So by this logic, should we get rid of the Space Tug Tractor Array on the Quadjumper since it makes Tractor Beam useful?

Those rocks are OP you know. They stop you from shooting!

Well, it looks like I have to change my assertion that Rebels are not competitive without Sabine/bombs.

41 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

But some could make the same claim about Palp and x7, and they didn't push ships out of use as much as Sabine. What makes her immune for nerfing consideration in light of that precedence?

Time series of all neutral and Rebel crew, cuts only. Sabine is the grey trend near the bottom. The fattest turquoise bar is Fin, who is at least twice as popular as Sabine. Sabine spiked once around August last year. Also, Gunner (purple, at the top) is always popular, as is RecSpec. Topmost bar is C3PO. Note this is sum of points. ie Finn occurs about as often as Sabine, (5 vs 2)

1 minute ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

I didn't delete it. It's there.

Quote it, if it is as problematic to my argument as you claim. Like I said. I looked there before and addressed the only thing I found.

Just now, Lampyridae said:

Well, it looks like I have to change my assertion that Rebels are not competitive without Sabine/bombs.

Time series of all neutral and Rebel crew, cuts only. Sabine is the grey trend near the bottom. The fattest turquoise bar is Fin, who is at least twice as popular as Sabine. Sabine spiked once around August last year. Also, Gunner (purple, at the top) is always popular, as is RecSpec. Topmost bar is C3PO.

Okay, nice. How does that answer my argument?

1 minute ago, SabineKey said:

Quote it, if it is as problematic to my argument as you claim. Like I said. I looked there before and addressed the only thing I found.

I don't take orders from you, sheesh.

Just now, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

I don't take orders from you, sheesh.

Then why should I look back when you order it? It is called common curtesy. I looked for what you mentioned, and I didn't find it. If you truly believe that this post you refer to is the answer to my points, why am I still missing it and why are you not bring it to the forefront if it crushes my counters?

46 minutes ago, migs6000 said:

Maybe if you want a nerf you should figure out to, I don't know, fly better.

Exactly what I said to people about Palpatine, Manaroo, Zuckuss, and X7 prior to the FAQ, but it looks like the Rebel whiners got their way. Now that we're ******* up everyone's go-to power cards why should Sabine be left out? I say nerf Miranda, Biggs, and Sabine and let Rebels feel the FAQ-hammer, too. Wouldn't want to be excludin' people, ya know?

*edit* Added the Hero of Canton.

Just now, SabineKey said:

Then why should I look back when you order it? It is called common curtesy. I looked for what you mentioned, and I didn't find it. If you truly believe that this post you refer to is the answer to my points, why am I still missing it and why are you not bring it to the forefront if it crushes my counters?

You want something to happen, and I've told you how to make it happen. If you don't actually want it to happen that's fine too.

And in otter news, this thread just makes me feel I should use my K-Wings and Sabine a heck of a lot more. I didn't realize I'd win every match if I did. Silly me... here I thought there were just fancy dust collectors.

Okay, we'll do this the long way.

4 hours ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

If Sabine needs players to run into their own bombs to be effective, then maybe she's overcosted at 2 points.

She doesn't need players to run into them. Her common carrier is quite capible of landing bombs on the target directly. And don't get me started about the whole trick of running over the bombs yourself, then using Sabine to damage an enemy.

&

4 hours ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

Again, lists where bombs are taken by the rebel player is such a narrow constraint that it doesn't matter that such lists need a card to function. Do we nerf Decimators because they dominate any list they're in?

Answered by:

4 hours ago, SabineKey said:

Your narrow constraint argument is flawed. x7 applied to only one ship, yet people thought it should be nerfed. Manaroo is one pilot ability, yet it was decided it should be nerfed. There are those who think TLTs should be nerfed, though they have a "narrow constraint".

&

2 hours ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

What do you even think my argument is?
It isn't "cards with narrow applications never should be nerfed". It's that cards being auto-included in a subset of lists isn't grounds for a nerf.

Answer:

2 hours ago, SabineKey said:

Still flawed. The subset is growing in use and has pushed other types of builds (low health Aces) out.

&

2 hours ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

Those sound like separate an independent reasons that are not "is an autoinclude" which is what I'm saying but whatever.

Answer:

1 hour ago, SabineKey said:

But it is linked. Because it is an auto include it is "everywhere", thus it drives up the cost of flying a low health ace above the benefit it offers.

