12 minutes ago, Biophysical said:

We all know that's not true in practice, though, because so many options are undercosted for what they bring, so having the slot is worth something on a ship.

I actually think we have at least one clear example where the cost of the slot is factored in, and that's with the TAP (3 points for 2 PS alone is way off), but in general I don't think the cost is.

25 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

Yeah, that's BS.

So if we had a Contracted with no upgrade slots what would it cost? Or a K-Wing with no slots? Or if an Academy Pilot had two Torpedo slots and a Bomb slot why should it cost more to put onto the table naked?

It's nonsense. You can't price slots because you can't know if they're bringing any value or not - you price the ship and you price the upgrade, it's the only sensible way of doing it.

I agree. I guess I'm not being all that clear. My point I'll trying to make is that it's a very strong ship with no upgrades at all for 25 points, but with Mindlink, for example (if supporting other Mindlinks), it's worth more than one point more on the table.

40 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

Yeah, that's BS.

So if we had a Contracted with no upgrade slots what would it cost? Or a K-Wing with no slots? Or if an Academy Pilot had two Torpedo slots and a Bomb slot why should it cost more to put onto the table naked?

It's nonsense. You can't price slots because you can't know if they're bringing any value or not - you price the ship and you price the upgrade, it's the only sensible way of doing it.

If that's the case then upgrades like R2-D6, B-Wing/E2, Virago, Sabine's Masterpiece, and the Heavy Syck (pre-errata) should have no cost beyond the loss of an upgrade slot since those do nothing more than add upgrade slots to their respective ships.

1 hour ago, Stay On The Leader said:

I don't think any cost is assigned to a ship for the upgrades it COULD equip. If the upgrade is costed appropriately then adding cost to the ship as well makes no sense.

Slots for upgrades have 0 cost.

1 hour ago, Stay On The Leader said:

Yeah, that's BS.

So if we had a Contracted with no upgrade slots what would it cost? Or a K-Wing with no slots? Or if an Academy Pilot had two Torpedo slots and a Bomb slot why should it cost more to put onto the table naked?

It's nonsense. You can't price slots because you can't know if they're bringing any value or not - you price the ship and you price the upgrade, it's the only sensible way of doing it.

As joe pointed out, we have numerous upgrades that add upgrade slots and you have to pay points for em. That alone indicates slots are worth something. Additionally, look at the hwk. if upgrade slots didn't cost anything, that ship would absolutely not be 16 points for the generic pilot.

A little jealous of Imps variety. Scum did well, but it seems we only see the same 3 ships and 5(give or take) pilots. We need some scum ace packs.

1 hour ago, Stay On The Leader said:

Yeah, that's BS.

So if we had a Contracted with no upgrade slots what would it cost? Or a K-Wing with no slots? Or if an Academy Pilot had two Torpedo slots and a Bomb slot why should it cost more to put onto the table naked?

It's nonsense. You can't price slots because you can't know if they're bringing any value or not - you price the ship and you price the upgrade, it's the only sensible way of doing it.

Do you think combo-ability should have a price though?

For the most part, I agree a flat cost is the way to go, except in a few cases. I'll call it the "combo" tax. This tax of 1, maybe 2 points, would be paid only if a) a ship has 4 or more NON secondary weapon based (non universal) upgrade slots , and b) the ship does not pay a tax of some other sort (such as a poor maneuver dial, i.e. YV-666).

Currently, these are the ships that would pay the tax-

Jumpmaster

Upsilon Shuttle (argument for dial paying utility cost)

Named Decimators

Elite Lancers

YV-666 (Almost certainly pays for utility with dial)

Think that's all of them. I may be alone, but I don't think I would be entirely upset if the Jumpmaster, Named Deci and Lancers saw an increase by 1 or 2 points... Well, except Sabine and the generic for the Lancer lol.

You're paying for the synergy. As a simplistic example, assume the existence of 2 synergistic upgrade cards that are costed in a balanced way when individually put on a ship with a single slot. But due to their synergy increasing the on table power when both are present that means they would be undercosted when both put on an otherwise identical ship with 2 slots. So the 2 slot ships ends up costing more so that the upgrades are viable on both ships.

