27 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

As far as I can tell, all of the anti-AdvSlam, anti-Bomb talk boils down to: "Your 30+ point K-wing should have no meaningful way to damage my 30+ point high-AGI ace, and it's just not fair that it does. My ace, of course, is allowed to shoot your low-AGI K-wing until you're dead."

As I said, I'm not opposed to a small change to Mines (not Bombs) in which a 3-AGI ship (printed and current) may cancel one Mine damage. My lack of objection to that is because (1) I think game design has gone too far in anti-ace tech, (2) I don't believe Sabine, Mines, and K-wings are as overwhelming a percentage of that as people think, and (3) Mines will remain effective enough, as a whole, to be worth taking.

But whining because one 30+ point ship can beat another 30+ point ship if the first 30+ point ship has favorable circumstances is just ludicrous.

Not a bad start, but I would think that hitting a mine at all (even a glancing hit) would still detonate the explosive. I guess maybe I'm thinking too much.

Even if Bombs and Sabine were the true culprits behind the "Mysterious Disappearance of Soontir Fel" (spoiler: they're not), I don't think nerfing them would be the right answer.

I think basic TIEs and Interceptors should all get buffed to 4 hull. At least that way, it would be impossible for an ace to get one-shot by a single badly rolled cluster + Sabine. It might also make swarms a bit more viable.

1 hour ago, Jeff Wilder said:

As far as I can tell, all of the anti-AdvSlam, anti-Bomb talk boils down to: "Your 30+ point K-wing should have no meaningful way to damage my 30+ point high-AGI ace, and it's just not fair that it does. My ace, of course, is allowed to shoot your low-AGI K-wing until you're dead."

As I said, I'm not opposed to a small change to Mines (not Bombs) in which a 3-AGI ship (printed and current) may cancel one Mine damage. My lack of objection to that is because (1) I think game design has gone too far in anti-ace tech, (2) I don't believe Sabine, Mines, and K-wings are as overwhelming a percentage of that as people think, and (3) Mines will remain effective enough, as a whole, to be worth taking.

But whining because one 30+ point ship can beat another 30+ point ship if the first 30+ point ship has favorable circumstances is just ludicrous.

And to me, the biggest current issue with action bombs is "Your 30-point ship can drop a bomb with perfect knowledge of where I'll be, since I haven't moved yet, and deal guaranteed damage while I have almost no chance to avoid it." FFG has repeatedly taken great pains to remove situations where players could use effects with perfect knowledge that they'll be successful (the Phantom nerf, the Palpatine nerf, the Manaroo nerf and arguably the x7 nerf all fit into this category).

People have thrown out ideas like always maneuvering to have a wingman or asteroid at your back to prevent actions, but that seems extreme and hardly a good solution.

21 minutes ago, StriderZessei said:

(spoiler: they're not)

So all the people who use to play aces a lot and is their favorite play style saying that bombs and Sabine is what has pushed them away from playing Aces are just wrong about their own experience?

1 hour ago, SabineKey said:

So all the people who use to play aces a lot and is their favorite play style saying that bombs and Sabine is what has pushed them away from playing Aces are just wrong about their own experience?

Not at all. Everyone has their own legitimate reasons based on their own experiences.

What I AM saying is that while bombs are powerful (with consistency added from Sabine), it hardly seems fair to say bombs are the sole reason Imperial aces are gone.

We have stress control, the Palp nerf, and the fielding of multiple TLTs in a single list as well.

1 hour ago, PhantomFO said:

And to me, the biggest current issue with action bombs is "Your 30-point ship can drop a bomb with perfect knowledge of where I'll be, since I haven't moved yet, and deal guaranteed damage while I have almost no chance to avoid it." FFG has repeatedly taken great pains to remove situations where players could use effects with perfect knowledge that they'll be successful (the Phantom nerf, the Palpatine nerf, the Manaroo nerf and arguably the x7 nerf all fit into this category).

1. The MOST damage guaranteed in a turn with a bomb is two: one from Seismics, Connors, Thermals and a second from Sabine. Of those, only one can be used after moving. Like I said earlier, don't ram into a bomber's rear.

2. It seems ironic that the people used to dealing with 'perfect knowledge' are the ones fielding the ps9+ pilots who get to move AFTER everyone else. Bombers typically need to plan their moves 1-3 TURNS in advance.

