Just now, pt106 said:Not really. As long as you have 4+ activations 2ISD list is still pretty viable, but does require skill. (And I flew 2ISD list with 5 activations the whole Wave 2 and Wave 4 with some level of success).
Lol "some level of sucess" humblebrag
6 minutes ago, pt106 said:I would still think it won't be enough as it doesn't deal with a Relay issue as well as Rieekan undead escorts soaking damage (as well as other Rieekan issues with high squadron lists)
Haha, crazy to think that I'm the one saying not enough now. Yes, though. I forgot Relay:
You may only relay squadron commands through a Relay-keyworded squadron once a turn.
10 minutes ago, Baltanok said:Meaning no Zombie Gold/Dagger squad, right? But Wedge still zombies as normal?
Yuuuuup. Wedge is good. No zombie gold, dagger.
I think that Rieekan doesn't affect squadrons is too much. I have a very specific focus: reduce the guaranteed firepower efficiency of squadrons. These two uniques are both 2 dice bombers, that's the issue.
Wedge being good is still a gosh darn issue. I dunno how to solve that. But if you alpha wedge, he simply gets to strike back with a 6dice counter, like an interceptor. Its not THAT back breaking. And that's coming form someone who gets killed by Wedge every game.
If Shara locks you down... bring Intel. That one's easy.
Actually take it back, I did solve the Wedge issue by taking a AA Demo with Flechette Torps. And 90 squadrons.
But if BCC and FCT are reduced, the ability to alpha strike a small ship becomes much harder and much less consistent, meaning you could now do the same thing with just AA Demo and 60 squadrons, or a Raider Flechette and 60-90 squadrons. See, it just reduces the need to counter squadrons with AA specific squadrons and upgrades.
I dunno why ppl would want to say no redundant BCC fishing, but don't agree to BCC being unique: it does tons of good things, first its easier and used errata in Xwing. 2nd, it achieves basically the same effect, without making it so that you can have 2 flotillas on tow sides of the cluster and EVERYWHERE in the battle zone is BCC-able. 3rd, it reduces the reason to take a 2nd flotilla simply for BCC. Which is what the 3rd flotilla in the Rieekan Aceholes tends to do.
The only nerf Yavaris needs Imo is FCT not letting it do alpha strikes. And only letting you relay through a relay squadron once a turn is probably enough to create scenarios where the squadron player has SOMETHING that has to get dangerously close, be it Yavaris or a flotilla. Speed 4.5 Bwings are nuts. Speed 3.2? Eh. You can counterplay that. They're still good.
Crazy enough as it sounds, I can tell you this: Nerf the Rieekan Aceholes too much and it would fall to a mediocre Tier 1 or Tier 1.5 list. That's not neccessary. Balance is good. Nerfing bomber play into the ground isn't the point.
26 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:Oddly enough a lot of you have more complex or even harsher balance changes than I would have created. I've played the boogeyman lists a few times and I think I can safely say that it wins by a large margin but not a huge margin. Let's say an eyeball 60-65 winrate (considered definitely overpowered to 50).
Rieekan: doesn't affect unnamed nonhero squadrons.
ET: cannot be used if maneuver overlapped another ship.
BCC: unique
FCT: unique
Flotillas cannot carry commanders. (Not counting for tabling seems a bit harsh. But also possible)
This gives plenty of ways to counter play squadrons ramming and so forth.
Flotollas counting as squadrons is really audacious. It would push toward medium ships and alpha strike large ship carriers which would be cool but it seems really overly harsh. I've not tried this out to know if it's actually fun or not.
edit:
A Relay squadron may only Relay commands once a turn. (if you have 2 shuttles, you can relay 4 activations a turn only. ).
---
A note: The Rieekan ace holes tends to place its commander on a flotilla, which survives into the end of the game. Taking out Rieekan early makes the game much easier AND taking out rieekan since he's on a target ship will give a 30pt equalizing amount of points in the case of huge scoring on the point objective trio of squadron objectives.
