13 minutes ago, WuFame said:how stupid the ET ramming rules are...
I have no words.
Ramming is hope, ramming is fear, ramming is lyf
Regionals Data
6 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:Fixes the CC questions too about how OP he is. And it nerfs Mythics list so Blail and Norse can start winning again.
In fact, I'd be totally ok with this.
Ban the maneuver tool. It's a crutch anyway.....
5 minutes ago, moodswing5537 said:Ban the maneuver tool. It's a crutch anyway.....
Ban dice too, while we're at it.
#SW90Life
12 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:There several levels of abstraction in determining how much somebody invested in squadrons, and I don't think you'd get universal buy-in on any one best way to do it... But I do think "number of squadrons" is one of the worse measures.
In budgeting my own lists, I measure points spent on squadron defense and points spent on squadron offense. I'll generally include in those categories squadron enhancement-specific upgrades like Flight Controllers and BCC, but not necessarily upgrades with a squadron-applicable use case like GT, depending on the reason I included the upgrade. In measuring an amalgamated pool of data like Shmitty's, it would be extremely difficult to abstract to that level without knowing each player's intent in building their list.
I do think "points spent on squadrons" is probably the best compromise between comprehensiveness and practicality. There is certainly some value in measuring number of squadrons, but as the range in squadron pricing grows (fourfold difference from cheapest to most expensive currently), the value of squadron count as a measure of investment decreases.
I really want to start tracking points on ships, squadrons, and upgrades. Numbers are useful when looking at deployments, etc, but points will tell a different story.
I do find it interesting that so far the Top 4 data for # of squadrons is almost identical across the three data sets. My suspicion would be that points have grown for the same period.
Everybody knows that the real culprit in all of this is ships.
Ban ships.
And Rieekan. I hate that B@$t@rd.
Back on track...I will say one thing about the dreaded ET ramming CR90 list: One thing that is really tough about it is that the counters I can think of to blow it up (or even mitigate against it) are REALLY bad at everything else. As always, you have to fly it, and no it isn't illegal or cheesy (although if anything is cheesy, this comes closest.) A few mistakes on the board will make it crumble.
I don't want to live on this planet anymore.
24 minutes ago, Caldias said:Man, I think the whole Rieekan in CC is OP is a little bit silly. How is auto-losing games OP? You still need to actually win games to get campaign points, and you also can't HS out until Turn 4. Ya'll just need more MC30s.
EDIT: I guess in the Empire they're called gladiators.
In my CC game versus rieekan my friend tried lifeboatinh him but my raider hunted him down. Unfortunately the zombie lord hyped out of the danger zone, costing me 0 points but saving him a whopping nine refit points!
This must be fixed.
CC literally unplayable.
11 minutes ago, CaribbeanNinja said:Back on track...I will say one thing about the dreaded ET ramming CR90 list: One thing that is really tough about it is that the counters I can think of to blow it up (or even mitigate against it) are REALLY bad at everything else. As always, you have to fly it, and no it isn't illegal or cheesy (although if anything is cheesy, this comes closest.) A few mistakes on the board will make it crumble.
Defending against this is exactly the same as defending against my SW90B's like you did in last year's World Cup.
Early alphas with bombers. And by "early" I'm talking start in with the Rhymer/Fire ball on round 1 if at all possible, and squadron command relentlessly. An alpha on Rieekan himself is preferable but unlikely unless he screws up.
Each successive one you can tackle significantly diminishes his threat. And remember that there is value in clearing them out even if they haven't already activated for the turn. Forcing him to trade one in order to use it is better than letting him get it to 1 hull and then RBD back to full.
Edited by Ardaedhel3 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:Defending against this is exactly the same as defending against my SW90B's like you did in last year's World Cup.
Early alphas with bombers. And by "early" I'm talking start in with the Rhymer/Fire ball on round 1 if at all possible, and squadron command relentlessly. An alpha on Rieekan himself is preferable but unlikely unless he screws up.
Each successive one you can tackle significantly diminishes his threat. And remember that there is value in clearing them out even if they haven't already activated for the turn. Forcing him to trade one in order to use it is better than letting him get it to 1 hull and then RBD back to full.
