Assuming I misunderstood something. Disregard.

The problem here is that anything that argues either against the meta or for the meta is lopsided due to the inherent hive/herd mind required for meta's to form in the first place.

Two world champs in a row have won from "non-conventional-at-the-time" lists while stomping the pants off of "common-at-the-time" meta lists.

Just saying.

Sometimes the statistics are irrelevant...kind of like politics and polls.

I doubt FFG would feel the need to change the rules without statistical evidence to back up any of the claims you make about flotillas, and they won't do it because you ask for it. The only way to get them to change the rules would be to convince or show everyone that life boats are so crazy OP and broken that they completely ruin the game. Which they don't. And one of those world champ lists had a flotilla killer to deal with the meta.

What claims? I just said I think they're a joke lol. Does it completely ruin the game to sit your admiral in an unarmed ship in the corner of the map? No. It does subtract from it, though. That other thread got hijacked by a bunch of people arguing with each other, partially because you're pretty aggressive with your opinion and aren't willing to even consider the other side's point of view, much less possible compromises.

Indeed I am but that's because I don't like someone else telling me how I should play after investing several hundred dollars into the game. I understand the point you make, but telling me I can't do what I want, which is legal within the rules, because it ruins your Star Wars immersion for the game is total BS. I don't disagree that it can be unthematic, but I'm also not lobbying for a rule change that alters the way you play.

The issue seems more from the other side. People who don't play at tournaments wanting to change the rules for when they play at home, so their opponent has to play by their rules. I have no issue with you putting a commander on an ISD or a flotilla. I assume you'd put it on the ISD, and typically I do to. But under no circumstances should you be allowed to tell me the way I play is wrong if I am not breaking the rules. That is what is pissing me off, and a fair amount of other players are annoyed with it as well.

This is rampant not only on the forums but pretty much elsewhere in society.

Oh the joys of having graded college papers...

What subject? I am a history TA at a tier one institute and grading papers is...enlightening.

As in "wow I never knew that" or "holy shikes you idiots stop using f'cking wikipedia as a primary source"?

The problem here is that anything that argues either against the meta or for the meta is lopsided due to the inherent hive/herd mind required for meta's to form in the first place.

Two world champs in a row have won from "non-conventional-at-the-time" lists while stomping the pants off of "common-at-the-time" meta lists.

Just saying.

Sometimes the statistics are irrelevant...kind of like politics and polls.

I doubt FFG would feel the need to change the rules without statistical evidence to back up any of the claims you make about flotillas, and they won't do it because you ask for it. The only way to get them to change the rules would be to convince or show everyone that life boats are so crazy OP and broken that they completely ruin the game. Which they don't. And one of those world champ lists had a flotilla killer to deal with the meta.

What claims? I just said I think they're a joke lol. Does it completely ruin the game to sit your admiral in an unarmed ship in the corner of the map? No. It does subtract from it, though. That other thread got hijacked by a bunch of people arguing with each other, partially because you're pretty aggressive with your opinion and aren't willing to even consider the other side's point of view, much less possible compromises.

Indeed I am but that's because I don't like someone else telling me how I should play after investing several hundred dollars into the game. I understand the point you make, but telling me I can't do what I want, which is legal within the rules, because it ruins your Star Wars immersion for the game is total BS. I don't disagree that it can be unthematic, but I'm also not lobbying for a rule change that alters the way you play.

The issue seems more from the other side. People who don't play at tournaments wanting to change the rules for when they play at home, so their opponent has to play by their rules. I have no issue with you putting a commander on an ISD or a flotilla. I assume you'd put it on the ISD, and typically I do to. But under no circumstances should you be allowed to tell me the way I play is wrong if I am not breaking the rules. That is what is pissing me off, and a fair amount of other players are annoyed with it as well.

I mean, if it helps the situation, Flotillas are likely going to be on the way out except maybe as a lifeboat flying off into the sunset. As I said (and others), the meta is already swinging back against the flotilla hard.

The Raider is broken!!

Now let's argue. I'll begin:

1. Maybe is not "the" raider rather than "my" raider.

2. Is not broken as "overpowered" rather than "literally" broken.

3. It was not Ben's fault and not mine of course. The daughter of my friend just put too much enthusiasm when she put her weight on the corner of the table. It was not her fault either (she is just 1 year old).

So the raider is broken but at least Armada still alive.

One Imp player in our CC campaign has a broken Raider, well the pin it sits on is broken, so perhaps not

This is rampant not only on the forums but pretty much elsewhere in society.

Oh the joys of having graded college papers...

What subject? I am a history TA at a tier one institute and grading papers is...enlightening.

As in "wow I never knew that" or "holy shikes you idiots stop using f'cking wikipedia as a primary source"?

Primary source? I believe you mean directly quoted but without quotation marks or citing. That is correct. Wikipedia plagiarism.

This is rampant not only on the forums but pretty much elsewhere in society.

