1 minute ago, Stay On The Leader said:

I can play something that doesn't lose to TLT and complain that I still don't like TLT's impact on the game and that I'm being steered towards playing something that's good against it

Okay. Fair. That's what the other part of my post is about. Finding like minded players and coming to an agreement.

There are plenty of combos that are bad for certain lists. That is the nature of the game. If everyone had the combo that preyed on their favorite list removed, then we'd have nothing left. And if others have to take their lumps and go up against bad match ups and card combos they hate, why should those of anti-TLT sentiments be any different?

3 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

Okay. Fair. That's what the other part of my post is about. Finding like minded players and coming to an agreement.

There are plenty of combos that are bad for certain lists. That is the nature of the game. If everyone had the combo that preyed on their favorite list removed, then we'd have nothing left. And if others have to take their lumps and go up against bad match ups and card combos they hate, why should those of anti-TLT sentiments be any different?

Well, a few months ago the same would be said about anti-Palp, or anti-Zuckuss and it's not even that these threads necessarily made any difference at all but the nerfs did show that there was an acceptance by FFG that things weren't right.

So when you come up against something that you think it's bad are you going to just put up with it like an abused girlfriend, or are you going to try and draw attention to it and see if it gets fixed?

Personally I'd rather be part of the solution than part of the problem.

6 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

Well, a few months ago the same would be said about anti-Palp, or anti-Zuckuss and it's not even that these threads necessarily made any difference at all but the nerfs did show that there was an acceptance by FFG that things weren't right.

So when you come up against something that you think it's bad are you going to just put up with it like an abused girlfriend, or are you going to try and draw attention to it and see if it gets fixed?

Personally I'd rather be part of the solution than part of the problem.

But FFG didn't see "things weren't right" from here. They went by tournament data. And at tournaments, TLTs aren't the problem. And you have to factor in that TLTs are the edge that some ships need to see play, because the other turret slot options are crap. Why should FFG spend time and money on fixing a upgrade that is maybe undercosted when it is not presenting the problems at tournaments and could possibly retire several ships?

Also, your abused girlfriend analogy in my mind is more akin to what U-Boats did to the meta. TLT, if anything, is a coffee table you stub your toe on.

7 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

But FFG didn't see "things weren't right" from here. They went by tournament data. And at tournaments, TLTs aren't the problem. And you have to factor in that TLTs are the edge that some ships need to see play, because the other turret slot options are crap. Why should FFG spend time and money on fixing a upgrade that is maybe undercosted when it is not presenting the problems at tournaments and could possibly retire several ships?

Also, your abused girlfriend analogy in my mind is more akin to what U-Boats did to the meta. TLT, if anything, is a coffee table you stub your toe on.

I think we can probably agree that we don't know what FFG based their decision on (but that tournament results are likely a major contributor). But if I'm faced with a choice of:

• Do nothing. 100% chance of not effecting a change I think is desirable
• Do something. 0-100% chance of not effecting a change I think is desirable.

Then I'll go for the 'Do something' option.

And the 'why should FFG spend time and money' question is answered by: because if they're any good at their jobs (which is uncertain) then they'll understand that tournament success is not the goal of their OP programme and that significant outcry from their player base about an issue should be taken seriously as it's really about creating a positive play experience to sell more ships.

6 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

I think we can probably agree that we don't know what FFG based their decision on (but that tournament results are likely a major contributor). But if I'm faced with a choice of:

• Do nothing. 100% chance of not effecting a change I think is desirable
• Do something. 0-100% chance of not effecting a change I think is desirable.

Then I'll go for the 'Do something' option.

And the 'why should FFG spend time and money' question is answered by: because if they're any good at their jobs (which is uncertain) then they'll understand that tournament success is not the goal of their OP programme and that significant outcry from their player base about an issue should be taken seriously as it's really about creating a positive play experience to sell more ships.

But, again, with what's wrong with the game being a matter of opinion, you are indorsing a contest that sees who can shout their opinion loudest. I think FFG screwed up the Palp nerf. Should I and those of like mind post five different topics about how the nerf should be repealed?

This also doesn't settle a point I brought up earlier. Every time we lob off a "troublesome" card, a different one takes its place. If we continue down that path, we'll end up with a bunch of junk cards no one wants to use. So instead of furthering that path, shouldn't we instead use actions to fix our problems rather than spending energy on shouting for a solution where we might not even be heard?

2 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

This also doesn't settle a point I brought up earlier. Every time we lob off a "troublesome" card, a different one takes its place. *

*citation needed.

