So FFG has done a lot of really great things to fix some poor tournament experiences. MOV over Strength of schedule, half points on large bases, final salvo over intentional draws... Most, if not all of their changes are regarded as good and necessary additions by a large portion of the community.

But one thing they have not looked to change or impact is players running late game to preserve a victory they hold on points that they would likely lose if they continued to engage. I personally find the fact that players are able to avoid combat in such a scenario without penalty to be an issue. I see this issue as very similar to the issue with large base ships before the half points MOV change. Much like Fat Han used to be able to win on points with 1 hull point at the end of the round against 2 full health Bs (before the scoring change), a player with a 1 hull Defender can win against a full health small base ship that costs 1 less point simply by running until time is called, even if it is clear that if the game was played out, the Defender would go down handily.

Does anyone have any thoughts on an appropriate way to fix this? Or, if you have something to share on the subject as to if it is or is not a real issue, feel free to let us know why it is or why it is not one.

Thanks.

Gotta do what you can to make the game manageable. Otherwise you can be there for hours and hours.

The only other option would be to divide each ship's points value by it's hull/shield value to calculate each point, but that would just be impractical.

Interesting subject Kdubb. Just offhand I'd have to say that considering the things you mentioned (the MOV scoring change as the biggest example), in this environment of hyper accurate guns, alpha strike capabilities and the like; If you manage to run away and win on points, I don't see how you didn't earn it.

Just my two bits.

You could argue that the possibility to run away balances in favor of 3+ ship lists.

Playing only two ships comes with the risk of being outrunned when you lose one ship.

This again? Granted it has been a while but running to preserve a lead and now the win is, and always should be, perfectly viable. If you can't chase them down and win then that's your loss. Maybe you think you should win "if only that ship would sit there like a good boy at take his beatdown!!!!!" but when he runs around on the artificially restrictive board he could just be waiting for your superior ships to reveal their chinks and then slowly pick them off.

Just a board size can be used to hem in a force with superior speed and agility the clock may allow them to stay alive long enough for the victory it you can't catch them when they are hobbled by the arena.

The other thing is that the behaviors you're complaining about wouldn't change if you changed how the game is scored- If one player is at a tactical disadvantage, it's in their interest to disengage until they can attack on more favorable terms. The only difference is who would win, and frankly, that's not as clear cut as you make it out to be.

There have been some pretty good arguments for introducing fractional MoV based on percentage points, but unless FFG rolled out more robust tournament software, you'd run into math problems.

How would you determine if a player was running away or trying to get better positioning?

I wouldn't.

Except maybe by making it possible to concede without losing additional MoV.

The obvious solution to it by the by is... make sure your last ship is more expensive than theirs. That's why when I'm expecting to fight defenders with defenders I use Rexler and build him dear...

It's just what happens. Working as designed.

First things first. Is this actually a problem? If it is a question, is it big enough to be addressed specifically?

I would say no in either case.

End all games by final salvo.

I don't think this needs fixing, but if it HAD to be fixed I'd look there first.

It's a strategy....in a strategy game.

Problem solved as far as I'm concerned.

You manage it by "gettin gud"

Half health for half mov already fixed it on large ships who were the most egregious abusers of this strat due to boost

dIxfe...

Ifxed...

fiexd...

fixed...

Here u go dude, i FIXED it for you

End all games by final salvo.

I don't think this needs fixing, but if it HAD to be fixed I'd look there first.

In the final 10 minutes of the game, start each round by damaging each ship by one. Though that would create very tanky builds.

Gonna take the tine to say "**** final salvo"

**** rng that purposely penalizes you for bringing sexy wingspan is some ole bull

Every ships worth should = total points / hull + shields (rounded down, making that last hull worth more)

Dash at 58pts is worth 5.8pts or 5pts per damage done.

Soontir at 35pts is worth 11.6pts or 11pts per damage done

x7 juke Vessery at 35pts is worth 5.8 or 5pts per dmg done.

Lothal at 39pts is worth 2.4pts or 2pts per damage done

So a Soontir with 2dmg is not worth 35pts, he is worth 13pts left alive. While a x7 juke Vessery with 3 hull left is 20pts (5pts per dmg). So Vessery is currently in the lead in this match (its not a draw at 35pts) and Soontir needs at least 2 more dmg on Vessery.

This would dramatically lower any type of Final Salvo, as mirror matches could end with Soontir #1 at 1dmg and Soontir #2 at 2dmg.

It's simple first grade math that would only add an extra 30 seconds at the end of each round. Getting 1 dmg on a 35pt Soontir hiding behind Palp should count as something, as it was probably harder to get that 1 dmg as it is to get 6 shields on Lothal.

If a player is good enough can close in, engage and then disengage to keep their last ship alive why should they be penalised? People complain about Rebel regen, but Empire have Palp and Scum have Manaroo. Players have to play to their squads strengths so if running is what keeps you alive, why hurt a player for it?

You need to try and coral a fleeing ship, not chase it.

Running away at the end of a game is a perfectly acceptable strategy. I agree it can be frustrating when playing against it, but choosing chips which are fast and can keep up with fleeing ships (Manaroo) should go into all list building. Avoiding ships and outmatched engagements is a part of real dog-fighting and certainly fits the theme of the game.