Oh the joys of having graded college papers...

What subject? I am a history TA at a tier one institute and grading papers is...enlightening.

As in "wow I never knew that" or "holy shikes you idiots stop using f'cking wikipedia as a primary source"?

Primary source? I believe you mean directly quoted but without quotation marks or citing. That is correct. Wikipedia plagiarism.

Google Scholar is where it's at. Love their citing button with all the formats.

Here you go:

Actually, if you look at the squadron average size, it gets progressively larger and larger EVERY step as you go 16, 8, 4, 2, 1.

Other data points are largely unchanged or cannot be determined: cr90s apparently consist of wins 78%, ISDs drop in success over each step, but Mc80s are up, by large swings, meaning that there's really not enough data...

Which makes it really hard to use these for numbers.

Rhymerballs are over performing, and Imps win 66% of the time.

Secondly, some of the labels don't really correspond to information we need.

What is Rebel Swarm? How many lists had BCC?

Anyway, if you wanted it. Squadron average size gets progressively larger and larger on each step.

Highest winners and top4 are Rhymerball, then rebel carriers. So... I think that does exclaim that with our little data, squadrons are doing statically better than normal.

Page 2 again, average number of squadrons simply increases, look at the graph.

All the evidence I need to rage about how broken the game is.

Here you go:

Actually, if you look at the squadron average size, it gets progressively larger and larger EVERY step as you go 16, 8, 4, 2, 1.

Other data points are largely unchanged or cannot be determined: cr90s apparently consist of wins 78%, ISDs drop in success over each step, but Mc80s are up, by large swings, meaning that there's really not enough data...

Which makes it really hard to use these for numbers.

Rhymerballs are over performing, and Imps win 66% of the time.

Secondly, some of the labels don't really correspond to information we need.

What is Rebel Swarm? How many lists had BCC?

Anyway, if you wanted it. Squadron average size gets progressively larger and larger on each step.

Highest winners and top4 are Rhymerball, then rebel carriers. So... I think that does exclaim that with our little data, squadrons are doing statically better than normal.

Page 2 again, average number of squadrons simply increases, look at the graph.

I think you're looking at the previous season's data. The latest data does include BCC and I dropped the archetype labels they were more trouble than they were worth.

LINK

Oh My God! The new thread on Flotillas is just stupid. He's backed himself into a corner and is insulting everyone who asked him to show evidence. Seriously, I'm an elitist because I said show the evidence. The dumbing down of America I guess. We'd rather act off our own perspectives of our game with Ben instead of looking at actual evidence.

Is there a Obi Wan avatar?

That's it, call me Ben now!

The problem here is that anything that argues either against the meta or for the meta is lopsided due to the inherent hive/herd mind required for meta's to form in the first place.

Two world champs in a row have won from "non-conventional-at-the-time" lists while stomping the pants off of "common-at-the-time" meta lists.

Just saying.

Sometimes the statistics are irrelevant...kind of like politics and polls.

I doubt FFG would feel the need to change the rules without statistical evidence to back up any of the claims you make about flotillas, and they won't do it because you ask for it. The only way to get them to change the rules would be to convince or show everyone that life boats are so crazy OP and broken that they completely ruin the game. Which they don't. And one of those world champ lists had a flotilla killer to deal with the meta.

What claims? I just said I think they're a joke lol. Does it completely ruin the game to sit your admiral in an unarmed ship in the corner of the map? No. It does subtract from it, though. That other thread got hijacked by a bunch of people arguing with each other, partially because you're pretty aggressive with your opinion and aren't willing to even consider the other side's point of view, much less possible compromises.

Indeed I am but that's because I don't like someone else telling me how I should play after investing several hundred dollars into the game. I understand the point you make, but telling me I can't do what I want, which is legal within the rules, because it ruins your Star Wars immersion for the game is total BS. I don't disagree that it can be unthematic, but I'm also not lobbying for a rule change that alters the way you play.

The issue seems more from the other side. People who don't play at tournaments wanting to change the rules for when they play at home, so their opponent has to play by their rules. I have no issue with you putting a commander on an ISD or a flotilla. I assume you'd put it on the ISD, and typically I do to. But under no circumstances should you be allowed to tell me the way I play is wrong if I am not breaking the rules. That is what is pissing me off, and a fair amount of other players are annoyed with it as well.

Holy **** can we not? This personal garbage is killing me.

Here we go for this season: On the prevalence of squadrons winning.

Well, this seasons is even easier.

BCC increases Fromm 39% all to 53% winners, with moderate increase in the middle. In contrast, to plot another point of reference, Demolisher sees no change.

Avg Sq size here again increases linearly from all to winner. Up to EVEN HIGHER than last season, 7.41 and 8.00, instead of the average of 6 or so from last season. Which, last season had the same linear graph for success of squadron largeness.

Squadron size as median and mode graph also increase linearly, up to 8 and 9 at the top. That's incredible!

