Good Morning everyone, Happy Weekend! It's NO biggie, but I was wondering if this would be too much to ask of my fellow X-wingers here on the forums...

Can we clearly state or tag posts about game-play, that it is Vassal or Table-top?

or should I just chime in on the threads & ask each time I'm unclear which is the case?

Quite often, I read comments/threads and I cannot tell if the poster is referring to Vassal (or computer) play or if they are talking about actual table-top gaming. Not that it's a big deal but I'll never play X-wing except for on the table and feel the Vassal experience is not the same. I think Vassal is awesome for players to play friends who are far away and I bet it's a great tool for competitive players (practice makes perfect). I want to get better at X-wing and have fun, BUT I really don't want to read pages of comments about some players experimenting with the newest expansions and to only find out on the last few posts that all the discussion and comments were about virtual computer play. I see a few posters will point out this detail and I would hope we all could follow suit: just let others know if it's Vassal-only when posting about game play experience in a conversation.

Carry On and Eat Breakfast.

Can you explain why you think Vassal experience doesn't apply or isn't relevant to the tabletop?

It is virtually (no pun intended) the same game. Anything you read about game play on vassal is fully comparable to game play on the table.

Having said that, players who have made both play platforms synonymous in their mind could be more careful about distinguishing which platform they are using when describing their experiences. But it certainly seems unnecessary. I would hate to have to post a sort of disclaimer in over half of my posts because that experience occurred on vassal or TTS.

It is a different experience, so much so i stopped playing virtually.

On the actual table you cannot have the movement precision you get virtually for both you and your opponent. It effects play, I know I leave alot more buffer around my ships then I needed virtually.

Thats not even factoring in the variance in movement templates (grab some callipers and measure a few ffg cardboard sets, it's kinda shocking)

I agree with the op on this one, mark your posts.

We need a preview, these forum-police topics are growing out of hand.

There are differences between vassal and real life but it's not going to change the valuation on ships other than swarms flying in tight formation.

It's not a forum police topic. It's someone asking that folks delineate between tabletop and virtual experience. Really no different than expecting someone to explain that they've had great experiences with ship X in solo rather than face to face play.

It is a different experience, so much so i stopped playing virtually.

On the actual table you cannot have the movement precision you get virtually for both you and your opponent. It effects play, I know I leave alot more buffer around my ships then I needed virtually.

Thats not even factoring in the variance in movement templates (grab some callipers and measure a few ffg cardboard sets, it's kinda shocking)

I agree with the op on this one, mark your posts.

It's not a forum police topic. It's someone asking that folks delineate between tabletop and virtual experience. Really no different than expecting someone to explain that they've had great experiences with ship X in solo rather than face to face play.

Really? Playing a game against someone on Vassal with a ship is different than playing them in person with the same ship? You get wildly different values from Vassal play and in person? It's obviously a different experience, but if you're solely talking game mechanics (especially combos, squads and the value of ships), it's the exact same thing. The T-65 isn't a magically better ship on the tabletop and Palp Aces aren't suddenly weaker on Vassal. Far more important than the medium is the skill of opposing player you are playing against.

Edit: The only reason I can see is that Vassal is often months ahead of the actual game so people recommending/discussing how those ships/cards are performing or recommending them could be confusing, but most people here already know the difference.

I too don't get OPs reasoning. Apart from actually moving ships on the table and judging distances (which is only partially equivalent), a the tactics and strategies being discussed are identical on Vassal and on the table.

I can't get Vassal to work, so I'm always talking about the tabletop game experience. I don't proxy anything, and don't play stuff until I actually own it, so I'm usually behind the meta also.

The differences are incredibly minor.

While the experiences are different, the differences don't really affect the general game talk that goes on.

Vassal is much more accurate and precise. Formation flying is different. When deploying, you know for a fact that your ship is at 90 degrees or w/e.

But overall, both players are subject to those differences. More importantly, the decision-making and strategy element doesn't change between games.

Can you explain why you think Vassal experience doesn't apply or isn't relevant to the tabletop?

I hope no one thinks I'm criticizing ANYONE about how they play.