This is definitely not a problem, and should not be addressed. I rather see it as a viable strategy of the game, one which should be employed as necessary.

If you don't like it, find a way to plan and execute your ships better to stop them from running.

If you can't do so, then your adversary has correctly chosen the proper strategy to win.

Every ships worth should = total points / hull + shields (rounded down, making that last hull worth more)

Dash at 58pts is worth 5.8pts or 5pts per damage done.

Soontir at 35pts is worth 11.6pts or 11pts per damage done

x7 juke Vessery at 35pts is worth 5.8 or 5pts per dmg done.

Lothal at 39pts is worth 2.4pts or 2pts per damage done

So a Soontir with 2dmg is not worth 35pts, he is worth 13pts left alive. While a x7 juke Vessery with 3 hull left is 20pts (5pts per dmg). So Vessery is currently in the lead in this match (its not a draw at 35pts) and Soontir needs at least 2 more dmg on Vessery.

This would dramatically lower any type of Final Salvo, as mirror matches could end with Soontir #1 at 1dmg and Soontir #2 at 2dmg.

It's simple first grade math that would only add an extra 30 seconds at the end of each round. Getting 1 dmg on a 35pt Soontir hiding behind Palp should count as something, as it was probably harder to get that 1 dmg as it is to get 6 shields on Lothal.

First off- Hyperbole does not help your case- Division is not first grade math in any education system I'm familiar with.

Now, as to partial MoV. The argument tends to go back and forth to the effect of "A ship is just as capable of fighting at one hull as it is at full. Therefor, only the last hull point matters," vs. "Factoring in the remaining hull of the surviving ships gives us a better indication of who would win if the match were extended." Both arguments have some merit, with a variety of counter arguments being thrown back and forth, but the change to half MoV for large ships (the biggest beneficiaries of the old system) seems to have been accepted by most players as an acceptable compromise..

Ultimately, the most likely reason fractional MoV wasn't implemented is that it's far too easy for people to mess up simple math. The easiest way to avoid that is to have all the calculations done by the tournament software. Unfortunately, FFG does not care to upgrade their tournament software to a more robust system that could handle the amount of information (Tracking every player's list and recording how much damage the surviving ships had each taken for each match). And, unless we see a fat ship renaissance of some sorts, it's unlikely FFG will do that.

I wouldn't.

Except maybe by making it possible to concede without losing additional MoV.

The obvious solution to it by the by is... make sure your last ship is more expensive than theirs. That's why when I'm expecting to fight defenders with defenders I use Rexler and build him dear...

I've suggested the "partial concession" in the past where a player could offer to stop the game without losing any additional MoV. Of course the hard-core scream "SCORING MANIPULATION!!!!!!!!!!!" and claim that is as bad, or even worse, than having intentional draws was seen. It seems that many think the winner in any situation should be clear as can be with no muddied middle ground.

If FFG wants to do partial points for damage then they should expand what they did on large ships. Honestly, they should have just done that from the beginning as some small ships can be nearly as hard to eliminate as large ships. I do NOT want to see the nickel and dime approach to scoring where every shield token lost or card taken means more points as that is just a nightmare. Although it can exist now there's also the issue of what to do about ships that can later throw out damage cards and/or regain shields although this moves into those complaints about Rebel Regen that have shown up lately.

Every ships worth should = total points / hull + shields (rounded down, making that last hull worth more)

x7 juke Vessery at 35pts is worth 5.8 or 5pts per dmg done.

While a Juke Vessery without the title is suddenly worth more, while functionally being worse.

Or Tycho, without a refit, being worth more than with one, while being functionally the same.

Every ships worth should = total points / hull + shields (rounded down, making that last hull worth more)

Dash at 58pts is worth 5.8pts or 5pts per damage done.

Soontir at 35pts is worth 11.6pts or 11pts per damage done

x7 juke Vessery at 35pts is worth 5.8 or 5pts per dmg done.

Lothal at 39pts is worth 2.4pts or 2pts per damage done

So a Soontir with 2dmg is not worth 35pts, he is worth 13pts left alive. While a x7 juke Vessery with 3 hull left is 20pts (5pts per dmg). So Vessery is currently in the lead in this match (its not a draw at 35pts) and Soontir needs at least 2 more dmg on Vessery.

This would dramatically lower any type of Final Salvo, as mirror matches could end with Soontir #1 at 1dmg and Soontir #2 at 2dmg.

It's simple first grade math that would only add an extra 30 seconds at the end of each round. Getting 1 dmg on a 35pt Soontir hiding behind Palp should count as something, as it was probably harder to get that 1 dmg as it is to get 6 shields on Lothal.

First off- Hyperbole does not help your case- Division is not first grade math in any education system I'm familiar with.

Now, as to partial MoV. The argument tends to go back and forth to the effect of "A ship is just as capable of fighting at one hull as it is at full. Therefor, only the last hull point matters," vs. "Factoring in the remaining hull of the surviving ships gives us a better indication of who would win if the match were extended." Both arguments have some merit, with a variety of counter arguments being thrown back and forth, but the change to half MoV for large ships (the biggest beneficiaries of the old system) seems to have been accepted by most players as an acceptable compromise..