Rieekan seems an enormous glut in the middle top8 top half and top4 and increases from 31% to 40%, although he can be used for many things, he is the go-to admiral usually for squadron builds. (Dodonna seems no change)

And rebels 66% in this season.

Yeah. The Rebels and Imperials actually flipped 33/66 to 66/33. Very interesting, indeed.

Of course it is a pretty small sample set.

A comparison of the 2 Regionals data sets: LINK

And we have to see what happens after this new wave just got released because I feel the Imperials may have gotten the advantage in this latest wave. But again I will wait to see what the evidence shows. As for BCC it is a very useful tool that everyone wanted to try and play. And since it is available to both Imperials and Rebels I don't see it as a disadvantage for anyone. Everyone has it available for use.

But it also is still not the only factor to look at when looking at the evidence, it is of course there as part of the reason, but it also shows that players that are willing to play more balanced lists with both squadrons and ships do have the current advantage. Now you can fly a Squadron-free list but you can not fly a Ship-free list. So for me the evidence points to players bringing a healthy balanced list that includes a decent portion of Squadrons or a screen to stop your opponent's squadrons. (I have been bringing a defensive screening of squadrons instead of an aggressive style of squadrons. And so far it has been effective at keeping my opponent's Bombers at bay and that leaves the game to my ships to get me the points. The days of flying squadron free are over. Otherwise I like the data and your assessment isn't that far off.)

A comparison of the 2 Regionals data sets: LINK

Glad you like it.

It is a dataset with plenty of limitations, but it is useful for answering some questions.

Glad you like it.

It is a dataset with plenty of limitations, but it is useful for answering some questions.

Sure? I have the regional this Saturday and I have no ******* idea of what I will bring

I think on a competitive 2GSD 1Rdr 2Gzt 6Defender but my 2ISD 1Rdr 2Gzt Fel+tie turn me on

Aaaaaargh!!!

Glad you like it.

It is a dataset with plenty of limitations, but it is useful for answering some questions.

Sure? I have the regional this Saturday and I have no ******* idea of what I will bring

I think on a competitive 2GSD 1Rdr 2Gzt 6Defender but my 2ISD 1Rdr 2Gzt Fel+tie turn me on

Aaaaaargh!!!

Glad you like it.

It is a dataset with plenty of limitations, but it is useful for answering some questions.

Sure? I have the regional this Saturday and I have no ******* idea of what I will bring

I think on a competitive 2GSD 1Rdr 2Gzt 6Defender but my 2ISD 1Rdr 2Gzt Fel+tie turn me on

Aaaaaargh!!!

Spend at least 70 points on Squadrons for at least a screen. Fel and a Tie will not be enough.

Thanks. I know but two pizzas with activation seems so brutal. I played against a rhymre ball and I won. I felt sick almost the entire game but at the end I said hell yeah!! XD

dont forget to check your bias as well

"demo is OP" - rebel player

"demo is fine, l2p" - imperial player

"demo may or may not require tuning, probably by releasing ships or upgrades in future expansions that may give a slight edge over demo type ships provided they are played properly, rather than the heavy handed ban-hammer approach, given the data available" - level headed, unbiased game designer

The problem here is that anything that argues either against the meta or for the meta is lopsided due to the inherent hive/herd mind required for meta's to form in the first place.

Two world champs in a row have won from "non-conventional-at-the-time" lists while stomping the pants off of "common-at-the-time" meta lists.

Just saying.

Sometimes the statistics are irrelevant...kind of like politics and polls.

I doubt FFG would feel the need to change the rules without statistical evidence to back up any of the claims you make about flotillas, and they won't do it because you ask for it. The only way to get them to change the rules would be to convince or show everyone that life boats are so crazy OP and broken that they completely ruin the game. Which they don't. And one of those world champ lists had a flotilla killer to deal with the meta.

What claims? I just said I think they're a joke lol. Does it completely ruin the game to sit your admiral in an unarmed ship in the corner of the map? No. It does subtract from it, though. That other thread got hijacked by a bunch of people arguing with each other, partially because you're pretty aggressive with your opinion and aren't willing to even consider the other side's point of view, much less possible compromises.

Indeed I am but that's because I don't like someone else telling me how I should play after investing several hundred dollars into the game. I understand the point you make, but telling me I can't do what I want, which is legal within the rules, because it ruins your Star Wars immersion for the game is total BS. I don't disagree that it can be unthematic, but I'm also not lobbying for a rule change that alters the way you play.

The issue seems more from the other side. People who don't play at tournaments wanting to change the rules for when they play at home, so their opponent has to play by their rules. I have no issue with you putting a commander on an ISD or a flotilla. I assume you'd put it on the ISD, and typically I do to. But under no circumstances should you be allowed to tell me the way I play is wrong if I am not breaking the rules. That is what is pissing me off, and a fair amount of other players are annoyed with it as well.

Several hundred? That's cute. How about don't take it so personal?