1 hour ago, joeshmoe554 said:

If that's the case then upgrades like R2-D6, B-Wing/E2, Virago, Sabine's Masterpiece, and the Heavy Syck (pre-errata) should have no cost beyond the loss of an upgrade slot since those do nothing more than add upgrade slots to their respective ships.

Those are optional extras so a different deal. And there's just as many examples which add slots and don't carry a cost (Test Pilot, Slave I) or even a discount (/X1).

is it possible to get back on topic in this post? I would rather see some interesting facts/lists about Hoth

5 hours ago, Tlfj200 said:

Day 1A is tomorrow.

I doubt there'll be any streams because a lot of these places charge for wifi access. At Naboo, it would have been $300 for the Krayts to get wifi access to stream :-(

Gold Squadron Podcast is there and the trouble they had was no power, not wifi access. They posted about it this morning on their Facebook page.

As a further update from their Facebook page, Gold Squadron said they would be streaming tomorrow and Saturday.

42 minutes ago, JediAutobot said:

As a further update from their Facebook page, Gold Squadron said they would be streaming tomorrow and Saturday.

thanks! that is very helpful

16 hours ago, Stay On The Leader said:

I don't think any cost is assigned to a ship for the upgrades it COULD equip. If the upgrade is costed appropriately then adding cost to the ship as well makes no sense.

Slots for upgrades have 0 cost.

If things aren't cosed for their slots, why are TIE BOmbers and TIE Punishers so frigging expensive? A TIE Bomber is less points-efficient than a TIE Fighter, and a Punisher is worse than either.

There's no particular reason this SHOULD be the case, but it pretty clearly IS.

.

Do we know how many players are at Hoth? Can someone explain me how this 3 days of tournament thing works?

Most likely it'll be 6 rounds of swiss day 1, with a cut of maybe the top half or so, another 4 to 6 rounds of swiss day 2, and a top 16 cut day 3.

Aren't SoS struck with only top8?

5 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

Aren't SoS struck with only top8?

Could be yeah. I'm hypothesising rather than speaking with any particular evidence.

well having spoken to Ryan, who went 6-1, its definitely 7 rounds on day 1. i presume that the day two games also have 7 rounds, and then anyone with a 5-2 record or better is put together into one pool for three games of swiss and a top 8 cut on the final day, as usual.

All System Opens this year are 7 rounds on day 1, with 5-2s making day 2. I guess this is so they can be consistent with the target lock prizes as well. Day 2 has either 2 or 3 rounds of swiss depending on size. The cut is always top 8.

Is there a stream for Hoth?

There wasn't one yesterday, but the Gold Squadron guys are planning to do one today.

1 hour ago, Sunitsa said:

Do we know how many players are at Hoth? Can someone explain me how this 3 days of tournament thing works?

110 On Thurs, likely more today, but don't know.

People who got 5-2 or better on Thurs or Fri then play on Sat. 3 more rounds of Swiss (with scores carried over) then a top 8.

Generally if you get 5-2 you need to win next 3 rounds of swiss, and get a good MoV to make the 8.

One thing I noted was quite a few players who weren't going to make the cut dropped out before round 7. Some people on lower tables had no opponent show up in last few rounds.

That's pretty poor if you ask me. Whilst there are some genuine reasons people need to go, I don't understand the mentality of coming to an event to play games, and then letting other people down because you had a bad day.

That aside event was really good :-)

20 minutes ago, Dave Grant said:

One thing I noted was quite a few players who weren't going to make the cut dropped out before round 7. Some people on lower tables had no opponent show up in last few rounds.

That's pretty poor if you ask me. Whilst there are some genuine reasons people need to go, I don't understand the mentality of coming to an event to play games, and then letting other people down because you had a bad day.

That aside event was really good :-)

Same discussion came up last year I think, but I don't think it's that surprising. It's a gaming convention where there are a ton of other things to do and seven games is a long day taking away from those other options. They should have at least reported they were dropping after the previous round though so their opponents were left with no one.