17 minutes ago, StriderZessei said:

Not at all. Everyone has their own legitimate reasons based on their own experiences.

What I AM saying is that while bombs are powerful (with consistency added from Sabine), it hardly seems fair to say bombs are the sole reason Imperial aces are gone.

We have stress control, the Palp nerf, and the fielding of multiple TLTs in a single list as well.

While I do think it is the biggest reason Imperial Aces are having troubles now, I do agree that it is not the only reason.

20 minutes ago, StriderZessei said:

2. It seems ironic that the people used to dealing with 'perfect knowledge' are the ones fielding the ps9+ pilots who get to move AFTER everyone else. Bombers typically need to plan their moves 1-3 TURNS in advance.

Exactly. Bombing is not easy, and it is not automatic. Not even with Advanced SLAM and Sabine.

This thread is actually starting to convince me that other factions should get Sabine- and Advanced SLAM-level upgrades to bombing. Holy counter-productivity, Batman!

2 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Exactly. Bombing is not easy, and it is not automatic. Not even with Advanced SLAM and Sabine.

This thread is actually starting to convince me that other factions should get Sabine- and Advanced SLAM-level upgrades to bombing. Holy counter-productivity, Batman!

Then how do you account for many people who love and played Imperial Aces saying that bombs with Advanced Slam and Sabine are the primary reason they've shelved that archetype?

^You are extrapolating a vocal few (those that say it is bombs/sabine ending imp aces) into a representing a larger group (those who have given up on imp aces).

2 hours ago, PhantomFO said:

And to me, the biggest current issue with action bombs is "Your 30-point ship can drop a bomb with perfect knowledge of where I'll be, since I haven't moved yet, and deal guaranteed damage while I have almost no chance to avoid it." FFG has repeatedly taken great pains to remove situations where players could use effects with perfect knowledge that they'll be successful (the Phantom nerf, the Palpatine nerf, the Manaroo nerf and arguably the x7 nerf all fit into this category).

People have thrown out ideas like always maneuvering to have a wingman or asteroid at your back to prevent actions, but that seems extreme and hardly a good solution.

The game doesn't start at range 3. That bomber had to approach and position to set up that bombing run, and no it is not so simple as fly towards them.

16 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

Then how do you account for many people who love and played Imperial Aces saying that bombs with Advanced Slam and Sabine are the primary reason they've shelved that archetype?

I think it's a combination of two things: (1) conflating Sabine/AdvSLAM's emergence as the final straw with Sabine/AdvSLAM as the cause, and (2) selective memory, because arc-dodging aces were well on their way out before Sabine/AdvSLAM became common enough to drive them away.

49 minutes ago, StriderZessei said:

1. The MOST damage guaranteed in a turn with a bomb is two: one from Seismics, Connors, Thermals and a second from Sabine. Of those, only one can be used after moving. Like I said earlier, don't ram into a bomber's rear.

2. It seems ironic that the people used to dealing with 'perfect knowledge' are the ones fielding the ps9+ pilots who get to move AFTER everyone else. Bombers typically need to plan their moves 1-3 TURNS in advance.

With the FAQ buff, I personally believe that Clusters fit in the category of "almost guaranteed." Each bomb token averages out to 1 damage, and it's not to hard to line up two or three tokens into someone's path.

I do agree that it's not the only reason fragile aces are out of the meta (Triple Jumps are another big contributor even after their assorted nerfs), but it's a strong factor.

10 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

I think it's a combination of two things: (1) conflating Sabine/AdvSLAM's emergence as the final straw with Sabine/AdvSLAM as the cause, and (2) selective memory, because arc-dodging aces were well on their way out before Sabine/AdvSLAM became common enough to drive them away.

Not the only one, but still the major one I hear from people I trust on the subject.

I agree Sabine/AdvSlam IS the single biggest predator facing Aces at the moment. It make's you think twice about taking aces, because you always know in the back of your mind, that if you bring them to an event and run into a Miranda list, you automatically lose- no sense in even playing the game. That's how dominant Sabine/Adv Slam is: a sure 100-0 hyper beatdown.