This is a fallacy, game balance is usually an exponential curve issue, not a pillar. When you lop off the top you don't drop down to one thing, you drop down to multiples and this creates diversity. When it's bungled, as I think FFG are in the midst of doing because they're FFG and haven't a clue about such things, you can actually hurt diversity.

Skipped ahead after page two.

I enjoy playing TLTs greatly. I especially like them on HWKS. It takes a lot of skill to fly them properly and stand a chance at winning. It's a challenge to play well.

TLT do not need a nerf. They have a max damage output, and you're sinking extra points into it if you want both shots modified to the point that you can rely on that max; they have a donut hole; the ships they're on aren't very maneuverable; you can only get four in a standard list, max, meaning 8 total damage possible per round - so many lists have higher max damage output that these are a blip on that radar; their second shot after stripping tokens does 1 damage - gunner, luke, 88B, Corran, etc are all more deadly with their guaranteed repeated attacks upon a miss.

Regen needs a nerf. Make that ship skip its combat phase for a round after a shield is regenerated (so blinded pilot can't be turned over, etc), or limit regeneration to 2 shields per game. Most regen badly needs a downside - Gonk is a good example of how to do it right. It's a crutch. If you fly regen and complain about TLT you are bad at X-Wing.

PTL needs a nerf. It should apply 2 stress instead of just one. It's the most auto include card in the game because 1 stress is too easy to shed. You aren't pushing any limits by receiving 1 stress. It's a crutch. If you fly PTL and complain about TLT you are bad at X-Wing.

5 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

*citation needed.

This is a fallacy, game balance is usually an exponential curve issue, not a pillar. When you lop off the top you don't drop down to one thing, you drop down to multiples and this creates diversity. When it's bungled, as I think FFG are in the midst of doing because they're FFG and haven't a clue about such things, you can actually hurt diversity.

So, why are you trusting them to handle a TLT nerf right?

as for citation, this forum had plenty of anti Palp, x7, Zuckuss, and Manaroo sentiment running around. Because FFG decided that they were too prevelent and spoiling diversity at tournaments, they acted. Now look at the forum. Calls for nerfing most things under the sun that are doing well at tournaments. Plus, as I have seen in these nerf threads (TLT themed ones particularly), it is based on player preference rather than actual consideration of game balance and what ramifications come about. It's about how they feel, not how a game should be balanced. You yourself have used a more feeling based argument than facts based one. And when we go by feelings, anything is fair game for the chopping block.

TLT was a necessary evil, when wave 7 came out it wiped the slate clean of fat turrets.

At this point in the game's meta, I think fat turrets no longer have a severe disadvantage to quad TLT. TLT's role is no longer necessary and it could be nerfed.

TLT is more of a problem on Miranda, and nerfing her is should be more of an issue than quad TLT (at least until Imperials get quad 3 agility TLT). Regen and TLT is extremely annoying, and her small base and regen makes it so that she's an excellent point fortress.

On 07/04/2017 at 4:19 PM, Stay On The Leader said:

. ..significant outcry from their player base about an issue...

'I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced. I fear another FAQ has failed to bring balance to The Force.'

I read all of your posts in a bad impression of Alec Guinness. Please try to keep every post a bit mysterious and aloof.

11 minutes ago, Turbo Toker said:

TLT was a necessary evil, when wave 7 came out it wiped the slate clean of fat turrets.

At this point in the game's meta, I think fat turrets no longer have a severe disadvantage to quad TLT. TLT's role is no longer necessary and it could be nerfed.

TLT is more of a problem on Miranda, and nerfing her is should be more of an issue than quad TLT (at least until Imperials get quad 3 agility TLT). Regen and TLT is extremely annoying, and her small base and regen makes it so that she's an excellent point fortress.

Apologies for double post. I'm relatively new to the game and love that the historical era of turret domination was defeated by introducing a dominant turret.

Eh?

On April 7, 2017 at 11:48 AM, ViscerothSWG said:

I enjoy playing TLTs greatly.

Holy crap so someone actually likes TLTs. Interesting. I think if you complain about anything and fly TLTs you are bad at X wing.

So far, @Shadow345 , you've proposed in the last few weeks that the following things need to be done to "save" the game:

• FFG should have stopped releasing any new ship past Wave 2
• Remove the entire Scum faction right now
• Publishing errata to "fix" ships (ie: Make the TIE and X-wing basically the same statwise)
• Release X-Wing v.2.0
• Nerf or ban Twin Laser Turrets

But then essentially never comment on pretty much any topic you post in X-Wing.