If only there werent really cheap aces in the form of Green Squad and Gold Squad.......
5 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:If only there werent really cheap aces in the form of Green Squad and Gold Squad.......
If only every single competent Rhymerball wasn't also rolling with Dengar or a Jumpmaster...
We can what-if all day. Assuming equally skilled play on both sides, this is the most turnkey way to shut down Rieekan CR90's.
It still bothers me that you guys use cheesy with an entirely different meaning...
I don't think it's illegal or OP. I think the ET ram rule is dumb and it's a great fleet to showcase why.
Edited by WuFame1 minute ago, WuFame said:It still bothers me that you guys use cheesy with an entirely different meaning...
I don't think it's illegal or OP. I think the ET ram rule is dumb and it's a great fleet to showcase why.
You must not have watched Rogue 1 and saw what a hammerhead corvette did to two ISD's!?
Just now, Brikhause said:You must not have watched Rogue 1 and saw what a hammerhead corvette did to two ISD's!?
Oh you mean it rammed, then backed up then rammed again?
12 minutes ago, WuFame said:Oh you mean it rammed, then backed up then rammed again?
Well it did ram then do another burn on the engines. So I guess it had engine techs for that "double ram".
2 minutes ago, mythics said:Well it did ram then do another burn on the engines. So I guess it had engine techs for that "double ram".
This was exactly what I thought on that scene: "Aaaand ENGINE TECHS GO!!" That's how I picture the ET "double ram" working thematically: not backing up and doing it again, but pouring on a little extra burst of power.
Eh maybe. It still feels dumb in the context of the game, but I'm for finding thematic ways to explain game mechanics.
22 minutes ago, Brikhause said:You must not have watched Rogue 1 and saw what a hammerhead corvette did to two ISD's!?
As all physics were thrown out the window at that point. No way it could have speed up a ship 4 times it size that quick to do serious damage to another one. Such a BS scene.
Just now, ripper998 said:As all physics were thrown out the window at that point. No way it could have speed up a ship 4 times it size that quick to do serious damage to another one. Such a BS scene.
I mean, I don't doubt the physics are exaggerated, but wasn't the issue that the ISD had lost all power so the corvette was able to nudge it? Presumably if the ISD still had functionality, it wouldn't have budged.
4 minutes ago, WuFame said:I mean, I don't doubt the physics are exaggerated, but wasn't the issue that the ISD had lost all power so the corvette was able to nudge it? Presumably if the ISD still had functionality, it wouldn't have budged.
Thats not what I am talking about. For one ISD to shear off the section of the other like it did, it would need to be doing some SERIOUS speed. No way a corvette so much smaller could work up enough to get it to do that. Move it sure, it should have just scrapped along, not utterly destroy it.
Edited by ripper99819 minutes ago, WuFame said:I mean, I don't doubt the physics are exaggerated, but wasn't the issue that the ISD had lost all power so the corvette was able to nudge it? Presumably if the ISD still had functionality, it wouldn't have budged.
But.. But... Overload pulse combo is not viable!
Always a good day to look at the forums and see everyone is talking about you.
I was flying this list at the Pittsburgh regional.
I just want everyone to know that the real person to blame is IceQube, he told me he almost ran this list at the Maryland regionals and I figured it looked fun so I ran it at Pittsburgh.
Ardaedhel, how can I be disavowed from ACFC and Classic Ben get to remain?
I also almost ran it in Maryland but I didn't have the cards for it.
46 minutes ago, ardneh42 said:
Ardaedhel, how can I be disavowed from ACFC and Classic Ben get to remain?
Just one more talent of classic Ben
1 hour ago, ripper998 said:Thats not what I am talking about. For one ISD to shear off the section of the other like it did, it would need to be doing some SERIOUS speed. No way a corvette so much smaller could work up enough to get it to do that. Move it sure, it should have just scrapped along, not utterly destroy it.
Maybe.
It's more about the total mass and the velocity it has been accelerated to.
Also it seems to have hit in a weak point on the second ISD.
But I mean, if you want realistic portrayal of spacefaring physics, you've come to the wrong shop.
Applying load in an abnormal fashion has a tendency to break things.
Source: I am an engineer