This review of a Netrunner expansion is HUGELY relevant

By Stay On The Leader, in X-Wing

On ‎4‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 7:39 AM, Ken at Sunrise said:

But in the RPS game of X-Wing. A mediocre to poor player with a good squad in the current meta can beat a good player. We have been saying for sometime that the game can be won in the squad building phase. There are some really cool builds that may looks good but will just melt against a squad of equal points in today's X-Wing.

You may have a Maxim gun, and your opponent doesn't. But your gun squad was from WWI Wave 1 and they have a Wave VII regen PWT with guaranteed dice. Take your best shot while we just remove one of your ships a turn.

This game's competitive meta hasn't been Rock Paper Scissors for like 4 waves now, and it wasn't even truly Rock Paper Scissors during waves 4-5-6 anyways.

That saying describes how easily the British army would crush African ones in battle during colonialism in the late 19th century. Their weapons significantly outmatched their opponents to the point where they would automatically win every battle. Hence the phrase, "Whatever happens we have got, the Maxim Gun, and they have not."

If you bring your turbo list against a bad list, if the squads are out matched enough then no amount of player skill can compensate. With the increasing amount of power creep in the game, these types of situations are becoming more common.

So telling players you just need to, "stop being a dirty netlister and git gud with [sub par squad], if you're good enough with [sub par squad] you can beat anything!" is a non-argument. When player skill is equal, the better list will win. Player skill can only go so far, and a player good enough to make [sub par squad] viable would have even more success with a squad that's already competitive.

On 4/21/2017 at 4:33 PM, Turbo Toker said:

So telling players you just need to, "stop being a dirty netlister and git gud with [sub par squad], if you're good enough with [sub par squad] you can beat anything!" is a non-argument. When player skill is equal, the better list will win. Player skill can only go so far, and a player good enough to make [sub par squad] viable would have even more success with a squad that's already competitive.

Just so we are clear I never said "stop being a dirty netlister and git gud with [sub par squad], if you're good enough with [sub par squad] you can beat anything!".

I actually was making the same argument as you, though maybe not as clear.

12 minutes ago, Ken at Sunrise said:

Just so we are clear I never said "stop being a dirty netlister and git gud with [sub par squad], if you're good enough with [sub par squad] you can beat anything!".

I actually was making the same argument as you, though maybe not as clear.

I didn't mean those comments for you, even though I quoted you. Sorry.

We do agree, yes.

39 minutes ago, Turbo Toker said:

I didn't mean those comments for you, even though I quoted you. Sorry.

We do agree, yes.

Yes we do. Thanks.

What kind of thread is this where people are agreeing on stuff?

46 minutes ago, Babaganoosh said:

What kind of thread is this where people are agreeing on stuff?

He doesn't like you. I don't like you, either. You just watch yourself. We're wanted men. I have the death sentence on 12 systems.

2 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

He doesn't like you. I don't like you, either. You just watch yourself. We're wanted men. I have the death sentence on 12 systems.

In an alternate universe:

greedo: wait, did that guy say he's wanted dead in twelve systems, screw solo, I'm getting that guy

13 minutes ago, DeathstarII said:

In an alternate universe:

greedo: wait, did that guy say he's wanted dead in twelve systems, screw solo, I'm getting that guy

Plus he's already half dead, so he shouldn't put up to much of a fight.

You sir are a genius.