your list is and you can't win with a bad list no matter how well you play (assuming competent opponents).

Netlists solves one of the aspects I think are needed to win (having a good list) and lets you focus only on playing better.

I don't believe in this whole oh if you bring a new list people won't know what to do. Good players will know. We've all read the cards and have the ability to read the cards and see the synergies. Maybe the bad and not so good players. Xizor and 5 z's for example without knowing the upgrade cards I know I'd be a moron to shoot at xizor. I need to clear out the z's first so that way you're left with a terrible anchor that wasted points on his ability. Part of being a good player is being able to find lists strengths and weaknesses and adapting.

You are taking an extreme example here though. Xizor + Zs has an obvious strategy to anyone who is familiar with the cards. It's gimmicky, but even if players know the strategy, it remains effective because the opponent is forced in to shooting less than optimal targets. That's why it's effective.

I agree that most gimmick lists or "synergy" lists often struggle competitively, and unless you find something that really, really works, like Xizor + Zs does in the right hands, you are better to field a list where ships can stand on their own. But not every non-meta list is gimmicky in a way that there is an obvious target or an obvious strategy that is simple to counter.

Say you show to a tournament with a typical Palp aces build- Inquisitor, Vader, Palp. Your opponent is fielding Dengar w/ Deadeye, RecSpec, R4 agro, Plasma torps, Munitions, Chips, title, and Bossk with Crackshot, K4,Concussion missiles, 4-LOM, Chips.

What is the obvious strategy here?

I'm gonna go ahead and say whatever strategy is effective against this list, you aren't going to figure it out in the 5-8 minutes of set up considering it just won a 65 player regional.

It's just a meme...

Well, I find the meta boring. You don't have to deal with me, though, as I don't go to tournaments. So, your pretty aggressive stance against Casual X-wing gameplay is noted. You don't have to be such a jerk.

I don't believe in this whole oh if you bring a new list people won't know what to do. Good players will know. We've all read the cards and have the ability to read the cards and see the synergies. Maybe the bad and not so good players. Xizor and 5 z's for example without knowing the upgrade cards I know I'd be a moron to shoot at xizor. I need to clear out the z's first so that way you're left with a terrible anchor that wasted points on his ability. Part of being a good player is being able to find lists strengths and weaknesses and adapting.

You are taking an extreme example here though. Xizor + Zs has an obvious strategy to anyone who is familiar with the cards. It's gimmicky, but even if players know the strategy, it remains effective because the opponent is forced in to shooting less than optimal targets. That's why it's effective.

I agree that most gimmick lists or "synergy" lists often struggle competitively, and unless you find something that really, really works, like Xizor + Zs does in the right hands, you are better to field a list where ships can stand on their own. But not every non-meta list is gimmicky in a way that there is an obvious target or an obvious strategy that is simple to counter.

Say you show to a tournament with a typical Palp aces build- Inquisitor, Vader, Palp. Your opponent is fielding Dengar w/ Deadeye, RecSpec, R4 agro, Plasma torps, Munitions, Chips, title, and Bossk with Crackshot, K4,Concussion missiles, 4-LOM, Chips.

What is the obvious strategy here?

I'm gonna go ahead and say whatever strategy is effective against this list, you aren't going to figure it out in the 5-8 minutes of set up considering it just won a 65 player regional.

First I go back and smack myself for bringing a Palp Aces list with no autothrusters. So then I change the list back to palp, omega, inquis, wampa. I'm probably gonna burn down bossk as fast as possible so he probably won't last 3 rounds of combat. Should be dead by the second round. Then I clean up a terribly built dengar. I could do it either way go for dengar or bossk first but bossk will go easier. If I have fel dengar will be pretty easy. Especially since you have deadeye and recon. That means you most likely won't be barrel rolling and if you do you give up dice mods. That makes you more predictable.

Did you know that the "terrible" build (or one pretty close to it) you just "destroyed" took a Regional? I am pretty sure it had to go through the standart Palp+Miniaces to do that.