In terms of most discussion on expansions, though, there's no difference between vassal and tabletop play.

Can you explain why you think Vassal experience doesn't apply or isn't relevant to the tabletop?

Never said it doesn't apply or that it isn't relevant. Please just re read my post. Just wanted to know when folks are talking about an experience, that they could possibly mention what they are playing.

I hope no one thinks I'm criticizing ANYONE about how they play.

You're asking people to put in extra effort, and, understandably IMO, we want to know why. Why does it matter if something happened on Vassal or on a real table?

Can you explain why you think Vassal experience doesn't apply or isn't relevant to the tabletop?

Never said it doesn't apply or that it isn't relevant. Please just re read my post. Just wanted to know when folks are talking about an experience, that they could possibly mention what they are playing.

I hope no one thinks I'm criticizing ANYONE about how they play.

I'm not following. How does it matter? I get that you'd personally like to know, I'm just confused as to why/how it matters.

Probably worth clarifying if OP has played X-wing on Vassal, as without experience playing it I can see how there may be a misunderstanding over it being a different experience.

The practical difference between Vassal play and real play is.. well, trivially small. It's not apples and oranges, it's apples and slightly redder apples.

Computer simulation has some advantages over table top with automation so being able to get exact measurements and take the waiting out of the results which can speed things up a bit. With computer simulations everything is binary as in 1 or 0. There is no it is on the line like in the table top game.

However with the tabletop game you get the perspective far better than on a computer screen. Also the models adds an aesthetic that can't be achieved in a computer game.

They might have the same rules, be based on the same game, but the experience is different.

Computer simulation has some advantages over table top with automation so being able to get exact measurements and take the waiting out of the results which can speed things up a bit. With computer simulations everything is binary as in 1 or 0. There is no it is on the line like in the table top game.

However with the tabletop game you get the perspective far better than on a computer screen. Also the models adds an aesthetic that can't be achieved in a computer game.

They might have the same rules, be based on the same game, but the experience is different.

Sure, but none of that really applies to what the discussion is about.

Can you explain why you think Vassal experience doesn't apply or isn't relevant to the tabletop?

Never said it doesn't apply or that it isn't relevant. Please just re read my post. Just wanted to know when folks are talking about an experience, that they could possibly mention what they are playing.

I hope no one thinks I'm criticizing ANYONE about how they play.

I read your post three or four times already trying to figure that out, and I'm still not clear on why it actually matters.

For the example two local players said they like didn't a particular ship and upgrade.I told them I'd played against it and watched a couple games of both played on Vassal and that they should give it shot, explaining some of the benefits and what I thought one pilot in particular brought to the table ( no need to go into detail here). They're now both playing that ship to good success. It wasn't my original idea but they're seeing the same success in real life for the same reasons I saw it virtually.

Computer simulation has some advantages over table top with automation so being able to get exact measurements and take the waiting out of the results which can speed things up a bit. With computer simulations everything is binary as in 1 or 0. There is no it is on the line like in the table top game.

It's actually more common than people think on VASSAL. I'd say that once every 10 or 12 games, there's a situation where it's genuinely too close to call. VASSAL has a limit on the available magnification, and at the top end, sometimes you can't tell if pixels are adjacent, or overlapping by one.

I think we should take it a step further. Those reporting a table top experience should indicate the play surface material. I don't want to read about games that happened on bare tables, plywood, felt or those GF9 vinyl mats. I only want to read about precise games on grip mats and the magnetic ones. I can live with the slippery FFG ones too.

I think we should take it a step further. Those reporting a table top experience should indicate the play surface material. I don't want to read about games that happened on bare tables, plywood, felt or those GF9 vinyl mats. I only want to read about precise games on grip mats and the magnetic ones. I can live with the slippery FFG ones too.

Nah, they need to indicate if they are playing on an FFG mat as well. Those rounded edges make a big difference!

Nah, they need to indicate if they are playing on an FFG mat as well. Those rounded edges make a big difference!

New on my bucket list: t-roll into a corner and be able to claim I'm in because the play area is legally square, despite the rounded corner.