It might not be the only counter to aces, but at least against the Triple Jumps, you have a chance to let your green dice carry you to victory- not so with bombs. You just auto-die with no chance to defend yourself, no luck involved.

I think at the end of the day we can all agree arc dodgers are not useful anymore and therefore the game is not fun.

43 minutes ago, PhantomFO said:

With the FAQ buff, I personally believe that Clusters fit in the category of "almost guaranteed." Each bomb token averages out to 1 damage, and it's not to hard to line up two or three tokens into someone's path.

I've had enough opponents roll nothing but blanks and focuses on multiple mines to disagree on the first part of this.

The only opponents who are "easy" to lay down lines of bombs in front of are the predictable ones, who are no less difficult to predict and block anyway.

33 minutes ago, Johen Dood said:

you always know in the back of your mind, that if you bring them to an event and run into a Miranda list, you automatically lose- no sense in even playing the game. That's how dominant Sabine/Adv Slam is: a sure 100-0 hyper beatdown.

Wow, hyperbole much?

4 hours ago, StriderZessei said:

Wow, hyperbole much?

Data and stories support it.

1 hour ago, SabineKey said:

Data and stories support it.

What data? What empirical, non-anecdotal evidence do you have to support this?

13 minutes ago, StriderZessei said:

What data? What empirical, non-anecdotal evidence do you have to support this?

Testimony from several members of this forum, the informed opinions of people I respect (as ace pilots, and one has done quite a bit of practicing as a bomber), and the continued situation of Imperials. Some is circumstantial, but taken together, it is suggestive.

how about you? What's your data?

It seems, I could be wrong, that the biggest threat to bombers are "control" guns (Stress causers, Ion, Tractors...) meaning they can't do a bombing run, and nearly all bombers die to 2-3 rounds of sustained fire (achievable if you can control their movement).

Surely therefore a Tie D (or Ion missiles... etc) is the tool the Imperials need to better manage bomb threats (or at least make the game competitive... ie could easily go either way) ???

Its not hard for Imperials to have a list with a Tie D and 2 aces (or an ace and 2 basic ships). Bombs may be not good for a "3-Ace" list, but I don't see a major issue for a balanced imperial list.

All that said Adv Slam Bombs + Sabine are very effective vs aces.

Or you could take 2 Upsilons + Epsilon leader and sit in the corner sulking all game.

8 hours ago, SabineKey said:

Testimony from several members of this forum, the informed opinions of people I respect (as ace pilots, and one has done quite a bit of practicing as a bomber), and the continued situation of Imperials. Some is circumstantial, but taken together, it is suggestive.

how about you? What's your data?

So your "data" is entirely secondhand and anecdotal. As the one making the accusations against Rebel bombing, the burden of proof falls on you.

The only evidence I'm looking at is the top 16 at worlds, which suggests that while Imperials as a whole are underperforming, the primary culprit is Scum, with 75% representation.

Jumpmasters are too good for cost, scum aces are better than any other ace point-for-point in almost every regard, and their insane action economy coupled with their own nasty bag of tricks makes them good against nearly any matchup.

1 hour ago, StriderZessei said:

So your "data" is entirely secondhand and anecdotal. As the one making the accusations against Rebel bombing, the burden of proof falls on you.

The only evidence I'm looking at is the top 16 at worlds, which suggests that while Imperials as a whole are underperforming, the primary culprit is Scum, with 75% representation.

Jumpmasters are too good for cost, scum aces are better than any other ace point-for-point in almost every regard, and their insane action economy coupled with their own nasty bag of tricks makes them good against nearly any matchup.

So your data is also secondhand, not to mention subject to observer bias. Good to know.

1 hour ago, SabineKey said:

So your data is also secondhand, not to mention subject to observer bias. Good to know.

Come on, Sabine, you're better than this.

Tournament results are the closest we can get to hard data (considering how heavily the game relies on RNG), because we have top players using the lists they honestly think are their best chances at winning, AND how well they did.

Just now, StriderZessei said:

Come on, Sabine, you're better than this.

Tournament results are the closest we can get to hard data (considering how heavily the game relies on RNG), because we have top players using the lists they honestly think are their best chances at winning, AND how well they did.

Okay. Show me top level play that disproves that K-wing bombers aren't a really bad match up for Imp Aces.