On 4/7/2017 at 11:48 AM, ViscerothSWG said:

1) TLT do not need a nerf. They have a max damage output, and you're sinking extra points into it if you want both shots modified to the point that you can rely on that max; they have a donut hole; the ships they're on aren't very maneuverable; you can only get four in a standard list, max, meaning 8 total damage possible per round - so many lists have higher max damage output that these are a blip on the radar.

2) If you fly regen and complain about TLT you are bad at X-Wing.

3) If you fly PTL and complain about TLT you are bad at X-Wing.

1) I think it will be nerfed post Aggressor spam, it's FFGs typical m odus operandi . And, ships with TLT don't have to be very maneuverable, would love it on my Lambda (the worst dialed ship in the game, save the stop)....and I would love to have 8 damage output per round; even getting 5-6 would be smashing!

2)...stop telling me how bad I am at X-Wing, it hurts man.

3)...really, stop; it's crushing me actually. Sob.

No, because XWM doesn't need to be "saved".

1 hour ago, Turbo Toker said:

TLT was a necessary evil, when wave 7 came out it wiped the slate clean of fat turrets.

At this point in the game's meta, I think fat turrets no longer have a severe disadvantage to quad TLT. TLT's role is no longer necessary and it could be nerfed.

TLT is more of a problem on Miranda, and nerfing her is should be more of an issue than quad TLT (at least until Imperials get quad 3 agility TLT). Regen and TLT is extremely annoying, and her small base and regen makes it so that she's an excellent point fortress.

If you focus Miranda down, she'll die quickly. There's no problem here.

No, because the X-Wing isnt really affected by the TLT, it cant use it, and it is never placed on the table as an x-wing, only a biggs.....oh wait....

2 minutes ago, Scopes said:

If you focus Miranda down, she'll die quickly. There's no problem here.

This is usually the answer to any big scary ship that seems to be ruling the meta.

1 hour ago, BlodVargarna said:

Holy crap so someone actually likes TLTs. Interesting. I think if you complain about anything and fly TLTs you are bad at X wing.

Did you miss at least two other people also say they liked TLT's?

1 hour ago, GrimmyV said:

This is usually the answer to any big scary ship that seems to be ruling the meta.

This is said no matter how invincible or obnoxious a ship is. This was said about Defenders backed by Palpatine. This was said about the Phantom before the cloak nerf.

How is someone supposed to argue that something is too hard to kill when the answer is always, "git gud and focus fire"?

32 minutes ago, Turbo Toker said:

This is said no matter how invincible or obnoxious a ship is. This was said about Defenders backed by Palpatine. This was said about the Phantom before the cloak nerf.

How is someone supposed to argue that something is too hard to kill when the answer is always, "git gud and focus fire"?

No try. Do, or do not. There is no try.

So u BETTAH git gud and focus or some green little man is gonna snack ya wit his stick.

1 hour ago, SabineKey said:

Did you miss at least two other people also say they liked TLT's?

Apparently so. Then I guess holy crap 3 people actually like TLT. I wonder what it is specifically they like about that particular upgrade card?

2 minutes ago, BlodVargarna said:

Apparently so. Then I guess holy crap 3 people actually like TLT. I wonder what it is specifically they like about that particular upgrade card?

The way it simulates an accurate anti-starfighter weapon that focuses on effeciently eating enemy tokens and producing consistent damage? I mean, at least it can't crit!

7 minutes ago, BlodVargarna said:

Apparently so. Then I guess holy crap 3 people actually like TLT. I wonder what it is specifically they like about that particular upgrade card?

Well, considering one of them was me and I directly quoted you with my answer, you might want to recheck it for the answer.

What I'm getting at is I know you are trying to flip ViscerothSWG's sentiment around on him. It wasn't particularly compelling when he used it and you using it is just sad. There were better ways to discredit his argument without furthering the list of players talked down to.

15 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

Well, considering one of them was me and I directly quoted you with my answer, you might want to recheck it for the answer.

What I'm getting at is I know you are trying to flip ViscerothSWG's sentiment around on him. It wasn't particularly compelling when he used it and you using it is just sad. There were better ways to discredit his argument without furthering the list of players talked down to.

And I was just reversing the over the top hateful sentiment in the argument against TLTs so it was a reverse of the reverse! And a copy of a copy is never quite as sharp.

Also, if they first or at the same time nerf regen and PTL, I'd be open to considering a TLT rebalance. But I'd probably be back to playing accuracy corrector Advanced with some proxy mine bombers if that happened.