I don't think I leaned on a crutch much... Of course, my results are pretty middling. I did my best when I stood on someone else's achievements.

My 1.0 cancer was probably anything that lets you PTL before moving. BB8+PTL or Adv. Sensors PTL.

And I did fly Dash a lot. Not because I though it was wholesome - because I was sick of losing all the time.

Also, well we're talking about defense tokens, I'm working on doing the math behind all the defensive tokens in 2.0. The math's done, I just need to make the graphs.

Here's what I've got so far:

I hate to call it a crutch as much as it was a bitter reaction to all the crap out there but did really well with double ghosts with TLT + AC + Tac + EU. Of which pretty much every single piece of that combination will be completely nullified in 2.0. I'm so looking forward to seeing if Firesprays are competitive in 2.0. Two of them plus a cheap blocking Fang fighter....hmmmm

Double repositioning with Vader and PTL Aces.

25 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

What was your #1 X-Wing 1.0 Crutch?

Soontir

Stressbot

TLT

5 minutes ago, impspy said:

Double repositioning with Vader and PTL Aces.

Pretty much this yep.

Going to have to re-wire my brain to only reposition once even if I was actively trying to avoid it before its gonna be one of the first habits ill have to break besides the new "pick an action and do it".

All good things though.

11 minutes ago, Kieransi said:

So there's more content coming here, so watch this space. There's also another graph for all the old tokens, to compare and contrast.

And I'm an engineering major, not a stats major, so yes I made an Excel file that had a column for each dice in each case (6 cases so 36 columns there), and then 6 more sets of columns to add up all the results for each dice number and each case (72 columns total) and then a row for every possible combination. So 8 rows for 1 die, 64 rows for 2 dice, 512 rows for 3 dice, 4096 rows for 4 dice, 32768 rows for 5 dice, and 262144 rows for 6 dice. Lots and lots of IF( ) statements and stuff to make all that stuff calculate whether or not Force tokens were already spent in each case and complicated stuff like that (since the odds of each dice aren't independent of each other with Force tokens and new evade tokens, and that's why those graphs have those weird curved shapes).

What's relevant about that is now I can get the standard deviation of all the possible results to show what's a reasonable range inside which your results will land.

And that's why engineers have good computers. Because we make things stupid complicated like that.

Have we seen any 2.0 pilots spoiled that can Focus + Evade? Vader no longer has Evade, Soontir only seems to get to combo into boost/barrel roll (still need to get a clear picture of his pilot ability though). It looks like the new arc dodgers are going to *have* to dodge arcs, instead of deciding between dodging arcs or tokening up.

1 minute ago, Transmogrifier said:

Have we seen any 2.0 pilots spoiled that can Focus + Evade? Vader no longer has Evade, Soontir only seems to get to combo into boost/barrel roll (still need to get a clear picture of his pilot ability though). It looks like the new arc dodgers are going to *have* to dodge arcs, instead of deciding between dodging arcs or tokening up.

Yeah, I've noticed the same thing. Same with force+evade.

I assume it's coming eventually, just at a steep cost

3 hours ago, viedit said:

I went to so far as to warn the gameshop owner last night to buckle down and be prepared for a very quiet 4 months. There's zero reason to buy current inventory.

If you're buying conversion kits anyway, 1e product is still a great purchase to fill gaps for ships you might want more of (or don't own at all) that are covered by the conversion kit.

3 hours ago, viedit said:

Short of Saws renegades which I think is going to be a bit of a dud knowing it's a transition piece in a now dead format there's no new content coming.

I don't think it'll be a complete dud. The tutu tubes look like they could be fun to fly. And everyone seems to forget the reaper

Saw's Renegades and the Reaper also give you medium bases and 2e cards a couple months early, for proxy purposes.

1 minute ago, mdl0114 said:

Saw's Renegades and the Reaper also give you medium bases and 2e cards a couple months early, for proxy purposes.

Do the discord suggestion- Play Power level games of 1.0 sure, it's just Reapers, Advanced, and TIEs vs U's and X's (and a handful of Y's) but it could work.

1 hour ago, Boom Owl said:

X-Wing 2.0:

What was your #1 X-Wing 1.0 Crutch?

I think for me its either infinite boost or double actions in any combination.

Correctly predicting my opponent's maneuvers.

1 minute ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

Do the discord suggestion- Play Power level games of 1.0 sure, it's just Reapers, Advanced, and TIEs vs U's and X's (and a handful of Y's) but it could work.

Playing proxy 2.0 using lists that have already been spoiled also sounds like fun.

29 minutes ago, VanderLegion said:

If you're buying conversion kits anyway, 1e product is still a great purchase to fill gaps for ships you might want more of (or don't own at all) that are covered by the conversion kit.

This has been something I've been thinking about - there are a few 1.0 ships I skipped picking up the first time around but I would be getting parts for in the conversion kit. I'm curious if the new designs of them will make going back and picking them up worthwhile, particularly for stuff like the TIE Punisher that can probably be found at a decent discount these days but will be seeing a price jump in 2.0.

2 hours ago, Kieransi said:

So there's more content coming here, so watch this space. There's also another graph for all the old tokens, to compare and contrast.

And I'm an engineering major, not a stats major, so yes I made an Excel file that had a column for each dice in each case (6 cases so 36 columns there), and then 6 more sets of columns to add up all the results for each dice number and each case (72 columns total) and then a row for every possible combination. So 8 rows for 1 die, 64 rows for 2 dice, 512 rows for 3 dice, 4096 rows for 4 dice, 32768 rows for 5 dice, and 262144 rows for 6 dice. Lots and lots of IF( ) statements and stuff to make all that stuff calculate whether or not Force tokens were already spent in each case and complicated stuff like that (since the odds of each dice aren't independent of each other with Force tokens and new evade tokens, and that's why those graphs have those weird curved shapes).