Ultimately, the most likely reason fractional MoV wasn't implemented is that it's far too easy for people to mess up simple math. The easiest way to avoid that is to have all the calculations done by the tournament software. Unfortunately, FFG does not care to upgrade their tournament software to a more robust system that could handle the amount of information (Tracking every player's list and recording how much damage the surviving ships had each taken for each match). And, unless we see a fat ship renaissance of some sorts, it's unlikely FFG will do that.

Great commentary by both of you here.

I really like the idea of MOV taking not only ships destroyed in to account, but also damage done. But, as mentioned, there is a clear and fair counterpoint that a ship isn't ever really 1/3rd or even 7/8th dead (although large bases seem to be able to be half dead haha)., so it should be counted as full until it drops. And even in the case health points were counted towards MOV no matter base size, it just flips the scenario. Now, the player with more effective MOV runs instead of the low health ship (although, arguably, they would be more inclined to engage since they would have a good chance of finishing off the low health ship). But the best argument against implementing a MOV systems like this is what Squark pointed out. That, even as "simple" as the math would seem to some, there is no way players should be expected to calculate these numbers on their own. With as much mental fatigue that is already involved in long tournaments, you are just asking for a mental mistake or two to occur in scoring. And ya, I don't ever see FFG putting in the time to make a program that could calculate this sort of scoring for the players, so it's just a pipe dream no matter what.

Every ships worth should = total points / hull + shields (rounded down, making that last hull worth more)

Dash at 58pts is worth 5.8pts or 5pts per damage done.

Soontir at 35pts is worth 11.6pts or 11pts per damage done

x7 juke Vessery at 35pts is worth 5.8 or 5pts per dmg done.

Lothal at 39pts is worth 2.4pts or 2pts per damage done

So a Soontir with 2dmg is not worth 35pts, he is worth 13pts left alive. While a x7 juke Vessery with 3 hull left is 20pts (5pts per dmg). So Vessery is currently in the lead in this match (its not a draw at 35pts) and Soontir needs at least 2 more dmg on Vessery.

This would dramatically lower any type of Final Salvo, as mirror matches could end with Soontir #1 at 1dmg and Soontir #2 at 2dmg.

It's simple first grade math that would only add an extra 30 seconds at the end of each round. Getting 1 dmg on a 35pt Soontir hiding behind Palp should count as something, as it was probably harder to get that 1 dmg as it is to get 6 shields on Lothal.

First off- Hyperbole does not help your case- Division is not first grade math in any education system I'm familiar with.

Now, as to partial MoV. The argument tends to go back and forth to the effect of "A ship is just as capable of fighting at one hull as it is at full. Therefor, only the last hull point matters," vs. "Factoring in the remaining hull of the surviving ships gives us a better indication of who would win if the match were extended." Both arguments have some merit, with a variety of counter arguments being thrown back and forth, but the change to half MoV for large ships (the biggest beneficiaries of the old system) seems to have been accepted by most players as an acceptable compromise..

Ultimately, the most likely reason fractional MoV wasn't implemented is that it's far too easy for people to mess up simple math. The easiest way to avoid that is to have all the calculations done by the tournament software. Unfortunately, FFG does not care to upgrade their tournament software to a more robust system that could handle the amount of information (Tracking every player's list and recording how much damage the surviving ships had each taken for each match). And, unless we see a fat ship renaissance of some sorts, it's unlikely FFG will do that.

Great commentary by both of you here.

I really like the idea of MOV taking not only ships destroyed in to account, but also damage done. But, as mentioned, there is a clear and fair counterpoint that a ship isn't ever really 1/3rd or even 7/8th dead (although large bases seem to be able to be half dead haha)., so it should be counted as full until it drops. And even in the case health points were counted towards MOV no matter base size, it just flips the scenario. Now, the player with more effective MOV runs instead of the low health ship (although, arguably, they would be more inclined to engage since they would have a good chance of finishing off the low health ship). But the best argument against implementing a MOV systems like this is what Squark pointed out. That, even as "simple" as the math would seem to some, there is no way players should be expected to calculate these numbers on their own. With as much mental fatigue that is already involved in long tournaments, you are just asking for a mental mistake or two to occur in scoring. And ya, I don't ever see FFG putting in the time to make a program that could calculate this sort of scoring for the players, so it's just a pipe dream no matter what.

As you mention, partial points doesn't really help your original concern, just flipping it (not to mention making regen even more valuable -- and probably frustrating than it currently is.) Side note: Miranda is currently the ship I think is the most frustrating example of the tactic because she can run easily against lower PS ships and regen, though in general I don't think it's a problem beyond a couple of corner case ships.

Another problem with partial points as I see it is, iirc, that it -- when first brought up -- was originally intended to try and take the end-game state into account and more correctly identify the actual winner. The problem with that is that we're getting further away from a game where the remaining health on a ship correctly identifies the game state due to the fact that there are more ships that are simply nigh invulnerable at the endgame to certain 1v1 or even 1v2 situations even though they might have just a couple of health left.