Just now, pt106 said:Not really. As long as you have 4+ activations 2ISD list is still pretty viable, but does require skill. (And I flew 2ISD list with 5 activations the whole Wave 2 and Wave 4 with some level of success).
I went with a five activation 1 ISD, demo list, for the extra manoverability that Demo gave me (and the ability to get 6 ties in the list for deployment) I did like the idea of a double ISD1, five activation list. ( I've never competed with less than five after wave one) , but was never so brave as to try in competition, in balance I did not want to take the risk of being out manouvered and I liked having 8 deployments, which I could just not find playing around with Duel ISD five activations, finally settled on a 3 gladiator five activation list. To be honest I Fancy a change back to a big base ship if I could figure a way to keep it alive.......
9 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:edit:
A Relay squadron may only Relay commands once a turn. (if you have 2 shuttles, you can relay 4 activations a turn only. ).
---
A note: The Rieekan ace holes tends to place its commander on a flotilla, which survives into the end of the game. Taking out Rieekan early makes the game much easier AND taking out rieekan since he's on a target ship will give a 30pt equalizing amount of points in the case of huge scoring on the point objective trio of squadron objectives.
Agreed. That might do it. And I totally agree on your point of not nerfing things into ground, for me the balanced approach is the one where low-squadron lists have a competing chance against high-squadron lists (and vice versa). So my point about Relay was not only about Rieekan, but to prevent an uncontrollable rise of flotilla-driven Jendonballs.
Another issue with Rieekan squad-heavy list as it is right now is that it's easy to win big with it, but its almost impossible to lose big (as it's very hard to table the lists and if you go for the ships and don't table, the squadronball points would make the game a 7-4 or 8-3), so I'm in favor of 'not preventing tabling' approach.
12 minutes ago, Johnnyreb said:I went with a five activation 1 ISD, demo list, for the extra manoverability that Demo gave me (and the ability to get 6 ties in the list for deployment) I did like the idea of a double ISD1, five activation list. ( I've never competed with less than five after wave one) , but was never so brave as to try in competition, in balance I did not want to take the risk of being out manouvered and I liked having 8 deployments, which I could just not find playing around with Duel ISD five activations, finally settled on a 3 gladiator five activation list. To be honest I Fancy a change back to a big base ship if I could figure a way to keep it alive.......
Go for the Imperial version of death pickle then 
17 Hull points with support is solid enough. A 2ISD list to take in the current wave is 2ISD + 2Gz + Defender ball, it's a good design (kudos to the author!) and performed pretty good during a regional season.
8 minutes ago, pt106 said:Go for the Imperial version of death pickle then
Repair crews on the Gozantis?
12 minutes ago, pt106 said:Go for the Imperial version of death pickle then
Looks like the list had empty ISDs and JJ so that it could fit Steele and 4x Defender.
That's pretty gutsy. Though the ISDs can only have 11 HP (or one could have 14).
24 minutes ago, pt106 said:Agreed. That might do it. And I totally agree on your point of not nerfing things into ground, for me the balanced approach is the one where low-squadron lists have a competing chance against high-squadron lists (and vice versa). So my point about Relay was not only about Rieekan, but to prevent an uncontrollable rise of flotilla-driven Jendonballs.
Another issue with Rieekan squad-heavy list as it is right now is that it's easy to win big with it, but its almost impossible to lose big (as it's very hard to table the lists and if you go for the ships and don't table, the squadronball points would make the game a 7-4 or 8-3), so I'm in favor of 'not preventing tabling' approach.
Yes, that's exactly an insight a lot of people miss if they aren't familiar with the list. It very rarely gets tabled or loses by more than a 5-6.
I would have a gleeful time if flotillas didn't prevent tabling. Actually I do think it'd be fun. I could support that.