What's relevant about that is now I can get the standard deviation of all the possible results to show what's a reasonable range inside which your results will land.

And that's why engineers have good computers. Because we make things stupid complicated like that.

NOOOOO! This hurts so much! Formulas do all of this for you The naked and focus one haven't changed:

• No tokens = # of dice * 3/8
• Focus = # of dice * 5/8

Evade and force need to also check "at least one focus or blank" and "at least one focus" respectively. Which are (1 - probability of natties) and (1 - probability of natties or blank outs). Natties are (3/8)^number of dice, while natties or blank outs are (5/8)^number of dice. So they should be:

• Evade = #dice * 3/8 + (1 - (3/8)^number of dice)
• Force = #dice * 3/8 + (1 - (5/8)^number of dice)
• Focus + evade = #dice * 5/8 + (1 - (5/8)^number of dice) ----- Since your focus will convert focus results, you're looking for probabilities of at least one blank
• Force + evade = gets complicated, since presumably you'd convert the focus with the force, so you'd be looking at probabilities of at least 2 non-evades.

My evade numbers appear to match yours, eyeballing your graph, force is not. I'm super rusty as this isn't used in my day job and my last stats/probabilities classes were at least a decade ago (and I lost my X-wing excel sheet...), so someone more math oriented can probably steer you better, but doing massive charts is not the way to go!

7 minutes ago, drjkel said:

NOOOOO! This hurts so much! Formulas do all of this for you The naked and focus one haven't changed:

• No tokens = # of dice * 3/8
• Focus = # of dice * 5/8

Evade and force need to also check "at least one focus or blank" and "at least one focus" respectively. Which are (1 - probability of natties) and (1 - probability of natties or blank outs). Natties are (3/8)^number of dice, while natties or blank outs are (5/8)^number of dice. So they should be:

• Evade = #dice * 3/8 + (1 - (3/8)^number of dice)
• Force = #dice * 3/8 + (1 - (5/8)^number of dice)
• Focus + evade = #dice * 5/8 + (1 - (5/8)^number of dice) ----- Since your focus will convert focus results, you're looking for probabilities of at least one blank
• Force + evade = gets complicated, since presumably you'd convert the focus with the force, so you'd be looking at probabilities of at least 2 non-evades.

My evade numbers appear to match yours, eyeballing your graph, force is not. I'm super rusty as this isn't used in my day job and my last stats/probabilities classes were at least a decade ago (and I lost my X-wing excel sheet...), so someone more math oriented can probably steer you better, but doing massive charts is not the way to go!

We're trying to quickly get a functional version of the dice calculator up. No promises, but should be able to get you some nice fancy numbers you can play with.

Just now, Brunas said:

We're trying to quickly get a functional version of the dice calculator up. No promises, but should be able to get you some nice fancy numbers you can play with.

I want to know how the sausage is made! The results alone are not as fun to me.

Just now, drjkel said:

I want to know how the sausage is made! The results alone are not as fun to me.

Open source is open source!

Unboxing the conversion kits a week from tomorrow should make proxy games easier!

I’m curious if every ship will have quick builds, because we’d be set until the app comes out.

My crutch is probably any kind of alpha strike. If I don't decimate an opponent in the opening engagement, I sort of flounder. Learning mid/end game has been my biggest challenge.

3 hours ago, Boom Owl said:

X-Wing 2.0:

What was your #1 X-Wing 1.0 Crutch?

That's an interesting question since I only flew Paratanni in more than on tournament (the third tournament, Naboo, was a serious mistake, I was bored with the list at that point). The fact that I've only played 146 "not against my son" matches in 2.5 years also makes the data hard to sift through when those 3 Paratanni (or Scout) tournaments totaled something like 20 matches within a very narrow timeframe.

I flew a lot of meta lists at least once to figure out how they work or to help locals prep for Nationals and the like.

A very not-meta Kath got me my first store championship last year, aided by a fair and balanced Ketsu. That list was brutal and fun and for some strange reason my longest match was against Ketsu/Bossk which surprised both of us. My Ketsu ended up chasing his Bossk around until he got a Damaged cockpit and I could stop being careful to avoid the simul-kill.

The ships I've flown most often across time were certainly the Defenders, from before they had title to long after their title was nerfed. Every time I see my son crush someone with them, I want to put them on the table again.

@drjkel, I got results, right?

The enourmous excel file isn't the best thing ever, but it seems easier than trying to figure out a whole bunch of complicated equations and stuff. Also allows me to go through and do more complicated analytics on the whole set of probabilities later. For example, focus is usually worse than evade with three dice, but has a higher chance of allowing you to dodge three damage (which is more relevant against old effect-on-hit stuff like Ion Cannon and TLT).

Am I asking too much for a player to roll 2 hits and a focus or crit on four red dice? Seems slightly harder than average, without doing the math. Guessing in the 35% chance range?

17 minutes ago, Kieransi said:

@drjkel, I got results, right?

The enourmous excel file isn't the best thing ever, but it seems easier than trying to figure out a whole bunch of complicated equations and stuff. Also allows me to go through and do more complicated analytics on the whole set of probabilities later. For example, focus is usually worse than evade with three dice, but has a higher chance of allowing you to dodge three damage (which is more relevant against old effect-on-hit stuff like Ion Cannon and TLT).

The fun thing with computer based tools is that they have functions to do that too, once you've figured out how your "formula" (i.e. what the probability is, more generally speaking).

The brute force way works too, obviously.