&

1 hour ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

Their link is a matter of consequence. Except one may be nerf worthy (pushes things out, a separate argument), and the other is irrelevant (how many people are playing Sabine).
Consider the following: A card comes out tomorrow that says "you win the game." If only I have a copy does it need to be nerfed? If everyone but me gets a copy does it need to be nerfed? If you're following along at home you'll notice the answers to both are "Yes" because it pushes out everything else which doesn't guarantee a 100% win chance. You will notice that it had nothing to do with being an auto-include, even though that would be a consequence of such a card.

Answer:

1 hour ago, SabineKey said:

You are missing the fact that because it is an auto include is the reason it pushes things out. Let's say Sabine wasn't an autoinclude, and appeared in say one Bomber list in five. That's four lists that Aces have a better chance against, so the benefit/cost ratio evens out. Yes, there is a Sabine still lurking out there, but that's one bad match up rather than five.

You are right. Simply being an auto include isn't enough. But when being an auto include forces other things out, it's a problem. They are not separate issues in this case. One leads to another.

Didn't address your hypothetical example as I found it hyperbolic. Something doesn't need to win all the time to need looking at. U-Boats didn't win all the time, but most can agree that it needed to change.

&

1 hour ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

Quit while you're ahead. This is literally all I'm saying.

The start of you ignoring my arguments.

so? What did I miss?

This absolutely KILLS the card. Why should I have to roll for a free boost or barrel roll action?

6 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

The start of you ignoring my arguments.

Actually this is when you went off on a tangent and I didn't bother to follow you,

Cut only, Emperor Palpatine, unique Rebels and Dengar because I made a mistake. Note that Sabine is roughly as popular as Finn or Kanan (July 2016 is roughly when the Rebels began to be wiped out in tournament play hence Dengar and Palp become massively skewed for a short while). At one point Palpatine was as common as every single unique Rebel crew combined. Palpatine starts to recede as soon as Boba Fett appears on the scene, and has suddenly experienced a resurgence in popularity. It's like he's a natural nerf herder.

Finn and Rey are very popular - as they should be, they are main characters and I expect no less

In summation, no, it does not appear as though Sabine is anywhere near the autoinclude Palp was. Yes, the data analysis is a little flawed but the closest I can come to like-to-like comparison.

1 minute ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

Actually this is when you went off on a tangent and I didn't bother to follow you,

Okay, so let's strip things back down to bare bones.

As I understand it, you believe that a card shouldn't be nerfed just because it is an auto include, and that the link between Sabine being an auto include is circumstantial. (Not trying to put words in your mouth, just writing down what I understand of your stance.) is this correct?

12 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

so? What did I miss?

That he's trolling you and you're falling for it?

Just now, Makaze said:

That he's trolling you and you're falling for it?

Probably. But I'm obstinate.

Just now, SabineKey said:

Okay, so let's strip things back down to bare bones.

As I understand it, you believe that a card shouldn't be nerfed just because it is an auto include,

That's it. Just stop.

5 minutes ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

That's it. Just stop.

No, because that denies my side of the story.

i see that link you call "no consequence" as a cause and effect. The reason Sabine is pushing people out is because she is an autoinclude. She is prevalent enough to provide a serious problem for low health aces. She stops being an autoinclude, she becomes an occasional bad match up instead of many.

If you want to prove it is not cause and effect, you gotta come up with a fresh post. If you don't, you obviously don't want it enough, as you would put it.

Just now, SabineKey said:

No, because that denies my side of the story.

You don't get a side of the story on my opinion.

1 minute ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

You don't get a side of the story on my opinion.

Than correct me.

31 minutes ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

You want something to happen, and I've told you how to make it happen. If you don't actually want it to happen that's fine too.

Back at you.

Just now, SabineKey said:

Than correct me.

Back at you.

Read only the part of your post I quoted. Why did I only quote those words and then abruptly end the quote?

@SabineKey just set him on ignore. @FourDogsInaHorseSuit is just trolling you at this point.

Just now, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

Read only the part of your post I quoted. Why did I only quote those words and then abruptly end the quote?

Because you choice to ignore my whole point. You cherry picked what you wanted to prove your point, thus misrepresenting what I said.

I'm not arguing that all auto includes deserve seeing to. I'm arguing that because Sabine is an Autoinclude, she should be.

3 minutes ago, kris40k said:

@SabineKey just set him on ignore. @FourDogsInaHorseSuit is just trolling you at this point.

If he doesn't address the cause and effect argument, he's lost anyway.

Just now, SabineKey said:

Because you choice to ignore my whole point.

Nope. You may try again though.