(Although, if I were to change as little as possible to balance the game as of Wave5, it wouldn't be the first thing I'd suggest)
4 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:I dunno why ppl would want to say no redundant BCC fishing, but don't agree to BCC being unique: it does tons of good things, first its easier and used errata in Xwing. 2nd, it achieves basically the same effect, without making it so that you can have 2 flotillas on tow sides of the cluster and EVERYWHERE in the battle zone is BCC-able. 3rd, it reduces the reason to take a 2nd flotilla simply for BCC. Which is what the 3rd flotilla in the Rieekan Aceholes tends to do.
Let me explain why I don't think BCC should be unique, addressing each of your points in turn;
1. Its not easier. When the card came out plenty of people thought you couldn't stack the reroll, because each BCC source had the same name. Just reverse that ruling and say that the any card with the same name is one source, which a bunch of people thought was how it should work from jump. Thats easier, because now I dont have to draw a stupid dot on my cards. Added bonus this is the only card where this happens, so you can establish precedent for future non unique reroll upgrades.
2. I have no issue with someone building redundancy in their list as either insurance or simply to increase the field effect. Once you remove the stacking effect you are paying 8 points for a luxury upgrade on the second BCC.
3. People bring three flotes in rieekan lists to get to five activations. Not all of them even take two BCCs. But making BCC unique isnt going to magically eliminate the percieved need for five activations. The argument that making BCC unique is going to cut into flotilla usage is severely flawed.
There you have it. I decided to address this because even though you say "people" I'm literally the only person in this thread who mentioned it. Irony.
6 minutes ago, Madaghmire said:Let me explain why I don't think BCC should be unique, addressing each of your points in turn;
1. Its not easier. When the card came out plenty of people thought you couldn't stack the reroll, because each BCC source had the same name. Just reverse that ruling and say that the any card with the same name is one source, which a bunch of people thought was how it should work from jump. Thats easier, because now I dont have to draw a stupid dot on my cards. Added bonus this is the only card where this happens, so you can establish precedent for future non unique reroll upgrades.
2. I have no issue with someone building redundancy in their list as either insurance or simply to increase the field effect. Once you remove the stacking effect you are paying 8 points for a luxury upgrade on the second BCC.
3. People bring three flotes in rieekan lists to get to five activations. Not all of them even take two BCCs. But making BCC unique isnt going to magically eliminate the percieved need for five activations. The argument that making BCC unique is going to cut into flotilla usage is severely flawed.
There you have it. I decided to address this because even though you say "people" I'm literally the only person in this thread who mentioned it. Irony.
Psst.
On point 1.
It does happen in one other place, with one other card (the same effect stacking twice) - Its just rare as all hell because I feel like I'm the only bastard to Try it - Targeting Scrambler.
17 minutes ago, Madaghmire said:Let me explain why I don't think BCC should be unique, addressing each of your points in turn;
1. Its not easier. When the card came out plenty of people thought you couldn't stack the reroll, because each BCC source had the same name. Just reverse that ruling and say that the any card with the same name is one source, which a bunch of people thought was how it should work from jump. Thats easier, because now I dont have to draw a stupid dot on my cards. Added bonus this is the only card where this happens, so you can establish precedent for future non unique reroll upgrades.
2. I have no issue with someone building redundancy in their list as either insurance or simply to increase the field effect. Once you remove the stacking effect you are paying 8 points for a luxury upgrade on the second BCC.
3. People bring three flotes in rieekan lists to get to five activations. Not all of them even take two BCCs. But making BCC unique isnt going to magically eliminate the percieved need for five activations. The argument that making BCC unique is going to cut into flotilla usage is severely flawed.
There you have it. I decided to address this because even though you say "people" I'm literally the only person in this thread who mentioned it. Irony.
Well. There's an explanation. =)
24 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:Psst.
On point 1.It does happen in one other place, with one other card (the same effect stacking twice) - Its just rare as all hell because I feel like I'm the only bastard to Try it - Targeting Scrambler.
Ah good point. You arent i actually had my *** kicked by it. Dont wanna relive.